|
Yeah, Man of Steel being a sci-fi movie about an alien finding his way on Earth, drawing as much from, like, Starman as it does previous Superman works, is one of its big strengths. Sucrose posted:Some of the best zombie movies simply use zombies as a plot device to create a post-apocalyptic world that’s still actively dangerous to the survivors. I’m thinking of movies like 28 Days Later. Definitely. The end of that movie is exactly what came to mind for a heist movie in a zombie apocalypse, where Jim is breaking into the manor house to rescue his companions.
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I love Man of Steel for that reason, I bought it on UHD recently and it's just a really fun rewatch with all kinds of different weird sci-fi things happening. Superman aside, actually a legitimately good piece of science fiction. I picked that up too and watched it a couple nights ago. Looks amazing and the Krypton stuff in particular really pops. This thread reminds me I need to watch his owl movie, just for completeness.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2019 20:01
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Oh course, that brings up why didn't Supes then just stop him when Bats crashed into him? Why let him go? That only works because we, as an audience, know that Bats is really a good guy. You are asking why he didn't engage in vigilante justice against a man he opposes because of his brutal vigilante justice.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:I think it was Ferrinus in the MoS thread who had a few very good posts about why the last moments of the Zod fight don't quite work, the main body of the fight is two impervious dudes throwing each other around and Superman gaining the upper hand seems to happen by sheer luck. I didn't mind the neck snap because snapping necks is pretty ubiquitous in action movies as a way of killing someone without stabbing, strangling or shooting them, all options that are out the window with Zod. I guess they could have established the neck as a weakness earlier with Zod killing an underling who displeases him, but I honestly don't mind that much. Yeah, you see how he gets the upper hand as they're crashing to Earth and, yes, it's a lucky break that gets him on top. Once Zod starts flying, Superman loses his one advantage and is getting his rear end handed to him. But that's part of the reason he has to kill Zod there. Given it's a suicide-by-cop situation, Zod wasn't quite trying to kill Superman, but there could be millions more dead before Superman got another chance like that, assuming he ever did.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2019 19:43
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The police have a cool cartoon that basically says "Hell yes I approve of Batman!" in their lobby, which Clark saw. Might discourage him a bit. The idea of dropping Batman off with the police when a station has this taped to its front desk is hilarious: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/cZ5pQB9.gifv hot dog truck
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:You actually don’t see, I think - Zod tackles Clark down at the earth, there’s a cut, next we see they’re hurtling down and somehow it’s Zod on the bottom being tackled by Clark. You definitely have the right read - Superman caught a lucky break and had to capitalize before he lost the edge - but we don’t get to see how it happened. If it was up to me I’d tie it to Clark’s cape somehow, although it’s hard to do that without wandering into slapstick territory. This is what we get to see: https://i.imgur.com/8sSpgIO.gifv They're tumbling over each other throughout the fight, sometimes Zod on top, sometimes Superman. Superman's break is that he's on top when they slam into the train station, with Zod perhaps momentarily frozen when he sees they're about to hit. But I think we see enough to see that there isn't some major advantage that Superman exploits. I don't think there's anything in the bit that gets obscured by the flames as they crash that is anything as specific as, like, his cape tripping up Zod (though we see pretty much the opposite, at the beginning). It's just, they hit, Zod took the hit worse, so Superman has a moment to get him in a hold.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
    
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
I can see that. Similar to Perry and Jenny inspiring Superman while he's fighting the world engine.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:more commentary going on 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
Yeah, Superman himself isn't an ironic character in BvS, but things like Batman's holy fury in the warehouse, or manipulations to see Lex tortured in Arkham, suggest the guy isn't as cleanly redeemed as we might want to think.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2019 20:11
|
|
|
Can't wait to see them follow up on that thread.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
I was under the impression that Affleck was gone and presumably they want to distance the Matt Reeves version from Snyder's, though I certainly wouldn't mind there being multiple Batmen the way they're apparently going to have multiple Jokers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2019 00:45
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:big strong Kansas boy 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't see how Man of Tomorrow works for a movie that for much of its running time is about an aimless drifter who doesn't know what to do with his life, whereas Man of Steel fit him being, again, for most of the movie just a super-strong guy who hasn't yet made himself a larger symbol. Ideally a Man of Tomorrow movie would be about him moving beyond reacting to disasters to actually forging a new world, though I'd be shocked if WB/DC went that way with Snyder gone.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
Yeah, it's both. Jor-El mentions that Earth's atmosphere will nourish Kal, the Kryptonians' senses start going haywire when their breathers fail on Earth, and Clark loses his super-strength from breathing the Kryptonian atmosphere. But Superman also does recharge from the sun in both Man of Steel and BvS.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 06:12
|
|
|
 Do we know who that woman is that Stanwick / Martian Manhunter was pretending to be? It looks like the coffee scene between Ma Kent and Lois Lane, but neither of those make a lot of sense. Presumably just some different scene we never saw anything about, but figured maybe I'm missing something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
teagone posted:It's because Snyder's a dudebro fratboy jock who wants to gently caress Ayn Rand. Despite what Atlas Shrugged might have you believe, loving someone is not an endorsement of their political philosophy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:She’s wearing the tenets of leftism as a costume until the danger has passed - and why vote for her when you could vote for the actual leftist in the race instead? Okay, but he didn't say to vote for her. He paraphrased a debate quip. I'm onboard with all your political points, but they hardly seem to justify jumping on somebody in a film forum for referencing her legitimately funny slam on John Delaney.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:It's also worth pointing out that Kal-El's mother is addressed as 'Lady' Lara. I don't remember any male Kryptonians being addressed as Lord or whatnot, but along with the capitalist bent, Krypton seems to comment on ossified monarchy which was a precursor to and wrapped up in capitalism. Right, it fits in with the notion that the end point of capitalism is that once you've granted sufficient rights to property owners and the processes of the system result in the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, you've essentially reinvented feudalism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
McCloud posted:I thought one of the big points of Watchmen was that Doc Manhattan was the reason nuclear war was inevitable. He was the ultimate deterrent that made the US impervious to nukes, which effectively made the US unstoppable in global politics, and they threw their weight around pissing off everyone else because they never factored in that their ultimate deterrent would one day want to stop deterring. He didn't make the US impervious to nukes, though. It's explicitly stated that he can't necessarily stop them all, and if even 1% get through that's enough to end life on Earth. Even when he's willing to act as a deterrent, he's still working to develop a free energy machine in the hope that it will reduce global tensions, because the world might still be able to destroy itself with nuclear weapons despite all his best efforts to stop it. The branching point seems more to be that Nixon was able to convince Dr Manhattan to intervene in Vietnam while the real Nixon wasn't willing to use, or at least was dissuaded from using, nuclear weapons in that conflict. Whether or not that would have actually won the war, it worked in Watchmen, which led to a US that was able to use the threat of its super-weapon to dictate terms to the rest of the world. So I see it being more about a world that's more precarious than ours because the US was willing to cross a line that it didn't in the real world than the precise mechanics of what crossing that line meant (Dr Manhattan versus dropping the bomb), even if, of course, there's also an exploration of the differences with it being a literal superhero rather than a super-weapon.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2019 21:00
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Case in point: Didn't Kissinger justify some of the horrible poo poo he did by claiming that he was keeping Nixon in check? Yeah. You see it with a lot of Trump subordinates as well. Ivanka and Jared, John Kelly, etc. News stories about how either they're restraining his worst impulses, or how they used to do so and things have only really gotten out of control now that they're gone. But it's ego inflation and an attempt to avoid complicity in the things that are actually happening, justifying their actions as the lesser of two evils all while serving themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
One things I'd note is that Rorschach's fantasy, as described to us at the very start, is for the world to ask to be saved and for him to say "no." Veidt's plan to save a world without it ever knowing it was saved is 180° from this.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2019 00:30
|
|
|
Arctic is pretty good if you'd like to see Mads Mikkelson play a non-satanic role. It's all but a one-man show, him trying to rescue himself and an unconscious young woman after an airplane crash in the Arctic. Currently streaming for free with Amazon Prime.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2019 06:02
|
|
|
Blood Boils posted:You don't have to finish it like to release in theatres you morons, just put the scenes in order or turn the storyboards into a comic book! I don't care about unfinished SFX I wanna know what was supposed to happen! Yeah, this is how the extended cut of Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse works, sections that are just static line art they would have used to prep the full animated version.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
The movie is not particularly direct about communicating just how much the exposure to the Kryptonian archives and the information about cosmic horrors like Darkseid awoke Lex's fixation on self-destruction and bent his desire for killing Superman from an end in itself to a means to an end in protecting his plan to destroy the world. I get this let them save the discussion of the equation itself for Justice League and Superman's explicit conversion (was, I believe, the plan). But it means it's easy to end the movie thinking that Doomsday was the backup plan to Batman killing Superman, rather than the manipulation of Batman ultimately being an effort to clear Superman from the playing field before Doomsday arrived. Because Lex's conversion happens offscreen. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Apr 26, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:Pro-Jordan Peterson articles are painful, but a Google capable of nuance is terrifying. What could go wrong? 
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2020 21:48
|
|
|
What a nice piece of news. I'm happily surprised WB is willing to have this sort of alternate take out there when they're still actively working on this iteration of the franchise.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
Roman posted:I really like that they're willing to have multiple batmans or jokers etc. and gave up on the cinematic universe thing, instead of having to shoehorn Joaquin Joker into the Birds of Prey universe or whatever That's a good point. From what we've seen, The Batman doesn't seem particularly concerned with continuity either. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 21:18 on May 20, 2020 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2020 21:16
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:How’d that turn out for him? 
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2020 01:00
|
|
|
I have a soft spot for Sucker Punch because—in addition to it clearly having its heart in the right place—when I watched it and saw the fight against the robots on the train, I thought "this guy should make a Superman movie" and then he did.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
David Ayer is not being subtle anymore: https://twitter.com/DavidAyerMovies/status/1264976357718515719
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2020 18:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DavidAyerMovies/status/1282024810726342656
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Pain and Gain is almost unrecognizable as a Bay film... but I've only seen it once. Pain and Gain is where I really got how much he appreciates the Coen Brothers, which makes going back to his other movies interesting. Aside from his consistent use of their stable of actors (like how between Burn After Reading and Transformers 3, John Malkovich and Frances McDormand switch which one gets to be the intelligence officer and which one gets to be the goofy doofus who accidentally falls into the plot), take this bit: SuperMechagodzilla posted:If you actually watch Transformers 4, the entire narrative is about the Marky Mark character’s feelings of failure that lead to an increasingly impotence-fuelled rage. He specifically feels that he’s a failure as a father. A harried father thinking that he finally had right on his side and discovering that, no, the government has officially sanctioned a sleazy older man to date his underage daughter is playing with the same sort of exasperation at the absurd injustices of the universe as you get in A Serious Man, but Bay filters it through the trappings of a Carl's Jr. ad. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jul 13, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Watch Wolf first because the ending of that film literally kickstarts the first act of Pain & Gain. Haven't watched them like that, but it would make a hell of a transition.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
The story of the theatrical cut is cleaner, so I prefer it, but the extended cut has some very nice deleted scenes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
I remember liking Reign of Fire but finding the color grading a bit much in a way typical of early 2000s movies, but that sort of stuff bothers me less as a historical artifact than when every movie was like that, so probably due a revisit.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
Space Fish posted:The active version of "does not kill" is "uses nonlethal means," which in Batman's case usually translates to "manages to overcome dangerous traps and violent situations without killing anyone." This is all still defining by absence: "nonlethal," "... without killing anyone." The closest we get to something active is saying that Batman stories tend to show him being principled, creative, and capable of difficult actions. And while that is generally true for the character, it's hardly specific to situations where he's not killing people. The non-killing rule has the issue of being a bit overloaded in meaning. One perspective, as SMG has repeatedly pointed out, is the bit where Batman slaps a gun out of Robin's hand, which works as a somewhat fourth-wall-breaking moment of Batman expliciting making sure this crime-fighting is appropriate for kids. It's explicit in-universe censorship of inappropriate content. Another is that some, but not all, versions of Batman embrace a belief in redemption and healing and a sympathy for outcasts. The Animated Series version, which I think influenced a lot of people the right age for this forum, has this, where he can look at Clayface, Poison Ivy, Harley Quinn, and see a person, not just a freak, because he is, himself, an emotionally-damaged outcast. So, to me, a story about the "no kill" rule isn't a story in which Batman happens to use a bunch of tasers. It's a story about Batman finding the humanity in someone that others might miss. And it's that instinct which Lois Lane, who already saw the man in the Superman, at least somewhat resurrected at the end of BvS. At his lowest point in the movie, Bruce refers to Superman as a "freak dressed like a clown," with part of the tragedy being that he's forgotten that that's also what he is. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Jul 29, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2020 17:00
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:The fantasy, I think, isn't even really "Batman doesn't kill" -- that's just presentation. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
WeedlordGoku69 posted:honestly, i've never one hundred percent understood why that Hulk thing keeps getting brought up in this context, because what they're trying to do there strikes me as a little different. it feels less like an attempt to use cartoon logic to soften the Hulk, and more an attempt to synchronize the two "halves" of the character by making it explicit that part of Bruce Banner's mind is still there in the background when he's big, green and mean, while simultaneously explaining away the numerous times throughout comics history that the Hulk has been depicted as somehow completely avoiding lethal collateral damage despite being, y'know, the Hulk. It is certainly an explanation, but there's a choice of whether or not to explain it, and there's a choice of whether or not you explain it by placing control of what would seem like chaos strictly within the agency of the character, and there's a choice of whether you take it so far as "you haven't killed a soul." I posted the panel in reference to the comment that the power fantasy was "Batman has absolute power over life and death," and a key word there is 'absolute.' You can see some of this desire for a figure of absolute control in criticisms of Snyder's Superman, where his failure to save bystanders is interpreted as an affirmative decision to let people die.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2020 22:26
|
|