|
|
| Post Number: 21
|
|
|
| Post Number: 22
|
GORDON 
90%
Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 36125
Joined: Jun. 2004
|
 |
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,05:14 |
|
    |
Other discussion forums are being much more kind to this film, and I've been reading them. I found this particular post by someone interesting.
QUOTE I realized why I like the use of alter-egos in this movie.
The Wonder Woman stuff and Lois stuff being choppy didn't not bother me that much because Lois Lane is Wonder Woman's alter ego. As far as this movie is concerned, there is no Diana Prince.
The reason that the film is so focused on Batman is so he can get two contrasts: Bruce Wayne's alter ego Lex Luthor, and Batman's alter ego Superman. In order to maintain the fiction that he is not Batman, Bruce has to masquerade as an arrogant shit, but of course as he gets older, he simply becomes what he pretends to be. He's so pumped by his own personal mythology that he can't even recall the distinction between the two and exists half-dreaming. Watch when he talks to Alfred in the burned out mansion, Alfred points out that the Wayne fortune was built on oil and real estate but that's not good enough for Bruce. Saying they were traders of pelts isn't good enough for him. They were hunters. So he keeps going out in total denial, he knows he's impotent, he knows it's vainglorious, but he's trying to get ready for something he can't conceive of, which is Superman. How could someone simply be imbued with that kind of power? He must not be real, or whole.
That's why Clark is good, because even he doesn't know yet what Superman is "supposed" to be. He can't merely just act without thinking, because he does not presume himself to be morally superior, nor is he the keeper of a childlike humanity. So instead of just "being good" as if he were some sort of unpaid one man NGO, he decides to just give himself to the world. He doesn't want to be worshiped, he wants to inspire.
--------------
I don't give a fuck!
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 23
|
Leisher
Top 3%, yo.
Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 26651
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,07:43 |
|
|
(GORDON @ Apr. 06 2016,08:14)
QUOTE Other discussion forums are being much more kind to this film, and I've been reading them. Â I found this particular post by someone interesting. QUOTE I realized why I like the use of alter-egos in this movie.
The Wonder Woman stuff and Lois stuff being choppy didn't not bother me that much because Lois Lane is Wonder Woman's alter ego. As far as this movie is concerned, there is no Diana Prince.
The reason that the film is so focused on Batman is so he can get two contrasts: Bruce Wayne's alter ego Lex Luthor, and Batman's alter ego Superman. In order to maintain the fiction that he is not Batman, Bruce has to masquerade as an arrogant shit, but of course as he gets older, he simply becomes what he pretends to be. He's so pumped by his own personal mythology that he can't even recall the distinction between the two and exists half-dreaming. Watch when he talks to Alfred in the burned out mansion, Alfred points out that the Wayne fortune was built on oil and real estate but that's not good enough for Bruce. Saying they were traders of pelts isn't good enough for him. They were hunters. So he keeps going out in total denial, he knows he's impotent, he knows it's vainglorious, but he's trying to get ready for something he can't conceive of, which is Superman. How could someone simply be imbued with that kind of power? He must not be real, or whole.
That's why Clark is good, because even he doesn't know yet what Superman is "supposed" to be. He can't merely just act without thinking, because he does not presume himself to be morally superior, nor is he the keeper of a childlike humanity. So instead of just "being good" as if he were some sort of unpaid one man NGO, he decides to just give himself to the world. He doesn't want to be worshiped, he wants to inspire.
I want to be absolutely clear here, I'm going to be bashing what you, Gordon, linked and not you yourself. I'm putting this here because I kind of rant about this below. I think my frustration with the film, and having tried to explain it multiple times the last few days exploded out of me here. I believe part of it is because you're someone who will understand it. I completely get why you liked the film, and I enjoyed it as well, but as I'll explain the film is a failure. I'm hopeful that you "get it" by the end of my rant, and if so I'll be using the same tactic in other discussions I've been having about the movie.
I'm not being mean when I say this, but that's complete garbage.
Whomever wrote that is trying to stretch the definition of "alter-ego", and I would wager has zero knowledge of the source material. (Which is why I think you could buy into it having little knowledge of the source material yourself.)
That, let's call it a theory, seems more of an attempt to justify their enjoyment of the film by making it much deeper than it actually was. An attempt to make the movie far more cerebral so they can explain why their superior intellect liked it, while the rest of the mouth breathing masses didn't.
How exactly is Lois Lane Wonder Woman's alter-ego? Because they're both women? That's literally all they have in common. One's a brunette, one's a redhead. One is essentially a god, and the other is mortal. One is poor, while the other is rich. One is a liability in a fight, while the other chuckles as she's blasted by Doomsday. One's been alive for a long time (hundreds of years or more), while the other is 35 (or so). One is a reporter, while the other has no day job. One is jacked, and the other isn't. One is model gorgeous, and the other is girl next door pretty.
By the way, Diana Prince exists in the movie. Or were we having another dream sequence when she got off the plane and the stewardess was calling to her, "Ms. Prince!" DC's even making an entire movie about this person that doesn't exist!
Superman is Batman's alter-ego? How is that exactly? Because I'm pretty sure one of them is human and the other is an alien. Oh wait! They're both heroes that don't kill...well, in the books they are...and they both have mothers named Martha! Yep, same person.
Lex Luthor is Bruce Wayne's alter ego? Because they're both rich business owners?
If this is the new way we look at alter-egos then every man on Earth is my alter-ego because I'm also a man on Earth!
I would like to repeat, I enjoyed the movie. I walked out having watched an enjoyable spectacle of a superhero film. However, as a Batman/Superman film it failed miserably. This wasn't failure on the level of that Fantastic Four turd of a film, but despite the box office, it's not far off.
Look at it like this Gordo...
Let's say Zach Snyder makes the next Star Trek film. In it, Spock is older and "wiser" yet easily manipulated by Khan from afar because, you know, Spock's so driven by emotions and not logic. (It'd help is you pretended Spock is the world's greatest detective and always two steps ahead of his enemies, too.) Khan easily gets Spock to plot murdering Kirk, who is literally out saving countless people over and over and over again, because Khan's able to plant doubt in Spock's mind that maybe, just maybe someday Kirk will kill the whole universe. And in Spock's logical mind 1% = 100%.
Did I mention that the person cast as Khan is Paul Reubens who uses his Pee Wee Herman voice?
Oh, and in this movie, the Borg show up, but don't assimilate people. They instead just shoot lasers from their eyes and eat things. The big threat is that they'll eventually eat Earth and every time the Enterprise crew tries to kill one, they fart and explode damaging things around them. Because Snyder thinks that's far more interesting than the characters that already exist and people enjoy.
Plus, he adds elements of the Mirror Mirror story to ensure nobody can tell that in another film too.
But, the movie does look great, the action is there, and there's a lot of big name actors and shitty 5 second cameos giving us peeks at future films.
You wouldn't be thrilled with that movie would you? As someone who knows Star Trek and its characters, you'd be pretty disappointed by what you saw and the decisions that were made. Would such a film excite you for additional Star Trek movies made by the same people?
Would you feel comforted by some jackass writing about how Uhura is the alter-ego of Nurse Chapman, and Yeoman Rand doesn't exist? And Kirk is the alter-ego of Khan and Spock is the alter-ego of Kirk?
You would feel the same way about that Star Trek movie as I feel about BvS and I hope that example helps you understand why those with knowledge of the source material are being pretty critical of the film.
And I want to note that the critics aren't wrong about all the film making mistakes either like the horrible editing throughout.
And if all that doesn't help you understand the criticism, then ponder this: Do you remember when The Avengers came out and received all the backlash from critics and fans? No? That's because it didn't happen. Yes, you had some folks who complained about things, because you can NEVER make everyone happy, but it wasn't like this backlash. The film makers there understood the characters and stayed true to them. Everyone at Marvel works as a team with one clear plan going forward. There is one guy that everyone working on every movie answers to and everything gets run past him first. All the films are planned out and fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. The DC universe films aren't being handled in the same way, and it shows.
Marvel, famously, dumped Edgar Wright whom everyone considers a brilliant film maker. They said no to his script for Ant-Man and got a new director. The parting was very friendly, but part they did. Ant-Man went on to become a surprise hit and a critical success. DC should have been taking notes. They should have vetted Snyder, especially after Man of Steel. Another film I enjoyed, but was blasted by fans for not staying true to the character.
Ok, I'm rambling now, but was I able to explain my disappointment in a better way? I really like the Star Trek example.
New question:
How was Superman able to know Lois was in trouble on the other side of the globe, yet couldn't locate his mother who was in the same city, and close enough where mortal Batman could get there and save her in under 10 minutes?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 24
|
TPRJones
I saw The Fault in our Stars opening night.
Group: Privateers
Posts: 12384
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,09:11 |
|
|
BvS is for comic book nerds as Starship Troopers was for Heinlein fans.
It doesn't matter how nice it looks, if you know the source material it's a piece of shit.
--------------
Vidi Perfutui Veni
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 25
|
|
|
| Post Number: 26
|
|
|
| Post Number: 27
|
|
|
| Post Number: 28
|
Leisher
Top 3%, yo.
Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 26651
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,12:16 |
|
|
The three stories Snyder ruined:
-The Death of Superman
-The Dark Knight Returns
-Kingdom Come
Also, you can count The Killing Joke, unless they plan to make a prequel covering that.
Also, here's how they changed Batman "a bit":
-Even though he's still fighting crime every night, he still has time to knock boots with randoms and wake up before them. (Something that has almost never happened in the books.)
-His parents' killer is no longer "someone". (He also appeared black...racists.)
-His parents were no longer killed in an alley, but rather on a normal side walk out in the open.
-His dad could be deemed responsible for his and his wife's death by attacking the mugger instead of being shot and killed in cold blood like they were previously.
-He's branding criminals.
-His brand gets them murdered and he knows it. So he might as well be killing them himself.
-When he commits theft, he leaves a calling card to let his victim know he did it, because...?
-Lex Luthor knows he's Batman. How? Who the fuck knows as it never gets explained.
-He's no longer 2 steps ahead of everyone else.
-He's no longer the smartest guy in the room as he gets manipulated by Alex Luthor despite many of Luthor's manipulations not reaching him for years. And returned checks from a hurt employee with messages on them? How diabolical! *sarcasm*
-He no longer thinks logically. Blow this off if you want, but this IS the same as Spock no longer thinking logically. Kind of a big change...
-He kills people because...I guess because he's old and crotchety and that's cool and understandable? I think someone's transfering... 
-He hides in corners in well lit rooms thinking he can't be seen.
-He has the foresight to know exactly what moves an invincible alien being will take to stop him, and despite being shot through several buildings and different floors of said buildings, somehow ends up right where he stashed his Kryptonite trap and spear. Wow. He can plan all that, but can't imagine just having a chat first? Can't see that he's being "manipulated"?
-In the books, he made plans and has contingencies in place for any super powered individual who loses it, but he doesn't go after anyone until they need to be stopped. Here "even if we think there's a 1% chance then we must accept it as a certainty!" WTF?
-Batman doesn't even have guns in his arsenal. Not even in The Dark Knight Returns.
-This Batman uses guns against the invincible alien. Batman doesn't use guns. So he's not just old and crotchety, but pretty stupid too. Why didn't he just lure him out and kryptonite gas and stab him? Why go through that whole fight with someone who can literally kill him in less than half a second if he so desired? And if Supes was THAT kind of threat to warrant being killed... Holy shit there was no logic to this story.
-Oh yeah, now his ancestors were trappers and oil men and blah, blah, blah. Not comic book canon...
So that's "a bit"? Yet, you're telling me my Star Trek example was "too extreme"? The changes to Batman in BvS are basically on par with Deadpool in Wolverine: Origins and we all know how that turned out.
The pile of shit that was this story hinges on the fact that their moms have the same name. Think about that for a bit. That's what saves the day. That's what saves humanity, hell all life on Earth. Because Batman's a complete moron easily manipulated while the "genius" that manipulates him to "save" humanity decides to make a monster for no fucking reason whatsoever.
The more I think about the film, the worse it gets and not just from a "they shit on the source material" standpoint. The story is fucking terrible.
It looked good though! (And if I'm being honest, the fight scenes were too dark.)
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 29
|
Leisher
Top 3%, yo.
Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 26651
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,12:26 |
|
|
And I want to stress that even without the obvious shitting on the source material the movie was still poorly made.
How were pacing, editing, and the story line this bad in a $250 million movie?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 30
|
Malcolm
I disagree.
Group: Privateers
Posts: 27168
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,12:47 |
|
|
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,14:26)
QUOTE And I want to stress that even without the obvious shitting on the source material the movie was still poorly made.
How were pacing, editing, and the story line this bad in a $250 million movie?
Well, let's look at the screenwriters since we've already slammed Zack a bit.
Chris Terrio: won Best Screenplay 2012 for Argo. Wow. What a coincidence he's in on another Affleck product. That's most of his resume.
David S. Goyer:
QUOTE "I think the world would be a better place if more filmmakers were either female or came from more diverse backgrounds, because there are too many white male directors. I was on the board of the Writer’s Guild and that was a big issue for us, sort of the chicken-and-the-egg thing: How do we add more diverse voices, especially when the audience is so diverse?"
You can look up his filmography at will, but suffice it to say his best days seem behind him.
--------------
Diogenes of Sinope:
"It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
"Other dogs bite only their enemies, whereas I bite also my friends in order to save them."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC:
"Better dead than smeg."
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 31
|
TPRJones
I saw The Fault in our Stars opening night.
Group: Privateers
Posts: 12384
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,12:50 |
|
|
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,13:21)
QUOTE
(TPRJones @ Apr. 06 2016,12:11)
QUOTE BvS is for comic book nerds as Starship Troopers was for Heinlein fans.
It doesn't matter how nice it looks, if you know the source material it's a piece of shit. That's pretty accurate. (Even if I don't think name calling was necessary...)
Eh? Name calling?
Starship Troopers was a piece of shit. I won't back down from that. But I didn't meant to imply that anyone liking it was a piece of shit if that's what you mean.
--------------
Vidi Perfutui Veni
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 32
|
Leisher
Top 3%, yo.
Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 26651
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,13:09 |
|
|
(TPRJones @ Apr. 06 2016,15:50)
QUOTE
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,13:21)
QUOTE
(TPRJones @ Apr. 06 2016,12:11)
QUOTE BvS is for comic book nerds as Starship Troopers was for Heinlein fans.
It doesn't matter how nice it looks, if you know the source material it's a piece of shit. That's pretty accurate. (Even if I don't think name calling was necessary...) Eh? Â Name calling? Starship Troopers was a piece of shit. Â I won't back down from that. Â But I didn't meant to imply that anyone liking it was a piece of shit if that's what you mean.
comic book nerds
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 33
|
TPRJones
I saw The Fault in our Stars opening night.
Group: Privateers
Posts: 12384
Joined: May 2004
|
|
Posted on: Apr. 06 2016,15:06 |
|
|
Heh. Where do you live, the 1950s? Nerd isn't an insult anymore.
--------------
Vidi Perfutui Veni
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
