Facebook
twitter

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dagenspear

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48
1
Justice League (2017) / Re: Justice League - ***SPOILER TALK***
« on: Mon, 20 Nov 2017, 17:52 »
If they scrap the DCEU, I don't think I'll ever watch another DC live action adaptation ever again. Without the likes of Affleck, Cavill and Gadot together, there's no point sticking around. and I'm not interested in seeing another actor donning the cowl for Matt Reeves.

I hope I'm wrong, but if the worst scenario does happen and the DCEU is shelved, the only thing we can do is treat MOS, BvS and JL as a trilogy of sorts. Some fans on Twitter are calling it the Superman trilogy, while others are describing it as the "Dawn of Justice" trilogy. The latter part makes more sense to me.
I don't understand this. If you're a Batman fan, why is there no point? I dislike the DCEU. I'm annoyed that it took so long to get to JL. I like pretty much very little that I've seen of JL, but I'm still going to watch it... eventually. It's Batman. Matt Reeves I've heard is a good director. A recast is just that. It's happened for decades. Ben Affleck being recast has no more meaning than Keaton or Kilmer. Or Christian Bale, if they'd decided to do that. It's still Batman. Where's the dealbreaker in a recast? Batman isn't a single actor. He's a character that can be explored by many different directors, with many different facets to his personality. I have reboot burnout too personally if that's your issue, but I don't know why that's cause for abandoning all the potential future films. Have a very great day!

God bless you all!

2
I would like to say this.

I am deeply troubled by the thought that anybody would feel more sympathy for Harvey Dent, who got corrupted by the Joker and became an evil scumbag who tried to murder a child, than Superman, who refused to let Lex Luthor corrupt him and gave his life to protect the world from Doomsday. If that's the popular consensus, that's incredibly sad.

I know which character earns the title "hero".
Harvey Dent isn't a hero. That's the point. Even after being lied about dying a hero, his death is only used politically. The people barely care.
Yeah, it's actually one of my biggest gripes about TDK. Batman went out of his way to cover up the crimes and deaths of a villain. The fact that Batman rather be seen as a villain, because he's more concerned with covering up what the real villain actually did, just never seemed right to me.
Good. The movies agree with you. It sits right with no one in the movies either.
Not the exact same! Therefore totally opposite!
Exact opposites in meaning, story and character. You use a false equivalency again, trying to troll me for no reason.

3
It's far more believable that a (trigger warning) global Jesus figure would be a point of contention or worship. Dent was just an up-and-coming politician, but we were meant to believe all of Gotham would lose hope if he was outed as a killer. That's nonsense. If someone who can save the world with his bare hands dies, that loss is going to be felt, even if you hated the guy. That's what makes more people coming over to the pro-Superman camp believable.
It absolutely is nonsense. And that's the point. The city won't and doesn't descend into chaos because of his criminality. Joker, Batman and Gordon are wrong. The movie is fair with how Dent's treated in his death. People don't unite under him. People don't love him who hated him. If society is divided, it will stay divided. That loss won't change anyone for Superman. That loss means no more than the massive amounts of death that happen to children every day that no one does anything about. That's cynical. That lives of many mean less than one, hero or not.
Quote
Superman was mourned for being who he WAS.
Dent was mourned for being who he WASN'T.
He wasn't truly mourned at all. That's the thing about this attempt to twist TDKT into seeming like there's a similarity. No one united under Dent's death. Even Dent's heroism accomplished very little. That's the thing. That movies treated it for what it was. BvS doesn't. The only people who cared about Dent's death in TDKRises are the people using it for personal or political gain.
Quote
Big difference. Dent may have been good once, but that's irrelevant when you're covering up the juicy details. The context changers. Superman was a genuine source of inspiration and his message hasn't been corrupted, even though Lex/MSM tried to. The only revelation is that he didn't murder the villagers in Africa. He had nothing to do with the Senate bombing. He was always innocent. He's the one who is owed an apology.
No. He wasn't responsible for it directly, but his fight with Zod did cause the Metropolis destruction and did kill people. And he doesn't care. That doesn't mean he should locked up. But he should be treated with hesitancy. Him being able to be manipulated by Lex and throwing a human being through a building showcases his lack innocence. Have a very great day!

God bless you all!

4
Justice League (2017) / Re: Justice League Promotion
« on: Fri, 10 Nov 2017, 06:52 »
I'm happy to hear that. It's not surprising to see the cast members throw BvS under the bus - Cavill said BvS was a "niche". Even though I think BvS is a masterpiece...this is business. Reality is the film got savaged by dumb critics, and the studio shot themselves in the foot by not release the ultimate edition in the first place. This is 1992 all over again. Like Batman Returns, we will likely never see something like BvS for a long time, with the tone lightening up in a way similar to Batman Forever...which still had elements of darkness. Not necessarily a complaint, but an observation.
Except Batman Returns was good. These statements about how dumb people are who criticize this movie are silly. I heard somebody say this about Avengers: Age Of Ultron once: If your superhero movie needs to be 3 hours to be good, the movie isn't good in general, essentially, I think. It's as true for that as it is for this. Not that AOU or BvS were good with 3 hour cuts regardless. The movie needed to cut out the needless nonsense, not add excuses. As for this movie, we'll see, the trailers are cool, but then again the trailer for MOS made me tear up, the BvS trailer got me hyped and the SS one got me excited and the onyl trailer I didn't like was WW, which was the better movie of them all, so it's still up in the air. Have a very great day!

God bless you all!

5
Not the exact same! Must be total opposites!
But having a bare minimum of similarities makes it an appropriate comparison? That's a false equivalency.

6
Called it!

But Harvey isn't Superman though. And things that aren't the exact, identical same obviously must be total opposites. Didn't you know?
I'm sorry, but it is literally not the same. The society wasn't divided against Harvey Dent. The city didn't unite under his death. It's pretty opposite. But things are said differently, because they're different. You have no argument here. Have a very great day!

God bless you all!

7
Gordon speaks about Harvey at the podium and says “it will be a very long time before someone inspires us the way he did.” In TDK, Gordon says “people will lose hope” because this one man died. Batman says unlike Dent he’s “not a hero”.

Dent may as well have been Superman in the way they spoke about him.
All of which is a false belief and all based on Harvey before his death.

Quote
TDK Rises shows that Gotham established ‘Harvey Dent Day’ to remember this single person. Nearly a decade later, society was united under his death via an annual holiday. Promotional material called Harvey “a hero to the people of Gotham City”. This sentiment transcended the legal system.

It’s all there, clear as crystal.
Not at all. The mayor was the one promoting this. The hero and Harvey Dent Day was his public statements. Not one all the cops share or even all the people share as some are still longing for Batman. It was very much a legal structure.
Quote
At the Harvey Dent memorial at Wayne Manor they have a photo of the guy, as if he’s a God to be worshipped. When they chase Batman with the army of police cars it’s all to arrest Dent’s killer. The film makes a point about Harvey’s legacy and continued admiration. That’s why it’s meant to be a big deal when Bane later blows the whistle on Dent's legacy outside Blackgate, even though Nolan drops this plot line straight after.
The point was the corruption, not Dent's fall. Only that cop was the one who wanted Batman, and was because he wanted to capture Batman so he could get the job as commissioner. Some cops were for him, other were mocking the rookie who shot at Batman and others were in awe of Batman's presence. The city was very much not pro Dent and anti Batman. It wasn't a united society. Of course though, my statement about how it's a different discussion and a movie could get away with it is being ignored. And we're stuck in the boring part of discussion.

8
The point of art is to illicit an emotional response. So, yes we can.
Then now we're just arguing our emotional opinion. Which is pointless, because they're different. If we're not discussing facts, then this conversation means nothing. If we're gonna discuss a movie, then our feelings about it can't be relevant, because then we have nothing to discuss, just talking about how we feel about it, which means nothing to the development of the story or the characters, just our feelings about it.
I don't think I agree with that. Like, at all. A movie's structure, conflicts and resolutions need to grab the audience on a visceral level. If it fails to do that, it may be otherwise well-constructed on a technical level but it failed in its mission.
Who decides what grabs an audience? What if it grabs one group, but doesn't grab another? There's no meaning to visceral-ness, because it's just another emotional reaction to something. And that doesn't equal anything. Some people think the ending of TDKR is garbage for the reasons you say you came around to it. Whose right? If the answer is both, then there's no point in having a discussion about any of these things.
Quote
Plus, your thesis doesn't allow for changing perceptions. Take me, for example. I'll never be confused with being a fan of the movie Superman Returns. There's just too much water under that particular bridge as far as I'm concerned.
I said that perceptions change. That's why it's a very flawed way for humans to view fiction. Have a very great day!

God bless you all!

9
Of course this isn't how people would act either in acceptance, just because a single hero died. A whole society doesn't unite under the death of one man.


A whole society didn't unite under Harvey's death. The legal system used his death, but if anything it created another rift for society.
Nice little rebuttal there, TDK.

An even better example would be real life cases like JFK and Nelson Mandela.
Did a whole society unite and change under their deaths? Because as far as I can tell America is and was still a mess after JFK died. And I don't know the structures of Nelson Mandela. But as far as I know, people who hated them didn't love them because they passed on.
That's different though because things that aren't exactly the same must be total opposites.
Not total opposites, just not the same or with the same meaning.

10
It's about making emotional sense to us, not the characters. A character's illogical decisions, rationalizations, that's the only way they work. It's not enough to put in themes, ideas, motivations, you have to make them resonate. This scene didn't do that.
That's an opinion. Emotional resonance is an opinion. We can't base it off of what we feel in the structure of those things, because emotionally our perception can shift and it's not a reliable indicator of it's or quality.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48
    
Not a member? Click here to register now!
Latest Forum Post
Re: Rate Justice League!
by The Dark Knight
Total Members: 707 | Total Posts: 49,846 | Total Topics: 3,179

SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
| Design based on the Reference theme by Crip XHTML RSS WAP2 iPhone Theme Scrolling News Ticker by Mioplanet
"BATMAN" all related characters indicia are copyrighted by D.C. COMICS, a TIME-WARNER company. Batman created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger.
All features, articles and blogs are © of Batman-Online.com's staff & members (unless otherwise indicated) and may NOT be copied without the author's permission. All artwork is © of respective owners.
This is NOT an official Batman website. Conceived, designed and edited by Paul Rodgers since 1st June 2002. Facebook and twitter feeds maintained by Rick Francis and Azrael.