Well, that is an interesting change of position. Thanks for clarifying
Not a change of position, but a clarification... As I said, the opinions of others can change my opinion, in the same way man can walk on the moon, or can win the lotto or can contract ebola... It's possible, but so massively unlikely to happen, it's easier for me to say that opinions and reviews have no effect, as under 99.99999% of situations, they won't...
Well, that is an interesting change of position. Thanks for clarifying
Not a change of position, but a clarification... As I said, the opinions of others can change my opinion, in the same way man can walk on the moon, or can win the lotto or can contract ebola... It's possible, but so massively unlikely to happen, it's easier for me to say that opinions and reviews have no effect, as under 99.99999% of situations, they won't...
I'm not trying to argue just for the sake of arguing, the going from a definitive "play NO part" to "might play a LITTLE part" is not a clarification, it is a change. "No" is absolute, and you have definitely changed from that absolute stance. Which is fine. But there is no point denying something that factually happened. There is nothing wrong with changing.
I guess my main reason for not going to see it is that I'm an old school comics guy, and just don't want to see a bunch of arcs spliced together. I don't think I can stomach it.
But, I suppose ill watch it eventually on sat or bluray. The whole Doomsday thing bugs me, a lot. Reminds me of Venom in Spider Man3. And how they completely ruined an all time great villian. I just don't feel like re-living that type of disapointment again. So thats the main thing that kept me away from the theater.
Frankly I don't know which reviewers to believe atm, you got people saying "Its the worst ever", and on the other hand you got reviews saying "Don't trust the critics, this is a masterpiece."
Guess ill need to see it with my own 2 eyes. But I'm wary, this old school comic guy can only take so much disapointment.
Not to mention his death was more than obvious. We had an interesting discussion about this a few months ago in fleet chat about whether or not Superman and Batman (or both) would die in the film. One guy in our fleet had said it would be Superman because it was the "dramatic" way to show what his intentions are. It was clear at the end of MoS that the government still didn't trust him. By sacrificing himself to save someone in BvS, he'd remove any doubts as to his intentions.
Yeah, for people who have read Superman comic books, the death of Superman was predictable. Doomsday defeated all the members of the JLA quite easily. Superman finally defeated Doomsday, but at the cost of his life. But he would be eventually resurrected.
I guess my main reason for not going to see it is that I'm an old school comics guy, and just don't want to see a bunch of arcs spliced together. I don't think I can stomach it.
I know what you mean. I read the original death of superman arc when it happened, so it is definitely...interesting...seeing this interpretation. That said, as I'm sure you're aware, if you actually read comics long enough you will see the same arcs retold even in that medium. So the fact that a movie is doing it is not really something new to comic fans =P
I guess my main reason for not going to see it is that I'm an old school comics guy, and just don't want to see a bunch of arcs spliced together. I don't think I can stomach it.
But, I suppose ill watch it eventually on sat or bluray.
The whole Doomsday thing bugs me, a lot. Reminds me of Venom in Spider Man3.
And how they completely ruined an all time great villian.
I just don't feel like re-living that type of disapointment again.
So thats the main thing that kept me away from the theater.
Frankly I don't know which reviewers to believe atm, you got people saying "Its the worst ever", and on the other hand you got reviews saying "Don't trust the critics, this is a masterpiece."
Guess ill need to see it with my own 2 eyes.
But I'm wary, this old school comic guy can only take so much disapointment.
I don't ever expect the movie writers to actually make a comic series into a movie. So I don't expect to see the Superman vs Doomsday arc made into a movie. Instead I expect to see a new story that uses certain aspects.
Well, that is an interesting change of position. Thanks for clarifying
Not a change of position, but a clarification... As I said, the opinions of others can change my opinion, in the same way man can walk on the moon, or can win the lotto or can contract ebola... It's possible, but so massively unlikely to happen, it's easier for me to say that opinions and reviews have no effect, as under 99.99999% of situations, they won't...
I'm not trying to argue just for the sake of arguing, the going from a definitive "play NO part" to "might play a LITTLE part" is not a clarification, it is a change. "No" is absolute, and you have definitely changed from that absolute stance. Which is fine. But there is no point denying something that factually happened. There is nothing wrong with changing.
Well, if you want to consider a "so infinitesimally small possibility as being essentially impossible to happen" as worthy of classifying as different to "playing no part", then fair enough... But even "might play a LITTLE part" is still such a gross exaggeration, as to be wildly inaccurate in this situation...
Well, that is an interesting change of position. Thanks for clarifying
Not a change of position, but a clarification... As I said, the opinions of others can change my opinion, in the same way man can walk on the moon, or can win the lotto or can contract ebola... It's possible, but so massively unlikely to happen, it's easier for me to say that opinions and reviews have no effect, as under 99.99999% of situations, they won't...
I'm not trying to argue just for the sake of arguing, the going from a definitive "play NO part" to "might play a LITTLE part" is not a clarification, it is a change. "No" is absolute, and you have definitely changed from that absolute stance. Which is fine. But there is no point denying something that factually happened. There is nothing wrong with changing.
Well, if you want to consider a "so infinitesimally small possibility as being essentially impossible to happen" as worthy of classifying as different to "playing no part", then fair enough... But even "might play a LITTLE part" is still such a gross exaggeration, as to be wildly inaccurate in this situation...
Heh, ok. But see, that brings me back to my earlier question. If the chance that you could actually be affected by other people's opinions is so small that it might as well not even exist...then why are you even mentioning the negative reviews and saying that they aren't changing your mind? This is like a merry-go-round at this point =P
If my eyes did not tricked me there was a split second of some vibrating movement on one of the coffins which, again if that was not an imagination since it was a very late night screening, could imply that someone in said coffin might not be dead as a parrot as everybody believes. But other than that the only indicators hes not dead is the comic history this story is based on and the expectancy to see Supes in the JL movies and maybe a MoS2.
Well, like I said I didn't see the movie yet. It was spoiled for me while I was in a bus with small group of people discussing the movie. I had no headphones at the time unfortunately. That scene should have probably just been left out because if the coffin was vibrating then that clearly indicates someone in there could possibly still be alive.
People who have read Superman comics will know he isn't truly dead. But the general audience would not know that... at least until a trailer is released for a possible MoS2. If Warner Bros. decides to release the JL first, then perhaps it's a good idea to exclude showing Superman in posters and trailers. Similar to how Luke Skywalker was never depicted in a Force Awakens poster or the trailers.
I guess my main reason for not going to see it is that I'm an old school comics guy, and just don't want to see a bunch of arcs spliced together. I don't think I can stomach it.
I know what you mean. I read the original death of superman arc when it happened, so it is definitely...interesting...seeing this interpretation. That said, as I'm sure you're aware, if you actually read comics long enough you will see the same arcs retold even in that medium. So the fact that a movie is doing it is not really something new to comic fans =P
I heard the Death of Superman (and Batman:Knightfall) on audio releases back in the mid-90s, and later read the novelization of after Superman's death (and the novelization of Knightfall) I enjoyed both, but as mentioned upthread, the Superman/Doomsday story could be made into three, or at least two movies... The idea of that element being shoehorned into BvS, just strikes me as trying to cram ten pounts of TRIBBLE into a two pound bag... :-\
I guess my main reason for not going to see it is that I'm an old school comics guy, and just don't want to see a bunch of arcs spliced together. I don't think I can stomach it.
I know what you mean. I read the original death of superman arc when it happened, so it is definitely...interesting...seeing this interpretation. That said, as I'm sure you're aware, if you actually read comics long enough you will see the same arcs retold even in that medium. So the fact that a movie is doing it is not really something new to comic fans =P
I heard the Death of Superman (and Batman:Knightfall) on audio releases back in the mid-90s, and later read the novelization of after Superman's death (and the novelization of Knightfall) I enjoyed both, but as mentioned upthread, the Superman/Doomsday story could be made into three, or at least two movies... The idea of that element being shoehorned into BvS, just strikes me as trying to cram ten pounts of TRIBBLE into a two pound bag... :-\
I never read the novel, so I don't know how closely it follows the original comics. That said, if you've never read the actual comics that the novel is based on, they are pretty awesome. And I would have loved to see a Cyborg Superman on the big screen
Well, that is an interesting change of position. Thanks for clarifying
Not a change of position, but a clarification... As I said, the opinions of others can change my opinion, in the same way man can walk on the moon, or can win the lotto or can contract ebola... It's possible, but so massively unlikely to happen, it's easier for me to say that opinions and reviews have no effect, as under 99.99999% of situations, they won't...
I'm not trying to argue just for the sake of arguing, the going from a definitive "play NO part" to "might play a LITTLE part" is not a clarification, it is a change. "No" is absolute, and you have definitely changed from that absolute stance. Which is fine. But there is no point denying something that factually happened. There is nothing wrong with changing.
Well, if you want to consider a "so infinitesimally small possibility as being essentially impossible to happen" as worthy of classifying as different to "playing no part", then fair enough... But even "might play a LITTLE part" is still such a gross exaggeration, as to be wildly inaccurate in this situation...
Heh, ok. But see, that brings me back to my earlier question. If the chance that you could actually be affected by other people's opinions is so small that it might as well not even exist...then why are you even mentioning the negative reviews and saying that they aren't changing your mind? This is like a merry-go-round at this point =P
Just for the sake of stating for accuracy, that the reviews (due to their consistent and negative nature) were not doing anything to make me consider changing my mind... It wasn't just a case of me having made up my mind, and not even being willing to entertain any other notion of the movie, because that would just be closed-minded... But as I said yesterday, those reviews really were the 'slapping the spade' on the freshly-filled grave of my interest
I guess my main reason for not going to see it is that I'm an old school comics guy, and just don't want to see a bunch of arcs spliced together. I don't think I can stomach it.
I know what you mean. I read the original death of superman arc when it happened, so it is definitely...interesting...seeing this interpretation. That said, as I'm sure you're aware, if you actually read comics long enough you will see the same arcs retold even in that medium. So the fact that a movie is doing it is not really something new to comic fans =P
I heard the Death of Superman (and Batman:Knightfall) on audio releases back in the mid-90s, and later read the novelization of after Superman's death (and the novelization of Knightfall) I enjoyed both, but as mentioned upthread, the Superman/Doomsday story could be made into three, or at least two movies... The idea of that element being shoehorned into BvS, just strikes me as trying to cram ten pounts of TRIBBLE into a two pound bag... :-\
I never read the novel, so I don't know how closely it follows the original comics. That said, if you've never read the actual comics that the novel is based on, they are pretty awesome. And I would have loved to see a Cyborg Superman on the big screen
It was pretty good, but I couldn't say how closely it followed the comics, the only Superman comics I ever read were the Silver Age series, up till the one where Clark flew to Lois in some South American archeological dig, and got his TRIBBLE whooped by a robot wrapped up as a mummy... That said, I think there was a plan long ago to do a film along the lines of the Death and Life of Superman, with Nic Cage as Superman...
If my eyes did not tricked me there was a split second of some vibrating movement on one of the coffins which, again if that was not an imagination since it was a very late night screening, could imply that someone in said coffin might not be dead as a parrot as everybody believes. But other than that the only indicators hes not dead is the comic history this story is based on and the expectancy to see Supes in the JL movies and maybe a MoS2.
Well, like I said I didn't see the movie yet. It was spoiled for me while I was in a bus with small group of people discussing the movie. I had no headphones at the time unfortunately. That scene should have probably just been left out because if the coffin was vibrating then that clearly indicates someone in there could possibly still be alive.
People who have read Superman comics will know he isn't truly dead. But the general audience would not know that... at least until a trailer is released for a possible MoS2. If Warner Bros. decides to release the JL first, then perhaps it's a good idea to exclude showing Superman in posters and trailers. Similar to how Luke Skywalker was never depicted in a Force Awakens poster or the trailers.
The original Doomsday/death/return arc was one of the most famous comic book storylines ever. Even if people don't know the specific details they might know things like Superman fights Doomsday and they both die. But Superman comes back later.
Also, Batman has avoided killing criminals in the films. He could have very easily let the Joker plummet to his death in TDK, yet chose to save him.
Remember when he blew up the chemical factory in the first Burton movie? He drove the Batmobile in, engaged the armor, then dropped those bombs from the tires with people surrounding the car
Remember when he blew up the chemical factory in the first Burton movie? He drove the Batmobile in, engaged the armor, then dropped those bombs from the tires with people surrounding the car
Ok, so? I don't think anyone is denying he killed people in the films.
The whole "Batman doesn't kill" thing is only rarely true in the comics, and it has never been true in the films, there have been deaths of criminals either through his direct action, or from collateral damage, or through Batman's inaction, from the very beginning of Batman comics and they have never gone away. There have been villain deaths in every single Batman film almost all of which are from Batman's direct action. The branding thing was also used in comics, not so much as something Bruce did to be fair, but it was done by Jean-Paul Valley aka Azrael during his time as Batman following Bruce being paralyzed by Bane. No joke with very little work I can find stories with Batman induced fatalities from nearly every year of his publication history, with the small exception of the ultra campy 1960s era under the Comics Code Authority (aka the Adam West era), thankfully that didn't last long.
As I said, in general Batman does not kill people. In general does not mean never. Portraying him as a crazed killing machine is not accurate as far as I'm concerned. That's more Punisher than Batman to me. Also, Batman has avoided killing criminals in the films. He could have very easily let the Joker plummet to his death in TDK, yet chose to save him.
I've never been big on reading comics (I did read a fair amount of the ultimate xmen comics, and some of ultimate spiderman until I read a spoiler about Peter Parker dieing), but my understanding has always been that batman doesn't kill unless he has to. Even in the dark and gritty Nolan movies this was true (1 villain died due to his inaction, 1 was intentionally saved, and 2 were killed accidentally). The Keaton batman was a bit more lenient on this, but val Kilmer's mostly stuck to this and clooney's ... was basically a reboot of the campy Adam West batman so that one doesn't really count anyway.
I haven't seen BvS and don't plan to until it's free on OnDemand, but if the descriptions I've heard about batfleck just mercilessly killing criminals is true it's just one more reason for me to skip it altogether, because to me that's not what batman is about. It's about Bruce Wayne going to that dark place necessary to do what he does, without losing his soul and becoming the very thing he fights against.
I haven't seen BvS and don't plan to until it's free on OnDemand, but if the descriptions I've heard about batfleck just mercilessly killing criminals is true it's just one more reason for me to skip it altogether, because to me that's not what batman is about. It's about Bruce Wayne going to that dark place necessary to do what he does, without losing his soul and becoming the very thing he fights against.
TBH, some people are exaggerating the killing in BvS. Yes, this Batman is based on TDKR version. Yes, Batman does kill some people in the movie. But he doesn't kill every criminal he fights, like some are claiming. I'm not sure why, but some people seem to think that exaggerating helps their point, but it actually invalidates it. If you have to exaggerate the truth to make your point, then that means your point can't stand on it's own merit.
From my understanding as it was described to me by friends (and what I've read) is that Batman is an older, angrier Batman full of rage after years of failure. I can understand wanting to make him more brutal, yet I agree with you that it doesn't quite fit the character in my mind... and IMO as you put it, he wouldn't lose his soul and become the criminal he wants to stop.
What you're trying to say without actually saying it is that this Batman is based on TDKR. That's really all there is to it.
What you're trying to say without actually saying it is that this Batman is based on TDKR. That's really all there is to it.
Well, no. What I'm saying is that I don't agree with the interpretation of the Batman character in this film, but if that's what you want to believe, then fine.
What do you mean "if that's what I want to believe"? I'm telling you the Batman in this film is based on TDKR version. Kevin Smith said as much in the quote you just posted. Now, whether you happen to *like* that version of Batman is obviously subjective, but the fact that this Batman is based on TDKR version has nothing to do with "what I want to believe".
What do you mean "if that's what I want to believe"? I'm telling you the Batman in this film is based on TDKR version. Kevin Smith said as much in the quote you just posted. Now, whether you happen to *like* that version of Batman is obviously subjective, but the fact that this Batman is based on TDKR version has nothing to do with "what I want to believe".
I don't disagree that this is what the film is heavily influenced by. I'm saying that I personally don't agree with the interpretation of the character, regardless of what comic(s) the film is based on.
And that is completely fine. There are plenty of comics arcs I don't like. But if some director decides to make a movie on an arc I don't like, that doesn't mean it isn't being true to the source material that it is actually based on.
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
I'm not trying to argue just for the sake of arguing, the going from a definitive "play NO part" to "might play a LITTLE part" is not a clarification, it is a change. "No" is absolute, and you have definitely changed from that absolute stance. Which is fine. But there is no point denying something that factually happened. There is nothing wrong with changing.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
But, I suppose ill watch it eventually on sat or bluray.
The whole Doomsday thing bugs me, a lot. Reminds me of Venom in Spider Man3.
And how they completely ruined an all time great villian.
I just don't feel like re-living that type of disapointment again.
So thats the main thing that kept me away from the theater.
Frankly I don't know which reviewers to believe atm, you got people saying "Its the worst ever", and on the other hand you got reviews saying "Don't trust the critics, this is a masterpiece."
Guess ill need to see it with my own 2 eyes.
But I'm wary, this old school comic guy can only take so much disapointment.
Yeah, for people who have read Superman comic books, the death of Superman was predictable. Doomsday defeated all the members of the JLA quite easily. Superman finally defeated Doomsday, but at the cost of his life. But he would be eventually resurrected.
I know what you mean. I read the original death of superman arc when it happened, so it is definitely...interesting...seeing this interpretation. That said, as I'm sure you're aware, if you actually read comics long enough you will see the same arcs retold even in that medium. So the fact that a movie is doing it is not really something new to comic fans =P
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
My character Tsin'xing
Heh, ok. But see, that brings me back to my earlier question. If the chance that you could actually be affected by other people's opinions is so small that it might as well not even exist...then why are you even mentioning the negative reviews and saying that they aren't changing your mind? This is like a merry-go-round at this point =P
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Well, like I said I didn't see the movie yet. It was spoiled for me while I was in a bus with small group of people discussing the movie. I had no headphones at the time unfortunately. That scene should have probably just been left out because if the coffin was vibrating then that clearly indicates someone in there could possibly still be alive.
People who have read Superman comics will know he isn't truly dead. But the general audience would not know that... at least until a trailer is released for a possible MoS2. If Warner Bros. decides to release the JL first, then perhaps it's a good idea to exclude showing Superman in posters and trailers. Similar to how Luke Skywalker was never depicted in a Force Awakens poster or the trailers.
I heard the Death of Superman (and Batman:Knightfall) on audio releases back in the mid-90s, and later read the novelization of after Superman's death (and the novelization of Knightfall) I enjoyed both, but as mentioned upthread, the Superman/Doomsday story could be made into three, or at least two movies... The idea of that element being shoehorned into BvS, just strikes me as trying to cram ten pounts of TRIBBLE into a two pound bag... :-\
I never read the novel, so I don't know how closely it follows the original comics. That said, if you've never read the actual comics that the novel is based on, they are pretty awesome. And I would have loved to see a Cyborg Superman on the big screen
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Just for the sake of stating for accuracy, that the reviews (due to their consistent and negative nature) were not doing anything to make me consider changing my mind... It wasn't just a case of me having made up my mind, and not even being willing to entertain any other notion of the movie, because that would just be closed-minded... But as I said yesterday, those reviews really were the 'slapping the spade' on the freshly-filled grave of my interest
My character Tsin'xing
Remember when he blew up the chemical factory in the first Burton movie? He drove the Batmobile in, engaged the armor, then dropped those bombs from the tires with people surrounding the car
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Um..you just said...
So, my point was, he certainly didn't AVOID killing all those people in the chemical factory.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I've never been big on reading comics (I did read a fair amount of the ultimate xmen comics, and some of ultimate spiderman until I read a spoiler about Peter Parker dieing), but my understanding has always been that batman doesn't kill unless he has to. Even in the dark and gritty Nolan movies this was true (1 villain died due to his inaction, 1 was intentionally saved, and 2 were killed accidentally). The Keaton batman was a bit more lenient on this, but val Kilmer's mostly stuck to this and clooney's ... was basically a reboot of the campy Adam West batman so that one doesn't really count anyway.
I haven't seen BvS and don't plan to until it's free on OnDemand, but if the descriptions I've heard about batfleck just mercilessly killing criminals is true it's just one more reason for me to skip it altogether, because to me that's not what batman is about. It's about Bruce Wayne going to that dark place necessary to do what he does, without losing his soul and becoming the very thing he fights against.
TBH, some people are exaggerating the killing in BvS. Yes, this Batman is based on TDKR version. Yes, Batman does kill some people in the movie. But he doesn't kill every criminal he fights, like some are claiming. I'm not sure why, but some people seem to think that exaggerating helps their point, but it actually invalidates it. If you have to exaggerate the truth to make your point, then that means your point can't stand on it's own merit.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
What you're trying to say without actually saying it is that this Batman is based on TDKR. That's really all there is to it.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
What do you mean "if that's what I want to believe"? I'm telling you the Batman in this film is based on TDKR version. Kevin Smith said as much in the quote you just posted. Now, whether you happen to *like* that version of Batman is obviously subjective, but the fact that this Batman is based on TDKR version has nothing to do with "what I want to believe".
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
And that is completely fine. There are plenty of comics arcs I don't like. But if some director decides to make a movie on an arc I don't like, that doesn't mean it isn't being true to the source material that it is actually based on.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008