Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

[IronJimbo]

1 minute ago, The Futurist said:

Brie Larson will probably hurt the MCU badly.

 

The trailer of her movie is so bland we can see through it.

She doesn't smile.

She s ugly.

She probably smells.(despite the baguette)

true to be honest, you seen her feet?

 

 

fungus!

[IronJimbo]

we need to move to making all actors cgi so we can make them perfectly beautiful like Alita

[GraceRandolph]

So I just watched Solo. It was good - what's all the hate about?  

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, GraceRandolph said:

So I just watched Solo. It was good - what's all the hate about?  

Never heard of much if even any hate about Solo such a nothing movie one way or an other, what are you referring too ?

[dxmatrixdt]

Star Wars films define a generation.  

Star Wars 77-80

Empire 80-83

Jedi 83-

 

Phantom Menace - 99-02

Attack of the Clones - 02-05

Revenge of the Sith - 05-08

Clone Wars - 08

Force Awakens - 15-16

Rogue One - 16-17

Solo - 17-18

 

Force Awakens did not stir up film the way The Phantom Menace did. but Rogue One followed up a year later with a heavy punch.

  The Last Jedi made up for The Force Awakens IMO.  

then Solo is a lost Star Wars film

 

so it is hard to determine which franchise is victorious, 

 

anyone have an idea at which one won?

Edited October 7, 2018 by dtairdryZid

[LaughingEvans]

4 hours ago, GraceRandolph said:

So I just watched Solo. It was good - what's all the hate about?  

 

Nobody cares enough to hate on it. The cult film that came before it killed all interest.

Edited October 7, 2018 by LaughingEvans

[MCKillswitch123]

Came across this post on the weekend thread, and felt like responding to it right here:

On 10/6/2018 at 9:34 AM, Elessar said:

JL was doomed the moment WB started heavily meddling with it because they succumbed to public pressure of some of the loud audience whose opinion they shouldn't have listened to, because frankly it sucks. MoS and BvS (Extended) are perfectly fine and some of the better comic book movies.

If you're talking about the quality of the film, the movie was hardly going to be much different than what it turned out to be if Snyder had stayed (instead of glowing red, the third act was gonna look dark; and it probably wouldn't have had some of the jokes Whedon inserted... that's how different the 'Snyder cut' would've been, since I'm pretty sure everything else would've stayed the same). So I feel like that's kind of a fallacy. Did you not see the JL teaser trailer? Looks similar enough to the actual movie. And filmings began right after BVS came out, so I doubt that they managed to shift to a completely or even half different script through studio pressure within a finger snap. JL was doomed the moment BVS came out, and that's on both WB and Snyder. Snyder still gets less fault as his baby (the extended version of BVS, which frankly ain't that good anyway, but it definitely succeeds a lot more than the theatrical version) was shrunk to bits in editing and that was what most people got sold on, but ultimately, he still had to take responsability for what was the theatrical version, and the theatrical version was a messy shamble of poor editing, writing and structuring that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. And that's not just WB's fault: it's his fault too, as both the theatrical and extended versions share deadly flaws that really bring the whole experience down in many ways.

 

If you wanna talk about a movie that WAS destroyed by studio meddling, look at Suicide Squad. That shit was completely ripped apart from head to toes, and I imagine the original Ayer version was way different. That whole "third act" with Hawaiian Delevigne was all reshoots and the teaser sold a way more serious film than any other marketing piece did.

Edited October 7, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[TomCruiseTop]

On 10/6/2018 at 9:45 AM, Box Office Theory Fan said:

this is common problem here in europe people moving around dates and numbers to suit the political motivations 

 

i did not think comic books fans would do the same though 😧

Yes it's quite common. Notice that those who were claiming otherwise have scuttled off back into their dark corners of ignorance once called out. 

 

[Napoleon]

On 10/7/2018 at 7:48 AM, MCKillswitch123 said:

Came across this post on the weekend thread, and felt like responding to it right here:

If you're talking about the quality of the film, the movie was hardly going to be much different than what it turned out to be if Snyder had stayed (instead of glowing red, the third act was gonna look dark; and it probably wouldn't have had some of the jokes Whedon inserted... that's how different the 'Snyder cut' would've been, since I'm pretty sure everything else would've stayed the same). So I feel like that's kind of a fallacy. Did you not see the JL teaser trailer? Looks similar enough to the actual movie. And filmings began right after BVS came out, so I doubt that they managed to shift to a completely or even half different script through studio pressure within a finger snap. JL was doomed the moment BVS came out, and that's on both WB and Snyder. Snyder still gets less fault as his baby (the extended version of BVS, which frankly ain't that good anyway, but it definitely succeeds a lot more than the theatrical version) was shrunk to bits in editing and that was what most people got sold on, but ultimately, he still had to take responsability for what was the theatrical version, and the theatrical version was a messy shamble of poor editing, writing and structuring that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. And that's not just WB's fault: it's his fault too, as both the theatrical and extended versions share deadly flaws that really bring the whole experience down in many ways.

 

If you wanna talk about a movie that WAS destroyed by studio meddling, look at Suicide Squad. That shit was completely ripped apart from head to toes, and I imagine the original Ayer version was way different. That whole "third act" with Hawaiian Delevigne was all reshoots and the teaser sold a way more serious film than any other marketing piece did.

Let's say Snyder's Justice League would have been around 150 minutes long. The Whedon version is 120 minutes long. Assuming 30% was Whedon reshoots, then over 1 hour of the original Snyder version was cut. That's huge, and enough to change a movie completely.

 

And it wasn't just that. They changed the score to an awful one, the reshoots were rushed and looked awful, they changed visuals digitally and made scenes awful, acting in the Whedon scenes was awful. And more importantly, the central aspects of the Snyder version were Cyborg's origin and Superman's return, and those scenes were butchered. If you remove one important peace you can compromise the whole structure.

[rukaio101]

1 hour ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Yes it's quite common. Notice that those who were claiming otherwise have scuttled off back into their dark corners of ignorance once called out. 

 

Or people are just aware that you're physically incapable of arguing in good faith on this subject and have decided not to waste their time?

 

Hell, you didn't even 'correct' anything. Zeesoh never said that Zorro came out before Birth of a Nation, he said that the Scarlet Pimpernel came out before BoaN. Which it did. By 10 years. As mentioned.

 

Plus, either way, Zorro coming out after BoaN means absolutely nothing in regards to your argument, since it coming out afterwards does not change the fact that it (along with the Shadow) was clearly one of the primary inspirations for Batman, rather than the klan. And unless you're seriously attempting to argue that the hispanic masked vigilante was equally inspired by Birth of a Nation, it kinda shoots the legs out from underneath your argument.

 

Hell, your entire argument falls apart almost immediately when you realise, as other people have pointed out, that the earliest and most influential superhero and the one who codified most of the tropes in the genre, Superman, did not wear a mask. And since like 90% of other superheroes were clearly inspired by either him or Batman (who as clearly stated was inspired by the likes of Zorro and the Shadow), it kinda means your claims are worth jack shit.

 

Now, I'm not going to claim that superhero comics have always been completely free of unfortunate racial implications, one only needs to look at the propaganda comics made during WWII to disprove that. Hell, maybe some superheroes or stories really were directly inspired by BoaN, rather than their competitors/Zorro/The Scarlet Pimpernel/Robin Hood/. But attempting to act like Birth of a Nation is some great forerunner or the primary inspiration for superhero comics, when the actual original superhero, Superman has zilch to do with it is just intellectually dishonest.

 

Quite frankly, I might as well claim that all of James Cameron's movies are inspired by the KKK as well, since he clearly uses filmmaking techniques and devices pioneered by that movie. In fact, same goes for Triumph of the Will, so that would make him inspired by the Nazi's as well. But I wouldn't do that, of course, because that would be ignoring all the other context surrounding his movies and influences and because it would also be lazy and stupid and bad faith arguing. Like what you're doing right now.

 

 

Side note: Also mods, is poisoning the well no longer an offense on here? Because attempting to claim that all superhero movies are directly inspired by the KKK and that one needs to watch BoaN to even fully understand them feels pretty well poison-y to me.

 

 

[MCKillswitch123]

7 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

Let's say Snyder's Justice League would have been around 150 minutes long. The Whedon version is 120 minutes long. Assuming 30% was Whedon reshoots, then over 1 hour of the original Snyder version was cut. That's huge, and enough to change a movie completely.

 

And it wasn't just that. They changed the score to an awful one, the reshoots were rushed and looked awful, they changed visuals digitally and made scenes awful, acting in the Whedon scenes was awful. And more importantly, the central aspects of the Snyder version were Cyborg's origin and Superman's return, and those scenes were butchered. If you remove one important peace you can compromise the whole structure.

Alright, let's presume for a moment that all of that is true. Still doesn't change my main point: Justice League was doomed by the reaction to BVS, and that's to the fault of both Zack Snyder and WB.

 

This not like Suicide Squad, which was pretty much in near completion by March 2016 and then got completely torn to shreds by panic mode reshufflings of the film, which David Ayer probably had very little control over. It pretty much got Fant4stic'ed - I don't know if Ayer's vision was any good on its own, but the studio meddling made it so much more insufferable. JL's misfortune was a product of both the studio AND director(s). Because whatever the would-be Snyder cut was going to look like (which we will never know what would it look like anyway, since he never actually created a cut of his film - the Snyder cut doesn't really exist... at best, there's an assembly cut of Snyder's unedited footage, but that's it - so we can't assume that it was always going to have that one hour presumably missing in it regardless; and the reshoots probably would always end up looking rushed, since the deadline for the film's release was not going to change from November 2017 cause Kevin Tsujihara is/was a greedy fuck), it would have done very little to change the underperformance of JL. The GA doesn't care about directors swapping, or directors period (apart from a few exceptions like Nolan and Cameron)... to them, JL was always in the shadow of BVS. And we saw what happened to BVS: opened enormously and then plummeted like an asteroid. It had very poor wom. The extended version patches some issues, sure, but both versions still share big problems and the movie would likely still wind up being recieved with Man Of Steel-esque divisiveness that would cast a huge question mark on JL for a lot of people. And as far as JL goes, the muted marketing, albeit not helped by the poor looking reshoot footage, did little favors. And you could say that the less than stellar reviews were the final nail in its coffin, as people were already side-eyeing it for all these outside factors, and poor reviews only further killed interest. So even if a Snyder cut exists and even if the movie was 1000x better than the one we got, the fact is..... JL would have still underperformed. Maybe not as much, but it certainly wouldn't have shot to a lot higher either. Unless it was, like, Wonder Woman-good or something.

 

Also, this is more down to personal feelings, but Superman's return was butchered? That was the best part of the movie   It's the one scene that had everyone raving about, especially the Supes/Flash interaction. Sure, it turned into a meme because of the Superstache, but most hot heads would tell you that scene worked, independently of the logic holes around it. Cyborg, despite having a rushed origin, was also one of the better parts of the film imo.... and why the hell would Cyborg's origin be one of the main plotlines of the film anyway? Why him over the Flash and Aquaman?

[ZeeSoh]

59 minutes ago, rukaio101 said:

Or people are just aware that you're physically incapable of arguing in good faith on this subject and have decided not to waste their time?

 

Hell, you didn't even 'correct' anything. Zeesoh never said that Zorro came out before Birth of a Nation, he said that the Scarlet Pimpernel came out before BoaN. Which it did. By 10 years. As mentioned.

 

Plus, either way, Zorro coming out after BoaN means absolutely nothing in regards to your argument, since it coming out afterwards does not change the fact that it (along with the Shadow) was clearly one of the primary inspirations for Batman, rather than the klan. And unless you're seriously attempting to argue that the hispanic masked vigilante was equally inspired by Birth of a Nation, it kinda shoots the legs out from underneath your argument.

 

Hell, your entire argument falls apart almost immediately when you realise, as other people have pointed out, that the earliest and most influential superhero and the one who codified most of the tropes in the genre, Superman, did not wear a mask. And since like 90% of other superheroes were clearly inspired by either him or Batman (who as clearly stated was inspired by the likes of Zorro and the Shadow), it kinda means your claims are worth jack shit.

 

Now, I'm not going to claim that superhero comics have always been completely free of unfortunate racial implications, one only needs to look at the propaganda comics made during WWII to disprove that. Hell, maybe some superheroes or stories really were directly inspired by BoaN, rather than their competitors/Zorro/The Scarlet Pimpernel/Robin Hood/. But attempting to act like Birth of a Nation is some great forerunner or the primary inspiration for superhero comics, when the actual original superhero, Superman has zilch to do with it is just intellectually dishonest.

 

Quite frankly, I might as well claim that all of James Cameron's movies are inspired by the KKK as well, since he clearly uses filmmaking techniques and devices pioneered by that movie. In fact, same goes for Triumph of the Will, so that would make him inspired by the Nazi's as well. But I wouldn't do that, of course, because that would be ignoring all the other context surrounding his movies and influences and because it would also be lazy and stupid and bad faith arguing. Like what you're doing right now.

 

 

Side note: Also mods, is poisoning the well no longer an offense on here? Because attempting to claim that all superhero movies are directly inspired by the KKK and that one needs to watch BoaN to even fully understand them feels pretty well poison-y to me.

 

 

Bingo. I realized long ago that these cameron trolls on these board are almost all worthless of my time and hence I have every single one of them on ignore. The only reason I ever responded to that brain dead original post was how hilariously inadequate it was. 

 

And when I provided ample references, one of the tards partially quoted a single paragraph conveniently ignoring pretty much everything else i said. Thats when I realized that even facts are useless against these tards and its useless to waste on them. 

 

I would advice the same to you. Save your time and energy. 

Edited October 8, 2018 by ZeeSoh

[TomCruiseTop]

1 hour ago, rukaio101 said:

Side note: Also mods, is poisoning the well no longer an offense on here? Because attempting to claim that all superhero movies are directly inspired by the KKK and that one needs to watch BoaN to even fully understand them feels pretty well poison-y to me.

 

So glad we have yet another genius on this board who believes themselves to be more of an authority on comic books and their history than Alan Moore. 

 

You can attempt to paint whatever picture you please, your revisionist reactionary wall of text changes nothing. I think I'll stick with Mr.Moore when it comes to knowledge of Comic Book History over that of someone who doesn't seem to even want to put in the time, nor the energy to look at the blatant evidence. Either that or you have a malicious designs on re-framing the history to have some other implications, but I'll stick with using Hanlon's razor given the current forum we're on. 

 

38 minutes ago, ZeeSoh said:

And when I provided ample references, one of the tards partially quoted a single paragraph conveniently ignoring pretty much everything else i said. Thats when I realized that even facts are useless against these tards and its useless to waste on them. 

 

Ableism as well as defending the quite abhorrent closeness of the Klan and the genesis of superheroes. You're really hitting the high notes now ZeeSoh. The fact that you have to fall back on name calling and that your "evidence" meant nothing - unless you're attempting to argue that the pulp stories of the 1910s were not influenced by the Klan - in which case you're wrong... again. 

 

Have they ceased to teach history or civics in american institutions? 

 

 

Edit: Think Moore's take here is a really great take on the current political climate in the US and perhaps opens a further discussion into just why comic book movies have grown so large in recent times... 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2018 by JamesCameronScholar

[Hydrogen]

49 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

So glad we have yet another genius on this board who believes themselves to be more of an authority on comic books and their history than Alan Moore. 

well they also think they know more about box office than james cameron so what do you expect XD 

[Napoleon]

2 hours ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Alright, let's presume for a moment that all of that is true. Still doesn't change my main point: Justice League was doomed by the reaction to BVS, and that's to the fault of both Zack Snyder and WB.

 

This not like Suicide Squad, which was pretty much in near completion by March 2016 and then got completely torn to shreds by panic mode reshufflings of the film, which David Ayer probably had very little control over. It pretty much got Fant4stic'ed - I don't know if Ayer's vision was any good on its own, but the studio meddling made it so much more insufferable. JL's misfortune was a product of both the studio AND director(s). Because whatever the would-be Snyder cut was going to look like (which we will never know what would it look like anyway, since he never actually created a cut of his film - the Snyder cut doesn't really exist... at best, there's an assembly cut of Snyder's unedited footage, but that's it - so we can't assume that it was always going to have that one hour presumably missing in it regardless; and the reshoots probably would always end up looking rushed, since the deadline for the film's release was not going to change from November 2017 cause Kevin Tsujihara is/was a greedy fuck), it would have done very little to change the underperformance of JL. The GA doesn't care about directors swapping, or directors period (apart from a few exceptions like Nolan and Cameron)... to them, JL was always in the shadow of BVS. And we saw what happened to BVS: opened enormously and then plummeted like an asteroid. It had very poor wom. The extended version patches some issues, sure, but both versions still share big problems and the movie would likely still wind up being recieved with Man Of Steel-esque divisiveness that would cast a huge question mark on JL for a lot of people. And as far as JL goes, the muted marketing, albeit not helped by the poor looking reshoot footage, did little favors. And you could say that the less than stellar reviews were the final nail in its coffin, as people were already side-eyeing it for all these outside factors, and poor reviews only further killed interest. So even if a Snyder cut exists and even if the movie was 1000x better than the one we got, the fact is..... JL would have still underperformed. Maybe not as much, but it certainly wouldn't have shot to a lot higher either. Unless it was, like, Wonder Woman-good or something.

 

Also, this is more down to personal feelings, but Superman's return was butchered? That was the best part of the movie   It's the one scene that had everyone raving about, especially the Supes/Flash interaction. Sure, it turned into a meme because of the Superstache, but most hot heads would tell you that scene worked, independently of the logic holes around it. Cyborg, despite having a rushed origin, was also one of the better parts of the film imo.... and why the hell would Cyborg's origin be one of the main plotlines of the film anyway? Why him over the Flash and Aquaman?

Snyder's Justice League was always said to be a more fun movie than BVS. The thing is Snyder has a very specific vision for the DC universe and what happened in BVS just had to happen because otherwise this world wouldn't make sense. I mean, those characters had to experience those events and deal with the consequences of their own existence. He is a real visionary filmmaker and he wanted each movie to be its own thing with its own meaning and reflection on our world. He was not trying to establish a formula to make DC movies as manufacturing like most of the franchises out there do. The fear of Justice League being just like BVS in tone and style is unreasonable.

 

Snyder's Justice League was going to be about how the world needs to put their political and religious differences aside and unite to defeat a common threat, and the movie was coming at a time we really needed to hear that message. Geoff Johns and his lack of vision took the opportunity of Snyder having to leave and got rid of all the political commentary of the film and made it a dumb, straight up fun and colorful adventure. The result was no one liked the movie. If Snyder wouldn't have gone through that tragedy in his own family, we could have had a very fun adventure with rich and powerful political commentary that I'm sure many people would love.

[langer]

I'm still to this day a very big fan of BvS but I have been very disappointed by JL.  I'm in the minority that prefers Snyder style to Whedon and having these two directors try to mesh JL into  a cohesive movie was painful to watch. 

 

I would cut 1 minute of BvS and be happy with it all (the way Superman says Martha, not the sentence, just the delivery  ---  Batman saying to Martha he's a friend of Superman, minutes after trying to kill him) 

[MCKillswitch123]

1 hour ago, Napoleon said:

Snyder's Justice League was always said to be a more fun movie than BVS. The thing is Snyder has a very specific vision for the DC universe and what happened in BVS just had to happen because otherwise this world wouldn't make sense. I mean, those characters had to experience those events and deal with the consequences of their own existence. He is a real visionary filmmaker and he wanted each movie to be its own thing with its own meaning and reflection on our world. He was not trying to establish a formula to make DC movies as manufacturing like most of the franchises out there do. The fear of Justice League being just like BVS in tone and style is unreasonable.

 

Snyder's Justice League was going to be about how the world needs to put their political and religious differences aside and unite to defeat a common threat, and the movie was coming at a time we really needed to hear that message. Geoff Johns and his lack of vision took the opportunity of Snyder having to leave and got rid of all the political commentary of the film and made it a dumb, straight up fun and colorful adventure. The result was no one liked the movie. If Snyder wouldn't have gone through that tragedy in his own family, we could have had a very fun adventure with rich and powerful political commentary that I'm sure many people would love.

Well, that's what WB should have told general audiences about JL during the (nearly) two years after BVS came out. But as I said, the marketing of the movie was pretty muted and inconsistent, so they failed at making the film look appealing, nevermind fun. Also, the footage that we saw in trailers that happened before any reshoots were ever scheduled looked pretty.... Snydery in visual approach, including the same kind of lifelessly grey color grading present in both MOS and BVS, so while I believe he intended a fun adventure, 'colorful' is definitely not the word I'd use. (Also, I don't buy for a damn second that MOS and BVS were 'their own thing' and different.... tonally speaking, they were exactly the same.)

 

As far as what BVS was, look mate, you don't have to justify what Snyder was doing or why you liked it. It's not like I can't see why BVS (and MOS) both have their fans. I don't loathe these movies myself either and I find qualities in them (though I can't sympathize with MOS, because I feel like it completely missed the mark on representing Superman; and that has nothing to do with him being dark and gritty, and all to do with just how poor the script was). Hell, the opening sequence of BVS alone - except for floating Bruce Wayne - is worth the price of admission imo, despite all the nonsense that comes after. The main point is: whatever Snyder was trying to do with BVS, no matter how ambitious or visionary his ideas were, didn't work. Plain and simple. You can enjoy the movie all you want, but the majority of people did not and will not remember it fondly. Some didn't like it for being too dark, others found it a big time mess, others wanted more Batman vs. Superman and without such a disappointing ending, etc.. Everyone had their own reasons. (Me, I'd chock it down to uneven and poor storytelling, a failure to invest me in the Batman/Superman conflict from a motivations perspective and some memetastically messy moments.) And that was always going to be a goose egg in the face of Justice League - it would always live in the shadow of BVS and its reception. No matter how the marketing, or Snyder himself, promised JL would be different and more lighthearted. If BVS had gotten even MOS-like reviews (very mixed, but nothing extraordinarily bad), there's a far bigger chance that Suicide Squad would have never been meddled with, WB would've just paid some yes-man (or even Ben Affleck) to finish JL instead of hiring the director of the two Avengers movies in the aftermath of Snyder's departure to mourn a tragedy, and JL probably would have at least opened to 100 million domestically and outgrossed MOS all over the world.

Edited October 8, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[Water Bottle]

On 10/3/2018 at 11:50 AM, ZeeSoh said:

What that ridiculous article basically boils down to is that CB’s are heavily influenced by the KKK simply because both are masked vigilantes operating outside the law doing what they think is right. 

 

That’s it. There is no other evidence or clear links provided. The author basically stripped the stories of every substance and any nuances into bare bolts. The author and the desperate person peddling this nonsense on here forgets that this trope predates both of these things. There have been others with similar tropes. That does not mean they were influenced by the KKK too. 

 

But it also doesn't mean the KKK didn't have an influence, whether you like that or not, intentional or not. Looking at the author, he's an assistant professor at Washington & Lee University and has written a couple of non-fiction novels focusing on analyzing superhero comics, their history, their influences, and their relationship with the culture and the politics of the time. He also had a blog where he contacted a Republican congressman for a year after Trump's election because he was outraged by Trump's electoral victory.  But I'd say the author is more of an expert on this issue than some random nobody posting on Reddit.

 

The author isn't attempting to discredit comic books or imply that they haven't had a positive impact on society. In fact, he'd probably argue otherwise.  Even the article states "The superhero, despite the character’s evolution into a champion of the oppressed, partly originated from an oppressive, racist impulse in American culture, and the formula codifies an ethics of vigilante extremism that still contradicts the superhero’s purported social mission."

 

I'm not entirely sure why JCS thinks a liberal can't like CBMs and superhero comic books just because you can find connections between the way the KKK was romanticized by bigots and some superhero tropes. Hell, you don't even need to tread into the history of the origins of the superhero to have problems ideologically: there's the slightly fascist and problematic law and order view that many superhero lores can inadvertently promote (despite being in the defense of the oppressed or in the defense of democracy). 

 

Instead of getting mad, just realize that JCS's initial premise is absurd. You can like something as a whole despite disliking parts of the history and disagreeing with parts of its message. I still like superhero movies but I wouldn't necessarily want to live in their universe for many reasons. Unless I had superpowers myself.  

[ZeeSoh]

45 minutes ago, Water Bottle said:

 

But it also doesn't mean the KKK didn't have an influence, whether you like that or not, intentional or not. Looking at the author, he's an assistant professor at Washington & Lee University and has written a couple of non-fiction novels focusing on analyzing superhero comics, their history, their influences, and their relationship with the culture and the politics of the time. He also had a blog where he contacted a Republican congressman for a year after Trump's election because he was outraged by Trump's electoral victory.  But I'd say the author is more of an expert on this issue than some random nobody posting on Reddit.

 

The author isn't attempting to discredit comic books or imply that they haven't had a positive impact on society. In fact, he'd probably argue otherwise.  Even the article states "The superhero, despite the character’s evolution into a champion of the oppressed, partly originated from an oppressive, racist impulse in American culture, and the formula codifies an ethics of vigilante extremism that still contradicts the superhero’s purported social mission."

 

I'm not entirely sure why JCS thinks a liberal can't like CBMs and superhero comic books just because you can find connections between the way the KKK was romanticized by bigots and some superhero tropes. Hell, you don't even need to tread into the history of the origins of the superhero to have problems ideologically: there's the slightly fascist and problematic law and order view that many superhero lores can inadvertently promote (despite being in the defense of the oppressed or in the defense of democracy). 

 

Instead of getting mad, just realize that JCS's initial premise is absurd. You can like something as a whole despite disliking parts of the history and disagreeing with parts of its message. I still like superhero movies but I wouldn't necessarily want to live in their universe for many reasons. Unless I had superpowers myself.  

 

Beyond making assumptions about KKK influence the author of the article provides no evidence of the fact that there was any direct influence. And the presence of similar tropes in both BoaN and comic books is by no means an evidence. Such tropes go way back in storytelling before cbm’s or BoaN (and KKk). I provided ample references in one of my precious post on how such tropes predates BoaN. That JCS guy keeps harping on about Alan Moore as if he is the end all be all of CBM’s. Well I went and read what inspired the original creators of CBM’s like Batman/Superman. There is a clear link going back from Batman/Superman/early SH to The Phantom to The Shadow (which was itself inspired by Dracula/The House and the Brain/Judex) to Zorro and then The Scarlet Pimpernickel. Both the latter of these have inspirations from some real life figures in the 19th centure and before as well as some others such as Sprint Heeled Jack from Penny Dreadfuls. All of which presates BoaN. So yeah i would rather place more trust on what the original creators cite as evidence rather than some author or writer that came later who found similar elements. Correlation does not mean causation. 

 

Again it is irrelevant where the tropes or influences came from. Even if some aspects were influenced I have issued with it. If you see one of my previous posts on this topic I clearly mention that even if KKK or Birth of a Nation had influenced early comic book it matters not because comic books took it and used it in a good way. 

 

My issue was with the insinuation that this is somehow bad. That this discredits all comic book readers or those who watch the movies based on them. That somehow left leaning people lose all credibility if they read comic books. And you are a long term member here so I am pretty sure that you and any intelligent person can clearly see that the purpose of the guy was to troll. He and other cameron tards have repeatedly made it clear they dislike SH. I have no problem discussing this thing with a rational person who actually wants to do so. But you cannot tell me with sincerity that that is what that guy wants to do.

 

Hell one of the things he insinuated about me in the very first post after my reply was that I somehow was a racist trying to hide the alleged racist past of comic books simply because I happen to have avatar of a white cbm character. 

Then after pointing out many references both before and after BoaN, he conviniently misquoted a single paragraph from my post and distorted it. And then somehow he brought the freaking holocaust into the midst accusing me of being a holocaust denier. You cannot tell me that there isnt something wrong with this guy. 

 

I have no interest discussing this with him or his ilks. I have them all on ignore. Which is pretty much why I did not quote him in my original post or why I havent replied to these trolls since. 

[Water Bottle]

1 minute ago, ZeeSoh said:

 

Beyond making assumptions about KKK influence the author of the article provides no evidence of the fact that there was any direct influence. And the presence of similar tropes in both BoaN and comic books is by no means an evidence. Such tropes go way back in storytelling before cbm’s or BoaN (and KKk). I provided ample references in one of my precious post on how such tropes predates BoaN. That JCS guy keeps harping on about Alan Moore as if he is the end all be all of CBM’s. Well I went and read what inspired the original creators of CBM’s like Batman/Superman. There is a clear link going back from Batman/Superman/early SH to The Phantom to The Shadow (which was itself inspired by Dracula/The House and the Brain/Judex) to Zorro and then The Scarlet Pimpernickel. Both the latter of these have inspirations from some real life figures in the 19th centure and before as well as some others such as Sprint Heeled Jack from Penny Dreadfuls. All of which presates BoaN. So yeah i would rather place more trust on what the original creators cite as evidence rather than some author or writer that came later who found similar elements. Correlation does not mean causation. 

 

Again it is irrelevant where the tropes or influences came from. Even if some aspects were influenced I have issued with it. If you see one of my previous posts on this topic I clearly mention that even if KKK or Birth of a Nation had influenced early comic book it matters not because comic books took it and used it in a good way. 

 

My issue was with the insinuation that this is somehow bad. That this discredits all comic book readers or those who watch the movies based on them. That somehow left leaning people lose all credibility if they read comic books. And you are a long term member here so I am pretty sure that you and any intelligent person can clearly see that the purpose of the guy was to troll. He and other cameron tards have repeatedly made it clear they dislike SH. I have no problem discussing this thing with a rational person who actually wants to do so. But you cannot tell me with sincerity that that is what that guy wants to do.

 

Hell one of the things he insinuated about me in the very first post after my reply was that I somehow was a racist trying to hide the alleged racist past of comic books simply because I happen to have avatar of a white cbm character. 

Then after pointing out many references both before and after BoaN, he conviniently misquoted a single paragraph from my post and distorted it. And then somehow he brought the freaking holocaust into the midst accusing me of being a holocaust denier. You cannot tell me that there isnt something wrong with this guy. 

 

I have no interest discussing this with him or his ilks. I have them all on ignore. Which is pretty much why I did not quote him in my original post or why I havent replied to these trolls since. 

 

I always encourage members to use the "ignore" feature for their own sanity.