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

[Arlborn]

Just now, RandomJC said:

 

Him gunning down cars in a chase scene isn't reluctance to kill.

 

For Deadshot, he'd just wait for the daughter to be dropped off and not there. He's still a known assassin who killed people.

 

Harley is a psychotic killer, who he actively saves from dying. 

 

Again, just look at their crimes. Killers get captured, thieves and kidnappers get neck snaps and run down by machine gun fire. 

 

And Batman is so reluctant to kill, he is trying to kill a man because "He may go bad" that isn't reluctance, that isn't even caution. 

 

Again, you're just nitpicking, it works in that universe. Those kills were in the heat of battle, that's what I meant when I said he isn't as careful as before, he won't go out of his way not to kill guys who are trying to gun him down, not with the mindset he is at the moment anyway. We both know he'll find a reason to revert back either on Justice League or on his next solo movie, that is a very telegraphed plot point waiting to happen.

 

Regarding Superman it's obvious that he's developed a weird obsession with him and he's just projecting all the shit that happened to him and that he's done on an easy target.

 

This Batman is not mentally stable and it shows, you can't expect every single little thing he does to make 100% sense from a sane point of view but if you put yourself in the shoes of a guilt-stricken run-down man like him who the world used as a punching bag for far too long and wore down his sense of justice to its limits then it really does make sense.

 

But if you think the movie sucks anyway and the whole universe sucks then sure, I understand why you wouldn't be willing to do all that. As I said, it's fine, but I just can't get behind that particular argument, it just seems to come from disliking what Sneyder created rather than inconsistencies within his creation.

[Arlborn]

3 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

Not even the Punisher tries to kill people because they may go bad. Batman is just a sociopathic killer looking for justification in his dreams to kill Superman.

Yes, he is, I completely agree with you. And hey, it works for me because I know that's not who he truly is and he'll snap back out of it. It has already started since the infamous Martha moment.

 

 

It just works for me, sorry, I know it doesn't for you.

[RandomCat]

1 minute ago, Arlborn said:

 

Again, you're just nitpicking, it works in that universe. Those kills were in the heat of battle, that's what I meant when I said he isn't as careful as before, he won't go out of his way not to kill guys who are trying to gun him down, not with the mindset he is at the moment anyway. We both know he'll find a reason to revert back either on Justice League or on his next solo movie, that is a very telegraphed plot point waiting to happen.

 

Regarding Superman it's obvious that he's developed a weird obsession with him and he's just projecting all the shit that happened to him and that he's done on an easy target.

 

This Batman is not mentally stable and it shows, you can't expect every single little thing he does to make 100% sense from a sane point of view but if you put yourself in the shoes of a guilt-stricken run-down man like him who the world used as a punching bag for far too long and wore down his sense of justice to its limits then it really does make sense.

 

But if you think the movie sucks anyway and the whole universe sucks then sure, I understand why you wouldn't be willing to do all that. As I said, it's fine, but I just can't get behind that particular argument, it just seems to come from disliking what Sneyder created rather than inconsistencies within his creation.

 

First, please don't put thoughts into my head. I don't know Batman will have a redemption. I firmly believe he isn't going to revert. Not with these people in charge. Nothing about "JL will be lighter" pandering BS can convince me otherwise.

 

Second, Harley was in the heat of battle, that he saves her instead of going after the Joker.

 

Third, I find it inconsistent with the character your trying to tell me is there, versus the one I saw. Batman in BvS is an unrepentant killer, not a reluctant one, from how I viewed the film.

 

Fourth, obviously we disagree, but please stop belittling my opinion on this matter to mere "nitpicking" it's rude and unhelpful to any discourse. 

[RandomCat]

10 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

Yes, he is, I completely agree with you. And hey, it works for me because I know that's not who he truly is and he'll snap back out of it. It has already started since the infamous Martha moment.

 

 

It just works for me, sorry, I know it doesn't for you.

 

You have more faith in a man who thinks dark is getting raped, and no man can just be good, he has to be troubled.

[Napoleon]

I'm glad in the DCEU the characters evolve. I know some people would love it, but I wouldn't want another comic book franchise that feels like a TV show, where the only thing that changes between episodes is the villain of the week.

[Arlborn]

1 minute ago, RandomJC said:

 

First, please don't put thoughts into my head. I don't know Batman will have a redemption. I firmly believe he isn't going to revert. Not with these people in charge. Nothing about "JL will be lighter" pandering BS can convince me otherwise.

 

Second, Harley was in the heat of battle, that he saves her instead of going after the Joker.

 

Third, I find it inconsistent with the character your trying to tell me is there, versus the one I saw. Batman in BvS is an unrepentant killer, not a reluctant one, from how I viewed the film.

 

Fourth, obviously we disagree, but please stop belittling my opinion on this matter to mere "nitpicking" it's rude and unhelpful to any discourse. 

 

 

Huh, here I thought I was being polite. I'm sorry for coming across as rude to you and I'm sorry if you felt I was belittling your opinion; that's not what I meant to do at all but if that's how you felt then I must have done something wrong and I sincerely apologize for that.

 

Since I've given my opinions on the matter as well as I could, I'll leave you alone now.

[Barnack]

9 hours ago, Clyde Donovan said:

You're right that people are easier on movies they like but I guess I'll never be able to get behind they way of thinking, it just doesn't make sense to me. 

 

It make a lot of sense to me, the only think that matter about a movie is enjoying your experience, if it achieved that you will not care as much about is issue.

 

People like or dislike a movie first and are not good at knowing why and will put a list of reason why ad-hoc while the exact same element will work on a movie they like, Rogue one didn't do more fan service stuff than Awaken (probably less), it was just not as good, not as fun for people.

 

People didn't complain as much about the ultra orange and teal palette of MadMax FuryRoad or the massive CGI in Jackie, it is because orange and teal is an excellent palette and CGI now are extremely good, those exact same thing will be pointed as negative on other movies, with people thinking they are the reason they disliked the movie.

Edited April 19, 2017 by Barnack

[theStun]

Look inconsistencies are throughout in just about every blockbuster. And I'm going to be honest it is still mind boggling to me that CW is such a critically acclaimed film with about as many problems and WTF moments from characters and just plain stupid decisions by the directors as BvS but hey Iron man cracked jokes and it wasn't dark....or was it? 

[Harpospoke]

9 hours ago, aabattery said:

 

Well, most people aren't going to be directly comparing it to the 1989 Batman. They'll compare it to Nolan's trilogy, which did have the "no killing rule" to a certain degree. On top of that, people are generally more forgiving of movies they like. 1989 Batman was loved by both critics and general audiences, while BvS was mixed to say the least. I think most peoples issues with BvS are much greater than just Batman killing.

 

I think the Batman fan base has changed quite a bit since 89.   The "no killing" thing became a bigger deal over the years.   The Nolan rules are still fresh in minds.    89 Batman was a different kind of movie too.  A little more cartoony so killing was part of the over the top package.   Every movie exists in its own environment.  

 

Plus, comic book fans complain.   That's what they do.   I remember when Chris Evans' hair color was all wrong for Capt America.   And notice Thor fans are excited about the helmet in the Thor 3 trailer?   That's because they've been complaining about that since the first movie.   I myself complain that the Hulk is a mute with no personality.  (hopefully that changes in Thor 3)

 

True about liked movies getting more of a pass.   Citizen Kane has one of the all time plot holes but it's completely forgiven.   The obvious fake shark in Jaws bothers no one.   If people didn't like those movies you would hear more complaints about their flaws.

 

I don't care if Batman kills or not myself.   I do care when Superman is turned into an idiot and mopes around all the time.   I would think Batman fans would be more upset that he was so clueless in BvS.    The "v" was the whole problem with BvS if you ask me.   There is no logical way to have those two character fight.    Imagine trying to make a movie based on the Hulk v Daredevil.   That would be easier to do than BvS since the Hulk really is dumb.   Superman is a resourceful genius until Batman walks into the room.

[Jandrew]

Hmm question. Wondered into the Cap Marv thread and I'm curious: do yall want a Black Widow movie because you want to see Budapest? Or because she's female and should have one?
 

Personally I think her, Vision, Hawkeye, Falcon, and Witch all fit well in other peoples movies. Widow fitted into IM2 and Cap 2 like a nice winter glove. I really don't see the need for her to have a spinoff. I know we need more female-led superhero movies, but I feel like many want it to happen just for that reason. 

 

Not like she's supporting cast. She was clearly a main character in Cap 2 and clearly the 3rd most important character after him and Bucky.

[The Futurist]

Superman was as stupidly brutal & violent than Batman in BvS.

[Napoleon]

7 minutes ago, jandrew said:

Hmm question. Wondered into the Cap Marv thread and I'm curious: do yall want a Black Widow movie because you want to see Budapest? Or because she's female and should have one?
 

Personally I think her, Vision, Hawkeye, Falcon, and Witch all fit well in other peoples movies. Widow fitted into IM2 and Cap 2 like a nice winter glove. I really don't see the need for her to have a spinoff. I know we need more female-led superhero movies, but I feel like many want it to happen just for that reason. 

 

Not like she's supporting cast. She was clearly a main character in Cap 2 and clearly the 3rd most important character after him and Bucky.

You don't see the need for her to have a solo movie because Marvel made her character to not need a solo movie, so as the other female characters in these movies. You're only getting Captain Marvel because of WB's Wonder Woman.

[YM!]

Just now, Napoleon said:

You don't see the need for her to have a solo movie because Marvel made her character to not need a solo movie, so as the other female characters in these movies. You're only getting Captain Marvel because of WB's Wonder Woman.

Cause something they've been planning since 2012 is a response to DC. Just like Cyborg is a response for Black Panther and Suicide Squad is a response for Guardians of The Galaxy.

[Hades]

29 minutes ago, YourMother said:

Cause something they've been planning since 2012 is a response to DC. Just like Cyborg is a response for Black Panther and Suicide Squad is a response for Guardians of The Galaxy.

Both Marvel and DC look at what each other are doing. I do believe Captain Marvel is coming sooner rather than latter because of Wonder Woman. Just like how Civil War only exist because of B v S (according to the Russos). WB are just as guilty also.  

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, Hades said:

Both Marvel and DC look at what each other are doing.

 

They certainly do, both are probably really happy and playing together quite a bit to feed some made up feud between them, they are stronger together in a competition than alone I imagine.

 

A bit like console that always time up their new generation release (can you imagine the difficulty otherwise for big multi-platform game developers), I imagine both studio time themselve a little bit (those movie with the same release date, that no one really believe and other stunts). Must make thing more fun and feed those fanbase/hundreds of platform decicated to "movies" but talk almost just about franchises that do a lot of publicity for free for them.

[RandomCat]

6 minutes ago, Hades said:

Both Marvel and DC look at what each other are doing. I do believe Captain Marvel is coming sooner rather than latter because of Wonder Woman.

 

This is harder to pin down, WW has always been an in limbo movie since the 90s. May 2013 Marvel announced they were working on a script for Carol Danvers. From the sources I see DC started really pushing a WW solo film later that year, after Gadot was cast in BvS in March 2013. It's hard to say if Captain Marvel is a direct reaction to WW, the timelines a little muddy there.

 

But yeah, BvS is the reason Civil War got made.

[TalismanRing]

1 hour ago, RandomJC said:

 

This is harder to pin down, WW has always been an in limbo movie since the 90s. May 2013 Marvel announced they were working on a script for Carol Danvers. From the sources I see DC started really pushing a WW solo film later that year, after Gadot was cast in BvS in March 2013. It's hard to say if Captain Marvel is a direct reaction to WW, the timelines a little muddy there.

 

But yeah, BvS is the reason Civil War got made.

 

CW, Black Panther and Captain Marvel are also part and parcel of Feige's power play with Permutter which the latter eventually lost as well as his position at the head of Marvel studios.

 

 

[RandomCat]

16 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

CW, Black Panther and Captain Marvel are also part and parcel of Feige's power play with Permutter which the latter eventually lost as well as his position at the head of Marvel studios.

 

 

 

When it comes to Captain Marvel versus Wonder Woman is a timeline. I have no doubt that Feige was trying to push a female led superhero movie for a long time, probably Black Widow at first, since it'd be the easiest to do for them. (And wouldn't be surprised if Winter Soldier was also meant as a testing ground for the character.) Perlmutter obviously was going to say no because she'd want more money, and she of course is a woman. Feige did get Captain Marvel, CW and Black Panther under Perlmutter, whether with Disney stepping on Perlmutter's neck, they were green lit under his "leadership". It may even be that Black Widow movie was sacrificed for Captain Marvel. Which honestly would be the smarter move (More Female Heroes.) I've heard rumors that Feige still wants to do a Black Widow movie, so hopefully we'll see one after Avengers 4.

 

But, Wonder Woman has been a will they/won't they since the 90s. It's hard to say when exactly DC hammered down a definite we will make this, compared to whenever Feige convinced someone to force Perlmutter to let him make the movie. It's a muddy timeline.

 

Cyborg is probably less a response to Black Panther and more "We need a Black superhero" and they took the Black superhero from JL.

 

Suicide Squad is a definite response to GOTG though.

[Barnack]

13 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

Suicide Squad is a definite response to GOTG though.

 

If that is true (from wiki):

The film was announced in 2009 with Dan Lin as producer. Stephen Gilchrist as co-producer and Justin Marks as the screenwriter.[33] David Ayer signed on to direct and write the film in September 2014

 

It is rarely more obvious, movie in development hell since at least 2009, 5 year's before, and a director/writer is signed on it the very month after the release (august 2014) of a similar type of movie doing 700+ million WW.

[RandomCat]

2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

If that is true (from wiki):

The film was announced in 2009 with Dan Lin as producer. Stephen Gilchrist as co-producer and Justin Marks as the screenwriter.[33] David Ayer signed on to direct and write the film in September 2014

 

It is rarely more obvious, movie in development hell since at least 2009, 5 year's before, and a director/writer is signed on it the very month after the release (august 2014) of a similar type of movie doing 700+ million WW.

 

It's hard not to watch Suicide Squad without being reminded of GOTG. The opening montage of classic rock songs is a pretty good give away. If the re-writes and editing stuff is true, it was certainly made more GOTG in the editing room at the very least.