DC Movies Thread - Shazam saves the day
-
-
Why bother writing a long-wall-of-text if you are going to boil down the discussion to "opinions because art is subjective and the obivous narrative flaws aren't flaws at all. They are just your imagination and nothing more".
-
Why bother writing a long-wall-of-text if you are going to boil down the discussion to "opinions because art is subjective and the obivous narrative flaws aren't flaws at all. They are just your imagination and nothing more".
Because of people who use "objective". You don't like the movie, move on, let it go, don't invest the effort into it. I just gave examples of thing that made complete sense and were either explained in the movie or additional materials.
-
William Dafoes JL character has been revealed as Nuidis Vulko, the science advisor of Atlantis and an Aquaman supporting character from the comics
-
The art debate is a philosophical debate. I won't waste time into this, I'm pretty a lot of people are thinking "art is only subjective, only God can judge a movie".
In defense of BvS:
-
Seriously, this dumb "art is subjective so its not bad if I personally say it isn't" defense again? Okay.
@me:
Art is subjective. If you like something or not is an opinion. That's the subjective part.
But actual structure, talent, and how well something is put together is study. You can looks at the parts of the whole and tell objectively if something is overall good, as an actual fact.Naruto is objectively bad.
Compared to itself, and only itself, no other outside work, no personal opinion, it falls apart on both an artistic and storytelling level after a while becoming lesser than it was and contradicts itself in a myriad of ways.
-I personally don't like the work of Jack Kirby. I just don't like the look of it. But I can see where the base skill level, creativity, inspiration, storytelling and influence on others were and that he was a massive influence on the American comics industry, and the actual stories were great.
-I personally like the Harry Potter books. They're the biggest sellers in the world and there's a lot that's good about them. But if you break them down objectively they have quite a few problems and weaknesses' of the writer's worldbuilding and pacing show through. But that's generally considered overridden by the quality of the character work and the overall imagination.
-I personally don't care for the art of Osamu Tezuka, because the simplistic designs aren't my taste. But on an objective level, I know those designs were that simple so he could draw 20 pages a day and that there is zero denying what he did for the industry or how influential he was or that he is, inarguably, the most important creator in manga, the godfather, the pioneer.
-I personally like Moulin Rogue, it's one of my favorite movies. But I know its a complete mess of editing full of terrible characters and nonsensical plot. But its full of visuals and little bits of nuance and songs that I enjoy.
-I personally don't like the Godfather films. But in terms of acting, music, pacing, direction, everything about them, they are perfect movies. I just personally don't care for them because I can't get past the mobster element. But they're still perfect movies.
-I personally really like Citiizen Kane. It deserves all the praise it gets. But I can see why it bores some people.
-I personally have mixed feelings on Lawrence of Arabia. It's paced a bit slowly and over-long for my tastes but all the storytelling on display is excellent.
-I personally find most of the films of Kurosawa to be really slow and dull, including Seven Samurai. But I've watched almost every single one of them an appreciated them, because they ARE masterpieces. I'm not going to argue that they aren't masterpieces just because I was born in the 80's after Star Wars sped up the storytelling speed of all movies and books.
-I personally like Star Wars, and its one of the biggest things to ever hit pop culture in the last 40 years. But its objectively got a loooooot of problems… especially when you pull in the spinoffs and the prequels... that are largely overshadowed by what it does right, the strength of the first two movies and what it pioneered and it's place in history.You can have an opinion on a thing, but still accept and appreciate the actual facts of the matter. You can love something, but admit its bad. You can hate something, but agree that it's good. What it means to you personally is one thing. It's inherent quality, compared to all other artists and storytellers that have come before for centuries? That's another.
Naruto is objectively bad.
You can like something that's objectively awful, and that's fine. And you can hate something that's universally praised. And that's fine too.
But there ARE measurable standards of quality, and BvS fails at most of them. (ESPECIALLY given it's budget and wealth of decades of stories and source material it has to drawn upon)
-
@Lef:
Because batman finally realized how far he'd gone? How hypocritical he is for projecting his shortcoming onto Superman? To murder the innocent because of your own preconceived fear of something outside your understanding or control.
that's not true. he stopped beating him when he heard him say martha he expressed no regrets at all nor were we shown anything to indicate what you're saying.
To police there was no connection between Wallace and Luthor at the time, Lois investigation is what helped get him behind bars.
he was seen with him multiple times, he was broke and he gave some sort of a job, and the chair was specficily made for him from luthercorps.
-
A wheelchair made out of lead mind you.
-
What are you basing those facts on? Opinions of other people who you feel are more fit to judge, but those are still people. With their preferences taste and -
-oh measurable qualities. It's not measurable, you think something is bad? Something less pleasant comes along and expands your linear grade, something good? Well here comes something even better and the thing before is back to gray zone. Apply that to any perceived quality you might list, you can stretch it by ears all day. So what the universal formula for judging a movie, a highbrow crit telling you something is good because he is a very sophisticated person, so does that denounces your preferences over theirs? To confine something to a box that is either self-made or made by others is very restricting. I like to think I've expanded my willingness to understand and perceive things without being told what's right or wrong. -
Most of the flaws pointed out by the critics are actually not flaws.
For instance, the Martha thing isn't a flaw.
Same about the introduction of Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg. The critic says "hey, I didn't want it to happen like this, I'd have like to see their movies instead of an email, haha, an email, that's not badass. " what they truly mean is "hey Marvel didn't do that. which means it's bad". -
@Lef:
What are you basing those facts on? Opinions of other people who you feel are more fit to judge, but those are still people.
i saw it. me seeing it is enough for me make a judgment about it based on my quality standards. fuck other people.
you think something is bad? Something less pleasant comes along and expands your linear grade, something good? Well here comes something even better and the thing before is back to gray zone. Apply that to any perceived quality you might list, you can stretch it by ears all day. So what the universal formula for judging a movie, a highbrow crit telling you something is good because he is a very sophisticated person, so does that denounces your preferences over theirs? To confine something to a box that is either self-made or made by others is very restricting. I like to think I've expanded my willingness to understand and perceive things without being told what's right or wrong.
i agree with this 100%. one shouldn't just keep going with the bandwagon and let others tell him whats good and whats bad. that is why i decided to watch it, and i can honestly tell you that BvS is a mediocre movie.
-
I always felt like the "art is subjective" argument is generally utilized by those that really don't have very much else to back some media for being generally awful. Essentially it boils down to "Oh I like it in spite of it being pretty darn flawed so boo on you". And that's fine, no one else is telling you "not" to like it, but one cannot be THAT dense to ignore flaws when a film like BvS has a considerable amount of it; and the Martha thing is a pretty darn stupid flaw in the film's narrative.
-
the Martha thing is a pretty darn stupid flaw in the film's narrative.
It's not. The twist is a directing choice and not dumb at all. Just put yourself in Batman's position and that's pretty simple to understand. Their moms name have always been the same, since fucking 1939. It's not even like Snyder created that.
-
that's not true. he stopped beating him when he heard him say martha he expressed no regrets at all nor were we shown anything to indicate what you're saying.
Why's the flashback, why throw a spear in disgust? You see no connection apart from it all hinging on it being the same name? What is it about name Martha that makes Bruce stop and recall that night? The gun, the fall. And in the end the rise.
"That's how it starts. The fever, the rage, the feeling of… powerlessness that turns good men...cruel."
"Justice turn dark across the harbor"
We know Batman has gone cruel. The dream of bat attacking Bruce, on some level even Bruce himself knows he've gone down the darker path
"The Daily Planet criticizing those who think they're above the laws. A little hypocritical, wouldn't you say?"
"about an alien who…if he wanted to, could burn the whole place down. There wouldn't be a damn thing we can do to stop him."
"We have always created icons in our own image. What we've done is we project ourselves on to him. The fact is, maybe he's not some sort of devil or Jesus character."
"He has the power to wipe out the entire human race and If we believe there even a 1% chance that he is our enemy, we have to take it as an absolute certainty. And we have to destroy him." How's that not a projection Bruce "But, he is not our enemy."
"Not today. 20 years in Gotham, Alfred. We've seen what promises are worth. How many good guys are left. How many stay that way." Has Batman himself stayed that way? "It's suicide."
"This maybe the only thing I do that matters."
"20 years of fighting criminals amount to nothing?"
"Criminals are like weeds, Alfred. Pull 1 up, another grows in it's place." There's that feeling of powerlessness, again. "This is about the future of the world. It's my legacy."
And look where it took you.
-Martha- Joe Chill with his gun murdering Bruce's parents. Now here is Bruce with spear preparing to murder Clark. And a name Martha is uttered and that Martha is set up to die. Who's the bad guy now?
But you got your chance to finally save her.
"I've failed him, in life. I won't fail him in death."
"Man is still good. We fight. We kill. We betray one another. But we can rebuild. We can do better. We will."
The risehe was seen with him multiple times, he was broke and he gave some sort of a job, and the chair was specficily made for him from luthercorps.
And who knows that the chair was made for him apart from Luthor? What sort of job, and they only seen each other once as far the the film goes. Wallace didn't know he was going to die.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
i saw it. me seeing it is enough for me make a judgment about it based on my quality standards. fuck other people.
i agree with this 100%. one shouldn't just keep going with the bandwagon and let others tell him whats good and whats bad. that is why i decided to watch it, and i can honestly tell you that BvS is a mediocre movie.
Good, I'm not telling you to like it, since the most I can offer is but a connection that could be made. And is made for some people.
For many others those connections are meaningless just like some works would be meaningless to me, but it can be there. And those works are there and mean something to others–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I always felt like the "art is subjective" argument is generally utilized by those that really don't have very much else to back some media for being generally awful. Essentially it boils down to "Oh I like it in spite of it being pretty darn flawed so boo on you". And that's fine, no one else is telling you "not" to like it, but one cannot be THAT dense to ignore flaws when a film like BvS has a considerable amount of it;
It's much more simple, for different people there are different flaws to consider, for some those flaws are of different degree, sorry to say that instead of categorizing them into something I- honestly… wouldn't know what, I simply looks at what's there and don't go saying something is a flaw, or good, or bad.
and the Martha thing is a pretty darn stupid flaw in the film's narrative.
Sorry you feel that way.
-
It's like the old saying goes. If's not a glitch; it's a feature.
-
Most of the flaws pointed out by the critics are actually not flaws.
For instance, the Martha thing isn't a flaw.
Same about the introduction of Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg. The critic says "hey, I didn't want it to happen like this, I'd have like to see their movies instead of an email, haha, an email, that's not badass. " what they truly mean is "hey Marvel didn't do that. which means it's bad".Why isn't a flaw? It's an incredibly cheap plot device that comes outta no where and just solves the biggest conflict of the movie just like that.
The Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg added nothing to the movie. It was pretty obvious that they were thrown in for the sake of fanservice.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Thank you Lef
This video is more about how art impacts an individual and what they take away from that experience. Has nothing to do with the actual quality of a film or art.
-
Why isn't a flaw? It's an incredibly cheap plot device that comes outta no where and just solves the biggest conflict of the movie just like that.
Why is it a flaw? How do you rate that cheapness. The Martha was previously established. Stop being vague.
The Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg added nothing to the movie. It was pretty obvious that they were thrown in for the sake of fanservice.
Sure were, unless you start thinking on possible reason as to why Luthor been collecting that info and even prepared the logos for them.
-
@Lef:
Why is it a flaw? How do you rate that cheapness. The Martha was previously established. Stop being vague.
Sure were, unless you start thinking on possible reason as to why Luthor been collecting that info and even prepared the logos for them.
Martha ex machina.
-
Martha ex machina.
You get a flashback of the instances where you can spot the very importance Martha held to Bruce.
Mother figures play big part in the life of both Superman and Batman. Only Lex never mentions his own mother, and yet still claims how "Every boy's special lady is his mother."
There are always 3 arguments that get's presented about the Martha scene, all of them already talked through with the conclusion being you either accept the interpretation or not.
-
The worst part of it was definitively Supes just randomly shouting Martha in the first place. He never refers to her by her name, why would he do it in that situation?
-
The worst part of it was definitively Supes just randomly shouting Martha in the first place. He never refers to her by her name, why would he do it in that situation?
Argument one. Why Martha-
! I'll copy paste my explanation.
! "This is an observation made based on a hunch, which checks out. Provided is the following breakdown of the scene-
Some people would point at the use of “Martha” and paint it as illogical, easily replaceable by Mom or mother. Why does Clark use “Martha”? Because the intention was to say Martha Kent.
! The choked out “Kent” is broken in two cuts, the viewer and Batman dismisses it as a grunt." -
That's all too convenient. That's all there is to it.
-
That's all too convenient. That's all there is to it.
Convenient explanation or convenient occurrence in the movie at all?
I suppose either is fair.
-
Martha is like one of the most hilariously bad plot twists I've seen in a long time, the type that would even send Shyamalan into a fit of giggles.
After 2 and a half hours worth of building up Batman's animosity for Superman, the thousands of people who died in Metropolis, the people who died in the courtroom, all the xenophobic sentiment he expressed, the talk of how if there's a 1% chance he could destroy the world, he must be eliminated talk…it's all forgotten because their moms had the same name.
"But but...it's a trigger word for Batman cause of how his mom died!"
Who gives a shit, does Bruce go into a panic attack every time he meets a woman named Martha? Was he so dense that he couldn't comprehend that Superman had a mom and that simple fact was all it took to wash away YEARS of resentment? What would have happened had Kent's mom been named Mary? "Mar-! Wait, her name is Mary? Never mind, I'm gonna kill you!"
It's a completely asinine twist and I don't care what flowery symbolism and deep metaphors you try to draw from it, none of it is anything less than superficial and none of it would fly in a real world context with supposedly real relatable characters that act and respond in ways a normal human would act and respond in that given situation. You could try and make the argument that you're not supposed to think too deeply about it but when the serious adult superhero movie shows less thought and maturity than one of those "goofy" Marvel movies, it's an embarrassment.
And no, we're not judging this movie harshly because we're biased Marvel fanboys, we're judging it harshly because it fucking sucked.
-
@Lef:
Convenient explanation or convenient occurrence in the movie at all?
I suppose either is fair.
Your explanation is alright, it's what the movie was going for. Although what happened isn't. There were literally no reasons other than plot to have Supes saying Marthan Kent over mom.
-
Although Superman yelling "Mom!" Why he's getting choked and nearly stabbed probably would have made Batman pause for other reasons.
-
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/06/21/justice-league-logo-and-synopsis-revealed?read
the Justice League movie synopsis and logo have been revealed
-
@TLC:
Martha is like one of the most hilariously bad plot twists I've seen in a long time, the type that would even send Shyamalan into a fit of giggles.
I remember you - you thought senator Finch drank the piss. No wonder things are hilarious.
After 2 and a half hours worth of building up Batman's animosity for Superman, the thousands of people who died in Metropolis, the people who died in the courtroom, all the xenophobic sentiment he expressed, the talk of how if there's a 1% chance he could destroy the world, he must be eliminated talk…it's all forgotten because their moms had the same name.
"But but...it's a trigger word for Batman cause of how his mom died!"The 1% percent chance, argument number 2, Batman straight up projecting his own shortcomings onto Superman eventually going down the darker path he himself is on. Superman did not kill the citizens of Metropolis, instead he even get's blamed for not preventing the bomb from going, even here on this forum and many other platforms, "people hate what they don't understand". By all account Batman should kill himself following his own reasoning(well actually he tries), solution, don't jump to conclusions, men are still good.
Who gives a shit, does Bruce go into a panic attack every time he meets a woman named Martha? Was he so dense that he couldn't comprehend that Superman had a mom and that simple fact was all it took to wash away YEARS of resentment? What would have happened had Kent's mom been named Mary? "Mar-! Wait, her name is Mary? Never mind, I'm gonna kill you!"
That we don't know, the context from both incidents however is pretty applicable. Different name…, yeah most likely Superman would be dead. And Mary might get saved after Superman is dead. Mom. "I bet your parents taught you, that you mean something." "Alien mom who cares", of course that's only for the sake of argument.
On flipside Batman finally got the chance to save the (different) Martha. Might that be enough to put the ghosts of the pasts behind. But then again it's not Batman if it's not about his dead parents.
It's a completely asinine twist and I don't care what flowery symbolism and deep metaphors you try to draw from it, none of it is anything less than superficial and none of it would fly in a real world context with supposedly real relatable characters that act and respond in ways a normal human would act and respond in that given situation. You could try and make the argument that you're not supposed to think too deeply about it but when the serious adult superhero movie shows less thought and maturity than one of those "goofy" Marvel movies, it's an embarrassment.
Well then why you even bring this discussion to the table if you don't care what another party has to say. Relatable characters to you, tell me normal human being, how would a normal human fare against the responsibility of whole world waiting for you to save them, a second coming or the devil in disguise, people saying what you should or shouldn't do, how to act, when to smile, sounds all kinds of terrific to me. Gladly I'm not subjecting myself to something so mentally draining, to go down the path of a hypocrite well come along a moment of self reflection, and I'd feel pretty terrible. I wouldn't monologue about what is it that I feel, and why is it that I do what I do. I'm sure some do, shouldn't judge those folks.
-
Most of the flaws pointed out by the critics are actually not flaws.
For instance, the Martha thing isn't a flaw.
I agree that the IDEA had merit. The idea being that Batman saw Superman as a monster, and hearing that their mothers have the same name is what snapped him out of it and made him realize that Clark essentially IS human in heart. The execution was absolutely horrible. It was very clearly ham-fisted.
the fact that they were SO hammering home that Batman's mom's name was "Martha" had me calling this at the start of the movie.
In two of Batman's dream sequences about his parents, the shooting that opens the movie and the Graveyard scene, Martha's name was VERY prominently featured. His dad says her name as he dies and it gives a closeup on her grave, but notice, Thomas Wayne's name never gets noticed once.
This made it ridiculously obvious they were setting it up and when it finally happened, I didn't go "Oh wow! That's clever!" I went "called it!"
Then there's the fact that when the actual "Martha!!" scene happens, it's so ridiculous and poorly done.
Nobody talks like that. Nobody who is on good terms with their mother like Clark, who is legitimately worried about their well-being is gonna call her by her first name. It's obvious Clark could give a crap about secret identities at this point, he's calling Batman "Bruce" the entire time. Why didn't he call her his "Mother"?
He didn't because the story needed him to say "Martha" so he said it that way even tho that's not how people refer to a parent they love, and so the scene comes off awkward as all hell.
You wanna know a way to fix the scene to make the dialog less clunky?
Clark: He has my mother!
[Batman keeps him pinned by is slightly stunned by this]
Batman: Mother? After Metropolis, you're supposed to be the last of your kind, that's what you told the press. You don't have a Mother.
Clark: My human mother… I came here as a baby, she took me in! Her name is Martha... Martha Kent!
Batman: Martha? Your.... human mother?...
Basically that Just replaces everything from when Superman screams "MARTHA!!" to when Lois throws herself on him and explains to Batman that's his mother's name.
Now, I'm not a writer, so I'm not saying my writing here is perfect, but give that basic idea to a competent writer for polish and you're good.
It fixes the issue on two fronts:
1: It has Clark referring to his mother the way any normal person would, so the scene comes off as less awkward.2: It makes it more apparent what's supposed to be going on. That Batman viewed him as an inhuman monster and the fact that both their mothers are named Martha just kinda snapped him out of his crazy and made him realize that.
They didn't mean it this way exactly, but the hamfisted dialog in the movie as it stands gives a lot of people the impression the story is literally resolved because "Hey, both our mothers have the same name! We're totes besties now!!"Same about the introduction of Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg. The critic says "hey, I didn't want it to happen like this, I'd have like to see their movies instead of an email, haha, an email, that's not badass. " what they truly mean is "hey Marvel didn't do that. which means it's bad".
The issue with that scene was that it felt lazily tacked on.
That scene does absolutely nothing to further the plot of what's going on between Batman and Superman, or Lex's plot, or anything at all happening with the story threads the movie has actually opened, so when it happens, it feels like it comes out of nowhere and that they basically stopped the movie for 5 or so minutes while Wonder Woman watches some Youtube videos.
Again, I just thought of a better way to do this that also fixes another huge plot problem in the movie.
Another big complaint of mine is this: If Lex wanted Batman to kill Superman, why didn't he wait to see if Batman won or not before creating Doomsday? He clearly had no control over Doomsday and no failsafe to stop him once he was let loose, so… why? Well, This idea could have killed two birds with one stone:
[Superman Confronts Lex in the kryptonian ship and sees Doomsday restrained]
Superman: What was this? Your backup plan in case Batman failed?
Lex: … Partly...
Superman: What do you mean?
Lex: Do you think you're the only one?! LOOK!
[Lex brings up the videos from the Wonder Woman scene on several screens behind him, only they're all playing at once, tiled across the frame]
Lex: Do you see this? Do you know what this is?! More of them! More of you! Are any of these ones aliens too? at least one started out human, but the result is the same. More false gods to bring about our end.
[As he's saying this, the scene is panning between the videos and pausing on them individually to give them spotlight]
Lex: It wasn't just meant for you. It was meant for ALL of you.
This would have made the scene feel like it actually served a purpose other than "Hey look, Justice League is gonna be a thing!!!"
As it stands, it's just more hamfisted Justice League Setup that doesn't serve towards forwarding the plot of this movie at all.
-
I'll just mention that there was an interesting take on Lex, plan, and reasoning. The premise was, how many times does Lex says something truthfully, there was no way Lex would let Martha or Lois walk away alive after all was said and done, "knowledge without power", would it be enough to simply remove Superman or would Lex want to fill that vacuum as a new saviour, so he would present his very own Justice League brought to you by Lexcorp, whose first foe will be either Doomsday or Superman(The Murderman of Martha's and journalists and Batman's)
-
In two of Batman's dream sequences about his parents, the shooting that opens the movie and the Graveyard scene, Martha's name was VERY prominently featured. His dad says her name as he dies and it gives a closeup on her grave, but notice, Thomas Wayne's name never gets noticed once.
Yeah, ok that's true. Thomas is never mentioned. I was wondering why when watching the film. " So he doesn't mind about his father ? " I thought.
I had just concluded he loved his mother way more, for some reasons that isn't explained. But well, I guess there is no need to that.But yeah. His father's name is never mentioned and that was suspicious. That's very true.
This made it ridiculously obvious they were setting it up and when it finally happened, I didn't go "Oh wow! That's clever!" I went "called it!"
It was not obvious though. Indeed, I also found it suspicious that his father's name isn't mentioned, though I wasn't thinking there would be something like that.
I just thought "hey, the film begins with the murder of his parents because it's a new saga, they just have to explain it again."before watching the movie I knew their moms had the same name, though I wasn't thinking about that at all while watching the film. It completely worked on me.
Then there's the fact that when the actual "Martha!!" scene happens, it's so ridiculous and poorly done.
I thought he said "Martha" because he investigated on him. Found out his true identity, that's why he calls him "Bruce". If I'm right, there is a cut scene in which Superman investigates on Batman's identity. But anyway, even if there isn't a cut-scene like that, he says "Bruce" with means he knows his identity. And that's why he says "Martha", because he knows Bruce's mom had the same name. Lois comes and says they have the same mother, which means she knew too.
But, there is a little flaw here. Lois comes but actually she couldn't possibly here Superman saying "Martha" because she was too far away when he said "Martha".That scene does absolutely nothing to further the plot of what's going on between Batman and Superman, or Lex's plot, or anything at all happening with the story threads the movie has actually opened, so when it happens, it feels like it comes out of nowhere and that they basically stopped the movie for 5 or so minutes while Wonder Woman watches some Youtube videos.
At least, the email thing wasn't cliché. Furthermore, I don't mind if it does not serve the plot of this movie. Lot of people said "a movie should only exist by itself, and I felt like this one was just setting up 10 more movies" just because of this scene.
Marvel is doing that at the end of the movie with an after-credit scene. DC just put that scene inside the movie, which IMO was better. And there are probably other scenes in the cut-scenes that have nothing to do with the plot of this movie. I'm thinking about the one in which Lex is getting arrested. This one:
There are probably others scenes too. I don't know.Lex having some screens in the kryptonian ship just to show Superman his master-plan would have rise even more critics, and been very cliché.
And Lex is manipulating them, he probably willingly gave his things about the "metahumans" to WonderWoman and Bruce.
A lot of people are criticizing the "hey, bullshit, there are no camera ? that's too easy to steal… " but I think he let them have it, I'm pretty sure of it actually. Lex is manipulating Bruce and Clark, and at the same time the audience is being manipulated.Another big complaint of mine is this: If Lex wanted Batman to kill Superman, why didn't he wait to see if Batman won or not before creating Doomsday? He clearly had no control over Doomsday and no failsafe to stop him once he was let loose, so… why? Well, This idea could have killed two birds with one stone.
yeah, true. nothing to say about this one. maybe it can be explained, but have no idea how right now.
-
I…actually only want to comment about the topic title.
So, when I was younger, I was really into Space Jam (as were my sisters). It got me really into basketball and I had a lot of Space Jame merchandise. We had the video on VHS and eventually, as I got older, our VHS tapes were given away as we moved to DVD. I hadn't seen Space Jam since I was probably around 8-10 and bought it a couple of years ago. Unlike most people, for the most part, I still like the things I liked when I was young and I don't feel any remorse or "nostalgia" over-riding quality (basically people who talk about something being their childhood and how something modern is ruining it when the original wasn't that good they just didn't remember it as well). Anyway, I was at Target and saw it on BD and thought "Awesome! Can't wait to watch this again!".
Yeah....I found it extremely annoying, didn't like the voices of the Toons and the terrible pop culture references, Mike was terrible at acting, and my favorite parts had to do with Charles Barkley that had nothing to do with the main characters (Bill Murray was funny too). The only things that really held up were the two main songs used in the movie. I actually was pretty surprised because the guys on the local sports radio talk about the movie ALL THE TIME and how its still holds up and how its one of the few things from their childhood that they can still enjoy (one guy is 30 the other 25). Needless to say I am not excited for a possible Lebron Jam.
-
To anyone who actually does want to argue that Space Jam is objectively good: https://thedissolve.com/features/forgotbusters/154-space-jams-cosmic-character-ruining-tackiness
(Course if the mods are afraid of the thread derailing feel free to move my (and RuNa's?) post to OfficialSpaceJamThreadLand)
-
I am wiling to make the argument that Optimus Prime mowing down like six Decepticons in the span of about a minute set to The Touch is one of the greatest sequences in film history.
-
Yeah, any possible flaws Transformers may have had are pretty much overridden by how amazing the first 20 minutes or so are.
-
The first 20 minutes are so good that the sheer euphoric high you get from it makes you look past the existence of Wheelie.
-
New, exciting news about the upcoming Justice League film.
(May contain spoilers) -
New, exciting news about the upcoming Justice League film.
They're replacing Zack Snyder?!?!?!
-
-
Who'll be replaced by Frank Miller:ninja:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Modern Frank Miller is terrible…...
-
-
So, who would you like to replace him ?
-
Edgar Wright. Lol.
-
So I was curious about what Robby and Cyan were talking about, and holy cow the first 20 minutes of the Transformers movie is about the most 80s thing I've seen in a while.
The music, the animation, the human drawings, the dialogue…
-
@Mr.:
So I was curious about what Robby and Cyan were talking about, and holy cow the first 20 minutes of the Transformers movie is about the most 80s thing I've seen in a while.
The music, the animation, the human drawings, the dialogue…
He got the touch.
-
Transformers and Space Jam. One movie I had the pleasure of revisiting and the other movie I saw for the first time when we watched them both here at Apforums movie night. Fortunately, Space Jam held up well for me and it being my first time seeing Transformers the experience was…awesome.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
I gave Man of Steel a 9/10, it's in my top 10 favorite superhero movies, some days it's in my top 5. To me it's the best live action Superman movie to date.
I gave Batman v Superman a 6/10. It had tons of flaws and I'm not going to get into a pissing match to defend it but I still liked the movie.
Basically agree with MoS as I would say 8.5/10 but you're being very generous towards BvS.
-
^I haven't even seen BvS and I think that's generous too:ninja:.
-
Transformers and Space Jam. One movie I had the pleasure of revisiting and the other movie I saw for the first time when we watched them both here at Apforums movie night. Fortunately, Space Jam held up well for me and it being my first time seeing Transformers the experience was…awesome.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
Basically agree with MoS as I would say 8.5/10 but you're being very generous towards BvS.
5 is my like/dislike line. I still liked the movie which is why I gave is a 6. But believe me I'm not about to defend the film because I see all the problems with it which people here have hammered to death.
-
@Mr.:
holy cow the first 20 minutes of the Transformers movie is about the most 80s thing I've seen in a while.
If I made a list of Most '80s Things, I'd say it was about third or fourth.
-
Jem is way, waaaay more 80's than Transformers could ever be