Moments when a piece of entertainment completely lost you.

Schleiermacher · Post by **Schleiermacher** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 8:43 am

I agree about Moore, but then again I think that might just be because I find him sympathetic.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 2:36 pm

erik wrote:
Stahlseele wrote:No, supes was not an asshole.
...
In this? He just does not care about hundreds, thousands of lives in danger and millions of dollars in property damage.
I'm not sure I follow this seeming contradiction.

Also, I remember a scene from a trailer where Pa Kent is telling Clark that maybe he should have let some people die rather than reveal his secret. That was a WTF moment to me.

In the old superman 2? movie, he actively acted assholish after getting kryptonite poisoning. Basically acting like a mean drunk with super powers.
In the new ones, i think the only really assholish thing he does it to wrap a few steel beams around a truck or something like that.
He would not actively attack and destroy the city he is fighting in . . he just does not care that it gets destroyed due to the fighting. In the old movies he'd have taken care of the dubstep machine and then fought Zod out of the city. Because in the old ones he was more of the stereotypical goodie two shoes. The superpowered boy scout.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 4:25 pm

Yeah. Not caring about a city being destroyed is totally assholish.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 5:58 pm

Yeah, In Avengers, you've got Cap telling the police how to evacuate people before they start laying the smack down on aliens and protecting people trapped in an office from an alien grenade.

In Man of Steel you've got Superman just unleashing hell with his laser eyes and not giving a shit that he's cutting up buildings with people in them.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 6:15 pm

Prak wrote:Yeah, In Avengers, you've got Cap telling the police how to evacuate people before they start laying the smack down on aliens and protecting people trapped in an office from an alien grenade.

In Man of Steel you've got Superman just unleashing hell with his laser eyes and not giving a shit that he's cutting up buildings with people in them.

If I thought more of Zack Snyder, I'd say it's because Papa Kent's influence, not quite instilling that whole "Think of other people, do what you can to make the world better."

Instead, Supes got "You should act powerless to stay under government radar, even if it means letting people die. Your personal comfort and lack of hassle is worth letting people die over" from dear ol' Kevin Costner.

But I don't think Snyder's canny enough to have worked that in.

Was good to see Costner go up in that tornado, though.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 7:57 pm

You just don't get to call yourself a hero without at least attempting to minimize collateral damage. Darker and grittier heroes won't let collateral damage stop them, but they're still not going to have a superpowered battle in the center of a major city if they've got the option to have a superpowered battle outside of a major city instead.

My decision to not see the new one has been cemented by learning that Batman kills someone using a gun. Apparently Snyder is of the opinion that it doesn't count because he did it by using the gun to trigger an explosion he knew would kill someone.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 8:46 pm

Ehh, by any sane definition Batman killed Ra's al Ghul in the Batman film series people actually like. And I'm pretty sure in Man of Steel, Zod is the one who chooses the venue for their fight, with the whole point being "I'm going to start murdering people now and I'm not going to stop until I'm out of people. Big whoop wanna fight about?" Snyder's two films are shitty, but they are not shitty because superheroes kill people/let people die in them. They are shitty because they try to make absurd things like whether or not to let a bus full of schoolchildren drown so you can have a "normal" life a serious dilemma. It's a kind of grim selfishness that is unfathomable for normal human beings (at least when laid out so plainly). There are ways to grimmify a superhero story, and that ain't one of them.

EDIT: You know, putting it like that ("grim selfishness"), it really is much easier to see why Snyder wants to adapt the Fountainhead; "with great power comes fuck you I got mine."

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 8:58 pm

Yeah, Batman has a history of killing people in his movies. Which is why I said BvS Batman is only in character if you're considering Movie Batman. It's to the point where the only way to explain Batman's continued adherence to the "no killing" rule is if you say he has a magic superpower where no matter what he does to someone, that person won't die, with the one exception being purposefully shooting them.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:04 pm

Prak wrote:Yeah, Batman has a history of killing people in his movies. Which is why I said BvS Batman is only in character if you're considering Movie Batman. It's to the point where the only way to explain Batman's continued adherence to the "no killing" rule is if you say he has a magic superpower where no matter what he does to someone, that person won't die, with the one exception being purposefully shooting them.

Or like in the older comics:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20111_th ... atman.html

Longes · Post by **Longes** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:11 pm

Prak wrote:Yeah, Batman has a history of killing people in his movies. Which is why I said BvS Batman is only in character if you're considering Movie Batman. It's to the point where the only way to explain Batman's continued adherence to the "no killing" rule is if you say he has a magic superpower where no matter what he does to someone, that person won't die, with the one exception being purposefully shooting them.

Batman has a magic superpower, because with batarangs and martial arts he would have definitely killed some people by now, even if only accidentally.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:25 pm

Guns are a particular sticking point for Batman, even in the stories where he does kill people. He'll destroy inanimate objects with them, but won't deliberately kill people with them, and trying is one of the things that can shock him into realizing that he's gone too far.

K · Post by K » Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:39 pm

Longes wrote:
Prak wrote:Yeah, Batman has a history of killing people in his movies. Which is why I said BvS Batman is only in character if you're considering Movie Batman. It's to the point where the only way to explain Batman's continued adherence to the "no killing" rule is if you say he has a magic superpower where no matter what he does to someone, that person won't die, with the one exception being purposefully shooting them.
Batman has a magic superpower, because with batarangs and martial arts he would have definitely killed some people by now, even if only accidentally.

Relevant youtube. is relevant.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:50 pm

Longes wrote:
Prak wrote:Yeah, Batman has a history of killing people in his movies. Which is why I said BvS Batman is only in character if you're considering Movie Batman. It's to the point where the only way to explain Batman's continued adherence to the "no killing" rule is if you say he has a magic superpower where no matter what he does to someone, that person won't die, with the one exception being purposefully shooting them.
Batman has a magic superpower, because with batarangs and martial arts he would have definitely killed some people by now, even if only accidentally.

I'm willing to believe the guy with like 20 PhDs had the foresight to not use shuriken in actual combat until he was skilled enough to aim for non-lethal wounds. But when he drives the fucking batmobile into the trailer of a semi with two guys standing up, and the next scene they're perfectly fine, if scared shitless, I call bullshit. Or when he's tossing mooks on their goddamned heads against concrete.

Or when he cuts the line of a flamethrower a guy is wearing, so the guy ignites and falls out a window...

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:54 pm

Prak wrote:Or when he cuts the line of a flamethrower a guy is wearing, so the guy ignites and falls out a window...

That was special nonviolent fall cushioning flame.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 11:07 pm

I don't really care that a bunch of people died during Supes v Zod and pals. I don't care that Supes killed Zod*. The reason I didn't like Man of Steel were all the bizarre developments during it. Why did old man Kent basically kill himself over (iirc) a damn dog when Clark could've done it just fine? Why did they make L Lane so damn important for no reason? Just so many things happened in the damn movie that really the final fight was probably the best part.

*I just believe it was a waste because they didn't exactly build up to it. So him killing Zod really wouldn't be a big deal unless you're already attached to Supes not killing people (which makes it strange that you'd specifically piss off those people).

Post by **fbmf** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 11:39 pm

name_here wrote: My decision to not see the new one has been cemented by learning that Batman kills someone using a gun. Apparently Snyder is of the opinion that it doesn't count because he did it by using the gun to trigger an explosion he knew would kill someone.

That's lifted nearly directly from The Dark Knight Returns.

Movie Batman uses vehicle mounted explosions and guns and kills people with them going back to 1989.

Game On,
fbmf

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 11:43 pm

Yeah, I'm fine with the machine guns on the batmobile being used to take out obstructions, and the same holds for BvS. I'm even fine with the turrets in BvS being used on Supes, since Bats knows the turrets won't hurt Supes. But when you give Bats a sniper rifle, even if it's to deliver a tracker, I question it a bit.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 12:04 am

You can see them kind of trying to build up a world of cardboard angle in Man of Steel with stuff about not using his powers to fight bullies because he'll pulp them, and the outline of what might be an arc where Superman gets more powerful the more unrestrained he gets, since he completely flips out when his hometown and family are threatened. That's something that could've culminated in killing Zod. But it's so subtle I'm not sure it's even intentional.

The main thing that would've helped sell the end of that movie is if Superman was constantly going out of his way to save people Zod put in danger, which Zod took advantage of to pummel Superman. It would've helped build up that killing Zod is the only way to save the city much better than having the very first people visibly threatened by Zod be the ones Superman kills him over. You wouldn't even have to show Zod killing anyone onscreen. It'd be fine if Superman saves every single person we actually see, just so long as Zod takes advantage of that to throw Superman through a skyscraper every single time he tries it. Bonus points if Superman gets Zod mostly locked down in some kind of headlock or trapped in a position he otherwise can't easily escape from once or twice, but Zod manages to break out after 10-15 seconds of struggle. A fairly long amount of time, long enough to make it clear that Superman could've finished Zod immediately if he really wanted to. Which builds up to the last time, when Superman is very obviously being faced with the choice of killing Zod, or letting Zod go on massacring Metropolis.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:08 am

Stahlseele wrote:
erik wrote:
Stahlseele wrote:No, supes was not an asshole.
...
In this? He just does not care about hundreds, thousands of lives in danger and millions of dollars in property damage.
I'm not sure I follow this seeming contradiction.

Also, I remember a scene from a trailer where Pa Kent is telling Clark that maybe he should have let some people die rather than reveal his secret. That was a WTF moment to me.
In the old superman 2? movie, he actively acted assholish after getting kryptonite poisoning. Basically acting like a mean drunk with super powers..

That was Superman 3. We try to pretend it doesn't exist.

Post by **fbmf** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:12 am

Prak wrote:Yeah, I'm fine with the machine guns on the batmobile being used to take out obstructions, and the same holds for BvS. I'm even fine with the turrets in BvS being used on Supes, since Bats knows the turrets won't hurt Supes. But when you give Bats a sniper rifle, even if it's to deliver a tracker, I question it a bit.

Also inspired from TDKR.

As far as weapons on the Batmobile ONLY taking out obstructions, are you suggesting all of the Jokers henchmen lived when Axis Chemicals blew up back in 1989, or that the Jester lived when Batman set him on fire in 1992.

Game On,
fbmf

Hiram McDaniels · Post by **Hiram McDaniels** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:30 am

fbmf wrote:
Prak wrote:Yeah, I'm fine with the machine guns on the batmobile being used to take out obstructions, and the same holds for BvS. I'm even fine with the turrets in BvS being used on Supes, since Bats knows the turrets won't hurt Supes. But when you give Bats a sniper rifle, even if it's to deliver a tracker, I question it a bit.
Also inspired from TDKR.

As far as weapons on the Batmobile ONLY taking out obstructions, are you suggesting all of the Jokers henchmen lived when Axis Chemicals blew up back in 1989, or that the Jester lived when Batman set him on fire in 1992.

Game On,
fbmf

Or when he stuck the time bomb in the clowns belt and kick him down into the manhole, which was followed by an explosion.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:17 am

Yeah, Batman is a Vigilante, not a Hero. No matter what you do and to what canon you point. MAYBE in one of the animated series, but everywhere else he has killed several dozends of people at least.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:48 am

I've seen pretty much every Batmovie since Batman Forever, so I'm aware that Batman is a goddamned murderer (manslaughterer?) in the movies. I'm pretty sure that at least in BTAS and The Batman, you can reasonably say he doesn't even accidentally kill people, but I'm not going to say that's gospel, because it's been a long ass time since I saw either. And the comics... ye gods, which writer do you want to go by?

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:01 am

BTAS wasn't allowed to show any deaths at all. The total confirmed kill count of the entire cast is zero. What's amazing is how threatening the villains feel despite that limitation.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:02 am

He canonically kills absolutely no one in the Arkham games, at least pre-Knight. I mean, he does plenty of things that by all rights should be fatal, but detective mode will specifically identify them as still alive and give a heart rate. It is a gameplay contrivance because the player will not be as conscientious as Batman and so it makes it flatly impossible to kill people instead of giving a game over (which is what happens if you get someone killed by fucking up a Predator section or bomb puzzle).

Anyways, it's a long-running rule that Batman has a thing about guns specifically that's very strong even in his most brutal incarnations. His parents weren't bombed, they were shot.