>Katana's sword literally steals souls
>The Enchantress is actually possessed by a witch
>The Tattoo Man has Tattoos that come to life to wreak havoc
>El Diablo can make fire just because
Remember when people said the DCEU would just yet to pull that "What you think is magic is actually advanced alien technology" bullshit?
It actually does make a big difference though. Whether or not they try to give a sci-fi explanation determines if you view it as sci-fi or fantasy. Your brain has really different categories for stuff like that
It's one of those things that's hard to explain criticism of because it's literally just because of the way our brain works, but yeah, that's it. Harry Potter wouldn't necessarily be a better or worse story if aliens gave them wands and shit, but it'd sure as hell be a different one.
Look, I'm a huge comicbook nerd and love to argue over the teeniest details, but what level of autist thinks this matters at all to the mass-market moviegoing audience?
Do you think casuals *give a shit* about how Katana's sword works? Honestly? And when millions of people go to these movies, and our obsessive little fanbase is lucky to push 30k units of a comicbook, guess how little we matter to the studio bean counters. Whatever non-zero value you're thinking of is wrong.
There is a thing known as Hard Fantasy. Just like Hard Sci fi it has set rules and explains shit properly and doesn't allow for the "lol it's just cause bro" What you see in the majprity of movies is soft sci fi and magic because most people can except that it's a work of fiction.
>everything /co/ loves flops and gets cancelled
>everything /co/ deems too casual and hates is incredibly successful
it's almost like appealing to a niche community of people who pirate all their content would be a retarded business decision
Oh I never get tired of this
Magic is simply a field of science. A means of harnessing/manipulating physics. If souls exist, then you can study them and figure out how they work. Thus, with enough working knowledge of astral mechanics, you make can make a sword that removes them from the host body. Someone figured out how souls work and made the Soultaker.
The difference between fantasy and science fiction is purely aesthetic, and you know it.
Science is shooting lightning from a glove
Magic is shooting lightning from an insignia on your hand
Science is confined to logic, magic isnt meaning magic can do anything even break its own rules, magic is basically small scale reality warping in its purest form, because of its fuck logic nature most magical entities tend to be insanely overpowered since they can do a number of impossible things like rewrite logic itself or even transcend logic.
No, magic has its own internal logic. Just like how you cannot apply the principles of algebra to that of literature. Both are different, but both operate on defined guidelines. The only difference is in the level of strictness.
That insignia is part of a previously implemented mechanism.
You need the insignia to shoot the lightning. You yourself have just established a rule governed by internal logic. It's science.
The most magic tricks literally fuck logic like turning a dollar bill into a hundred dollar bill without transmuting it, making metal rings fuse together, making something cease to exist then bring it back to existence, causing animals to come out of a top hat, pulling our a cloth from your gut that is too long for you to have possibly swallowed without dying, and those are basic magic tricks.
The insignia is needed to shoot the lightning but there is no reason given as to why the insignia causes lightning it just happens that is magic mate.
>magic isnt meaning magic can do anything even break its own rules, magic is basically small scale reality warping in its purest form, because of its fuck logic nature
I've never understood this. By default, magic has to have some sort of internal logic, otherwise, characters like Fate, Strange, Wiccan, Zatanna, and other magical beings would never be able to study and manipulate it.
The fact that you need an insignia on your hand to shoot lightning implies that there's a reasoning behind that that the person with the insignia understands.
I understand magic may not be as easy to understand as science in a fantasy sense, but it has its own rules. Or at least each magician does.
And? Those magic tricks all work a certain way.
>The insignia is needed to shoot the lightning but there is no reason given as to why the insignia causes lightning it just happens that is magic mate.
Even if the story doesn't offer an explanation, it's easy to intuit a few methods. Made of super ink, special geometric pattern, carved into the hand with a dragon tooth, etc. Someone or something caused that insignia to be there, and it works. So there's clearly rules in place.
>Science is confined to logic
Science is confined by fucking nothing. And reality warping's simply another word for quantum physics.
If it can happen, it's science. Any fictional setting that contains "magic" has different underlying scientific laws allowing it to happen. Fucking Full-Metal Alchemist is science.
The only thing it's confined by is people's understanding of the term, including fiction writers. They just think it means "shit I learned in high school", which only applies to our reality and goes out the window when discussing others.
this shitty meme must be stopped
Magic seems to be using extra-universal energies or forces then arrange them in specific patterns that cause a supernatural effect in the universe.
The specific pattern can be virtually anything, as to why these patterns even exist is anyone's guess, but magic is essentially hacking reality.
So yes the equivalent of magic in science is basically mathematical formulas that warp reality everytime they are made.
You are of those asperglords who flipped their shit when Captain America mentioned God, are not you?
>there is no reason given
Yeah. And that's fine.
It's still science. Because there IS a reason. Otherwise it wouldn't work.
>By default, magic has to have some sort of internal logic, otherwise, characters like Fate, Strange, Wiccan, Zatanna, and other magical beings would never be able to study and manipulate it.
Im having a hard time trying to figure out exactly how Odin's powers even fucking work using science.
I mean yes its easy to scienfically replicate Thor's powers if you are advanced enough but the lightning Thor creates defies logic and then Mjollnir gaining an infinite amount of inertia if someone other than Thor or Odin tries to wield it.
Magic is just science but on a more profound level.
If magic were not consistent, predictable, or did not have its own internal sense of logic, no mage could reliably be considered powerful, and magic could not be studied, but only observed. If someone uses magnetism to manipulate metal, that's science. If someone uses incantations and mystical circles to manipulate metal, that's magic.
As far as comics are concerned, the only difference between the two is whether or not we understand the process.
Well, isn't this a little like saying science is just math? Sure, they might have parts of one in the other, but all in all they're different things.
Magic may have some roots in science, it may not, depending on the setting, but in the end they're separate.
That's easy. Asgardian physiology has developed in such a way to cause these effects. Thor is effectively a living lighting generator, and Mjolnir possesses a form of artificial intelligence that grants it sentience, allowing it to activate its internal security protocols.
And there's no way it literally gains infinite inertia. That's an exaggeration that sounds more fancy than some stupidly long number.
I say infinite inertia because the object becomes impossible to move meaning its inertia has to be finite for that to even happen, just as how Juggernaut has infinite momentum. Its magic bro it buttfucks logic all the time.
>study and application of extant forces
That's a poor analogy. Crazy people have their own rules, and you can exploit those rules to make dealing with them easier.
What? Juggernaut gets stopped all the time. He became a huge jobber for a while because his "infinite momentum" thing is total bullshit.
>People aren't science
So I guess psychologists are just full of shit, huh?
Science is using matter around you to manipulate reality
Magic is using energies that exist outside of reality to manipulate reality
So science is matter and magic is energy basically, however a smart enough scientist could figure out how to control extradimensional energies allowing them to do magic.
Things get really confusing when you encounter things like curses, enchantments, and stuff. Like imagine a cursed glove that kills anything it touchs and you cant remove it.
Bull-shit you can't. Where do you think all those ancient spell books come from? Someone spent ages performing experiments and doing redundant tests to discover repeatable results, then wrote them down.
You just need to ask question and then find answers. How much eye of newt is too much? Do I really need wolfsbane to freeze this lake, or can I substitute dragonroot instead?
>So I guess psychologists are just full of shit, huh?
Psychologists are frauds. All they do is stand around and listen to your problems because sometimes you have problems you can't talk to anyone you know about and this stranger is obligated to never tell anyone about these things or else he loses his license.
>So science is matter and magic is energy basically
Why is is that whenever someone tries to explain the difference between science and magic, they comically fuck up in their understanding of what science is?
I found the notion of potions to be completely absurd, but spells seem logical enough.
I mean lets say I add a goat's toe, some human saliva, and a dash and water, and mix it together and it becomes a drink that makes you see in the dark.
I mean maybe potions work by adding magical energy to the concoction which then causes the ingredients to uhhh become the potion somehow?
Yes, it can be studied with the scientific method, but you shouldn't be able to throw Soultaker in a modern science lab and explain it using modern scientific terms.
Magic should be defined on its own terms and studied on its own terms. That's the issue with the Thor films. It isn't that it takes a more science-fictiony bent on things, it's that they can have Jane go to Asgard and she'll sit on a magic bed and she'll say 'oh this is just a quantum field'.
Fuck that; the only difference might be the aesthetic but that aesthetic is incredibly important, especially in a visual medium like film.
Anon when we say science we actually mean technology, we all know science is basically anything as anything that exist with a system of reason can be studied and thus be a science, so magic is essentially physics from other dimensions.
Psychologist are paid to study people, they pick people with mental issues because they are out of the ordinary making them nice experimental data.
Because when people say "science" what they're actually referring to is "physics". That's why magic is a field of science, because it's the study of whatever exotic energies allow for physical manipulation.
>I mean maybe potions work by adding magical energy to the concoction which then causes the ingredients to uhhh become the potion somehow?
Yep. That's usually the idea.
>That's a psychiatrist or a therapist. A psychologist is someone who runs controlled experiments to try to determine how people react to things.
Most of the time psychotherapists are psychologists or psychiatrists.
Because they're comical fuck ups who don't understand it.
>Magic is not predictable, it has it's own rules, sure, but it's not predictable.
It has to be, otherwise, Zatanna saying "etativel em" wouldn't always work. And it does.
The closest thing to what you're saying is Nico Minoru's use of the Staff of One, which prevents her from doing the same spell twice in a row, and producing a random effect if she tries it. And even then, it's predictable in that it never allows the same spell twice.
Spiritual magic can be philosophical, but magic related to potions doesn't necessarily have to be. There are different types of magic. And you forget that science was largely spiritual until we found out the reasons behind things. Rain dances were once considered their own form of science by those who practiced them.
>Yes, it can be studied with the scientific method, but you shouldn't be able to throw Soultaker in a modern science lab and explain it using modern scientific terms.
Obviously. You wouldn't ask an electrical engineer to oversee a geological survey.
>Magic should be defined on its own terms and studied on its own terms.
It already is.
>we all know science is basically anything as anything that exist with a system of reason can be studied and thus be a science
>That's why magic is a field of science
Thanks for admitting that magic, if it existed, would be under the purview of "science". You clearly understand this concept better than the writers of Thor 2, who heard Thor's explanation that they are the same (this in a movie where Odin spoke words to a magic hammer to put an enchantment on it), and decided "Well, that means we need to put spaceships and lasers and turret guns in our movie, a herp derp!"
>complaining about unrealistic things in capeshit
>Magic is simply a field of science
No it isn't. There are no fast hard rules about what magic can't or can do. That's why it's one of superman's weaknesses, it works on him because it defies physics.
Magic may defy physics, but it has its own set of rules which define how it does so.
And it works on Superman because the writers say it does.
>all this salt
Why are you so mad about this?
Magic works on Supes the same way magic works on humans, superman isnt vulnerable to magic its just that magic is hax to anything that doesnt have magic protection and because Supes is so hard to kill normally I guess that makes him vulnerable or some shit.
I think that the issue here isn't when magic is treated scientifically within the universe, it's more when it's not treated as it's own field of science.
Like, it isn't a subset of physics or chemistry, it's its own thing, but it can still be studied with the scientific method.
>Magic may defy physics, but it has its own set of rules which define how it does so.
Sometimes magic has rules, sometimes it does not.
There was an attempt to bring in all magic together with the Fifth Age thing but it didn't really go anywhere.
Every piece of fiction that deals with "magic" has to set some limitations to it or face the usual questions about not being able to solve all the problems with magic.
The key problem of magic is that it's essentially turning will into reality, bypassing every possible obstacle on the way. It's why you'll wrap things around in mysticism, rituals, innate talents, unobtainable grimoires, rare ingredients, etc.
Very rarely are any of those conditions properly ruled in a way that can be studied from a scientific standpoint.
Two points from the (early) Discworld magic come to mind.
First of all, that the rituals and ingredients to perform some spells are such a pain to perform/gather that they might as well just find a different way to do what they want. As in, when you think about the old wizard needing the "drop of blood from a virgin salamander with stripes" you really don't think about needing to find the damn thing.
Second is, from later in the books, that they don't really need all the fluff and they can just skip right to the magic business. But tradition gets in the way. When it all boils down, the magic character can do whatever, whenever. But it's not as interesting or fun without all the bells and whistles.
We've seen several characters in comics try to rationalize magic-as-science, but considering the variety of writers you have working on comics, you can never find ONE coherent system of magic that would allow you to apply a scientific perspective.
>Magic is simply a field of science
No, it can be studied through science. Witchcraft is a science. Magic is like radiation or particles; it's the thing studied, not the field of study.
>shamed of its fantastical elements
I fail to see how utilizing Clarke's Third Law as a storytelling element means you're "ashamed" of the weird stuff. If anything it's a means of giving the setting a consistent foundation. Establishing the rules and sticking to them allows the audience to remain invested without them having to ask too many questions.
>Magic is simply a field of science.
Not the DCU it aint.
>Establishing the rules and sticking to them allows the audience to remain invested without them having to ask too many questions.
Yeah, because people got really confused about why the gods have powers in Clash of the Titans.
harry potter sucks cause the "whimsical" (if thats even the right word here) quality of the books is lost when shown, the flying car is interesting to read about but when shown well...its stupid as fuck. when you film something magical the audience can only buy so much cause it starts to really bend our reality and break suspension of disbelief which when described in book form doesn't happen nearly as much. its why lord of the rings with its generally down played magic that rarely happens works so well on screen.
harry potter could not avoid this. comic movies have tried to avoid this but because the source material didn't have to avoid it, it's hard to reach the balance of telling the same story or even worse having the characters be true to themselves VS. whats going to actually work on screen.
>Remember when people said the DCEU would just yet to pull that "What you think is magic is actually advanced alien technology" bullshit?
Actually no, I don't remember that happening.
They gave "realism" and "grounded" a lot of lip service because Nolan, but that's it.
>all magic in the MCU is "sufficiently advanced technology" or played for laughs
>because the mass market likes to feel 'nerdy' but don't want to be associated with D&D playing geeks, and feel magic based heroes are lame, so we'll tuck Marvel's rich history of magic away in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator
Go check the notes from your boss' meeting for Thor, Disney shill, you'll see I just paraphrased them
It was mainly rumours about Wonder Woman and Aquaman being Kryptonian, from what I remember.
I don't know, I think that the Harry potter films were very whimsical for the first few.
The issue for me was actually how the later ones got really grey and drab.
The asgardians are too retarded to have sufficiently advanced tech thats why we their powers magic because it makes sense for them utilize weird energies to create supernatural effects in realituy, theres just no way they are using advanced tech, what they are using is a different form of science than us however.
Considering how mad you're getting over something so trivial and jumping to conclusions of conspiracy, maybe producers are correct in making things less nerdy.
Hell, I don't want anything to do with nerds. Y'all are the fucking worst.
>I don't care about explanations
The reason explanations are important is because it gives the world of the story its flavor. The reason magic is magic explanation is more interesting is because it challenges the viewer more and opens doors to certain kinds of stories, as opposed to "don't worry you guys its not magic its just super science".
>female nick fury
>edgy grimdark characters
>even more Joker
Who the fuck cares? Man of Steel had me hyped but the cinematic universe is just falling apart.
I actually want to see BvS, but it looks a lot more moderated and run by editorial, for better or for worse. The by-the-numbers storytelling may work for making the audience reaction less divisive than MoS's was, but I'm not expecting anything really jaw-dropping or ground-breaking out of it.
Suicide Squad I had zero hype for until this trailer dropped, but now I'm really excited for it because it looks like it's willing to take more risks in terms of developing the setting and characters.
I keep hearing this. A movie can't be "grimdark" if it's not grim and self-serious. NolanBats movies were "grimdark". Does this look like it's trying to be operatic and serious?
That's what endeared me the most about the trailer, they had some really good instances of comedic timing. (Boomer sneaking a beer, for example). I can't enjoy a movie if it's just constantly beating you down with gritty angst and pain, all the characters are unlikeable assholes or unrealistically amoral monsters, and there's no space in the narrative to let anything positive happen.
I was scared Suicide Squad was going to stray too far into that, but seeing more of it in this trailer helped alleviate that fear somewhat.
"Grow up" is not an argument, and "edgy" is not grim. The point of lines like that is not to create a sense of grimness, but of fun. It's dark humor. It's not meant to be taken seriously, and if you're honestly offended by it, I think you're missing the point entirely.