Why is it okay for George Lucas to talk about Kurosawa heavily

Because Zack Snyder's an overgrown twelve year old in his edgelord phase that thinks comics are unrealistic because Batman isn't getting raped in them.

File: steve.png (84KB, 245x316px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 245x316px

>>91506127
That doesn't answer my question though.

Why are people shocked about Kurosawa influences? They're fairly common in film. A Bug's Life is based on Seven Samurai for example.

>>91506173
That's what i'm saying. But now we have new round of calling Snyder shit just because he talked about liking a movie.

>>91506137

Because George Lucas took inspiration to serve what he was making, because for all his flaws he was clearly really into his own creation and wanted to build it up as what it was. Snyder, on the other hand, thinks that what he's working to create is shit to begin with and wants to turn it into something else to "elevate" it.

Lucas had some small twisted idea of what was likeable about what he was making and used his inspirations to prop it up further, Snyder has either no idea or a totally wrong idea why people like his source material, so he's hollowing out what he's supposed to be making and filling it in with what he already likes.

File: Clark.gif (2MB, 245x140px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 245x140px

>>91506231
>thinks that what he's working to create is shit to begin with
Stop being reductionist.

>>91506231
>Snyder has either no idea or a totally wrong idea why people like his source material
I disagree. I've been reading DC for 20 years i'm liking his stuff so far.
I could also link you a video of a fat nerd how was hosting/announcing for a comic convention where Snyder was there and told him the same thing, that he'd been reading Supes for 25 years and Snyder did him justice.

>>91506231
>Because George Lucas took inspiration to serve what he was making, because for all his flaws he was clearly really into his own creation and wanted to build it up as what it was. Snyder, on the other hand, thinks that what he's working to create is shit to begin with and wants to turn it into something else to "elevate" it.

This is very bizarre speculation. Snyder revels in the superficial pop qualities of comics and superheroes, which paradoxically make them much resonant.

Lucas saw the movie when it was new and it made a lasting impression. 20 years later it influences his own filmmaking.

Snyder was born too late is why. He was the same age when Star Wars came out that Lucas was when Seven Samurai came out.

>>91506231
>Snyder has either no idea or a totally wrong idea why people like his source material,

Well you just have to look at why people do like the source material.

All the shrill complaints about Superman not saving enough people or not smiling make it clear that people wanted reassurations and comfort. Snyder instead gave a conflicted but genuine portrait of a superhero, which people hate.

It's not hard to see how completely bonkers the weird cult of hatred around Snyder is. It all boils down to fear and insecurity.

>>91506304
saved

>>91506255

>Stop being reductionist

But he's right, though. Snyder - and to a larger extent, the Warner Bros. corporation bigwigs - are practically ashamed to be fans of these bright, colorful, well-known comic book characters. Why else do you think they have tried turning them into "serious" films with "serious" storylines rooted in a "gritty" form of reality? They want to "elevate" these goofy, campy comic book characters into something that can be seen as art (or, dare I say it, "kino").

>>91506073

>Why is it okay for George Lucas to talk about Kurosawa heavily influencing him but not Zack Snyder?

Because one did it well and one did it poorly.

This isn't a hard concept. Just like how people were fine with the Stranger Things writers talking about how Spielberg influenced their work but rolled their eyes when JJ said the same thing making Super 8, execution is everything.

Any retard can be inspired by great works, there's an entire decade of shitty Tarantino and Fincher knockoffs we got in the 90's that are proof of that. it's execution that matters.

>>91506276

> Snyder revels in the superficial pop qualities of comics and superheroes

Only insofar as he can use them to masturbate of his thematic concepts. He's no better then the Wachowskis when they made the Matrix sequels.

>>91506304

>Snyder instead gave a conflicted but genuine portrait of a superhero, which people hate.

You can repeat that till the cows come home, what we got at the end of the day was a plot device poorly acted by a performer out of his depth and written to have zero emotional range.

Take the Superman name off the character and he would still be terrible. Actually he would be even worse because most of Snyder's characterisation comes through the iconography instead of making him a person in the context of the narrative.

>>91506073
Because it doesn't look like he's going to do anything with the themes of the movie that he's referencing and is just using the basic plot line of "Good guys team up and beat the bad guy."

You can be damn sure he isn't going to be influenced by the directing or editing style of Kurosawa either.

>>91506344

>Take the Superman name off the character and he would still be terrible. Actually he would be even worse because most of Snyder's characterisation comes through the iconography instead of making him a person in the context of the narrative.

THIS MOTHERFUCKING SHIT RIGHT HERE.

>>91506344
>>91506358
>yeah but it's shit
Is an argument guys.
You could say that all day, and it would never be true.

>>91506073
Because it's like Tommy Wiseau saying he was inspired by Robert Altman.

File: cate.jpg (140KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 800x600px

>>91506329
>Why else do you think they have tried turning them into "serious" films with "serious" storylines rooted in a "gritty" form of reality?
Because we've already had FIVE campy silly Superman movies and Batman 66 and the Schumucher films?

Variety good.
Same thing forever bad.

File: Dr. Strange director.png (326KB, 597x558px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 597x558px

>>91506384
No?
What a dumb comparison.

>>91506383

Because you're looking for some sort of "logical explanation" when it comes to art criticism.

You're no better then those "Objective criticism of art totally exists u guise, and coincidentally ii always agrees with me" people.

>>91506408
So we agree that you're not being objective?
Good.

>>91506412

>So we agree that you're not being objective?

Sure.

Neither are you.

Neither is anyone who has ever reviewed a piece of art.

Congratulations, you unlocked the code.

>>91506396
Superman Returns wasn't campy or silly. If anything, we've been drowned in so many "dark Superman" stories like Injustice, Irredeemable, and Man of Steel that a silly live-action Superman movie would add variety.

>>91506396

Who said MoS had to be campy and silly? Why couldn't most of the film have been even as remotely uplifting and positive as the First Flight? Why did the movie - and its sequel - have to be so dour and cynical about everything?

Fuck, at this point, I will take campy and silly because I would rather laugh at fucking "Batman & Robin", ironically and sincerely, over watching "Man of Steel" and feeling like slitting my own throat.

>>91506430
But the moviegoing audience isn't familiar with that crap.
The knew Reeve.

>>91506433
>Fuck, at this point, I will take campy and silly because I would rather laugh at fucking "Batman & Robin", ironically and sincerely, over watching "Man of Steel" and feeling like slitting my own throat.
Oh man. I disagree.

>>91506412

Your version of objectivity does not exist, anon. Movies are not viewed in a vacuum and cannot be judged entirely on their own merits. We all have pre-existing biases and subjective ideas about what makes for a good story, a good movie, and so on. We cannot ignore those biases, no matter how hard we try.

An objective look at a film would only be looking at objective facts (e.g., "Man of Steel stars Henry Cavill as Superman"). Everything else is subjective and open to interpretation and value judgments, just like any other film. Get the fuck over your "view from nowhere" version of objectivity because it can never exist.

>>91506383
He explained how he thinks the movie was bad, though. It's okay you disagree with him, but maybe you could bother to answer his points? You're complaining about simplistic unjustified statements and then making one yourself.

>>91506451
Maybe I enjoy Snyder movies because I overlap with him on Randian issues of objectivity.

>>91506425
> semantic trick
But that anon does have a point. Are you telling his opinion worth nothing because there is no opinion that can be truly objective in formal philosophical way? That is just pathetic.

>>91506402
A shit director (Wiseau/Snyder) says he took inspiration for his shitty work (the room /JL) from a great director (Altman /kurosawa).

It is disrespectful to the original creator, and by no means the cult followers of the inspired idiot should call him a visionary because of that.

>>91506443

What, so you would rather have another decade of depressing Superman movies? You would prefer another ten years of DC movies that are "super-serious" "kino"? Fuck that shit. I want something fun.

Superheroes are campy by nature. So why does "campy" automatically mean "shitty" if it is connected with superhero media? Why can't we have a "campy" superhero film that is also good?

>>91506469

Ah, so you suck Ayn Rand's dead dick. Good for you.

>>91506460
>You're complaining about simplistic unjustified statements and then making one yourself.
Exactly.
going
>buh he fundamentally misunderstand Superman becuase uh moping and whining and uh bad acting and uh uh uh
Isn't an argument.

Before you reply to this thread, let me remind you that you're getting into an argument with a retarded Snyder fan.

>>91506412
Playing fast and loose with a general consensus isn't a solution to your dilemma of having an unpopular and undefendable opinion.

Escaping to increasingly broader and vague contexts is just an exercise in mental gymnastics, moving the goal post further and further back until literally nothing matters or holds any value in any meta-cognitive spectrum of interpersonal communication.

tl;dr, if your only recourse in defending a movie is the reductionist defense mechanism of crying "subjectivity" while goose-stepping the burden of proof onto the other person any time you're held accountable for your words, then you're either intellectually ill-equipped for this kind of discussion and/or have poor taste.

>>91506481
> Isn't an argument

Nor is anything you've presented. All you've done is make equally if not more-so dubious and unsubstantiable claims while demanding the other side foot undisputed empirical proof. Not to mention your guerrilla tactics hit-&-run method of arguing in which you only respond to what you can exploit.

>>91506481

It is an argument, though. Most people know of the Superman character through cultural osmosis - be it the old films, the Justice League cartoon, the comics, or whatever. They have a preconceived notion of what Superman is "supposed" to be as a character. You cannot expect people to drop all that and view "Man of Steel" (or BvS, for that matter) in a vacuum where every other iteration of Superman does not and will not ever exist. They will compare Snyder!Superman to all other versions of Superman, including the one that exists only in their head - the amalgamation of their views on the character - and they will make a judgment about Snyder!Superman based on that.

>>91506498
I hate Snyder fans. They remind me of the Bronies who kept harping on how MLP was a multilayered tapestry of art, or those fucking Undertale fans who say their lives changed for the better because of playing the game.

>>91506480

>Superheroes are campy by nature

You can have something that's both campy and peppered with real moments of darkness or humanity at the same time.

Just look at Farscape.

>>91506474

>Are you telling his opinion worth nothing because there is no opinion that can be truly objective in formal philosophical way?

What? No. I'm saying that his "Why are Snyder haters so subjective and biased unlike us enlightened gentlemen Snyder enthusiasts :^)" argument is bullshit because everyone has a bias in their appreciation of art.

>>91506510
Mate, that will leave the snyderkek in a coma

>>91506520
>They remind me of the Bronies who kept harping on how MLP was a multilayered tapestry of art
But I don't think his movies are deep art.
I just think they are good movies.

Stop trying to push a narrative.

>>91506073
Because ANH is a really, really good film, and in fact one of the pivotal entries in western filmmaking. Whereas nothing Snyder makes is worth his weight in shit.

Also, Lucas merely revealed his influences afterwards, he didn't go around comparing the film to Hidden Fortress before it was out.

>>91506538

>I just think they are good movies.

Okay, so...why are they good stories?

>>91506541
>Whereas nothing Snyder makes is worth his weight in shit.
Directors disagree with you.
see
>>91506402

>>91506538
>Stop trying to push a narrative

Friendly reminder that the geniuses that appreciate Snyder's work fell for the /tv/ meme known as KINO

>>91506550
Because I enjoy the approach they take?

I'm not trying to convince you mate.
I'm just stating my opinion.
You guys """know""" Snyder is shit, and that's fine. Just know that you're delusional.
see
>>91506402

>>91506551

>Directors disagree with you.

Director. Singular. One.

>>91506565
Not all of them.
Again, stop pigeonholing.

>>91506551
Directors aren't necessarily good filmmakers, anon.

Snyder is proof of that.

>>91506538

>I just think they are good movies.

Except they fail as pure movies tot he point that the only defence point that has any legitimacy is as art-house thematic tapestries.

If you look at BvS as pure surface level it's a boring nightmare punctuated by dollops of unintentional comedy in the action scenes.

>>91506551
Praising one of the most passable things Snyder has ever done isn't really an open endorsement of the man's filmography or his current work.

>>91506538
Though an overused comparison, it is a more than fair one in this context. If for no other purpose than to illustrate the utter lack of self-awareness that people who defend MLP and Snyder exhibit.

>>91506569

>Because I enjoy the approach they take?

That alone is not reason enough. Convince me why they are good stories. Go deep into that shit. If you truly appreciate his films, you can answer the question with more than "BUT I LIKED THEM". If you liked them, tell us why.

File: james-cameron-considera-a-zack-snyder-una-inspiracion_yx1g.640.jpg (9KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 640x360px

>>91506579
I’m also inspired by — these are established filmmakers now, but I remember being very inspired by them when they first broke on the scene — like Zack Snyder and Robert Rodriguez, guys that were just creating their own new cinematic language. So I can be inspired by somebody whose name I don’t even know if they do something that’s unique and remarkable and nobody’s seen it before.

http://www.slashfilm.com/james-cameron-inspirations/

>>91506590
What's my motivation though?
I say something, you pick it apart.
You don't agree with me about Snyder. That's fine.

>>91506610
fug forgot my
>meme arrows

>>91506610

>I say something, you pick it apart.

Yes, that is how discussion works. Don't like it? Stick with "BUT AH LAHKED IT" and move on. Otherwise, dig deep into why you liked that shit and give us something of substance to work with.

>>91506635
Again mate, what is my motivation?

>>91506610
> Attacks other people's arguments and Opinions
> His gets backed into a corner
> "We'll just have to agree to disagree"

Also citing analogues to other directors and using terms like "cinematic languages" doesn't prove or establish anything other than superficial contexts at best. And to be fair, the only "cinematic language" snyder has created is lens filters.

>>91506663
>> "We'll just have to agree to disagree"
see
>>91506644

What would be my "carrot on a stick" so to speak?
How do I benefit from wasting my time going back a forth with a guy who has his opinions on the issue fairly set in stone?

>>91506644
You tell me, you're the one still posting in this thread backed into a corner after having attacked other people's opinions. Suddenly it's not only everyone else's burden of proof to defend what they're saying but to convince you to defend your own?

>>91506644

If you want to be able to hold your own in discussions like these, you have to understand your arguments. So dig deep and figure it out. Otherwise, stick with "BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIKED IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT" like the bitch you are.

>>91506663

>And to be fair, the only "cinematic language" snyder has created is lens filters.

And wasting talented cinematographers.

That dipshit Kong movie used Larry Fong better then fucking BvS, He got an amazing artist to frame his movie and then shot the whole thing in close-ups.

I really hate how BvS looks.

>>91506681
>>91506684
wat
Why is this question so hard?
I'm asking you- what go I gain from arguing this issue?

>>91506693

A better understanding of why you like Snyder's shit beyond "BUT I LIKED IT, YOU SPERM-SWALLOWING SEALCLUBBER".

File: vlcsnap-2017-03-21-15h09m57s226.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>91506689
>I really hate how BvS looks.
BvS looks great IMO.

You guys just don't like muh no colors muh low light.

>>91506678
You seemed to have plenty of motivation above, only now that you've been put in your place do you pull this "what's my motivation" defense mechanism.

Funny, because if that truly was the case what is your motivation for posting "What's my motivation", to get the last word in?

>>91506693
You should have asked yourself that when making this thread? Did you expect everyone else to do all the work?

>>91506705
>A better understanding of why you like Snyder's shit
I highly doubt that.
I think it would be more along the lines of me getting a better understanding of why /co/ has foaming at the mouth hatred over it.

>>91506707
That fight scene with the cave troll left a bit to be desired.

>>91506073
Because fuck DC and fuck you

>>91506707

>You guys just don't like muh no colors muh low light.

Well, yes, generally being able to see what is going on and comprehend it through visual cues is kind of paramount in trying to enjoy a film.

>>91506721

Yes, and that is a problem, how?

>>91506708
>You seemed to have plenty of motivation above, only now that you've been put in your place do you pull this "what's my motivation" defense mechanism.
>Funny, because if that truly was the case what is your motivation for posting "What's my motivation", to get the last word in?
Again, this is super simple stuff.

I say I liked it.
You ask me why.
I've noticed that you seem set in your opinions.
I ask you what I would gain from arguing with you.

As far as getting the last word goes, if you insult me i'm probably going to respond, don't know what to tell to you.

>>91506732
>Yes, and that is a problem, how?
Because I've spend years here and have heard it a thousand times?

>>91506732
>Well, yes, generally being able to see what is going on and comprehend it through visual cues
I can do that with that image (and the whole film) though.

>>91506073
Zack is a hack with bad ideas

Lucas is a hack with good ideas

Disney should take over for DC like they did Star Wars since they make it better

>>91506723
Did it though? Did it REALLY?

>>91506707

>You guys just don't like muh no colors muh low light.

There's a difference between muted colors and turning the dial to "murky" and leaving it at that.

A Cure For Wellness had a muted color palette but it still looked absolutely gorgeous, because for all of Verbinski's faults the man has never made an ugly movie in his life. Outside of Watchmen all of Snyder's movies look like bad early 2000's music videos.

>>91506721
It's not so much that /co/ hates it as anyone in the human race with a high functioning neurotypical brain hates it or at the very least finds it offputing.

Again you've only shown you're childish and unrealistic expectations of interacting with others. Classic tell of autism.

>>91506743
Yet you created a thread for this and now that it's come time for you to defend your side of the argument you've got cold feet. So everyone has to explain themselves to you, but not vice versa?

Are you embarrassed that the real reason you like BvS is because you're high functioning austistic?

>>91506743

>you seem set in your opinions

And here's the thing: Even if I am somehow "set" in my opinions, they can still be changed if the argument is good enough. So maybe try harder with your arguments, and you might change my mind. Or stick with "BUT I LIKED IT I LIKED IT I LIKED IT" and see where that gets you.

>>91506764
>ad hominem
For a guy trying to take the intellectual stance, you're not doing so hot.

>>91506770
>they can still be changed if the argument is good enough.
I don't think that's true though.
I've been in this exact situation before with a guy who hated Snyder's movies.

I don't believe that you believe that you will ever like BvS.

File: 1488165698081.png (244KB, 728x745px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 728x745px

>>91506073
I don't think anybody thinks that. You probably saw one comment and assumed EVERYONE thinks like that.

It's perfectly fine to have influences, it's okay if they show that much, and he can talk about them as much as he likes. BvS has problems because of many, MANY other factors, and people disliked it because if those factors. Not because it looked like a fucking painting at times and not because it made a callback to other works.

I feel like I'm using too much effort replying to bait, but I like writing, I guess.

>>91506786
>bait
It's not bait.
Calling things you don't like bait IS bait though.

>>91506775
It would only be ad hominem if that was the entirety of the argument. The core of my argument is that you're expecting a one sided discussion which isn't realistic or serving to your stance.

Also your response is simple deflection, another logical fallacy much like ad hominem. Are Snyder's works really so weak that you can't even make a single compelling argument in their defense.

>>91506784
Is claiming: "b-b-b-but you're set in your ways" any less pathetic than not being able to offer a single reason as to why you like something and think others should too?

>>91506707
yes I dislike the visual choice to intentionally make things hard to see or make out

its literally a film techniques whose only real merit is that it can allow people to cut corners since the audience can't tell something looks bad when they can barely tell what they are looking at anyway

>>91506803
>Is claiming: "b-b-b-but you're set in your ways" any less pathetic than not being able to offer a single reason as to why you like something and think others should too?
I don't know, but what I'm confident of is this
>I don't believe that you believe that you will ever like BvS.

>>91506073
Also, that's a pretty cool wallpaper, do you happen to have it in higher rez?

>>91506784

>I've been in this exact situation before with a guy who hated Snyder's movies.

And I bet you pulled the exact same shit - you say you liked them, he asked why, and you said "whoa, hey, what do I get out of this argument" until he punched you in the throat and left you to die in a ditch like your mother should have done after she spat you out of her diseased vagina 13 years ago.

>>91506809
>make things hard to see
Are you blind?

>>91506073
For one
>/tv/
You're barely even talking about movie adaptations, you're literally talking about filmmakers and film influences.

Also Snyder is considered far more of a hack by a good portion of /co/, and unsurprisingly people are far less interested in the influences of a filmmaker they don't respect.

George is considered a hack too, but he still has the original trilogy on his resume and is capable of showing good cinematic influences when he's kept in check by people willing to tell him no.

>>91506816
yikes
Why are you angry?

>>91506795
Cool, even better, then refer to the rest of the post.

>>91506824
>even better
How?

>>91506795
It is bait if you're not willing to engage in any actual form of constructive discourse and keep defaulting on:

> "What's my motivation for defending myself?"
> "You're set in your opinion so there's no point in arguing with you."

>>91506811
Then what was the point of making this thread if you're not willing to engage in any kind of constructive discourse?

>>91506832
>Then what was the point of making this thread
To make people think.

>>91506823

Because of people like you, who expect to be agreed with no matter what and try to shut down arguments whenever you are confronted with disagreement or even the tiniest bit of spite. Because you think you can get away with "BUT I LIKED THEM" and subsequently conflate all criticism of MoS and BvS with "NOT MUH SUPES". Because you are an underaged asshole with no real appreciation of film, superhero or otherwise. Because you refuse to dig deep into your own head and come up with a better reason for liking Snyder's shit other than "just because".

>>91506841
>To make people think
>About literal /tv/ threads on /co/.

>>91506841

Then why are you not giving us any goddamned substantive arguments to think about?

>>91506841
All you've done is make us think how completely childish and vapid people like yourself who defend Snyder are. A mentally fragile child incapable of dealing the criticism of his own unpolished and immature opinions yet expects everyone else to defend and explain theirs despite his utter refusal to accept anything they say.

>>91506073
That sounds like over generalizing but here's my take on it:
If Snyder is being influenced by a Kurosawa movie, good for him, Kurosawa is a pretty fucking good director. Nothing revealed about his most recent movie screams "Kurosawa", but then again neither did the promotional material for Star Wars.

Have a (you) on the house and stop trying to defend a very mediocre director from the meanies of the internet.

Because there is a difference between saying you have drawn inspiration from something vs. traight up saying your movie is like a superior source material.

Lucas was never under the impression he was making something as good a Kurosawa.

>>91506889

/thread

>>91506820
George is also self-aware of his shortcomings as a writer. Like he's always called himself the "King of Wooden Dialog".

He wanted his friends and people from the OT to help out on the prequels, but they were either busy with other projects or just felt like George should do it himself.

>>91506828
Because it's a little frustrating to have a discussion with someone who's just trying to make people mad.

>>91506889
That and Lucas openly admits all of his works are composites of other artists works that he's admired. Fuck, the entire premise of the first Star Wars movie was adapted largely from Jordowosky's script for Dune.

>>91506909
Also the Hidden Fortress and Flash Gordon. Like the whole impetus for Star Wars was that George couldn't get the remake rights to Flash Gordon.

>>91506127
Snyder never said anything like that, he said. Nolan movies are not dark compared to watchmen and he is right. Or you will deny it?

>>91506936
I don't think I've seen a single interview with Lucas where he wasn't self-deprecating to some extent or openly admitting that he's given far too much credit for what he's done. Meanwhile Snyder acts like he's THE pioneer of Super Hero Cinematography even throwing other contemporaries such as Nolan under the bus to drive home the point just how unique and unrivaled his work is.

>>91506964
Read it for yourself

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/2/11565932/zack-snyder-justice-league

File: vlcsnap-2017-03-19-19h54m05s178.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>91506848
>superhero or otherwise.
I am only going to make this one post. I'm not going to go back and forth with you.

My favorite filmmaker is Terrence Malick.
His movies frequently feature lines like
>I remember mother when she was dyin'; all shrunk up and grey. I asked her if she was afraid... she just shook her head. I was afraid to touch the death I seen in her. I couldn't find nothin' beautiful or upliftin' about her goin' back to God. I heard people talk about immortality... But I ain't seen it. I wondered how it'd be when I died. What it'd be like to know that this breath now was the last one you was ever gonna draw... I just hope that I can meet it the same way she did. With the same... calm. Cause that's where it's hidden -- the immortality I hadn't seen."
or other things that more cynical man might call pretentious, so when I see lines like
>There was a time above... a time before. There were perfect things... diamond absolutes. But things fall, things on Earth. And what falls... is fallen. In the dream, they took me to the light. A beautiful lie.
I try to understand before I write off.
And in the case of BvS, I found that outside a tendency to veer into purple-ish prose (which actually seems reminiscent of older comics to me) I actually really liked the script and idea of the conflict.


Again, call me autistic, call me whatever other stock insults, but i'm not defending myself any more than this.

I think it's safe to say that a "refutation" of this post is incoming, so i'm just clarifying that i'm an autistic hit-and-run baby coward and I won't be making another post in this chain of posts.

>>91506971
Yeah, there's this one video I love where he's gushing about Hidden Fortress and how it inspired him. You really get a feel of what it means for him as a storyteller.

>>91507011

I generally disagree with your post, but at least this is something closer to a substantive argument than "BUT I LIKED IT YOU BIG MEANIE-HEADS".

>>91507011
Remember this humility next time you think about making a substance-less thread in which you're not willing to engage in said discourse yet still post anyway.

>>91507042
>Remember this humility
>what is sarcasm

>I won't be making another post in this chain of posts.
I lied I guess.

>>91506073
ITT jealous hacks trying to feel good about themselves

>>91507056
Vanity is your undoing.

Ego is your sin.

Lack of self awareness is no excuse for your failures here today.

You claim others are unwilling to change and therefor won't listen to your arguments yet all along it was merely you projecting your own immaturity onto others thinking everyone else in this thread was equally as childish as yourself.

Go on, post again, you no you can't help yourself.

>>91507092
>Go on, post again, you no you can't help yourself.
But you keep insulting me?
I don't see how my behavior is any more vain than you, who keeps trying to stay on his hill built up from putting me down.

>>91506073
mods how is this not a /tv/ thread? you guys suck at your job.

File: 1485995240394.png (589KB, 1342x664px) Image search: [Google]

589KB, 1342x664px

>>91507006
>You could call it "high-brow" comics, but to me, that comic book was just pretty sexy! I had a buddy who tried getting me into "normal" comic books, but I was all like, "No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn’t really doing it for me." I was a little broken, that way. So whenWatchmencame along, I was, "This is more my scene."

>>91507145
Unironically based.

>>91506475
I'll defend Tommy and say that he did a better job at infusing his inspirations than Zack the Hack did. The Room is such a unique, poorly made film that it will be remembered long after BVS and Man of Steel. It incorporates Tommy's tragedy, tastes, and the essence of Tommy really into one Freudian clusterfuck while Snyder films are mostly just soulless repetitions of what's come before.

>>91507162
>I'll defend Tommy and say that he did a better job at infusing his inspirations than Zack the Hack did.
yikes

>>91507116
Ever the autist, ever the need to be self-righteous and make others conform to his own un-vetted opinions you are compelled to continue on even though you have no argument, no substance, no points... nothing what-so-ever to contribute to any grander or meaningful discourse.

You made this thread in response to a frenzied tantrum, hoping for some validation for your frustration, but here you are, a hypocrite, posting when you said you wouldn't anymore.

>>91507170

It's true, though.

Also true: The Room will be remembered more than BvS and MoS ever will be. Greatness is lauded. Awfulness is mocked. But mediocrity? Mediocrity is forgotten.

>>91507175
>but here you are, a hypocrite, posting when you said you wouldn't anymore.
My man, what is wrong with you?
I the other two guys that responded didn't just insult me like you keep doing.
What kind of logic are you operating under where I can't be indignant at an insult?

And besides, when I said I won't be replying to that chain of posts, I really meant that topic, not someone attacking my character.

>>91507170

I mean their mastery of the green-screen is about on the same level.

>>91507186
But your argment makes no sense.
You're admitting that Zack's stuff is mediocre and Tommy's is bad, so unless Tommy's influences are all bad (not mediocre, bad) filmmakers, then this
>he did a better job at infusing his inspirations than Zack the Hack did.
Is a contradiction.

>>91507238
yikes

>>91507210
You can't help but keep responding can you? Forever doomed by your ego and vanity. So self-assured of your own correctedness that the idea anyone wouldn't agree with such can't be left as is.

Go on, post again, use defamation of your character as an excuse once more. As if that's even a valid defense on an anonymous image board.

>>91507170
>I don't know anything about The Room- The Post

>>91507246
Tommy's stuff is so "bad" it's good, it's called Irony and has become a pop culture touchstone regarding the subject. Look up any top ten list of movies that are so bad they're good and it's on there easily.

>>91507257
>Go on, post again
see
>>91507116


>use defamation of your character as an excuse once more. As if that's even a valid defense on an anonymous image board.
Also, if you're implying that I shouldn't care about it, why are you posting it at all?

You are confused.

>>91507252

>implying the rooftop scenes in The Room look much worse then the Doomsday scenes.

I still have no idea how Snyder's compositing looks so bad. It's like the actors are running around in fucking Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow.

File: 74b.png (653KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

653KB, 1280x720px

>>91506073
>>91506191
Because, dear brainless fan boy, Snyder is horrible at using these easter eggs or inspirations.

He is the guy that thought that Miller's Batman killed all the time on his out famous comic, when it was a big plot point that he DOESN'T. HE is the guy that missed the point of Whatchmen, he is just a manchild with a poor understanding of what he is working on.

His influences and references are EXACTLY like the kind of stuff that Steven Universe does, and are as deep as them.

His fan boys are also stupid enough to believe that making references in movies somehow make the movies better than they actually are. In reality it is mostly a bunch of fucks that like to feel smart by knowing that background detail "x" is a reference for an actual good movie that they never watched.

>>91507260
Oh, but I do.

>>91507292
But Sky Captain still looks better than The Room so I don't see your point.

>>91506480
>Superheroes are campy by nature. So why does "campy" automatically mean "shitty" if it is connected with superhero media? Why can't we have a "campy" superhero film that is also good?

Nolan brought this plague upon us

>>91507300
>when it was a big plot point that he DOESN'T. H
He literally killed that mutant thug.

>>91507285
> b-b-b-but my feelings
> You keep insulting me so I'm forced to respond

It's an anonymous image board, you have no identity here. The only one forcing you to do anything is yourself.

> Also, if you're implying that I shouldn't care about it, why are you posting it at all?

Well what is motivation for responding to that? :)

>>91506402
>Ahead of it's time
>A 1 for 1 adaption of a comic from 30 years ago

>>91507314
You are retarded and a casual.

>>91507342
Thanks for not insulting me this time.

>Well what is motivation for responding to that? :)
Did you mis-type?
I don't get what you're trying to say here.

>>91507357
He killed the mutant thug though.
Irrefutable fact.

>>91506396
>Variety good
>Two tones of film in every movie since 1966 is variety

>>91507260
Are you referring to yourself? Wiseau didn't intend for it to be a cult film.

>>91507364
And what is my motivation for responding to this?

Are you that oblivious to your own hypocrisy and logistical failure?

>>91507246
Really, I don't have a horse in this race. I just came in here and saw people bringing up Tommy, and figured I'd add my two cents since he and Zack are very dissimilar.

The Room has heavy inspiration from James Dean's forays into romanticism, and this is accentuated by how Tommy thrusts his character into a similar state of angst. The guy identified with Dean, even as a forty something year old man, and so a lot of the guy and his work resonates with Tommy on an existential level. Thus, I get peeved whenever people use The Room as a measure of something's quality or the lack thereof. It's got way more going on behind the scenes as art than most genre flicks do.

Snyder comparatively is more of a fanboy. He sees all these ideas and imagery and wants to replicate it, with little regard for the finished product. A possible comparison would be a Marvel writer like Slott or Bendis, whose writing is frequently derived from mashing up their action figures. They don't hold any true convictions or tastes that flesh out their work, it's all hollow.

>>91507399
>The Room has heavy inspiration from James Dean's forays into romanticism, and this is accentuated by how Tommy thrusts his character into a similar state of angst. The guy identified with Dean, even as a forty something year old man, and so a lot of the guy and his work resonates with Tommy on an existential level. Thus, I get peeved whenever people use The Room as a measure of something's quality or the lack thereof. It's got way more going on behind the scenes as art than most genre flicks do.
pffft
The execution being so awful is why it's funny, dumbass.

>>91507399

>Snyder comparatively is more of a fanboy. He sees all these ideas and imagery and wants to replicate it, with little regard for the finished produc

I hate the way he uses Excalibur in BvS more then anything.

So who's worse? Snyder, the Wachowski's or Bay?

>>91507442
That's a close call, but I would have to say Bay.

>>91506073

Lucas created something that resonated with people. Snyder created something Because he's a hack that got the job because he's fucking the executive producer.

>>91507246

>You're admitting that Zack's stuff is mediocre and Tommy's is bad

Yes, I am. And that is why Wiseau will be remembered long after Snyder. Like "Manos", "The Room" is famously awful - and both films are a masterclass in what happens when someone with a vision tries to tell a story that they have no idea how to tell and lack the resources to tell it properly. They are both remembered for being famously awful in just about every way, and they will be remembered for their awfulness for decades to come.

Snyder's films will fall to the wayside of pop culture because they are not memorable for being either great or awful. I mean, shit, look at "Avatar" - that was the biggest moneymaker in (not adjusted for inflation) box office history, and it vanished from cultural conversations after it left theatres. It was neither good enough to give endless praise nor bad enough to give eternal mockery. It was mediocre, and mediocrity gets forgotten.

File: ohmang.jpg (13KB, 304x237px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 304x237px

>>91507389
>And what is my motivation for responding to this?
You tell me?
>Are you that oblivious to your own hypocrisy and logistical failure?
I think you're trying to overcomplicate the issue.
The other guy respected my post enough to just disagree.
You had to roll in with a "play dumb" comment, becasue you knew I wasn't trying to show humility.

AGAIN, why would you post that if not to be inflammatory. You knew that you were intentionally misconstruing my post.

Then when I reply to your bait, you fire up the armchair psychology stuff (muh ego muh vanity etc etc etc)

And you're still playing dumb.

>>91507357
blasted

>>91507469
>Yes, I am.
see
>>91507246
>then this
>>he did a better job at infusing his inspirations than Zack the Hack did.
>Is a contradiction.

>>91507442

> the Wachowskis

They still made The Matrix and Speed Racer and Bound. And they pioneered technology in action filmmaking in ways no one was expecting.

>Bay

The Rock is one of the best action movies ever made.

So I'll go with Snyder.

>>91507442
The Wachowskis have made one really good film.

Bay and Snyder are about the same tier as directors. Bay knows he's just a producer of samey crap, though, whereas Snyder thinks he's Kubrick reborn in phoenix-fire.

>>91507469
>It was mediocre, and mediocrity gets forgotten.
marvelstudios.jpg

>>91507373
The comic explicitly say that he doesn't killed her.

>>91506073
Because Zack rhymes with Hack.

Lucas is heavily respected for episodes 4-6, so people will anything up regarding those films.

>>91507519
No, it doesn't.

>>91507527
>episodes 4-6

>inb4 memes

IRREDUCIBLE STORY CREDIT
LOOK IT UP

>>91506073
because star wars is really good
snyders films arennt quite as good

>>91507507

Ultimately, yes, the worst Marvel films will be forgotten, as they are mediocre. (Who talks about "The Incredible Hulk" these days?) The best Marvel films will be remembered and thrust into the cultural conversation because they are good enough to stay there.

>>91507543
>The best Marvel films will be remembered and thrust into the cultural conversation because they are good enough to stay there.
Like what?
What from the MCU will be remembered like TDK and Ledger?

>>91507542
Because for all of Lucas faults he is a storyteller and wants to tell a story. Snyder not so much.

>>91507555

>What from the MCU will be remembered like TDK and Ledger?

You don't have to like The Avengers, but that movie is still referenced all the fucking time.

>>91507571

>Because for all of Lucas faults he is a storyteller and wants to tell a story

After the PT I'm not so sure.

File: IMG_2377.jpg (21KB, 208x200px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 208x200px

Because everyone here jumps on the bandwagon on who's popular to hate
It's like how people bitch and complain about Arin doing game grumps but he never really used animation for more then to throw his voice around but it's fine for the sleepy cast guys to do let's plays

>>91507486

Truth be told, neither man did a good job of infusing their inspirations because, at the core level, neither of them went deep into why their inspirations inspired them in the first place. Neither of them seems to have understood the underlying reasons for why they felt how they felt when they first encountered those inspirations.

Think of it in terms of Lightsaber battles. Everyone thinks "OH THOSE ARE SO COOL", but why are they "cool"? Why are the Lightsaber battles in "Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi" given more credit than those from the Prequel Trilogy? Because there is a deeper emotional resonance to the Original Trilogy's Lightsaber battles than exists in most of the Prequel Trilogy's battles.

That is the key problem with Snyder's films: He has all these inspirations, but he sees them only as tangible details, as things to be copied - all without understanding the deeper emotional resonance of those details and why they worked in other films.

>>91507590
>After the PT I'm not so sure.
What?
The PT was an ambitious story, execution aside.
Anakin's fall, the Chancellor's rise, a galaxy wide war, politics whether you like them or not, etc...

>>91507555

Iron Man 1, The Avengers, and The Winter Soldier.

>>91507608
>Because there is a deeper emotional resonance to the Original Trilogy's Lightsaber battles than exists in most of the Prequel Trilogy's battles.
Not that guy but I disagree.
I think the Obi Wan and Vader fight in ANH is terrible.
Even the dialogue.
They don't sound all that emotional about meeting again.

>>91507616

>The PT was an ambitious story, execution aside.

But it was all in service to the effects, they totally drowned out the narrative.

>>91507621
>Iron Man 1
yes
>The Avengers
no
>The Winter Soldier
pffft

>>91507637
That's irrelevant?
He had an ambitious tale plotted, execution aside depending on your opinion, as I said.

George Lucas is an incompetent director who has some good ideas, but is crippled by his inability to actually make a movie.

Zack Snyder is an expert hack who excels at making trash.

>>91507629

>I think the Obi Wan and Vader fight in ANH is terrible.

That is why I did not explicitly bring it up - out of the Lightsaber battles in the OT, that one is arguably the worst.

But it gets to my point: The average person sees Lightsaber battles and thinks they all have to be like the ones in the PT because ZOMG FLIPS AND SHIT EVERYWHERE, but the ones in the OT have the better emotional resonance because they are trying to tell a better story. Fan films that rely on Lightsaber battles suffer the same fate - they try to do the "cool" thing by leaning on the tangible details of "choreographed lasersword fights" without understanding that violence is but a method to solving a conflict rather than the conflict itself.

>>91507676
>but the ones in the OT have the better emotional resonance because they are trying to tell a better story.
BUt I don't think that's true for the movie that started it all.
The delivery of the lines in the ANH fight never made me very invested in the fact that they were apparently meeting again for some kind of destined rematch.

>>91507676
actually, normies watch red letter media too

>>91507691

>The delivery of the lines in the ANH fight never made me very invested in the fact that they were apparently meeting again for some kind of destined rematch.

And, again, this is why I did not explicitly bring up that specific fight: It lacks the same kind of emotional resonance that comes from the fights in Episodes V and VI. But it does at least set the tone for what comes in those films, which is its one saving grace.

>>91507697

The fuck is a "normie"?

File: vlcsnap-2017-02-22-17h00m54s160.png (3MB, 1920x816px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x816px

>>91507720
But Mark Hamill talks about the fact that by ROTJ they were operating under the rule that the sabers were weightless and they were told to move fast as they could, and Luke flips and jumps in the fight too.
Hell, Obi Wan makes a pointless spin in ANH.

George always had the same vision, only thing that changed was his increasing abitly to achieve it.
ROTJ also has dodgy (as in good paintings, but obviously paintings) matte paintings and matte lines and compositing and midgets in suits and everything else.

ROTJ would have been the exact same movie with CG, just with CG because it existed.

George never changed.

>>91507734
Please be joking.

Snyder is a master when filming action scenes.
that's it.
like del Toro or rodrigues are awesome in specific stuff, but they aren't good actor's directors or relevant writers.

i love to see how Snyder films some stuff, but believing that he is a competent/solid director or a good writer, please.

even better, show mw a movie directed by Snyder with no special effects, somthign simple so i can see how he handles a simple story.

no? nothing?

just take the good things that Zack the hack can do and move on, giving the entire MCU origin to Snyder was a huge mistake, he should've filmed the action scenes and someone more competent should've directed the actor's scenes.

and hire a good writer for fuck's sake, Marthaaaaa will be the only thing everybody will remember about BvS in 5 years.

>>91507006
You can read it you imbecile, he is saying exactly that, Nolan isn't really dark. That's all. As for the rest do capeshitters really get mad that people. That grow up on heavy metal finds capeshit offputting at first? Capeshit is usually tame as fuck and really really scared of doing experimental or imaginative stuff.

>>91507641

Avengers will be remembered not so much for the quality of its story or cinematography (which were both mediocre), as much as it will be remembered for proving that the "shared universe" concept could actually be transplanted to films. It justifies its own existence, then spends its entire third act celebrating that fact with arguably the best third-act superbattle in superhero film history.

>>91507785
>Marthaaaaa will be the only thing everybody will remember about BvS in 5 years.
You now realize that reporters know that you humanize someone by using their name and not their title(i.e. "mom").

>>91506073
>good movie is inspired by X
>Bad movie is inspired by X
>complain about bad movie, compliment good movie
what is problem here?

>>91507598
>Because everyone here jumps on the bandwagon on who's popular to hate

Most people here wouldn't hate Snyder if there weren't an army of shills trying to push his garbage as masterworks of cinema.

I'd honestly prefer to forget about him.

>>91507186
We have. More Mos threads daily than civil war or doctor strange. And that will continue

>>91507817
>>Bad movie is inspired by X
Justice League isn't out.
The BIG complaint about these movies has been the story, and Goyer is not involved with this one.

>>91507827
>army of shills
I just like his movies, guy.

>>91507812
That doesn't make it any less stupid. And Lois wasn't fucking reporting when telling Batman what her name was about.
>>91494695

>>91507784

>Mark Hamill talks about the fact that by ROTJ they were operating under the rule that the sabers were weightless and they were told to move fast as they could, and Luke flips and jumps in the fight too.

The entire fight in Jedi was not about Luke flipping and jumping and shit, but about Luke trying to convert his father back to the Light Side of the Force, all while trying to avoid the allure of the Dark Side while in the presence of two Sith Lords. The emotional resonance comes from Luke's desire to stop the Empire coupled with his attempts to save his father. That is what gives the fight its emotional weight.

>>91507836
But Snyder is.

And Sucker Punch showed that he is worst than Ayer.

>>91507850
>That doesn't make it any less stupid.
yes it does
>>91507850
>And Lois wasn't fucking reporting when telling Batman what her name was about.
She was literally answering Batman's question.

>>91507859
>The entire fight in Jedi was not about Luke flipping and jumping and shit
Nor was Obi v. Maul or Anakin v. Dooku etc etc etc

>I sense much fear in you, Skywalker. You have hate, you have anger- but you don't use them.

>>91507864
Sucker punch is fantastic, and proof that Snyder should direct a live action heavy metal movie

>>91507835

Only reason for that is because faggots like the OP can't stop trolling because it gives them the only emotional trigger they have in their lonely, pathetic, basement-dwelling days.

Thanks, mods. A thread about filmmakers and film criticism on /co/.

Just salvage the thread by making it a DCEU thread.
Give us some Kurosawa influences and references that appear in MoS and BvS. Don't just talk about broad conceptual shit that you can't demonstrate.

>>91507894
You don't sound too happy yourself though, otherwise you wouldn't care so much about other people's opinions of a popcorn movie.

>>91507912
>Give us some Kurosawa influences and references that appear in MoS and BvS.
That's not what the thread is about?
It's in reference to Zack talking about JL and Kusosawa.

>>91507827
No, this is a manchildren board that wants superman to be a cartoon and a father figure for 30 years old neck beards and single mom's teens

>>91507890

>Nor was Obi v. Maul or Anakin v. Dooku

Obi-Wan and Qui-Gonn vs. Darth Maul in TPM is exactly the kind of thing I am getting at here. Everyone thinks that fight is "cool", but there is little-to-no real emotional resonance in the battle because we haven't been given reason to give a shit about either Maul or Qui-Gonn as characters (especially Maul). The battle is nothing but what Lucas likely envisioned such battles to be, but could never do because of the limitations of technology and filmmaking in its day.

Anakin v Dooku was much the same problem: We have no reason to give a shit about Dooku as a character beyond him being a villain, so the fight between those two means little.

The only Lightsaber battle from the PT with any actual emotional resonance is Anakin v Obi-Wan in Episode III, and that only works because the entire trilogy was premised around getting exactly to that point.

>>91507942
bingo

>>91507827

/thread

>>91507942
I want a conflicted Superman who doubts himself on a regular basis, and I dislike what Snyder's done to him.

>>91507942
>I want to watch serious movies about characters I hold active contempt for

>>91507894
They got mad, they feel bad, they think Warner is ashamed of the source material when in reality it's just that adults usually don't want the same story that is fit for children, this reactions are from people that discusses Saturday morning cartoons as a serious issue.

His movies are shit, that's why.

>>91507989

>I want to make serious movies about a character I hold active contempt for

- Snyder and WB execs, probably

>>91507971
I disagree m8.
I find the ANH fight to be less "emotionally resonant than both Obi going into Hyperdrive after Maul killing Qui-Gon, or Anakin getting triggered by Dooku's taunts.

I also like the
>this time we'll do it together
>I was about to say that
Moment that shows how far they've come as a team.

I dunno mate, the whole PT being bad or inferior thing just never really rang true with me. The OT is pretty good, but they're just movies too.

>>91508010
forgot my second " mark

>>91506304
Or that his movies are shit drone. Its edgy dribble.

>>91507994
>only serious adults are smart enough for the DCEU and also Harley Quinn was the most popular Halloween costume last year

>>91507994

>adults usually don't want the same story that is fit for children

Fuck that noise hard. Why the fuck do you think most of us are here on /co/? We certainly aren't discussing adults-only comics.

>>91508010

The emotional resonance comes not from the moments in the fight, but from what those fights represent and what they mean to the characterization of those involved.

We care about Luke v Vader in Episode 5 because we know about the characters and what the conflict is there (Luke's headstrong desire to save his friends versus Vader's desire to bring Luke to the Emperor), even without the Big Reveal involved. There is just no caring about Maul or Dooku because they were not fleshed out as characters and given any reason to exist beyond "the Jedi need to fight a Sith Lord here". Their fights, and the outcomes thereof, lack emotional resonance because they themselves lack a connection the audience as anything beyond one-note one-dimensional cardboard cutout villains who exist only to be defeated by the Jedi.

>>91507994
Except DC has published far better and mature comics than anything sunder has produced. Read comic books you faggot before posting here.
Also ADULTS don't like sunder shit. They want a GOOD comic movie.

Synder doesn't hate DC, that's stupid

He just has a vision nobody likes and not enough skill to pull it off

>>91506073
Because George Lucas actually went to film school

>>91508079
>There is just no caring about Maul or Dooku because they were not fleshed out as characters and given any reason to exist beyond "the Jedi need to fight a Sith Lord here". Their fights, and the outcomes thereof, lack emotional resonance because they themselves lack a connection the audience as anything beyond one-note one-dimensional cardboard cutout villains who exist only to be defeated by the Jedi.
I just don't agree. Those fights have emotional resonance not because of how great the villains are but because of what they've done/them being a foil foil for the good guy.

Again, I really don't get that logic.

>>91508119

>I really don't get that logic.

Maul and Dooku were not fleshed-out characters in the same sense that Vader was. Even by the end of Episode 4, we have a clear picture of Vader's general personality, abilities, and reasons for doing what he does beyond "I'm evil". Can you say the same for Maul, who had maybe two lines at the most in Episode 1? What about Dooku?

The Lightsaber battles in the PT looked "cool" at the time, sure. But "cool" changes from time to time, and what looks "cool" now can be "uncool" in a few years. The Lightsaber battles in the OT may not look as "cool" as those in the PT, but the emotional resonance from the OT battles - the underlying stories being told and the conflicts being resolved through those battles - do far more to help their respective films stay in the public consciousness than those in the PT ever did.

The PT battles have the edge on visuals. The OT battles have the edge on emotion and storytelling. I'll take the latter any day of the week.

>>91508119
Not the other anon, but the thing is, with those PT fights we already know how they're going to play out. Sure, Anakin might be pissed off a Dooku for the things Dooku's done, but there's no inner conflict going on during the battle. Dooku's a bad guy, Anakin's a good guy, good guy wins, end of story.

With Luke versus Vader, there is so much more on the line. Luke is legitimately being tempted by the Dark Side; if his heart is not strong enough, we may have seen him fall under the Emperor's sway and the Rebellion utterly destroyed. Note how in both times Luke faces Vader, both fighters aren't going all out - they're not fighting to *kill* the other, but rather fighting to *get through* to the other.

That is why they hold so much weight.

>>91507989
I love superman, batman was among the first words I spokem since I was born in 1989 in the middle of the batmania over Burton's movie. Thing is, not everyone wants the very same interpretation in every portrayal of the character. Snyder stuff is valid, and attacking him and we for being ashamed of the source is retarded, they are not, Snyder made an animated movie about talking owls, the direction of themovie is an artistic choice not product of some fictional hate Snyder has over comics.

>>91508224

>Snyder stuff is valid

Nobody said it was not valid.

But "valid" is not the same as "good".

If Snyder's so brilliant why do we need 4 threads a day defending him?

>>91508241

See, this is a good point. We rarely talk about the awesome stuff because, hey, what the hell else can we say that has not already been said before? We don't have twenty threads a week about "Speed Racer" or "Animaniacs" or "Aladdin", after all.

File: vlcsnap-2017-03-04-23h20m14s169.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>91508201
>>91508215
>The OT battles have the edge on emotion and storytelling
Eh, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I never understood that whole line of complaint.
Luke v. Vader is intersting emotionally to a point, but the one in ESB especially gets tiring because Luke is just so rookie.
There's dramatic tension in more evenly matched fights, like Qui-Gon vs. Maul. Either one could win.
With ESB, we know Luke isn't trained. I get the emotional angle, but there is more than one type of emotional engagement.

>>91506396
Variety isn't inherently good. Variety is DIFFERENT. You could get shot in the chest today. It'd be different, right? But does that means you should want it?

Furthermore, no, what Snyder's doing isn't different. He's basically doing a sad clown and you guys are acting like its genius even though "What if God was one of us" has been a tired old cliche all by itself for decades now.

People have been pimping deconstructions of Superman longer than anyone in this thread has been alive. The only difference between Snyder's take and theirs is budgetary.

>>91508313
>He's basically doing a sad clown
As opposed to not doing that.
i.e. something different

Think before you post.

>>91506515
Especially since every creative decision Snyder has made relies on that preexisting familiarty to work. He NEEDS us to remember Superman media that came before because he wants to skip straight to turning it on its head than to build something out of whole cloth from the ground up.

>>91508312
>but the one in ESB especially gets tiring because Luke is just so rookie.
But he was being rookie *on purpose* anon. The whole point of that fight was that Luke was being tempted by the Emperor, who was offering him a way of defeating Vader through the use of his anger and rage. But Luke knew that use those feelings would mean succumbing to the Dark Side, so he deliberately held back and had his ass whooped by Vader. If he DID actually defeat Vader, the Rebellion would've lost and the Emperor would've had another younger, arguably more powerful Sith Lord under his command.

>>91508411
>because he wants to skip straight to turning it on its head than to build something out of whole cloth from the ground up.

You mean skip straight to doing something new?
>build something out of whole cloth from the ground up.
You do!

>>91508312

>the one in ESB especially gets tiring because Luke is just so rookie

That is the larger point of that fight: To show how outclassed Luke is in terms of being a Force user. Luke went to confront Vader out of fear - fear of the safety of his friends - and Vader used that fear to help him ultimately defeat Luke in that battle. It also aided the overall arc of the film, in showing that the Rebel Alliance was wholly outclassed by the Empire and, if the Empire willed it so, could be ultimately annihilated without too much trouble.

>There's dramatic tension in more evenly matched fights, like Qui-Gon vs. Maul. Either one could win.

Yes, but do we care WHY those two are fighting beyond "oh hey it's a Lightsaber battle"? That is the whole point I am getting at: That shit means nothing if we do not care about either the characters or the underlying conflict that the fight is trying to resolve. What deeper conflict beyond "good vs evil" was Qui-Gonn v Maul trying to resolve? Why was I supposed to care about either of them when neither of them were fully fleshed-out characters who were all but ignored for the rest of the PT?

>>91508426
????
I'm talking about ESB.
You even quoted that in your post...

>>91508430

Nothing he did was new in terms of telling a Superman story. Just different than what other filmmakers had done with the character.

>>91508440
Oh fug

Ignore my post

>>91508431
>Yes, but do we care WHY those two are fighting beyond "oh hey it's a Lightsaber battle"? That is the whole point I am getting at: That shit means nothing if we do not care about either the characters or the underlying conflict that the fight is trying to resolve. What deeper conflict beyond "good vs evil" was Qui-Gonn v Maul trying to resolve? Why was I supposed to care about either of them when neither of them were fully fleshed-out characters who were all but ignored for the rest of the PT?
I guess this just does back to the ROgue One issue where people said they weren't fleshed out.

Qui-Gon and Maul were plenty fleshed out to me and were even directly contrasted (Qui-Gon meditating while Maul paces like an Animal).

As for why we (or I) care
1. the first time we've seen Old Republic Jedi in their prime go at it
2. we know that this is the first time a Sith has been around for a Millenia and so do the Jedi

I don't get man, I really don't. I get so much out of the PT and it's damn shame that so many people don't.

>>91508456
>different isn't new
wat

>>91508332
Anon, you need to think. Non-ironic clowns are the rarity now. It's all sad clowns and monster clowns. And in the same vein, "guys with superman powers that are a pile of human flaws" outnumber examples of the trope played straight. They have since the 80s.

Let me walk you through this.
If I do thing A, and you come along and do thing B, that's different yes.
But now a dozen other guys start doing thing B, and says how brilliant and brave and bold and risky thing B is because it's not thing A.
Except now, thing B is everywhere.
I didn't have to move at all to become a part of the minority. Thing B is the new standard and the subversion is now Thing A.
The fact that thing A game first is irrelevant; what matters is exposure and proliferation.
When a deconstruction gets overplayed RECONSTRUCTION is the new different and bold take.

>>91508506

>Qui-Gon and Maul were plenty fleshed out to me

Really? Then do the Red Letter Media test: Without mentioning their appearance or their profession or role in the film, describe the characters as if describing them to someone who has never seen a Star Wars film before.

>the first time we've seen Old Republic Jedi in their prime go at it

So what?

>we know that this is the first time a Sith has been around for a Millenia and so do the Jedi

Again: So what?

None of those two things would matter to anyone but hardcore Star Wars nerds. To the average filmgoer, it would mean jack shit.

>>91508521

I could eat something different on a given day than I normally do on that day, but just because I eat something different does not mean I am eating something new.

>>91508570
BvS is a reconstruction though.
Batman AND Wonder Woman both decide to change their ways and hope again because of Superman.

>>91508430
Yes and if he were legitimate in his endeavor he wouldn't be so hated. Look at Batman for example. His Batman is old and busted, and you guys keep telling us that the classic Batman happened off camera.

If we have to take it for granted and ASSUME character development happened OFF CAMERA, we're no longer relying on the movie itself. We're relying on memory of prior interpretations. Snyder didn't do those, he's just claiming credit for them.

File: MIKE .png (167KB, 300x347px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 300x347px

>>91508585
>To the average filmgoer, it would mean jack shit.
But i'm a hardcore SW nerd.

>>91508585
>Then do the Red Letter Media test: Without mentioning their appearance or their profession or role in the film, describe the characters as if describing them to someone who has never seen a Star Wars film before.
>>the first time we've seen Old Republic Jedi in their prime go at it
>So what?

>Then do the Red Letter Media test
No, that's about as useful as the Bechdel test.
Truth be told I didn't know you were an RLM drone so i'm gone.
You may claim victory.

>>91508332
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeYxdIZpUK4
Just out of curiosity do you understand why this joke works?

>>91508646

>I didn't know you were an RLM drone

I'm not. (The TFA review sucked ass.) But I recognise a good argument when I see it.

>But i'm a hardcore SW nerd.

Good for you. How does that help the average filmgoer give a shit about the Old Republic?

>>91508603
Snyder's wife and producer said it was a deconstruction. Why is your word more valid than that of the people working on the movie?

File: 1492045713448.jpg (262KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1080x1080px

>>91508664
Because you have a little white diqq.

>>91508682
I'm just going by what's IN the movie mate.
Batman AND Wonder Woman change for the better because of the events of the film.

If we wee being technical i'd say that it's both. It kind of starts in media res with deconstructed characters, and then builds them back up throughout the movie.
That's actually the biggest reason I like it.

If I knew nothing else about Snyder the fact that you guys are trying to turn him into a bigger meme than Milhouse would be enough to set off warning bells.

>>91508680
>But I recognize a good argument when I see it.
Apparently not.

Han Solo is the most 2d of 2d characters
>rogue with a heart of gold
Just because I can say it like that doesn't make him a good character.

I never liked Han actually. I love Luke, Leia, and Vader though.

>>91508713
>we wee
we're*
I don't know what happened there.

>>91508713
>I'm just going by what's IN the movie mate.
Putting aside the fact that "changing for the better" isn't what makes something a reconstruction (anymore than being darker doesn't make it a deconstruction and this is the flawed interpretation of the term people bandy about) The problem with this is that it assumes we agree the movies make sense and are well written. Watch:

"I can argue that the movies aren't a reconstruction, and that the characters don't actually develop in any meaningful way; they just arbitrarily defy their own internal logic, because they need to come background for sequels."

Now what do you say?

>>91508646
Concession accepted.

>>91507011
>I remember mother when she was dyin'; all shrunk up and grey. I asked her if she was afraid... she just shook her head. I was afraid to touch the death I seen in her. I couldn't find nothin' beautiful or upliftin' about her goin' back to God. I heard people talk about immortality... But I ain't seen it. I wondered how it'd be when I died. What it'd be like to know that this breath now was the last one you was ever gonna draw... I just hope that I can meet it the same way she did. With the same... calm. Cause that's where it's hidden -- the immortality I hadn't seen
As a cynical /lit/ guy, this is actually a good line. Without knowing anything about the movie, I can tell it's someone born poor or low class, philosophizing about death and what comes after, based on their own life experiences. It gives insight on the characters background and motivations.

This on the other hand
>There was a time above... a time before. There were perfect things... diamond absolutes. But things fall, things on Earth. And what falls... is fallen. In the dream, they took me to the light. A beautiful lie
Is trite shit. Things that fall are fallen. No shit sherlock. This is just a pile of cliches without meaning, trying to invoke nostalgia about some perfect past without explaining why the past was perfect, why now is bad or why was it a lie.

And sure you liked the script and the conflict, that is your prerogative. But just because you personally liked doesn't make it good. The script didn't use its purple prose to good effect, the plot wasn't good, the conflict was forced and the characterization was bad on purpose to force the conflict.

I can understand ignoring bad dialog for an otherwise good movie, but I'm not seeing the otherwise good movie.

>>91508803
I would say I disagree.
Yet, again, your mind is made up and I have no incentive to try to change that.

>>91508865
Yet again*

>>91508824
I disagree.
I think that line is about Bruce's cynicism and how the light is waiting for him if he wants it.

>>91508815
You're not that guy though.

>>91508750

>Han Solo is the most 2d of 2d characters

Not really. His growth from Episode 4 to Episode 6 - from caring only about himself to becoming a trusted member of the Rebel Alliance - is actually pretty damn good. And his character is fleshed out enough to make that growth clear across those three films. He feels far more like an actual person than Qui-Gonn ever did.

>Just because I can say it like that doesn't make him a good character.

It's also cutting his character down to a single line that does nothing to actually get at his actual character.

He is a dashing, self-centered asshole. He cares more about saving his own ass than he does other people. But when does care about people, he does not hesitate to protect them, and he does so often without thought to his own safety. His inner conflict generally lies in whether to join the good guys or stay out of the line of sight of the bad guys.

There, that three-dimensional enough for you?

>>91508912
>He feels far more like an actual person than Qui-Gon ever did.
I disagree. Han feels like a cartoon to me.
The arc is bog standard.
>rogue with a heart of gold
The heart of gold wins out. Who saw that coming?
Also, nothing about his ROTJ performance is anything but phoned in.

>>91508944

>nothing about his ROTJ performance is anything but phoned in

And what was Liam Neeson doing, acting in fucking Shakespeare like his life depended on it?

>The arc is bog standard.

One of the reasons it feels that way? Han is our modern cultural touchstone for "rogue with a heart of gold" storylines - our template for such characters, for better or for worse.

>Han feels like a cartoon to me.

And what makes Qui-Gonn an actual fleshed-out character other than "he exists"? What is his actual consistent personality in Episode 1?

File: 1489841090444.png (195KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 499x499px

>>91507352
It's not 1 for 1, it gets a lot of shit blatantly wrong and adds in stupid garbage like Rorschach stabbing that pedophile in the head.

>>91507314
Everything he does because of "cool" factor. Every listen to one of his commentaries? Like nearly everything he does, he does because it's "cool." He'll force a reference, even it makes no sense for the movie, like Lois throwing the sprear in the water just so they can get it from the water for his stupid king Arthur reference. Superman floating above people trapped on their roof makes no sense because there is no fucking reason for Superman to fucking just sit there and stare at them as they cried for help other than the shot looked "cool." Snyder is a 13 year old boy, and his DC movies only appeal to contrarians. I'd be willing to bet there is a lot of overlap between DCEU fans and people who say the star wars prequels "aren't all that bad"

>>91507151
True anon, it is based to want Batman to be raped in prison.

>>91509009

Also the whole ending thing with the squid.

>>91509009
And that's before the complete fuck up of the ending that not only misses the point but actively undoes character development on the part of Manhattan.

>>91509035

>I'd be willing to bet there is a lot of overlap between DCEU fans and people who say the star wars prequels "aren't all that bad"

This thread is kind of demonstrating that point.

>>91509008
>Han is our modern cultural touchstone for "rogue with a heart of gold" storylines - our template for such characters, for better or for worse.
But Lucas based his characters on pulp comics where rogues with hearts of gold were a dime a dozen...

>What is his actual consistent personality in Episode 1?
Unorthodox but wise.
From the very first scene when Qui-Gon tells Obi that to follow what Yoda says, but not at the expense of the moment, to him using mindtricks to get his way, to training Anakin by going against the council.

He's independent minded like Han, but he's less of a cartoon because he's still measured and wise, he just differs with the Jedi on the issues.

>>91509035
>I'd be willing to bet there is a lot of overlap between DCEU fans and people who say the star wars prequels "aren't all that bad"
At least you admit that there are people that see the PT as good that don't like Snyder's movies.

>>91509035
The prequels are better than TFA at least.

Better to have a rough-edged product than a soulless machined one

Anonymous ## Mod 2017-04-13 03:59:04 Post No.91509151
[Report]

Anonymous ## Mod 2017-04-13 03:59:04 Post No.91509151 [Report]

This thread was moved to >>>/tv/81578822