Which one Sup Forums?

Which one Sup Forums?

X-men tbqh

Obviously \thread

Watchmen

DC movies are fundamentally flawed as films, Marvel movies are solid but ultimately boring and filled with cliches. There are however gems here and there like Guardians of the Galaxy and Deadpool. Never saw Wonder Woman but heard it's good. Justice League movie looks like shit.

A bullet

Marvel because it's childish. I don't want 5th grade tier analogies filled with 4th grade theology and philosophy (which is wrong anyway. Lex cties the God of Classical Theism argument and gets it WRONG). When it's a film called Batman v Superman, I expect the two to fight more than 15 mins. If you need to write dozens of posts defending it as 'kino' before you pop off to reddit, then it's not a good film. That doesn't make Marvel good either, but it knows it's source material is childish shit and keeps it childish.

>OUR MOMMIES HAVE THE SAME NAME?!

The one that tells its stories in a coherent way.

The problem with Snyder's DCU films is that they think they're smart, but they're not. It's like Snyder/Goyer/whoever read the Wikipedia pages of a few philosophers and wrote scripts based on that. So on top of not getting characterization or storytelling right, it does its philosophy like a 15 year old would.

>Lex cties the God of Classical Theism argument and gets it WRONG
Care to elaborate?

suicide squad is the worst superhero movie in the last decade, thats all I know

>pretending that DC trash got any depth in them
Come the fuck on. They are generally better made due hiring directors that can do more than TV ads and rip off others but thematically, they are just as shallow as marvel trash, and the structure is where the shit tends to fall apart even harder.

The only right answer.

There's nothing coherent about Civil War.

I saw it in the theater. I will never get that money back.

whole thing makes sense whether you hate it or not

I am not one of the KINOfags but how? It's kinda messy and barely a movie, and more of music video clips that are kinda connected by a story, but at least it was a somewhat interesting experience, unlike BvM or most Marvel stuff sans GotG or Homecoming or the Thor movies. Ironman or Avengers are much worse than SS and lack any resemblance of a soul.

Yeah, I guess that's why it won an Oscar, huh?

No, it doesn't. From the stupid disasters being pinned on the Avengers were less people die than in a road accident to be used as an excuse for the Accords, to Captain America not caring about accountability, to Iron Man caring about that shit but hiring a teenager as a soldier, to the fights where the characters claim they don't want to hurt each other but clearly make deadly attacks.

To be fair, in the comics Cap's main gripe was that Tony and the American government were forcing people with powers into a government backed military force against their will, and dissenters were sent to a dimension that LITERALLY EATS YOUR HAPPINESS until they promised to cooperate.

But yeah, both these franchises are shit and I can't wait for hollywood to stop shitting on my favorite characters.

Did you even watch the film? That's not Batman's reasoning at all.

Stop excusing the most retarded scene in decades.

Stop using the shallowest critique in decades.

Oscars dont meant shit,especially a Make-up one,a weak movie like Star Trek Beyond(i think that was the name)came out in the same year and had way better make-up,Suicide Squad only had Croc and he could barely speak with that shit

A key scene playing like a parody is shallow critique? His real motives don't mean shit if the movie fails to translate it to the screen.

>better
Suicide Squad make-up became iconic as fuck right away. As worthless as oscars are, shouldn't something relevant get the prize?

I just want them all to go away.

>His real motives don't mean shit if the movie fails to translate it to the screen.

The problem wasn't with the movie, but with you.

And almost every person watching the movie. The same people who didn't have issues with other movies. Unless you're seriously arguing for BvS being the most complex movie ever made, "muh stupid audience" doesn't work.

No, i'm saying most people that were watched the movie were dumb as shit because they were expecting a silly capeshit where they could just turn they brain off and end up being caught off-guard.

>"muh stupid audience" doesn't work.

It does, actually.

There are several people that managed to understand what the scene was about, and many more that didn't. If the problem was with the scene itself nobody would be able to understand it. Ergo most people were too stupid for the movie.

A movie doesn't need to be the most complex ever made, it just needs to be a complex movie. BvS had more subtext than the average capeshit.

If it was more than a silly capeshit, the depth would've caught their attention somewhere at start. At least if it was a well made movie. Besides, the amount of people who watched it is large enough to consider that not almost all were complete idiots. If it wasn't as shit, it'd get more recognition beyond the memers.

>There are several people that managed to understand what the scene was about
And from these many still found it laughable.

It was a capeshit blockbuster that drew more people in than the typical capeshit fans, kinda like the Dark Knight trilogy, specially at start before people realised what it really was. We're talking about a movie that has characters with decades of pop culture impact and are better known than most world leaders, so the audience tends to be relatively diverse.

Plenty of people understood what the scene was about and enjoyed the movie. Plenty. Not just here.

The thing is that the majority where expecting something out of the MCU. Something fun and inoffensive. That they could just watch without needing to engage the movie or think to much about. So because of that they were left disappointed.

You're not actually making an argument. Everything you're saying is, at best, conjecture. The fact is that when people cite simplistic and, frankly, lazy criticisms that are easily refuted by not only implicit devices but also explicit dialogue, then they clearly either didn't pay attention or are just plain stupid.

Snyder has always made movies that are tailored for specific audiences, even if they were blockbusters.

The Beifuss review doesn't even mention the scene. Besides "a movie of its time; it's not a commentary on our demented era but a symptom of it." is pretty tongue in cheek.

Also we were talking is the scene, no? The movie isn't nearly as bad as most reviews suggest indeed. That's indeed simply the case of audience expectations being not met.

>You're not actually making an argument.
My point was that "the scene isn't dumb because the audience was too dumb to get it" is a shitty excuse based on the sheer size of the audience. The amount of people who saw it, makes it beyond unlikely that SO MANY were too stupid to get a simple scene that is a bit more subtle than your average capeshit, and given how most people who even liked the movie, still found it ridiculous doesn't help either.

>Snyder has always made movies that are tailored for specific audiences, even if they were blockbusters.
And while the reaction always varied, no other of his movies got as misunderstood. Sure, a lot of it is down to the genre but these also helps to increase the number of people who'd get it. Is it more complex than Sucker Punch? Not by any reasonable criteria.

I am not arguing against the movie per se but about the key scene being so badly done. Something as simple as making it between the two instead of pushing in Lois would already improve it. Skipping the dumb flashbacks and names would probably too, and lower the potential of misunderstanding for the slow people.

Okay, so let's talk about the scene.

What do you feel the scene was about?

"Muh jaded billionaire who thought Supes was just an alien disconnected from their world and oblivious to the consequences/destruction his existence/actions causes, finding out in last moment, with the help of a second character, that Supes actually cares and is connected to humanity, seeing one of them as his mother, who also had the same name as his dead mom, which a grown ass man still obsesses about, which in turn causes him to go "dem immigrants aren't too bad, they are kinda like us, let's go ahead to the finale."

Haven't watched it since Directors Cut release, so may forgot a detail or two.

>"the scene isn't dumb because the audience was too dumb to get it" is a shitty excuse based on the sheer size of the audience
>implying that most movie-goers aren't mouth-breathing retards looking for 2 hours of explosions and quips

We're talking about the same retarded people who think Civil War was a thought-provoking film.

>Is it more complex than Sucker Punch?
No, but that only proves my point. Sucker Punch was reviled by the average person.

>skipping the dumb flashbacks and names would probably too
The flashbacks and names are the only thing that would possibly trigger understanding for those slow people. That's Snyder basically putting the implicit meaning in subtitles at the bottom of the screen.

Sorry, I closed the thread. Basically Lex goes 'If God is all-powerful but doesn't help me, he isn't God'. He got it wrong because while, yes, the God of Classical Theism debate says 'God is all-powerful, all-knowing, all places and all loving, if he isn't one of these, then he isn't God', but what Lex doesn't mention is the fact the counter argument to this is with the statement that God gave humans Free Will, therefore intervening with anything (ie; saving Lex from being beaten by his dad) would be breaching that.

He also applies it to Superman because some people were viewing him as a God and he was going 'b-b-but he isn't cause nobody saved me from my dad :(((' when that's not applicable to Superman and even if you ignore the Free Will bit, God helping Lex wouldn't make people not think Superman is God.

This is the problem, I could make up loads of utter bollocks about what the film actually means. Like, 'oh well Superman is an analogy for God or the closest to God Lex can get to so he wants to kill Superman to prove God doesn't exist by killing God and God won't save superman despitee Superman doing good things andf blahblahblahblah'. It doesn't make it a good film. Any film can be claimed to be some deepest lore tier amazing analogy, but it isn't. Like, I dunno, Shrek is actually about how evil white men abuse minorities and then get minorities to do things they want and then reward them by giving them something that was already there's before they came along and how i doesn't matter what you're born as, as long as you think you are something or love yourself or some crap that's what you really are. See? It can be applied to anything.

DC tried to be different by going a darker route, that's fine. But it failed by treating it's audience with contempt.

>HEY! LOOK! SUPERMAN IS IN A CHURCH AND LOOK THERE'S A STAINED GLASS WINDOW OF JESUS PRAYING TO GOD FOR GUIDANCE? DO YOU GET IT??????

This is reinforced by the reception Mother! got.

Oh look, someone who took the church scene at face value.

>We're talking about the same retarded people who think Civil War was a thought-provoking film.
Was more of a capeshit movie with capeshit audience, so that's given. BvS while also clearly aiming at the same people, was of interest for many more, alone due characters having a stronger base in pop culture. Also very likely due the Nolan movies, that drew people who couldn't give a shit about capeshit.

>Sucker Punch was reviled by the average person.
It was still a lot more mixed with a lot more positive voices in-between the idiots, and it lacked the comic fanboys, who'd defend everything from "their" company.

>That's Snyder basically putting the implicit meaning in subtitles at the bottom of the screen.
And causing more harm that way. Instead of being left confused which is suboptimal but can work for the "2deep4u" interpretations, they got misdirected by that clumsy shit.

>We're talking about the same retarded people who think Civil War was a thought-provoking film.
It was though. The best capeshit thread I've ever seen on Sup Forums was a discussion about whether Tony or Cap were morally correct.

Actually, the BIGGEST point of the scene is the correlation Batman creates in his mind between Superman and his father at that moment.

It wasn't either about Superman simple being an alien threat that needs to be dealt with, since another BIG point is that he sees himself in Superman, although you're right about him thinking both he and Superman being guilty of and needing to be made accountable for the unintended consequences they've brought to those around them with their crusades.

The scene isn't that complex in the slightest and the movie pretty much screams to the audience what is trying to convey. That Batman sees both him and Superman as bad men right until the point where he realize Superman is actually more like his father who was a good man. He, Batman, is the only true bad guy there.

For some reason, though, many can't see that scene that way and only focus on the mother thing. Despite the scene juxtaposition Superman and Thomas Wayne together through the lazy use of flashbacks.

I'd rather watch Batman Returns

>Thomas Wayne
Heh, I honestly don't recall even a hint of his existence in the movie.

>Was more of a capeshit movie with capeshit audience, so that's given.
>BvS aimed at the same people
Snyder definitely did not design BvS for the same people as Disney did Civil War. And if we can't expect those morons to understand Civil War then there's no way they'll get the slightly more complex than average BvS.

>it lacked the comic fanboys, who'd defend everything from "their" company
Also those from the other company who'd do anything to attack DC. It also lacked the DC hate band-wagon. Even with that it has terrible audience reviews and terrible critic reviews.

>they got misdirected by that clumsy shit
They weren't misdirected, they misunderstood it in spite of very clear subtext. That makes them stupid.

>Sup Forums thread is evidence of quality of film
>implying Sup Forums isn't just a bunch of retarded monkeys throwing shit at each other

But the Jesus God allegories are met with Pa Kent's understanding that Clark is a person who's circumstances are going to put him in a very hard place, basically yes a God, but as we see Clark is not a God but just a "man" who's burden is maybe greater than his strength, a very big part of the conflict both Batman and Luthor have with Superman is that they see him as this God/demon, and is not until Batman realizes Superman is just a "person" like him with family and a great (that's the reason for the "save Martha" part)

I could go on, but the point is made, you are free to dislike the movie for it's religious allegories, but you definitely are missing the broader picture.

Dude, here's a clue to better understanding the movie:

Lex Luthor in the movie is shown as a myth buff because he believes in the idea that the basis for our myths came from the so called meta-humans.

This is something that was not even implied, but outright stated by Lex Luthor. It's a fact made explicit through dialog. It's also a very easy concept that explains pretty much all of Lex use of philosophy to get his points across and the heavy handed references to classic sculptures and paintings featuring deities and religious figures.

The movie is telling us that all the gods and heroes and whatever else that we imagined and worshiped throughout history were actually based on people with superpowers that existed and now here they're again among us. That's why the DC characters in the movie are shown much in the same light throughout the whole thing. As figures of myth and religion. Because in this world they're building that's what they inspired and continue to inspire.

Civil War only exists because of Snyder making a BvS film. Disney is ultimately a reactionary company that has no role to play in the growth of cultures. BvS is an actual film. Civil War is McDonald's entertainmnent.

That's pretty hard to miss since Batman can't shut up about his dad father.

What the fuck? Watch the film next time.

>Even with that it has terrible audience reviews and terrible critic reviews.
Oh shit, I just rechecked. I remember it being quite a bit better in the 60%s or so. What the fucking fuck. Now this is a true injustice.

Im sorry user, I dont care about make up as much as (You).
It's not even a fight. Marvel wins in every category.

I love that the 'save Martha' criticism is the most common, but it's also incorrect. The beginning of that particular scene is the monologue by Batman about his parents followed by Superman saying "you're letting him kill Martha", which is far more jarring and invasive a thought than "save Martha", especially given the context of the comment.

Critics got a hate boner for Snyder ever since 300, for really stupid reasons.

Well, i find it stupid, but many would say i'm part of the problem.

He's choking with Batman's foot on his throat
After he says "Martha" you can distinctly hear him utter "K-", meaning he was probably trying to say Martha Kent. How would asking Batman to save "my mother" help in any way, if Batman has no idea who that is?

The reviews for BvS basically ensured the genre will remain in infantile and shallow Marvel territory for atleast another decade. BvS was a paradigm shift we needed but not the one we deserved. WW and Whedon doing JL is already telling thst Snyder and Nolan lost the culture war to hacks like Kevin Feige, Geoff Johns and the executives that puppeteer them.

I am aware of that and some criticism is perfectly valid just in case of Sucker Punch it just seems way too excessive, it was a genuinely original film and told a more impactful story in the first three minutes than most manage in three hours. I get how one could dislike it but 23% tomatometer is fucking criminal.

People also refuses to see that Batman's twisted trial against Superman (the v in the title) is less about the destruction of Metropolis and more about the death of Waynes and Bruce's failure in coping with it. Superman is Batman's enemy because only Superman is great enough to stand trial for that heinous act.

Exactly, Superman demonstrated how good he truly was by using his last breath to give Batman the information needed to save Superman's mom.

fpbp

Burton's Batman

>I'm older now than my father ever was
>Literally the guy who says Martha
If you forgot Thomas Wayne was in the film, you essentially haven't watched it at all

We're talking about critics here that see 300 as an attempt at a historical piece and that complain about its glaring inaccuracies and clear propaganda, when the movie couldn't be more clear that 90% of the plot is nothing but an exaggerated tale told by a Spartan soldier to motivate his Spartan brother-at-arms for battle.

So they don't see Sucker Punch beyond the sexy girls and heavy action.

It's also stupid vapid criticisms like the amount of damage caused in Man of Steel. It's an invasion and terraforming event by aliens who can move planets with their bare hands. What did the critics think was going to happen?

>Marvel death toll in Avengers 1 and 2 is less than 500

Oh, that's right. They expected it to be free of all moral consequence.

This is even more clear when at the start of the fight Batman is calm and rational while at the end he can barely hold his now visible face together without cracking. "My parents taught me a different lesson, dying in the gutter for no reason at all". At this point Batman isn't even talking about his previous justification to wage war. Now the truth is revealed with his unmasking.

The ironic part being that Batman's unmasking is also what saves Superman because it allows him to see what monster he is about to become.

I have only seen the Marvel movies, but some arguments here are convincing me I should get into DCverse and watch BVS. What other essentials should I watch with my family as we're fucking?

I'm responsible.

I like how in BvS the media twists the events of MoS to pit Batman against what would be a natural ally to him. Snyder is fully aware of the MoS criticism - and then completely debunks it as false journalism. Instead we have Lois Lane searching for the truth because other journalists are too afraid.

Did Zack end up insulting thin-skinned critics too much with BvS? Maybe. But that would only end up proving his point.

I'm gonna pretend you're being serious. Start with Man of Steel, then BvS, then WW. You can probably safely ignore Suicide Squad as there's really only hints at the actual continuity of the DCEU.

>Lex cties the God of Classical Theism argument and gets it WRONG

What is paraphrasing?

Swap WW with Watchmen DC if you'd ask me. And also watch the Nolan films.

Neither watchmen or the Nolan films are part of the DCverse thought.

I was talking specifically about the current DCEU.

Welp

you are wrong on so many levels
lex basically just says that god doesn't exist and that superman is just as flawed as humans and that he's going to prove that

that's literally all

Whenever i see people asking about what a certain scene meant or what the characters motivations were in BvS i feel like i'm being baited.

BvS is really fucking simple, if overwritten, and it goes out of the way to expel what is trying to convey many times. Maybe the problem is that it tries to do it implicitly through juxtaposition instead of outright exposition, but even then you've many scenes where the characters blurt what they are all about.

Take for example Batman. Batman sees himself as an ineffectual hero that carries the blame for all of those that were corrupted, hurt or killed because of him and his pointless crusade. To the point where he began to see himself as part of the problem instead of the solution. There are several scenes where he outright calls himself a criminal no better than those he used to hunt. And some where he pretty much implies he should pay for his sins with his life.

At the same time he glorifies his father as a true hero because of how utterly human his father was. Both in the physical as the metaphorical aspect. A guy that bled and died, like any other normal guy, for the protect of those close to him. Not some big hero in a cape fighting for a lofty goal.

And just how does Batman see and treat Superman as? A ineffectual hero that carries the blame for all of those that were corrupted, hurt or killed because of him and his pointless crusade. To the point where he began to see himself as part of the problem instead of the solution. Thus needing to pay for his sins with his life.

And what we get in the end thanks to Batman's own actions? A guy that bled and died, like any other normal guy, for the protect of those close to him. To make the point even clearer the movie show Batman constantly taunting Superman if he can bleed. Not to mention the flashbacks drawing comparisons between Superman and Batman's dad.

This.

I like how Spiderman 2 did the whole "superhero struggling with the responsibilities of heroism" theme so much better than Snyder's Superman, and in a way that actually makes the audience care about his struggle. Proof that less is often more and you don't need an army of people willing to make overlong thesis's about hamfisted symbolism and why we should care (if they even care themselves - can even Snyder's most ardent backers pretend to care about Superman as a character?) to pack the same weight and accomplish the same goal.

The costume designer put a Joseph Campbell quote translated to kryptonese (that's something that exists, for some reason) in Superman's costume that pretty much defines the themes of the film. He also put part of another Campbell quote on Wonder Woman's shield and sword but translated to ancient Greek. Here's the more important one and that is on Superman's costume:

>And where we had thought to find an abomination, we shall find a god; where we had thought to slay another, we shall slay ourselves; where we had thought to travel outward, we shall come to the center of our own existence; and where we had thought to be alone, we shall be with all the world.

That shit right there pretty much defines the movie.

Spider-Man 2 and Superman duology both achieve that. Clark reminiscing about his father in BvS is a gut punch and completely breaks down all the legends surrounding his character and reveals who he really is. A guy who wants to do the right thing in a complex and often unpredictable world.

Compare this to the character rape in Civil War, where Spidey is recruited as a mercenary by Tony to kill Cap America based on nothing but financial incentive. One might wonder what morals are guiding this glorified toy seller.

You got to get away from constantly comparing your movie to the latest Marvel flick without any prompting if you want anyone to consider BvS as anything special at all.

And then he almost kills Bucky and then Cap America almost kills a kid and quips about it.

The MCU is dumb and morally devoid I don't even see a purpose in discussing it unless I have a desire to throw up. Both Raimi and Snyder atleast try to infuse morality in their films. The morality in MCU? So long as you can quip and be charming, you're the good guy. Also brainwashing. Lots and lots of brainwashing. God forbid they actually develop the characters into nuanced people instead.

I was giving you an example of Spider-Man done wrong. If you want to point fingers at hollow moralism, you're pointing at the wrong film.

I've been saying this for years.

Marvel
>Everyman heroes who are easily relateable

DC
>Pantheon of Gods and their exploits
Generalizing here, but you get the gist.

Talking about Civil War and the whole brainwashing thing with Bucky, is funny how if you compare Civil War with BvS you essentially get a movie that tells us that being victim of brainwashing should make you exempt of all your crimes no matter how heinous they were (Civil War) and another movie that tells us that no matter how little involvement you had in something you're still culpable for whatever bad consequence that situation might have created even if said bad consequence wasn't desired by you.

In Civil War you've Captain America risking it all to protect his buddy against all reason and odds damn the consequences because he believe his friend should be exempt from the guilt and consequences from any action he took while brainwashed. Whatever he did while brainwashed, that wasn't him.

In BvS you've Superman being blamed left and right for people getting hurt and killed from situations he had no control and deciding to shoulder all that blame for the unintended consequences his fucking existed, not even his actions, but his mere fucking existence helped created.

But hey, Cap smiled and quipped a lot, so he's our boy.

Snyder: Be a fucking man and take responsibility for your life.

MCU: It's ok we at Disney love you so long as you buy movie tickets. Everything will be fine big daddy Disney will protect you from reality.

MARDHA??~!!??!!??!?!!?!?
Y DID U SEY DAT NAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????????????????????????????

Are you having a fucking stroke?

>Tfw not enough of a brainlet to enjoy MCU

>Feelsbatman