|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 9, 2017 0:07:43 GMT
Respectfully, Lord Death Man , this is the assertion with which I most fundamentally disagree. Who is "no one"? By that extension, who are "we [who] see ourselves as the heroes of our own stories"? I certainly wasn't born when the "age of heroes," super- or otherwise, was in its heyday, and I always supported it. I love the myths of old and their heroes; I studied the subject from my earliest days, not on someone else's initiative but on my own. Now, my experience is different from many others'--perhaps the majority's--I grant you, but I certainly know many others, also in their '20s or '30s, who were similar to me. We count as "modern" people just as much as anyone else, even if we don't "fit the zeitgeist." And the zeitgeist, may I add, is not always the right way to be: if the clock is going in the wrong direction, the correct thing to do is turn it back, and start it going in the right one. I want the age of heroes to come back. I believe in the classical virtues: honesty, fairness, justice, moderation, decency, love of neighbor and one's fellow man. These are ideals, yes, but that is the point: they represent the better angels of our nature, for which we must strive. A hero like Superman demonstrates that, and thus we can believe, ultimately, than a man can fly. We believe in wonder. So do others, judging from comments on this board and in my real life. And, more than anything, we are "someones," not "no ones." I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong in this scenario. I'm just taking a stab at what I think is the cause of so many people having negative feelings towards the DCEU. I don't know that images of devastated hell-scapes and ash-covered city-scapes makes for consistently engaging entertainment (that goes for both Marvel and DC). Believing in the age of heroes relies on a certain naïveté and innocence that audiences just don't have anymore. I could be wrong but, casual observation tells me I'm on to something. The snarky, NOW humor and sarcasm of the MCU resonate because that is how we communicate with each other today. We all use sarcasm to deflect that which we can't easily dismiss or confront. There is no denying that a character like Batman is a towering figure in the genre and a universally recognizable symbol of super-heroics but, is he losing relevancy? If I'm crazy, then there will be no need for you to answer that question. If I'm right, then that explains how a character like Iron Man, who is relevant, could start chipping away at his popularity. Batman is a guy who dresses up like a bat and beats up evildoers in a fictional city that is perpetually crime-ridden despite his best efforts. Iron Man is at the intersection of technology and transhumanism. Those ideas are now and relevant. To call someone, a "crimefighter" is a quaint oversimplification of what the job entails. Batman is a crimefighter. |
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 9, 2017 0:16:45 GMT
Lord Death Man I see your point, but I still insist that just because some people believe in cynicism, technology, and transhumanism does not mean that everyone does. Indeed, I know many people who stand strongly against the zeitgeist but just cannot state it for fear of repercussion; I recently hosted a discussion on the topic, but we're passing a bit too far into politics. I do not think that I am particularly naïve or unduly innocent because I think that idealism and idealistic heroes whom we should look up to are better than cynicism and its discontents. Indeed, oftentimes cynicism is more naïve than idealism, as in a cynical age it is easier to be cynical than idealistic. People still want entertainment, a sense of joy, a feeling of aspiration to better things; that is why "images of devastated hell-scapes and ash-covered city-scapes" do not make for consistently engaging entertainment. Perhaps we may say that's not very realistic; indeed, that's the point. Ultimately, the idealistic lasts longer than the cynical, which comes and go with the spirit of the age. (In fact, I'm also arguing for the reason that Marvel is more popular, albeit from diametrically opposed justifications!) But more than this, perhaps, I should not go, lest we wade into murkier waters...  Olive branch, m'lord?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 9, 2017 0:34:55 GMT
Lord Death Man I see your point, but I still insist that just because some people believe in cynicism, technology, and transhumanism does not mean that everyone does. Indeed, I know many people who stand strongly against the zeitgeist but just cannot state it for fear of repercussion; I recently hosted a discussion on the topic, but we're passing a bit too far into politics. I do not think that I am particularly naïve or unduly innocent because I think that idealism and idealistic heroes whom we should look up to are better than cynicism and its discontents. Indeed, oftentimes cynicism is more naïve than idealism, as in a cynical age it is easier to be cynical than idealistic. People still want entertainment, a sense of joy, a feeling of aspiration to better things; that is why "images of devastated hell-scapes and ash-covered city-scapes" do not make for consistently engaging entertainment. Perhaps we may say that's not very realistic; indeed, that's the point. Ultimately, the idealistic lasts longer than the cynical, which comes and go with the spirit of the age. (In fact, I'm also arguing for the reason that Marvel is more popular, albeit from diametrically opposed justifications!) But more than this, perhaps, I should not go, lest we wade into murkier waters... Olive branch, m'lord? Your peace offering is accepted, my friend. Ultimately, the DCEU films have a far better chance of producing timeless classics then the Marvel films. Marvel isn't trying to make classics and that's okay. They're taking advantage of current trends which is giving them immediate gains. DCEU is aspiring to something greater but, they're missing the mark and they're out of step with the popular zeitgeist. When trends and tastes change, they could turn out winners but, not all of their films will be seen as classic master works. That kind of defeats the purpose of a classic - true classics are rare in any genre. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2017 0:55:08 GMT
@weirdraptor Yes, exactly--I completely agree with you here. I also think (and, dear God, I'm not trying to reignite these Marvel-DC wars!) that this is an element that Marvel did [does? I'll have to see Ragnarok] very well, especially in the early pictures: Iron Man, Captain America especially, and even (though, as you know, I'm not a fan of it) Thor. There's a lightness and a deftness that is very appealing. Captain America, in particular, loves the very concept of a superhero; Johnston thinks that a hero has a purpose, a meaning, and I find that a wonderful quality. While I don't think Cap was without its flaws, it understands the very essence of Superman far more than Man of Steel ever does. (If I never see Man of Steel again, I'll be perfectly happy.) I think The Winter Soldier and Civil War got the idea just as well as the first Captain America film. Cap was going to do the right thing regardless of any attempts to turn him aside be they in conversation or confrontation. In WS, he saw right through what was going on and told Nick Fury that what they were shooting for wasn't freedom and justice. It was fear. Steve Rogers: Attention all S.H.I.E.L.D. agents, this is Steve Rogers. You've heard a lot about me over the last few days. Some of you were even ordered to hunt me down. But I think it's time to tell the truth. S.H.I.E.L.D. is not what we thought it was. It's been taken over by HYDRA. Alexander Pierce is their leader. The S.T.R.I.K.E. and Insight crew are HYDRA as well. I don't know how many more, but I know they're in the building. They could be standing right next to you. They almost have what they want. Absolute control. They shot Nick Fury. And it won't end there. If you launch those helicarriers today, HYDRA will be able to kill anyone that stands in their way. Unless we stop them. I know I'm asking a lot. But the price of freedom is high. It always has been. And it's a price I'm willing to pay. And if I'm the only one, then so be it. But I'm willing to bet I'm not. Seriously, that's the sort of thing Superman should be saying in his own movies. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Nov 9, 2017 3:19:07 GMT
He has said this stuff before, and kudos to him for it.
But no one changed then, and no one's changing now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2017 4:18:02 GMT
He has said this stuff before, and kudos to him for it. But no one changed then, and no one's changing now. In the DCEU, he hasn't. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 9, 2017 15:31:25 GMT
I just used Steel as an example as being an older movie before the MCU. I get called an MCU fanboy for not liking Spider-man 2 or X2 when they came out. I think the shared universe stuff might come from Marvel having more experience. DC wants but doesn't know how to get there. Because, yeah, DC is really having a hard time at it. Wouldn't BvS being bad because the DCEU is bad be a valid complaint? It is the second movie in the series. I can see if BvS was like the 4th or 5th movie and the complaint was that it is bad because it's connected to the DCEU. That would be wrong. Or if they are saying because they think Suicide Squad was bad so BvS is bad too. That's going a bit too far. But if a person says, from the stand point of only Man of Steel and BvS, that BvS is bad because the DCEU is bad that's a different story. As long as there are 2 or more things that are close to the same, there will be rivalries between companies. Marvel started doing real people with powers. DC was more fantasy and mythological with their characters. Superheroes before they were people. I think most people identified with regular people with powers more than superheroes among us. We can go back and forth forever on the other stuff, but lets address this last statement:
Marvel started doing real people with powers. DC was more fantasy and mythological with their characters. Superheroes before they were people. I think most people identified with regular people with powers more than superheroes among us.
That's true. I don't deny that. In the 60's when Marvel first became the Marvel we now know (Fantastic Four, Spiderman, etc.) they must have seemed like a quantum leap forward in storytelling. Everything was more bombastic while at the same time being (relatively speaking) more realistic - as you say "regular people with powers more than superheroes among us."
But that changed where now its the norm in ALL comics. DC has also come to adopt that style since that's what ALL writers and artists do in comics nowadays, and have since the late 70's early 80's.
That being the case, why is there still this idea that DC is the older, out of touch company, and Marvel the younger hipper one? And at this point they're both old anyway, so why the persistent notion?
If anything, in the last few decades its been DC who has been at the forefront of new innovation: The Prestige Format comic, The separate but related imprint (Vertigo), Crisis on Infinite Earths, Ronin, Watchmen, Dark Knight Returns, Sandman, Preacher, weekly comics, Geoff Johns Green Lantern run, The New 52 (which wasn't to everyones liking, but you gotta admit - ballsy move!) and now Rebirth - which is better than any initiative Marvel has done in quite some time. All this and not to mention the fact that they share creators, writers and artists with Marvel all the time!
The persistent notion that DC is lesser is just irrational to me. You can say you don't like a particular character, but a whole company? Doesn't make sense.
Because even with that change DC still has that perception. Hell, with Superman they keep going back and forth, with each new reboot of all the comics, of him being a god among us. He's either really powerful or kinda powerful. It depends on the writers and which era of comics they prefer. Marvel has this thing of updating the comics while the series go on. So you don't really notice any changes to the characters. Being "innovative" is all well and good, but it doesn't change what people see of the characters in their ongoing series. Stuff like The New 52 and Crisis on Infinite Earths are just company wide reboots that DC does from time to time. They really need to keep an eye on their writers because they seem to like to go rogue and destabilize the comics that cause these reboots. But, yeah, DC loves their Elseworld scenarios and comics outside of the main DC world. I wouldn't say DC is the lesser. Just different. I'd kinda say that DC was Star Wars and Marvel is Star Trek. DC is the more fantasy/magical of the two. |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Nov 9, 2017 17:36:39 GMT
How could that be when BvS was only the 2nd DCEU movie? Granted, MoS got worse reviews than the lowest ranked MCU movie, but it wasn't terrible. After the one two punch of BvS and Suicide Squad is when DCEU's reputation really cratered. WW was a step in a better direction, but it remains to be seen if it is the beginning of a trend or not. Respectable reviews for JL will silence many of the DC critics. Middling or poor reviews will just reinforce the notion that WW was an outlier and DC really is bush league compared to Marvel. How could that be when BvS was only the 2nd DCEU movie?
I ask myself that all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 22, 2017 14:30:26 GMT
So guys at the top of Marvel call for the feud to end.
DC approves a marketing poster for China where the JL slaughter Marvel heroes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 14:46:46 GMT
So guys at the top of Marvel call for the feud to end. DC approves a marketing poster for China where the JL slaughter Marvel heroes. Well it could be justified if the movie did indeed slaughter Marvel at the box office. So which company is really being made fun of with that poster I ask you. |
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 23, 2017 1:24:26 GMT
So guys at the top of Marvel call for the feud to end. DC approves a marketing poster for China where the JL slaughter Marvel heroes. Well it could be justified if the movie did indeed slaughter Marvel at the box office. So which company is really being made fun of with that poster I ask you. Thor made $3 mill more opening weekend |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2017 14:00:09 GMT
It is ridiculous.
They're both companies with fanbases who are two sides of the same coin: arguing over which terrible movie series is better. One is extremely safe and predictable with their storytelling and the other is pretentious, untrue to the source material and so horribly made.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Nov 25, 2017 17:12:46 GMT
Respectfully, Lord Death Man , this is the assertion with which I most fundamentally disagree. Who is "no one"? By that extension, who are "we [who] see ourselves as the heroes of our own stories"? I certainly wasn't born when the "age of heroes," super- or otherwise, was in its heyday, and I always supported it. I love the myths of old and their heroes; I studied the subject from my earliest days, not on someone else's initiative but on my own. Now, my experience is different from many others'--perhaps the majority's--I grant you, but I certainly know many others, also in their '20s or '30s, who were similar to me. We count as "modern" people just as much as anyone else, even if we don't "fit the zeitgeist." And the zeitgeist, may I add, is not always the right way to be: if the clock is going in the wrong direction, the correct thing to do is turn it back, and start it going in the right one. I want the age of heroes to come back. I believe in the classical virtues: honesty, fairness, justice, moderation, decency, love of neighbor and one's fellow man. These are ideals, yes, but that is the point: they represent the better angels of our nature, for which we must strive. A hero like Superman demonstrates that, and thus we can believe, ultimately, than a man can fly. We believe in wonder. So do others, judging from comments on this board and in my real life. And, more than anything, we are "someones," not "no ones." I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong in this scenario. I'm just taking a stab at what I think is the cause of so many people having negative feelings towards the DCEU. I don't know that images of devastated hell-scapes and ash-covered city-scapes makes for consistently engaging entertainment (that goes for both Marvel and DC). Believing in the age of heroes relies on a certain naïveté and innocence that audiences just don't have anymore. I could be wrong but, casual observation tells me I'm on to something. The snarky, NOW humor and sarcasm of the MCU resonate because that is how we communicate with each other today. We all use sarcasm to deflect that which we can't easily dismiss or confront. There is no denying that a character like Batman is a towering figure in the genre and a universally recognizable symbol of super-heroics but, is he losing relevancy? If I'm crazy, then there will be no need for you to answer that question. If I'm right, then that explains how a character like Iron Man, who is relevant, could start chipping away at his popularity. Batman is a guy who dresses up like a bat and beats up evildoers in a fictional city that is perpetually crime-ridden despite his best efforts. Iron Man is at the intersection of technology and transhumanism. Those ideas are now and relevant. To call someone, a "crimefighter" is a quaint oversimplification of what the job entails. Batman is a crimefighter.
Pfft, thanks for that. I just spat coffee all over my kitchen table. Come clean it up. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 25, 2017 23:55:13 GMT
I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong in this scenario. I'm just taking a stab at what I think is the cause of so many people having negative feelings towards the DCEU. I don't know that images of devastated hell-scapes and ash-covered city-scapes makes for consistently engaging entertainment (that goes for both Marvel and DC). Believing in the age of heroes relies on a certain naïveté and innocence that audiences just don't have anymore. I could be wrong but, casual observation tells me I'm on to something. The snarky, NOW humor and sarcasm of the MCU resonate because that is how we communicate with each other today. We all use sarcasm to deflect that which we can't easily dismiss or confront. There is no denying that a character like Batman is a towering figure in the genre and a universally recognizable symbol of super-heroics but, is he losing relevancy? If I'm crazy, then there will be no need for you to answer that question. If I'm right, then that explains how a character like Iron Man, who is relevant, could start chipping away at his popularity. Batman is a guy who dresses up like a bat and beats up evildoers in a fictional city that is perpetually crime-ridden despite his best efforts. Iron Man is at the intersection of technology and transhumanism. Those ideas are now and relevant. To call someone, a "crimefighter" is a quaint oversimplification of what the job entails. Batman is a crimefighter.
Pfft, thanks for that. I just spat coffee all over my kitchen table. Come clean it up. Tony is nowhere near the incompetent Bruce is, Bruce can't even clean up one city. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 26, 2017 0:17:18 GMT
Pfft, thanks for that. I just spat coffee all over my kitchen table. Come clean it up. Tony is nowhere near the incompetent Bruce is, Bruce can't even clean up one city. Damn, cauliflower is still alive? That's one resilient vegetable. I heard he died in a freak accident choking on his mom's vaginal fluid. Can't keep a good chode down I guess or, maybe he can. Hee hee hee... Batman is as relevant as a Palm Pilot - without the fucking stylus. |
|
Olive branch, m'lord?
