|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 17, 2017 19:05:11 GMT
Star Wars has the most iconic and famous villains, I'm not only talking about Palpatine and Vader, I'm talking about Maul, Jabba, Bobba Fett etc. They're all quite flat, character-wise. Put them out today without any history backing them and they'd get the same criticism MCU villains get. It just shows how ingrained the notion of "The Hero is just a cipher who opposes the colorful villain" is, thanks to DC. A lot of people don't realize the sex jokes in Shakespeare's works. Nostalgia's a Hell of a thing. But I'm grateful that the MCU produced better heroes that Frodo Baggins
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 17, 2017 19:16:39 GMT
You know what? I kinda liked it. But I think the only reason I did like it was because it was basically Justice League War. If you saw that animated movie you saw this movie.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 17, 2017 20:28:02 GMT
No they're way more than just being "as simple and straightforward as you can get". That would be what Suicide Squad was.And marvel has some really strong character moves, such as how both Tony and Steve have evolved. You're just wrong man. BTW, Ragnarok just beat Justice League's opening night. Let's just think about that, say it out loud, and try telling me again that there's not a serious problem. Suicide Squad was just as simple, no more or less. Most characters evolved but they're still essentially just simple and straight forward characters, out of all of them Civil War was the best for it because it didn't fully follow the same formula as the others which is probably why it was one of the better ones. This also doesn't really have anything to do with Thor or Justice League's box office so I don't know why you randomly mentioned that. SS was vastly more simple. You could literally take every character out and the plot wouldn't change. That's how ridiculously paper thin the plot was.
If you don't understand the problem with suicide squad, then no wonder you don't understand critics. You don't know have a clue what they're talking about when they discuss film structure.
How are you the moderator of a film board when you can't discuss filmmaking?
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Nov 17, 2017 20:32:42 GMT
Me either. From what I'm getting in reviews - that it's entertaining with great interactions amongst the team, but it's simplistic and the villain is weak - is basically what I thought of the first two Avengers movies. (I like Loki in the Thor films, but he was bland as hell in Avengers)
Maybe if it came out 5 years ago, it'd be more successful.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 17, 2017 20:39:13 GMT
Suicide Squad was just as simple, no more or less. Most characters evolved but they're still essentially just simple and straight forward characters, out of all of them Civil War was the best for it because it didn't fully follow the same formula as the others which is probably why it was one of the better ones. This also doesn't really have anything to do with Thor or Justice League's box office so I don't know why you randomly mentioned that. SS was vastly more simple. You could literally take every character out and the plot wouldn't change. That's how ridiculously paper thin the plot was.
If you don't understand the problem with suicide squad, then no wonder you don't understand critics. You don't know have a clue what they're talking about when they discuss film structure.
How are you the moderator of a film board when you can't discuss filmmaking?
Except you couldn't literally take every character out of the movie or then there'd be no movie, that's not what the word literally means. The movie was called Suicide Squad, the movie revolved around them sending in an expendable crew to take down a villain. If Enchantress wasn't in the movie, the plot would change. If Harley Quinn wasn't in the movie, the plot would change. If Amanda Waller wasn't in the movie, the plot would change etc. There's no discussion here, you're just flat out wrong for saying it. A thin plot is also not the same as being simple.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 17, 2017 20:41:16 GMT
SS was vastly more simple. You could literally take every character out and the plot wouldn't change. That's how ridiculously paper thin the plot was.
If you don't understand the problem with suicide squad, then no wonder you don't understand critics. You don't know have a clue what they're talking about when they discuss film structure.
How are you the moderator of a film board when you can't discuss filmmaking?
Except you couldn't literally take every character out of the movie or then there'd be no movie, that's not what the word literally means. The movie was called Suicide Squad, the movie revolved around them sending in an expendable crew to take down a villain. If Enchantress wasn't in the movie, the plot would change. If Harley Quinn wasn't in the movie, the plot would change. If Amanda Waller wasn't in the movie, the plot would change etc. There's no discussion here, you're just flat out wrong for saying it. A thin plot is also not the same as being simple. Point missed.
You could take everybody, but I'd say Deadshot and probably Amanda out and nothing would change.
Joker showing up had zero to with the plot. Harley's backstory had nothing to do with anything. Boomerang didn't do anything. Kroc did even less. It was the most amateur movie I've ever seen. It's absurd.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 17, 2017 20:57:39 GMT
You could take everybody, but I'd say Deadshot and probably Amanda out and nothing would change. If Enchantress was not in the movie, then there'd no Suicide Squad that would need to be formed as such there would be no movie. If Rick Flag wasn't in the movie, then the Suicide Squad wouldn't have been put under control, they would not attempt to capture Enchantress, the plot would change. If Killer Croc wasn't in the movie, then Rick Flag's men would never have been able to plant the bomb which eventually killed Incubus and Diablo. If Incubus had not died then Enchantress would not have been weakened which allowed them to fight back and beat her in the end, so the plot would have changed. They don't have to have a big part, it was a team movie but not like The Avengers were it's more balanced but more along the lines of X-men where it focused on a few major characters instead like Deadshot.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 17, 2017 21:00:37 GMT
You could take everybody, but I'd say Deadshot and probably Amanda out and nothing would change. If Enchantress was not in the movie, then there'd no Suicide Squad that would need to be formed as such there would be no movie. If Rick Flag wasn't in the movie, then the Suicide Squad wouldn't have been put under control, they would not attempt to capture Enchantress, the plot would change. If Killer Croc wasn't in the movie, then Rick Flag's men would never have been able to plant the bomb which eventually killed Incubus and Diablo. If Incubus had not died then Enchantress would not have been weakened which allowed them to fight back and beat her in the end, so the plot would have changed. They don't have to have a big part, it was a team movie but not like The Avengers were it's more balanced but more along the lines of X-men where it focused on a few major characters instead like Deadshot. Enchantress was one of the dumbest parts.
Dude it got a 26 for a reason. If you don't get why, that's a you problem.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 17, 2017 21:09:35 GMT
If Enchantress was not in the movie, then there'd no Suicide Squad that would need to be formed as such there would be no movie. If Rick Flag wasn't in the movie, then the Suicide Squad wouldn't have been put under control, they would not attempt to capture Enchantress, the plot would change. If Killer Croc wasn't in the movie, then Rick Flag's men would never have been able to plant the bomb which eventually killed Incubus and Diablo. If Incubus had not died then Enchantress would not have been weakened which allowed them to fight back and beat her in the end, so the plot would have changed. They don't have to have a big part, it was a team movie but not like The Avengers were it's more balanced but more along the lines of X-men where it focused on a few major characters instead like Deadshot. Enchantress was one of the dumbest parts.
Dude it got a 26 for a reason. If you don't get why, that's a you problem.
Dumb or not, there's no movie at all without that character. It got a 26 because it wasn't that good of a movie. It doesn't take away from the Marvel villain being also simple but much better made. Simple is not a dirty word.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 17, 2017 23:51:32 GMT
Enchantress was one of the dumbest parts.
Dude it got a 26 for a reason. If you don't get why, that's a you problem.
Dumb or not, there's no movie at all without that character. It got a 26 because it wasn't that good of a movie. It doesn't take away from the Marvel villain being also simple but much better made. Simple is not a dirty word. But there is a movie without everybody but Deadshot, Enchantress, Waller, and maybe Katana for the sword. Nobody else did anything. Deadshot could have easily run surveillance, easily snuck in without the others, and Katana could have killed her. Nobody else in that film did a god damn thing.
Not to mention they shouldn't have used Enchantress as the villain at all. It was an absolutely silly choice that didn't have a theme, didn't match the team, and didn't have a point.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 18, 2017 0:12:30 GMT
Dumb or not, there's no movie at all without that character. It got a 26 because it wasn't that good of a movie. It doesn't take away from the Marvel villain being also simple but much better made. Simple is not a dirty word. But there is a movie without everybody but Deadshot, Enchantress, Waller, and maybe Katana for the sword. Nobody else did anything. Deadshot could have easily run surveillance, easily snuck in without the others, and Katana could have killed her. Nobody else in that film did a god damn thing.
Not to mention they shouldn't have used Enchantress as the villain at all. It was an absolutely silly choice that didn't have a theme, didn't match the team, and didn't have a point.
Incubus did something, he killed El Diablo. Killer Crochet did something he killed Incubus. Rick Flag did something, he kept the team under control,. Harley Quinn did something, she was the one who retrieved the heart from Enchantress which allowed her to be killed. The Joker did something, he broke Harley Quinn out of jail. And so on.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 18, 2017 0:17:40 GMT
But there is a movie without everybody but Deadshot, Enchantress, Waller, and maybe Katana for the sword. Nobody else did anything. Deadshot could have easily run surveillance, easily snuck in without the others, and Katana could have killed her. Nobody else in that film did a god damn thing.
Not to mention they shouldn't have used Enchantress as the villain at all. It was an absolutely silly choice that didn't have a theme, didn't match the team, and didn't have a point.
Incubus did something, he killed El Diablo. Killer Crochet did something he killed Incubus. Rick Flag did something, he kept the team under control,. Harley Quinn did something, she was the one who retrieved the heart from Enchantress which allowed her to be killed. The Joker did something, he broke Harley Quinn out of jail. And so on. I can't believe you're actually trying to argue this.
Here I'll give you one example so you don't get confused by talking about every character at once.
Joker and Harley's backstory had nothing to do with anything. He shows up, rescues her, and then then within a minute she's back on the team again. You could have cut all of that out and absolutely nothing about the plot changes even a little. It was all a complete waste of time.
The same with almost every other character. They had zero function to the plot.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 18, 2017 0:22:33 GMT
Incubus did something, he killed El Diablo. Killer Crochet did something he killed Incubus. Rick Flag did something, he kept the team under control,. Harley Quinn did something, she was the one who retrieved the heart from Enchantress which allowed her to be killed. The Joker did something, he broke Harley Quinn out of jail. And so on. I can't believe you're actually trying to argue this.
Here I'll give you one example so you don't get confused by talking about every character at once.
Joker and Harley's backstory had nothing to do with anything. He shows up, rescues her, and then then within a minute she's back on the team again. You could have cut all of that out and absolutely nothing about the plot changes even a little. It was all a complete waste of time.
The same with almost every other character. They had zero function to the plot.
Joker and Harley's backstory ties in to their own character arc, not the main movie arc with Enchantress. This is what they call a sub plot in movies.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 18, 2017 0:23:09 GMT
I can't believe you're actually trying to argue this.
Here I'll give you one example so you don't get confused by talking about every character at once.
Joker and Harley's backstory had nothing to do with anything. He shows up, rescues her, and then then within a minute she's back on the team again. You could have cut all of that out and absolutely nothing about the plot changes even a little. It was all a complete waste of time.
The same with almost every other character. They had zero function to the plot.
Joker and Harley's backstory ties in to their own character arc, not the main movie arc with Enchantress. This is what they call a sub plot in movies. exactly
So why did you delete my thread asking why Justice League is failing?
I'd actually like to know why DC Fans think it's failing. I mean you claim fans like it. I assume you think people like DC. What's the problem?
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 18, 2017 0:24:48 GMT
Joker and Harley's backstory ties in to their own character arc, not the main movie arc with Enchantress. This is what they call a sub plot in movies. exactly
So why did you delete my thread asking why Justice League is failing?
Because it was yet another bait thread (which you won't be making any more of) that was a box office related question so was moved to the box office related thread.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 18, 2017 0:31:14 GMT
I quite liked the movie, but I can see why it's not getting stellar reviews as the story is rushed and feels too simplified to where you can summarize it all in a singular sentence. But the character interaction was great and it left me wanting to see where things will go down the road in the DCEU.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 1:54:46 GMT
ArArArchStanton Critic scores are irrelevant when discussing what audiences like. MCU movies are as straight forward and simple as can be, that doesn't mean they're bad but there's nothing deep about them. They're made so they can be easy to follow to all audiences, children included. Simple plots, straight forward characters, cool looking CGI and action scenes and colourful costumes, that's what they are. Thank you for confirming that you don't actually sit down and watch these films.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 18, 2017 1:57:27 GMT
ArArArchStanton Critic scores are irrelevant when discussing what audiences like. MCU movies are as straight forward and simple as can be, that doesn't mean they're bad but there's nothing deep about them. They're made so they can be easy to follow to all audiences, children included. Simple plots, straight forward characters, cool looking CGI and action scenes and colourful costumes, that's what they are. Thank you for confirming that you don't actually sit down and watch these films. Don't make excuses for criticism, that's petty and the equivalent of you putting your fingers in your ears and screaming lalalala.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 1:59:12 GMT
Thank you for confirming that you don't actually sit down and watch these films. Don't make excuses for criticism, that's petty and the equivalent of you putting your fingers in your ears and screaming lalalala. This isn't a legitimate criticism. You're just trying to tear the MCU down to make Justice League look better.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 18, 2017 2:04:21 GMT
Don't make excuses for criticism, that's petty and the equivalent of you putting your fingers in your ears and screaming lalalala. This isn't a legitimate criticism. You're just trying to tear the MCU down to make Justice League look better. No it's not really a criticism either really, it's just saying it as it is. They're simple and straightforward forward, non complex or deep superhero popcorn blockbuster movies. That's what they're made for, they've done very well at it.
|
|