I would say there is at least one exception to that in Fumoffu after Souseke shoots a watermellon with a rifle, while blindfolded, while Kaname was relatively close to it, she smacks him a pretty fair distance.
Movie, TV, Web Series, and Music Hot Take(s).
- Thread starter BrawlMan
- Start date
Eh, Fumoffu amped up the comedy more than a few notches. But that is still a remarkably reserved bite of the cherry on those kinds of shenanigans.
While I like a good electric guitar shred as much as the next person, the industry is sleeping on acoustics
What in the heck is with all these "prestige" movies being about famous actors doing impressions of real people? Sure, there have always been biopics and such, but this year's Best Pic nom list alone includes, of all people, the guy that wrote rent and the father of the tennis sisters. Not the actual sisters, who are cool and win championships, but their freaking dad.
I was reading a few reviews of The Batman - a movie I've decided I'm going to best enjoy in my own home - and I find myself confused about something. There is an ongoing complaint about Batman that him going around beating up poor people isn't helping solve societies problems and a very selfish use of all his fantastic wealth that he could be using for social programs and such. Plus the last few years really have seen people turning the screws on the mega rich in real life so that also sort of hurts the character.
Well, pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but basically every version of Bruce Wayne does that. Like the Wayne Foundation is almost singularly responsible for coordinating Gotham City's private social services and charities, along with pretty generous donations to the public ones and Bruce makes sure Wayne Enterprises isn't dodging its taxes. However, not everyone is for that: gangsters and corrupt corporations and political operatives still exist to try and grift Gotham City's people and of course there's straight up supervillains.
Everything Bruce Wayne does is the carrot and olive branch. Helping people help themselves. Batman is the stick. Batman exists to go about town and remind the genuine degenerates that this city isn't their fucking playground or its people their playthings and he's not above breaking a few kneecaps or elbows to remind them that violating the social contract in Gotham now comes with serious consequences. Batman.
So its less that movies need Batman to check his privilege, and more that the movies need to - if only briefly but clearly - communicate that Bruce Wayne is contributing to both sides of the equation because he's actually smart. Though more scenes of him putting the boot in to top level guys like in Year One won't got amiss.
Well, pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but basically every version of Bruce Wayne does that. Like the Wayne Foundation is almost singularly responsible for coordinating Gotham City's private social services and charities, along with pretty generous donations to the public ones and Bruce makes sure Wayne Enterprises isn't dodging its taxes. However, not everyone is for that: gangsters and corrupt corporations and political operatives still exist to try and grift Gotham City's people and of course there's straight up supervillains.
Everything Bruce Wayne does is the carrot and olive branch. Helping people help themselves. Batman is the stick. Batman exists to go about town and remind the genuine degenerates that this city isn't their fucking playground or its people their playthings and he's not above breaking a few kneecaps or elbows to remind them that violating the social contract in Gotham now comes with serious consequences. Batman.
So its less that movies need Batman to check his privilege, and more that the movies need to - if only briefly but clearly - communicate that Bruce Wayne is contributing to both sides of the equation because he's actually smart. Though more scenes of him putting the boot in to top level guys like in Year One won't got amiss.
Last edited:
The funny thing is, the TDK Trilogy already had this down right. People are just stupid or want to forget for the sake of convenience and being "in the right side of history".
Agreed. For further irony, BTAS/DCAU, Batman Beyond, and even The Batman (2004 TV Series), had no problems doing this multiple times. Some people are really that stupid, and ignorant. Those that don't watch the animated shows, yet claim to be Bat fans, say those shows don't count because "they're animated, too cartoony, or for kids". Yeah, assholes like them can get RKOed in to the next century.
Eh, Batman varies depending on the writer. Sometimes Bruce Wayne is a respected philanthropist, sometimes he's a clueless rich waste of space so nobody suspects he's Batman.
And he's also investing in good things (including a magic clean energy source that movies like playing with, but that's another issue) and is seen as serious and sensible at the same time.
But, eh, he's Captain McFurry the Clown-Fighter, it's not going to make too much sense.
Even in Batman Begins he gets into the newspaper as a drunken billionaire who burns down his house, and in The Dark Knight he's "I wasn't trying to stop that guy, I just ran the red light in my expensive car and don't know there's a bomb at the hospital" and people believed him.
And he's also investing in good things (including a magic clean energy source that movies like playing with, but that's another issue) and is seen as serious and sensible at the same time.
But, eh, he's Captain McFurry the Clown-Fighter, it's not going to make too much sense.
Oh I know, Batman at its core is fucking absurd. Its just my rant is about a criticism I'm kind of jack of hearing about because nine times out of ten it isn't true because movies about Batman are laser focused on him punching people and moping in the Batcave or smoking room of Wayne Manor. Like change it up; maybe do a Bruce Wayne who's motto is 'work hard, party hard'; you know like does 15-16 hour days in the work week because he's that invested that his shit is run his way and then on Saturday he holds a fucking rock opera at Wayne Manor and crowd surfs with super models.
I think I talked about this on these forums, maybe even in this specific thread. Or maybe the woke thread?
Anyway, this is immensely stupid. They might have been right in what, the 40s? 50s? But do they really think hundreds if not thousands of comic book authors missed out on the bit that if Bruce Wayne focused his wealth solely on fighting crime, it would look bad? And even then, I'd like to see a social program deal with a human refrigerator who wants to bring about another ice age. It's a fucking COMIC BOOK people. Comics about building orphanages and investing in education aren't exactly flying off the shelves.
It's such a shit argument, made only worse by the smugness of the people making it. I guess it gives them stiffies/wet panties when they show off just how woke they are, picking on a fictional billionaire superhero instead of the actual fucking billionaires burning our planet to the ground.
OT: Speaking of Batman, hot take time. BTAS, and it's spinoffs, ultimately failed to live up to it's fullest potential. It has the absolute perfect depiction of Batman, but bar Alfred, it has pretty poor depictions of the rest of the Batfamily. Dick as Robin is alright, but we all know everyone wants to see him as Nightwing. And then we do get him as Nightwing, he's pretty much the same person. Never grows out of angsty phase. Barbara is... well. What Beyond implies is just gross. Tim doesn't even really get to be Tim, he's just playing some combination of himself and Jason (who is not present). I know it probably has something to do with all the weird restrictions the Batman IP had, but I really would have liked to see things like Dick taking on the mantle or making a name for himself in Bludhaven, Tim being the only Robin to have a somewhat normal life, etc, etc.
Because comic books written like a hundred years ago are not going to be relevant thematically to today, no matter how many think pieces, twitter threads, or grim-dark revisionist versions get made, re-made, reset and prequeled.
The behavior and personality of Batman is inspired by this trope of gentlemen adventurers like Zorro and the Scarlet Pimpernel, heck even the 3 Muskateers, in a time when writers and artists were besotted by trying to glom some sort of moral righteousness to glamour and wealth. All of this is completely not relevant to today, nobody wants this. So instead we have Bruce Wayne being tortured and guilty and all this nonsense.
I'll happy play the resident SJW woke lib in most pop culture arguments, but on this one, yeah, it's stupid to criticize Batman for "beating up the poor." I have made this joke plenty- more about the fact that he's beating up the mentally ill, actually- but I am joking when I do this.
The behavior and personality of Batman is inspired by this trope of gentlemen adventurers like Zorro and the Scarlet Pimpernel, heck even the 3 Muskateers, in a time when writers and artists were besotted by trying to glom some sort of moral righteousness to glamour and wealth. All of this is completely not relevant to today, nobody wants this. So instead we have Bruce Wayne being tortured and guilty and all this nonsense.
I'll happy play the resident SJW woke lib in most pop culture arguments, but on this one, yeah, it's stupid to criticize Batman for "beating up the poor." I have made this joke plenty- more about the fact that he's beating up the mentally ill, actually- but I am joking when I do this.
Its funny to think the most empathetic and popular Comics to today are Spider-man, a poor smart regular guy who only ever thinks of how he can help other people and The Punisher who thinks anyone who doesn't agree with his view on how society should exist deserves to die. (Granted Punisher is more nuisanced, but thats not why hes popular.)
Depending on the writer, for one. Two, he's popular for many right and wrong reasons. Don't even get me started on all of the wannabes, Ultra Alt-Right/Conservatives, and military drop outs that thinks they're special, because they've been "shunned", and The Punisher represents everything about them. I don't hate the character, but I certainly don't care much for him anymore.
The Punisher has the same allure as Insane Clown Posse or Dexter. I think people who are aghast at the very idea are full of shit and anyone who doesn't cringe at least a bit is probably a serial killer.
I never once saw Dexter, and still not interested. ISP, I barely ever listened to their music. My older brother is a bigger fan by comparison to me, but it's not saying much.
For me at least, I just don't find the character interesting, because ironic enough, there are expies or substitutes in games, tv, or movies that I find better than the official Punisher adaptions or comic originals. Punisher 2004 I enjoyed for the time, and Punisher War Zone is just an entertaining one-off splatter fest. The Dolph Lungdren version I don't even remember watching more than twice. And I hated the Netflix Punisher TV series. Give me Man on Fire, Equalizer, The Purge sequels that involve Leo, or Max Payne any day over The Punisher. I'll play the shit out of the arcade game though. Great work, Capcom! I'll still take the official Punisher movies over the Taken trilogy. So there is that.
You know its funny, the exact same thing can be said about Steve Rogers.
Saw a post mentioning Man of Steel in the last-watched movies topic, and it reminded me of something.
I don't love Man of Steel, but at the same time, there is one particular line that seems to piss everybody off, and I'm just left here thinking "You all seem to not completely understand what's going on here." That would be Jonathan Kent saying "...Maybe,". Yes, in that scene.
Is it a good suggestion, saying Clark Kent should have let innocent children die in order to hide his powers? No, AND JONATHAN ISN'T SAYING THAT. "Maybe" is essentially Jonathan admitting that while it's all well and good to say "You should hide your powers, that way no one will treat you as anything other than another kid," Clark is making a really good point that given the situation, using his powers seemed like not only the right thing to do, but the only thing to conceivably do. Jonathan Kent, essentially, is admitting that his urging to Clark to hide his powers has its limits.
I don't love Man of Steel, but at the same time, there is one particular line that seems to piss everybody off, and I'm just left here thinking "You all seem to not completely understand what's going on here." That would be Jonathan Kent saying "...Maybe,". Yes, in that scene.
Is it a good suggestion, saying Clark Kent should have let innocent children die in order to hide his powers? No, AND JONATHAN ISN'T SAYING THAT. "Maybe" is essentially Jonathan admitting that while it's all well and good to say "You should hide your powers, that way no one will treat you as anything other than another kid," Clark is making a really good point that given the situation, using his powers seemed like not only the right thing to do, but the only thing to conceivably do. Jonathan Kent, essentially, is admitting that his urging to Clark to hide his powers has its limits.
That interpretation makes sense, but it didn't seem to be what he was saying in the film, and I'm not surprised that others have interpreted him to be not totally against letting people die. Especially as, IIRC, he then goes on for a bit to say that Clark is super special, implying that Clark's secrecy is of greater value than a small group of people's lives.
Disney should just give the Star Wars license over to the Lego folks whole cloth
I know that this version of Pa Kent is seen as an unsympathetic idiot by good amount (mainly ones that have an axe to grind against this movie), but you're clearly not supposed to agree with him. I do admit the tornado scene is not good and feels forced, so the movie can have a dead parent cliche. It's one of the few parts of the movie, I genuinely dislike. Keep in mind, big Man of Steel fan here.