- Apr 1, 2012
The more relatable a concept is, the more likely an audience is to buy it as being a truthful story told honestly.Alek_the_Great said:Who said it had to be broadly relatable?
whatAlek_the_Great said:Peter Parker isn't exactly an everyman
Are you kidding me with this? No, seriously, are you just messing with me now? Spider-Man has always been about a more or less average person (that he's brilliant enough to invent webshooters is, more often than not, glossed over as being an ugly necessity to give him an extra spider power), one defined more by personal failures than by triumphs, a schlub whose life is pretty much made of personal problems. He has super powers, but within the context of the world he exists in, his powers are extremely weak, outmatched by almost everyone he faces. Hell, his biggest power, when you think about it, isn't strength but an ability to yell "Yikes!" and duck when someone tries to punch him. One of his super powers is to cringe when someone throws a truck at him, and he only got those powers because of an accident. He was not meant to be a superhero, not born or destined to be one. He's just a guy who got shoved into a life he didn't ask for.
Peter Parker is an average person who is constantly placed in un-average circumstances. That is the very definition of an everyman.
You must have burst a blood vessel when in the last two movies, Johnny had a buzzcut instead of a wavy haircut and his sister was played by a Latina woman.Alek_the_Great said:They're both pretty damn important aspects of a character, but it's less of a hassle to update a character's background than it is to do their appearance.
I do not accept that premise, and have argued with you already about what I think is gained in this thread, so I'm not doing this again.Alek_the_Great said:Keep in mind, nothing at all is gained from it either other than adding a check to some imaginary racial quota.
They are only reasonable if it is okay to start from a preconceived notion and from there go looking for ways to interpret the facts to fit that narrative. It isn't. That is called "confirmation bias," though I hesitate to use the term here because I think it unfairly dignifies what you're doing, which is essentially just making shit up and insisting you're right because the burden isn't on you to prove yourself right but rather on me to prove you wrong. That is not how logic works, nor evidence, nor facts.Alek_the_Great said:Because I'm not writing a goddamn research paper. I'm just making some reasonable points and all you have to refute is "sources?" without providing any sort of meaningful counter argument.
Make up your mind, Alek_the_Great. Are they meaningless, or do they muddle canon? You can't simultaneously argue irrelevancy and relevancy.Alek_the_Great said:Again, they're meaningless changes that only serve to further muddle the canon when the original was perfectly serviceable.
Tough shit for them.Alek_the_Great said:Let's just say a lot of people weren't happy to see the character devolved into nothing but a figurehead.
Alek_the_Great, I am trying very hard to remain patient and calm as I say this: I fucking know what you are arguing. I know that. You have said it over and over and over. I have also said in the past that I think movie-Bane is recognizable as comic-Bane, so I'm leaving this tangent because you seem to have nothing to say except to ignore my points in favor of repeating shit you have already said.Alek_the_Great said:And again, I'm arguing they should be recognizable.
So it's not important that you think the changes will work. Changes are inherently bad in and of themselves, though less so when they're about history and personality and more so when they're about appearance.Alek_the_Great said:That [the changes won't work] is not the argument though. You can make any change work, the Constantine film for example, but there's still going to be a lot of fans unhappy with the portrayal.
I have absolutely no sympathy for this stance. If you want everything to be the same forever, then lock yourself in your room and only read the stuff you're already read before so you'll never have to fear being exposed to scary new ideas and interpretations.
Ahem:Alek_the_Great said:Whoa, what? I never said something was bad if you couldn't make a movie out of it.
I specifically asked you if it's only possible to be a fan of something that can be turned into a movie, and you said if a thing can't be turned into a movie, then that thing is not done at all or is done badly.Alek_the_Great said:Usually, if something isn't able to be translated into a movie, it's either not done at all or it's done badly.JimB said:That is completely insupportable crap. It's only possible to be a fan of something that can be translated to a movie?Alek_the_Great said:If the source material itself wouldn't work in movie form, then there wouldn't be fans of it in the first place.
I cannot think of any new ways to say that the word "default" does not mean "original." Please quit treating them as if they're synonymous. They're not, and it's a pretty disingenuous fucking argument if you have to change the meanings of words to make them suit your argument.Alek_the_Great said:But this Johnny Storm is still a spinoff, thus a white Johnny Storm is still the default.