WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Sat May 18, 2013 9:56 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13545 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611, 612 ... 678  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:52 am 
Offline
A brother to dragons.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:22 am
Posts: 1492
Location: Portugal
feliciano182 wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Ever seen a little jewel called "Mask Of The Phantasm" ?


Dude, it is clear you weren't seeing the same movie we were all seeing.

Newsflash, Batman is a dangerous creature, he does whatever the hell he wants without holding himself to any standard of accountability, to any method or procedure but the one HE decides is the most convenient of all, why did you think Lucius was so angry at the creation of a device that could monitor the location of every single cell phone in a city ?

Why was The Joker even in Gotham for starters ? Was it because he came out of nowhere to cause mayhem ? Did you really think Batman came in and played chivalrous knight to Gotham ?

Read a little something called "The Dark Knight Returns" by Frank Miller, when you do, you'll see what really happens with The Joker when Batman is retired.


Having seen the Mask of the Phantasm I can´t really see how that can tie with my coment.Awesome movie,but it doesn´t talk about the Wayne clinging to his role as Batman as a life long comitment.Maybe I´m missing on something...

As to the Joker on DKR,those two share almost a symbiotic relationship, so you can really extrapolate that to the rest of the gallery of rogues. No mention the normal criminals...


Joker was in Gotham city because it his evolution. As crimefighters evolve, criminals will too. Gordon says that on Begins. A new type of criminals will emerge after the appearance of Batman, because that how things work.It´s a cycle. But then again, it´s not as if a figure like Batman wasn´t necessary to stop the tidal wave of corruption and crime that Gotham was facing...


He functions with a diferent code because he sees the powers that be either morally corrupted or just plain and simply incapable of dealing with the new threats that emerge.
The part with the "bigg brother device" and Lucius annoys a little bit, because the creation of the device without Lucius knowing is classic Batman, but Bruce using Lucius as a surrogate conscience was a bit unecessary.




Godziller66 wrote:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but he actually died a villain. The dying as a hero thing was just a lie they told Gotham.

Anyway, I'm gonna re-watch it soon, will report back. *salutes*


He should have became a villain for everybody to see. He should have lived long enough to become a villain.There´s is no White Knight capable of helping Gotham.All men are corruptable.But a symbol, like Batman is incorruptible, just like Wayne said on Begins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:54 pm 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10058
RuiBK wrote:
Having seen the Mask of the Phantasm I can´t really see how that can tie with my coment.Awesome movie,but it doesn´t talk about the Wayne clinging to his role as Batman as a life long comitment.Maybe I´m missing on something...


There's a scene where Bruce stands in front of his parent's grave and "tells them" (more like "wonders to his own self") that he's going to give up his oath to avenge them, his desire for happiness with his new-found love is stronger than any need for revenge.

Thus, like it is expressed in "The Dark Knight Returns" by Frank Miller, it's not out of the question or even out of character to suggest Batman could give up the cowl.

RuiBK wrote:
Joker was in Gotham city because it his evolution. As crimefighters evolve, criminals will too. Gordon says that on Begins. A new type of criminals will emerge after the appearance of Batman, because that how things work.It´s a cycle.


That's actually not what a cycle is :lol:

Anyways, you really can't find Batman to be (partly at least) morally responsible for everything The Joker does ?

Like it or not, his appearence in the city, and all the chaos in TDK, probably wouldn't have happened if Batman hadn't show up in Begins, the harsh truth, the dark reality to face here, is that Batman's presence and continued crusade is probably the cause for more crime and more violence in Gotham.

RuiBK wrote:
But then again, it´s not as if a figure like Batman wasn´t necessary to stop the tidal wave of corruption and crime that Gotham was facing...


Depends, someone could make the argument that things weren't as bad until he appeared and decided to take the self-appointed mantle of "protector" of Gotham that everything REALLY went to hell, and that all the events in TDK are nothing more than Batman trying to "fix" his own mistakes.

RuiBK wrote:
He functions with a diferent code because he sees the powers that be either morally corrupted or just plain and simply incapable of dealing with the new threats that emerge. The part with the "bigg brother device" and Lucius annoys a little bit, because the creation of the device without Lucius knowing is classic Batman, but Bruce using Lucius as a surrogate conscience was a bit unecessary.


This is exactly why I know Nolan did such a great job with Batman.

Nolan slyly tells us that, because we know and love Batman as much as we do, we give him the benefit of the doubt when doing the most questionable, inmoral acts in the name of our own "safety".

But what if it was someone we didn't know ? What if a guy in your city appeared in a red mask with a beak, called himself "The Phoenix !" and proclaimed himself as "THE SAVIOR OF MANKIND !" and somehow, in some way, you discovered he was making devices similar to those Batman was using, devices that will let him know where you are at any time and place, devices that would allow him to know who you are, what you do, how much money do you spend, how much you don't, who you're sleeping with, where do you study, what classes have you flunked, where you work, yadda yadda yadda.

Would you be okay with someone doing that ?

RuiBK wrote:
He should have became a villain for everybody to see. He should have lived long enough to become a villain.There´s is no White Knight capable of helping Gotham.All men are corruptable.But a symbol, like Batman is incorruptible, just like Wayne said on Begins.


So you think Rorschach was right in his attempt to reveal the truth about Karnak ?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:31 am 
Offline
Judge of All the Earth
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:39 am
Posts: 6825
Location: Everywhere, Everywhen, UK.
Batman Begins: 9/10
The Dark Knight: 9/10

unfortunately I watched TDK in 2 sittings due to time constraints, I had to stop just after the Joker announces he will blow up a hospital, so the incredible tension at that part of the movie was mostly lost by the time I began watching it again, but the loss of tension was short lived.

I'm pretty hyped for TDKR now.

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script. :?
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:09 am 
Offline
...look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:43 am
Posts: 2137
Image
8/10
This movie is all still photographs with voice overs by different actors that gives shape to a story. Even if you hate the idea of it, I still encourage a view or two. The fact that the story is so simple is part of its appeal. It gives it a degree of intimacy and sweetness, sadness and humor.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:15 am 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10058
TheMovieDude wrote:
Image
8/10
This movie is all still photographs with voice overs by different actors that gives shape to a story. Even if you hate the idea of it, I still encourage a view or two. The fact that the story is so simple is part of its appeal. It gives it a degree of intimacy and sweetness, sadness and humor.


A Stephen King movie dealing with such themes ? I'm interested !

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:24 am 
Offline
...look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:43 am
Posts: 2137
feliciano182 wrote:
TheMovieDude wrote:
Image
8/10
This movie is all still photographs with voice overs by different actors that gives shape to a story. Even if you hate the idea of it, I still encourage a view or two. The fact that the story is so simple is part of its appeal. It gives it a degree of intimacy and sweetness, sadness and humor.


A Stephen King movie dealing with such themes ? I'm interested !


Fuuuuucccck, I can't never tell if the pics are working or not.
Hopefully this one works:
Image

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:30 am 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10058
TheMovieDude wrote:
feliciano182 wrote:
TheMovieDude wrote:
Image
8/10
This movie is all still photographs with voice overs by different actors that gives shape to a story. Even if you hate the idea of it, I still encourage a view or two. The fact that the story is so simple is part of its appeal. It gives it a degree of intimacy and sweetness, sadness and humor.


A Stephen King movie dealing with such themes ? I'm interested !


Fuuuuucccck, I can't never tell if the pics are working or not.
Hopefully this one works:
Image


Now it shows !

HOLY SHIT :o !

Is that Maribel Verdú ?!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:04 am 
Offline
...look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:43 am
Posts: 2137
feliciano182 wrote:
TheMovieDude wrote:
feliciano182 wrote:
TheMovieDude wrote:
Image
8/10
This movie is all still photographs with voice overs by different actors that gives shape to a story. Even if you hate the idea of it, I still encourage a view or two. The fact that the story is so simple is part of its appeal. It gives it a degree of intimacy and sweetness, sadness and humor.


A Stephen King movie dealing with such themes ? I'm interested !


Fuuuuucccck, I can't never tell if the pics are working or not.
Hopefully this one works:
Image


Now it shows !

HOLY SHIT :o !

Is that Maribel Verdú ?!


Nope, that's Eireaan Harper.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:12 am 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:53 pm
Posts: 10058
Image

5/10

This movie just...........doesn't work.

It's difficult to pin-point a specific problem, but it's just a mediocre, unimpressive film that sins on it's misuse of the awesomeness incarnate that is Liam Neeson.

I guess the only salvageable thing I can pick from it is the subtle "lovecraftian" commentary about nature.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:16 am 
Offline
Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:26 pm
Posts: 4608
Location: the City
After Dirty Laundry, I was compelled to go back and see the 2004 Tom Jane Punisher flick.

I give it a 7.9/10 shit-pick if you must about my score but it is what it is.

I cannot shake the idea of Jane playing Castle. Its perfect. He's far and away my favorite Punisher.
He's owns the role in a way that Stevenson and Lundgren could only dream of.
If only the movie around Tom Jane's Frank Castle was better.
I loath John Travolta and his character here.
He infects the movie with a horrible dislikeability that stabs the movie in the back and never lets it recover.
I can't stand him.
And not in the way that a villain is supposed to be disliked.
He's whiney, arrogant, and ANNOYING. And he gets the lions share of the screen time. Why? because he's John Travolta.
The action is solid and the pacing is decent.
But I must shitpick about the Skull.

Why can't we get a clear-cut solid white skull?
Hmm?
Do they hide Superman's 'S' behind layers of obstructive grime?
No.
I want to see the Skull. It should stand out, not blend in.
Although, at least they had a skull. It'd easily be the kind of thing hollywood execs would be likely to ax.
But thankfully the Lundgren movie taught them better.

Oh well. With Dirty Laundry kicking all kinds of ass in only 10 minutes, I'm HOPING that Jane'll get another crack at Castle.
Here's to hoping.

_________________
My Blog of Movie Reviews and Such
Image
I'll be right back. I gotta go see a man about a mule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:49 am 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:48 pm
Posts: 11531
Location: Monster Island (Really New York)
Image

Well, that was pretty bitchin'.

Certainly not without its faults, though.

_________________
"The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.
Image
"There's a cello in your house now."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 3:38 am 
Offline
...look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!

Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:09 pm
Posts: 2114
The Dark Knight Rises
8/10

This goes back to the comic-bookyness of Begins, and sadly loses a lot of the ambition and thoughtfulness set by TDK. Even so, it's an entertaining conclusion (even if it falters at points); but I'd really like to see how this one stands on a second viewing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 6:55 am 
Offline
A brother to dragons.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:22 am
Posts: 1492
Location: Portugal
feliciano182 wrote:


There's a scene where Bruce stands in front of his parent's grave and "tells them" (more like "wonders to his own self") that he's going to give up his oath to avenge them, his desire for happiness with his new-found love is stronger than any need for revenge.

Thus, like it is expressed in "The Dark Knight Returns" by Frank Miller, it's not out of the question or even out of character to suggest Batman could give up the cowl.







Anyways, you really can't find Batman to be (partly at least) morally responsible for everything The Joker does ?

Like it or not, his appearence in the city, and all the chaos in TDK, probably wouldn't have happened if Batman hadn't show up in Begins, the harsh truth, the dark reality to face here, is that Batman's presence and continued crusade is probably the cause for more crime and more violence in Gotham.



Depends, someone could make the argument that things weren't as bad until he appeared and decided to take the self-appointed mantle of "protector" of Gotham that everything REALLY went to hell, and that all the events in TDK are nothing more than Batman trying to "fix" his own mistakes.





This is exactly why I know Nolan did such a great job with Batman.

Nolan slyly tells us that, because we know and love Batman as much as we do, we give him the benefit of the doubt when doing the most questionable, inmoral acts in the name of our own "safety".

But what if it was someone we didn't know ? What if a guy in your city appeared in a red mask with a beak, called himself "The Phoenix !" and proclaimed himself as "THE SAVIOR OF MANKIND !" and somehow, in some way, you discovered he was making devices similar to those Batman was using, devices that will let him know where you are at any time and place, devices that would allow him to know who you are, what you do, how much money do you spend, how much you don't, who you're sleeping with, where do you study, what classes have you flunked, where you work, yadda yadda yadda.

Would you be okay with someone doing that ?




So you think Rorschach was right in his attempt to reveal the truth about Karnak ?




Shit, forgot that bit. But as to MotF, I´m not as against the idea of Batman having moments of weakness.He just a man, and as such he has needs,emotionally, that his life as Batman hinders.But the burden that he carries, the "I will never let happen to anyone what happened to me" propels him forward. Shit, Batman Inc actually shows that he wants to perpetate that ideia beyond himself.
As to Bruce on TDKR, it´s Frank Miller being Frank Miller. His reputation comes from breaking standards, not from doing stuff like others. Plus, that Wayne had decades of work on his shoulders. In TDK Wayne is Batman for what, 1/2 years?



No bro,I don´t seem him as responsible.As it is, Gotham seems to be a magnet of sorts. The League targeted it even before his parents died, and by the time Bruce came back, dudes like Zsaz and Scarecrow already populated the place. As to Joker himself, he just aimed as high as he could. He sees himself as a figure of chaos, and in a city like Gotham, where corruption is widespread, the greatest symbol of order is Batman. The Joker is atracted to the idea of "fighting the powe" and Batman is the biggest incarnation of it.


The other criminals, well, they owned the fucking place.As it is they were forced to take desperate measures(outsourcing). But by the beggining of TDK they were feeling the squeeze. That kind of crime was actually on the down-low.



Gotham was cesspool.The mob had the fucking place. They were running amook.Guys like Zasz could get away with murder(sort of).The worst of it is that the cops were in with them. Guys like Gordon were the exception. Wayne did good. Thing is, by "replacing" the cops, he made himself a target to those that normally would target the cops on account of the role in society.


Oh, so now we get into the "vigilantes in the real world " bit?Ok, I can play that game.

If I lived in a cesspool like Gotham where even the cops aren´t trustworthy and Phoenix(first name Simon? :D ) was presenting some results and bringing about change, yeah, hack away. Desperation has an act for changing thresholds...




As to Rorschach, yeah, he was. That plays to the trope that heroes are uncorruptable. Even Bale knows this:

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/07/18/t ... n-trilogy/

"And Christian Bale, for one, believes this should trouble us. “Superheroes should tell the truth, right? That’s exactly what they’re meant to do,” says the actor. The Batman/Gordon conspiracy “was a decision… that the truth was too damaging or too much for people to handle,” says Bale. “It’s not a philosophy that [we] want to hear. It’s elitist. It’s a belief in the inability of the public to handle complexity — and it’s probably, really, sadly true, as well. It was very interesting because it’s not what I wanted. I don’t mean playing it — I mean as an audience member. You want this guy will tell the truth regardless of how harsh and regardless of how cruel that is. It’s a great problem for him as well."

But like the Black Freighter hints, and TDKR will show, sooner or later the mask falls, and shit degrades fast.


Ah , fuck it, after all the shit that I read, probably gonna see TDKR on a theather.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:51 pm 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 7753
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
NiteOwl wrote:
After Dirty Laundry, I was compelled to go back and see the 2004 Tom Jane Punisher flick.

I give it a 7.9/10 shit-pick if you must about my score but it is what it is.

I cannot shake the idea of Jane playing Castle. Its perfect. He's far and away my favorite Punisher.
He's owns the role in a way that Stevenson and Lundgren could only dream of.
If only the movie around Tom Jane's Frank Castle was better.
I loath John Travolta and his character here.
He infects the movie with a horrible dislikeability that stabs the movie in the back and never lets it recover.
I can't stand him.
And not in the way that a villain is supposed to be disliked.
He's whiney, arrogant, and ANNOYING. And he gets the lions share of the screen time. Why? because he's John Travolta.
The action is solid and the pacing is decent.
But I must shitpick about the Skull.

Why can't we get a clear-cut solid white skull?
Hmm?
Do they hide Superman's 'S' behind layers of obstructive grime?
No.
I want to see the Skull. It should stand out, not blend in.
Although, at least they had a skull. It'd easily be the kind of thing hollywood execs would be likely to ax.
But thankfully the Lundgren movie taught them better.

Oh well. With Dirty Laundry kicking all kinds of ass in only 10 minutes, I'm HOPING that Jane'll get another crack at Castle.
Here's to hoping.


The theatrical or extended cut? Extended cut is so much better, it fills in all the gaps.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 6:06 pm 
Offline
Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:26 pm
Posts: 4608
Location: the City
WJK wrote:
NiteOwl wrote:
After Dirty Laundry, I was compelled to go back and see the 2004 Tom Jane Punisher flick.

I give it a 7.9/10 shit-pick if you must about my score but it is what it is.

I cannot shake the idea of Jane playing Castle. Its perfect. He's far and away my favorite Punisher.
He's owns the role in a way that Stevenson and Lundgren could only dream of.
If only the movie around Tom Jane's Frank Castle was better.
I loath John Travolta and his character here.
He infects the movie with a horrible dislikeability that stabs the movie in the back and never lets it recover.
I can't stand him.
And not in the way that a villain is supposed to be disliked.
He's whiney, arrogant, and ANNOYING. And he gets the lions share of the screen time. Why? because he's John Travolta.
The action is solid and the pacing is decent.
But I must shitpick about the Skull.

Why can't we get a clear-cut solid white skull?
Hmm?
Do they hide Superman's 'S' behind layers of obstructive grime?
No.
I want to see the Skull. It should stand out, not blend in.
Although, at least they had a skull. It'd easily be the kind of thing hollywood execs would be likely to ax.
But thankfully the Lundgren movie taught them better.

Oh well. With Dirty Laundry kicking all kinds of ass in only 10 minutes, I'm HOPING that Jane'll get another crack at Castle.
Here's to hoping.


The theatrical or extended cut? Extended cut is so much better, it fills in all the gaps.

Extended. It is much better.
The theatrical is probably just a 6.5/10 to me.

_________________
My Blog of Movie Reviews and Such
Image
I'll be right back. I gotta go see a man about a mule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:37 pm 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 7628
Location: Clackamas, OR
Take This Waltz

That was a particularly difficult blog entry to write. That's partly because the movie was so boring I couldn't remember huge portions of it, and that's partly because the film was so painful I didn't really enjoy talking about it.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:44 pm 
Offline
Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:26 pm
Posts: 4608
Location: the City
Bronson - 9/10

Watched it with mom and dad.
Finally. A movie we can TALK about.
Something to sink their teeth into.

_________________
My Blog of Movie Reviews and Such
Image
I'll be right back. I gotta go see a man about a mule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:09 am 
Offline
Drinking a toast to absent friends.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:16 am
Posts: 1256
Dark Knight Rises- 6.9/10

Definitely enjoyed it but a lot of stuff felt rushed/mishandled which is surprising considering how long it was.
Lose a couple of the random new characters and focus more on Bane/ Gordon/ Talia and you've got a better movie IMHO.

_________________
" Funny STORY. Sounds UNBELIEVABLE. Probably TRUE."

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:55 am 
Offline
Judge of All the Earth
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:39 am
Posts: 6825
Location: Everywhere, Everywhen, UK.
Moneyball. I know nothing about baseball, but that's a good movie.

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script. :?
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:45 am 
Offline
Indestructible Man
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 7753
Location: 1060 W. Addison St.
NiteOwl wrote:
Bronson - 9/10

Watched it with mom and dad.
Finally. A movie we can TALK about.
Something to sink their teeth into.


you finally saw it?

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13545 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611, 612 ... 678  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.208s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]