|
Community Links |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
|
Thread Tools |
11-29-2023, 11:58 AM | #3271 |
Tokusatsu Hero
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,223
|
Alan Moore is someone that I have a lot of respect for even if I don't agree with him with everything. He views his comics as art and not junk food material. The guy simply does not be associated with a large captalist company. Marvel and DC have become so corporate that they lost their artistic vision and what their books fun in the first place long gone. After Marvel being bought by Disney and DC resetting their universe mutiple times made me stop liking them in the 2010s.
__________________
She/Her |
11-29-2023, 12:24 PM | #3272 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 1,947
|
This particular moment brought me to certain thoughts. The fact is that such a sensitive topic is much harder to play than to write. I don't know the details of this particular scene in Watchmen, but I can remember similar moments in other films. For example, in Alien: Covenant, the dissected body of Elisabeth Shaw was supposed to have her eyes open, but Fassbender asked for them to be closed because he couldn't focus. Or certainly an unknown case. In the film "Pirates of the Twentieth Century" of the year 1979, the antagonist had to torture a captive woman. The role of the villain was played by Talgat Nigmatulin, a man with very strong principles. So hard that, being a martial arts master, he allowed himself to be beaten to death, because the attacker was older, and Nigmatulin did not beat old people. Of course, he refused to play in this scene and therefore the actress who played the captive lied that she was a masochist. So it is quite possible that in the case of ?Watchmen? the changes were caused precisely by the actor?s desire.
|
11-29-2023, 02:30 PM | #3273 |
Avi by @CSarracenian
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,186
|
Quote:
This particular moment brought me to certain thoughts. The fact is that such a sensitive topic is much harder to play than to write. I don't know the details of this particular scene in Watchmen, but I can remember similar moments in other films. For example, in Alien: Covenant, the dissected body of Elisabeth Shaw was supposed to have her eyes open, but Fassbender asked for them to be closed because he couldn't focus. Or certainly an unknown case. In the film "Pirates of the Twentieth Century" of the year 1979, the antagonist had to torture a captive woman. The role of the villain was played by Talgat Nigmatulin, a man with very strong principles. So hard that, being a martial arts master, he allowed himself to be beaten to death, because the attacker was older, and Nigmatulin did not beat old people. Of course, he refused to play in this scene and therefore the actress who played the captive lied that she was a masochist. So it is quite possible that in the case of ?Watchmen? the changes were caused precisely by the actor?s desire.
__________________
|
03-14-2024, 10:31 AM | #3274 |
TokuKnight89
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Central Louisiana (Cenla)
Posts: 2,556
|
The Snyder take on things as always been a pecking point, but Grant Morrison believes that Batman doesn't kill not because "he can't", but because he chooses not to as both a personal code of honor and because of the childhood trauma that defined his life.
https://comicbook.com/irl/news/grant...er-than-joker/ I know many won't care for the source, but the breakdown is worth the read, as are the comments. In short: Villains Kill, Heroes Don't. |
03-14-2024, 11:17 AM | #3275 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 1,947
|
Quote:
The Snyder take on things as always been a pecking point, but Grant Morrison believes that Batman doesn't kill not because "he can't", but because he chooses not to as both a personal code of honor and because of the childhood trauma that defined his life.
https://comicbook.com/irl/news/grant...er-than-joker/ I know many won't care for the source, but the breakdown is worth the read, as are the comments. In short: Villains Kill, Heroes Don't. Well, this is unique because most often childhood trauma is used to explain murders. In principle, I have nothing against this rule, but there are two significant ?buts?: 1) It is taken to the point of absurdity and even distorted when Batman is ready to allow the death of hundreds of innocents so that the Joker survives; 2) It is stated, but ignored when it is inconvenient, as in the Nolan trilogy. My favorite moment: when Bruce declared that he didn't kill, and then set off an explosion that killed about a dozen people. It seems to me that it is sufficient to limit ourselves to the principle: ?does not seek to kill.? Because 100% Batman cannot know what old injuries a random back alley robber has. What about the evil ones who have heart problems?Not using lethal weapons, not playing the role of executioner, handing over criminals to the police is normal. But when Batman shields the Joker from a policeman's bullet, it's already too much. But you also need to understand that this is the world of comics. Popular villains aren't going away. They will not be killed, and if they are killed, they will be resurrected. The Joker will always be in Gotham, whether Batman kills or not. Another thing is that in the case of Batman being a killer, this means that he cannot kill his archenemy. And in the case of the non-killing Batman - that he does not want to do it. That is, the second option clearly demonstrates that Batman is stronger. And the stupidest thing in Snyder?s version is that he kills random bandits, but the Joker is quite intact. |
03-14-2024, 11:21 PM | #3276 |
TokuKnight89
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Central Louisiana (Cenla)
Posts: 2,556
|
Quote:
Well, this is unique because most often childhood trauma is used to explain murders. In principle, I have nothing against this rule, but there are two significant ?buts?:
1) It is taken to the point of absurdity and even distorted when Batman is ready to allow the death of hundreds of innocents so that the Joker survives; 2) It is stated, but ignored when it is inconvenient, as in the Nolan trilogy. My favorite moment: when Bruce declared that he didn't kill, and then set off an explosion that killed about a dozen people. It seems to me that it is sufficient to limit ourselves to the principle: ?does not seek to kill.? Because 100% Batman cannot know what old injuries a random back alley robber has. What about the evil ones who have heart problems?Not using lethal weapons, not playing the role of executioner, handing over criminals to the police is normal. But when Batman shields the Joker from a policeman's bullet, it's already too much. But you also need to understand that this is the world of comics. Popular villains aren't going away. They will not be killed, and if they are killed, they will be resurrected. The Joker will always be in Gotham, whether Batman kills or not. Another thing is that in the case of Batman being a killer, this means that he cannot kill his archenemy. And in the case of the non-killing Batman - that he does not want to do it. That is, the second option clearly demonstrates that Batman is stronger. And the stupidest thing in Snyder?s version is that he kills random bandits, but the Joker is quite intact. https://www.dc.com/blog/2022/03/02/w...an-doesnt-kill In short, Bob Kane and Bill Finger were not on equal ground with this subject. The No-Kill thing was to make the comic "kid-friendly" cause parental complaints were apparently a thing from the very beginning. Kane hated taking lethal force away, but Finger hated the fact that it was ever allowed in the first place. One of the arguments put forth is the idea that Bruce has a darkness in him which could run wild if he doesn't keep it in check. The other side is that the World's Greatest Hero can't kill the World's Greatest Killer lest he become the Greatest Killer himself. |
03-15-2024, 09:05 PM | #3277 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 2,448
|
Batman Vs Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
I saw this today on DVD. This movie made almost no sense. Joker and Quinn becoming mutated? WTF is this? TMNT 2012? Geeze. This movie confused me. After The Bat Man and the 90s movies I will have seen them all.
__________________
Currently watching Galaxy Man - Aba and To Quger - Don Bros. on DVD. |
|
TokuNation News & Rumors |
Kakuranger: 30 Years After |
ToyRise RyuKenDo |
Alternative Cut of "Day Of The Dumpster" Released |
Shodo SUPER Kyoryuger Teaser |
Figuarts/Seihou GRIDMAN |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:50 AM.
|