WatchNon-threaded

Forums » The Lounge » Read Message

A place to sit back, hang out, and talk about anything you'd like.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

...David Bowie is not dead.

4 years ago

He's fine. It was yet another stupid internet prank.

http://en.mediamass.net/people/david-bowie/deathhoax.html

...David Bowie is not dead.

4 years ago

That's over a pretty obvious fake account (rip bowie), these are his official accounts.

Just reported by Fox, too... https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/686442124380745728

Official website: http://www.davidbowie.com/news/january-10-2016-55521

It's looking like it's true...... It needs to be a marketing stunt. Dear god.

...David Bowie is not dead.

4 years ago

Well, one site has his rep confirming (yesterday) he's alive and that it's bullshit, so I dunno what to tell you. A lot of news sites don't fact check, and that was a freaking tweet...

...David Bowie is not dead.

4 years ago

Why would his official facebook, twitter, and website, along with a host of other twitter accounts and news sites all say the same thing. Even his son's twitter confirmed it. Doesn't make any sense. Only hope is a Death Grips style marketing shit, since one of the track names on Blackstar is Lazarus... Plz.

*shrug*

4 years ago

Fair enough. Maybe he is. xD I'm not as invested in this issue as some, though...

...David Bowie is not dead.

4 years ago

"David Bowie’s death in New York on Sunday January 10, 2016 has now been confirmed: the singer best known for hit songs like Let's Dance orFame died at 69." 

-- that website

...David Bowie is dead.

4 years ago

*re-checks* They updated it, then. Ah, well. R.I.P. Bowie.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Luckily for me, I wasn't aware of the fact that he lived past the 20th century, so I never had to feel these feels. 'Twas a shame though, his music is amazing.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Super sad, the world has lost a truly amazing and talented artist and I just want to say right now with utmost sincerity that...


You remind me of the babe.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

I knew someone was going to make a Goblin King reference.

But I think everyone's glad that David Bowie was cast instead of going with their other choice Michael Jackson.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Especially the baby cheeky

(And words cannot express how upset I am that nobody asked "What babe?" You should all be ashamed of yourselves.)

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

What babe?

Edit: Damn it all. I was too late.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Babe with power. Sorry, just wanted to get in on this.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

What power? xD

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

The power of voodoo.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Who do?

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Hutus.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Fucking shit, Swift.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

I hate you angry

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

You do!

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

What?!

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

The power of voodoo.... who do?.... you.... do?

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Do what?

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Because I totally didn't say it.

Remind me of the babe. *tosses in the air*

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Remind me of the babe.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

What babe?

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

:P

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

What babe?

EDIT: Nevermind, I was too late.

DOUBLE EDIT: Holy shit, I said the same thing as James.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Yes, he died.

I believe that Cancer got him in the end.

Goddamnit...

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

"I don't know where I'm going from here, but I promise it won't be boring." - David Bowie.

Rest in peace, Ziggy.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Excellent and talented showman/singer. Unfortunate someone like Cosby gets to live a decade over him.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Glad they caught Cosby.

4 years ago

I guess the proof was in the pudding. 

Glad they caught Cosby.

4 years ago

Glad they caught Cosby.

4 years ago

RIP Mr Bowie, long live the Labyrinth and Hoggle!

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago
Saw his death coming from a mile away. Not surprised. RIP Bowie.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

I really do think he was a great artist. I practically worshipped Space Odessey.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

*Space Oddity

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

I was wondering when somebody was going to correct that.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

R.I.P David Bowie.

Blackstar was a preemptive warning. Every single song seemed to be speaking of his death. He knew it was coming.

*wails loudly*

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

How true.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

And they both died within days of each other of cancer at the age of 69... Whatever happened to celebrities dying of drug overdoses or committing suicide at the age of 27? I think Rupert Grint's 27 now. Come on Mr Reaper, you can have Ron if you give us Snape back! ^_^

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Oh goddamnit, didn't know about Alan. I liked a lot of his roles.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

2016's off to a great start :P

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Okay. Now I'm sad. I loved his acting and he was a really nice guy IRL. Damn... R.I.P. Alan.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Damn it! Have I pissed off some powerful cosmic entity or something?

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

So apparently the deaths of celebrities come in threes. Curious who the third one will be...

If fucking ANYONE ELSE FAMOUS DIES, then I think 2016 will prove to be the worst year in the universe.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Could be Tim Curry, he's 69 right now.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

No. No... NOT THE SWEET TRANSVESTITE!

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

No! It and Muppets Treasure Island were my early childhood!

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Or Tommy Lee Jones. 

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Musician (Bowie) > Actor (Rickman) > Director/Producer (Spielberg)

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

But, Spielberg isn't dead, is he?

Edit: I am such an idiot. I took the > for "greater than" signs, not arrows.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Oh... 

damn. 

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

OH MY GOD HE'S 69 TOO.

RUN STEVE, RUN!

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Lemmy died just before 2016, does that count?

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Another musical legend...

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Probably Stan Lee, he's on his last legs. 

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

Goddamnit!

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago
next one is bill cosby - called it now.

Not Alan Rickman too!!!

4 years ago

I wouldn't bet on it. He's gotten away with a lot worse. ;D

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Any other famous people aged 69 I got to were about. ;(

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

David Bowie's ? (called Blackstar) already took Adele's 25 off of the top spot, and since it is his swan song, I doubt it will go out of the spot anytime soon.

R.I.P. Bowie, and thank you Bowie for your amazing musical talent.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

So Blackstar was a trip. I honestly think that the dead astronaut in the beginning was a representation of Major Tom, by the way.

Rest in peace, spaceboy.

EDIT: Also, here's a story from Chris' late grandpa (God rest his soul):

My grandpa told me one time that, when he was in seventh grade, he sat behind an odd girl. She was pretty, no doubt about it, though she didn't really pay any mind to him. Then one day, out of the blue, she just grabs him and kisses him, then walks away. He looks at her binder... And sees a sketch of David Bowie, in his character of Ziggy Stardust. From that moment on, he liked David Bowie.

He told me all of this while we were listening to Space Oddity, just a night before he died.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

I couldn't make it through the Blackstar video. For whatever reason, it made me really uncomfortable. 

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

It was disturbing. Like, really disturbing. But I think we can all be glad he died doing what he loved: making shit that was weird as fuck.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Man, everyone's dropping like flies!  Glenn Frey's gone too.  I'm gonna miss those live performances of Hotel California.  :(

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

NO! NOT GLENN FREY! GODDAMMIT WHY ARE CELEBRITIES DYING LEFT AND RIGHT?!

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

67. Damn.

...David Bowie might be dead...

4 years ago

Glenn Fry? ... Stephen's brother? frown

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

See that above this post? Yeah, apparently Labyrinth is getting a remake and Nicole Perman, co-writer of Guardians of the Galaxy, is writing the screenplay.

So, uh, cool I guess? I'm too scared that they'll fuck up what made the movie magical in the first place and I'm also scared they won't remind me of the babe.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Nicole Perman, co-writer of Guardians of the Galaxy, is writing the screenplay.

I am not ok with this.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

But Guardians of the Galaxy was awesome ^_^

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Please tell me that's a joke. :p

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

It's going to suck.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Finally someone other than my one friend who agrees that it is trash. People I know get pissed off if I tell them my opinion on it so I usually keep quiet about it.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

*Gasp* There are people in the world that didn't like Guardians of the Galaxy? My faith in humanity is ruined. sad

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

People hate it, but think they were expecting too much out of it. I expected a fun, ridiculous comedy, and that's what a received. 

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

The jokes felt aimed for a much younger age IMO.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

What in God's name are you talking about? Most of the jokes were nostalgic references to the 80s. 

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Eh, it was alright. The best thing about it was the soundtrack, and that was a completely unoriginal mashup of catchy 80's tunes. Suicide Squad is looking like it's going to be DC's Guardians of the Galaxy, and as of now, it should be better, just because it has actual acting talent (Jared Leto).

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Pshh. Michael Bay was the obvious choice.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

You guys didn't like Guardians of the Galaxy? You crazy bastards can burn, that was one of my favorite movies.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

I mean, what's that great about it apart from the soundtrack? The screenplay wasn't that great, the acting ranged from serviceable (Pratt) to downright terrible (Bautista). All the actors I would expect something from (Benicio Del Toro) had incredibly small roles (and Bradley Cooper just VA'd). From what I remember, the visuals were alright, costumes were good. It's fine to like it, but it probably shouldn't be one of your favorite movies.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

It's a fun movie! It made me laugh and it has a talking raccoon and a tree. What's not to like? ^_^

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Are you kidding? It's the perfect anti-superhero-movie! It brings conciousness to the inherent absurdities of the usual superhero yarn without being all depressing and gory about it like it does whenever they allow Alan Moore to write something. It was fun, affectionate, and colorful. A damn sight better than the Nolan Batmans, that's for sure. (AND HOOKED ON A FEELING IS FROM THE 70'S YOU SCRUBLING!)

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

without being all depressing and gory about it like it does whenever they allow Alan Moore to write something.

You take that back, Alan Moore is a god.

A damn sight better than the Nolan Batmans

Absolutely fucking not. It's better than The Dark Knight Rises (but that's because TDKR sucks). Batman Begins and TDK (whitch itself is one of the best in the genre) are way better superhero movies.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Ish Ish Oshk Oshk Ish Ish Oshk Oshk Ish Ish Oshk Oshk

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

I don't get it?

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

You should be glad that my personal youtube boycott has ended.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

"You take that back, Alan Moore is a god."

Oh, no no, you misunderstand me. Alan Moore is great. I wouldn't call him a god, (Watchman is great and well characterized and everything, but it's of above-average novel quality, Mr. A feels like pages and pages of author tract covering up the illustrations like a good version of Ctrl-Alt-Delete) but he is a damn good writer. I just find it unfortunate that everyone in charge of superhero movies is trying to be Alan Moore, and they aren't very good at it. Particularly everyone in charge of the Nolan DC movies.

"Absolutely fucking not. It's better than The Dark Knight Rises (But that's because TDKR sucks). Batman Begins and TDK (whitch itself is one of the best in the genre) are way better superhero movies."

I'd argue that Nolan's movies are mostly just very well-executed versions of not-very great concepts. Nolan did what Nolan does in every movie: Everything is gritty, dark, and world-endingly important.  Granted, a lot of these Nolan tropes are justified within the movies' narratives, but that isn't really what batman is. Yes, Batman stories are dark, gritty, and world-endingly important, but the stories have elements of whimsy and fun to them, things that make you feel like you're experiencing a wild tale of adventure and action where all parties involved have some undeniable element of insanity, whether they're conscious of it or not. It allows you to be deeply engrossed in what's happening while reminding you that you're also supposed to be having fun.

The villains of the comics become empty shells surrounded by the hype of the story, which carries them around on the big ol' wave of "Stop questioning this character and just admire what a goddamn magnificent bastard they are!" and all the love was sucked out by creators who think that "Remarkably badass" serves not only as a marvelous setpiece, but also as a pullitzer-worthy plot device and an amazing character trait. You stop wanting to learn more about them and the fantastical world they're in and care only about the shit they're going to try and pull next. They're no longer clearly established as personalities and are instead thrown into the setting as badasses who pursue their goals with all the finesse of a writer who just learned what their motivation was off their characters' wikipedia page.

Now, this would be just fine, if they replaced their character's lost personalities with something new, but they don't. In fact, one of the few reasons Christian Bale really has any special characteristics that set him apart from generic, base batman, is probably because they gave him three whole movies to develop a quirk or defining personality trait of some kind. That quirk seems to be that the batsuit makes him sound like Hulk Hogan waking up after getting his tonsils removed. They try to achieve emotion and fun in entertainment by doing it the CoD way: Everything is dark and depressing and shit. In fact, the humorous parts seem rather off-tone, as if it's in denial about the fact that it's actively trying to make you feel like you're watching something gritty and badass, but it knows deep down that you know it's all very bland and very blended together to the point where you no longer care about anything other than the explosions and the music.

Alan Moore was dark and gritty and badass, but that seems to be the only thing that the writers of superhero media seem to have learned from him was that darkness and grittiness and badassity sell tickets to theatres. Alan Moore could afford to be dark and gr-etc. etc. because his dark, etc. etc. worlds were more than just dark, etc. etc. They were actual worlds, inhabitted by actual characters. They got you interested and emotionally invested. The tone actually changed sometimes. Batman tried to do Moore, but ended up flanderizing itself into plain asskicking, monotonous combustion, and unflinching, ridiculous levels of seriousness with each passing movie. Christopher Nolan was to Batman a much less extreme version of what The New 52 was to Lobo: Trying to view the character's world through a pair of shades so gritty that they didn't even bother to melt the silicon sand into a lense-shape and missing the point of those characters and their worlds entirely.

GoG, in stark contrast, is self-conscious about the fact that it's a superhero movie. It's campy on purpose, in (what is purely subjective, apparently) a charming and silly way. It's an action movie that does action, but also does comedy. The characters are really characters, and it takes place in an expansive, interesting universe that this time, actually makes you interested in learning more about that universe. It was enjoyable to watch for more reasons than "skrubs get rekt, gay cowboy is hardkoar, there is asploshun". I actually felt some vague stirrings of emotion whenever Groot blew up, rather than feeling some vague stirring of "Huh, that' was cool, I guess.) throughout the entire goddamn movie. It was clear that the guys who made Guardians put some mild effort into learning about what they were producing, but that shouldn't even matter in creating an engaging superhero movie. Tim Burton has the same amount of comic-reading experience as Nolan, but despite nipple armor, despite the fact that he sleeps upside-down on a pull-up bar or collects sets of armor, and that Jack Napier is a card-playing mafioso, or that Penguin lived in the sewers. or all the other liberties that were taken with Batman's story, 80s Batman still holds truer to the spirit of the stories and their characters, (and is more entertaining for it) than the "realistic " 21st century batman ever did. Nolan's Batman does one thing, and it does it well, and GoG does many things that work together beautifully. It tells a story that's genuinely pleasant to experience because it is a story. It's not the best story in the world, but by god, at least it is one, unlike any other superhero movie made, and most certainly unlike the oatmeal plot that was in Batman. It went places, it did new things, it had a mood that actually worked to some effect. Of the two summer-fun action-hero-fests, I prefer Guardians. It had heart and character and explosions, whereas Batman just had hype and a deep-sounding screenplay and explosions.

But eh, I guess it's all how you look at it.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Oh, no no, you misunderstand me. Alan Moore is great. I wouldn't call him a god, (Watchman is great and well characterized and everything, but it's of above-average novel quality, Mr. A feels like pages and pages of author tract covering up the illustrations like a good version of Ctrl-Alt-Delete) but he is a damn good writer.

I think saying he's a "damn good writer" is an understatement. He's one of the best writers within comic books/graphic novels, basically ever.

I just find it unfortunate that everyone in charge of superhero movies is trying to be Alan Moore, and they aren't very good at it. Particularly everyone in charge of the Nolan DC movies.

I see what you're saying with this, that most people go for dark and brooding with the superhero movies, but that's basically switched at this point. All of Marvel is basically fun and lighthearted, and if Suicide Squad pans out, DC will go the same route, though a more dark comedy approach.

I'd argue that Nolan's movies are mostly just very well-executed versions of not-very great concepts. Nolan did what Nolan does in every movie: Everything is gritty, dark, and world-endingly important.  Granted, a lot of these Nolan tropes are justified within the movies' narratives, but that isn't really what batman is. Yes, Batman stories are dark, gritty, and world-endingly important, but the stories have elements of whimsy and fun to them, things that make you feel like you're experiencing a wild tale of adventure and action where all parties involved have some undeniable element of insanity, whether they're conscious of it or not. It allows you to be deeply engrossed in what's happening while reminding you that you're also supposed to be having fun.

You're right, Nolan's movies contain a lot of the same tropes, but if it weren't for The Dark Knight Rises, I don't think you could claim he's made a bad movie. The guy's damn good at what he does. There's a ton of Batman comics in which there's no fun or whimsy (a few of which are some of the most famous Batman stories: The Killing Joke, Grant Morrison's Arkham Asylum, Emperor Joker, The Black Mirror, etc.)

The villains of the comics become empty shells surrounded by the hype of the story, which carries them around on the big ol' wave of "Stop questioning this character and just admire what a goddamn magnificent bastard they are!" and all the love was sucked out by creators who think that "Remarkably badass" serves not only as a marvelous setpiece, but also as a pullitzer-worthy plot device and an amazing character trait. You stop wanting to learn more about them and the fantastical world they're in and care only about the shit they're going to try and pull next. They're no longer clearly established as personalities and are instead thrown into the setting as badasses who pursue their goals with all the finesse of a writer who just learned what their motivation was off their characters' wikipedia page.

Heath Ledger's Joker was an empty shell and had all the love sucked out? His performance was absolutely fantastic, and singlehandedly, overnight, became the definitive film version of the Joker. Not to mention critics and fans everywhere simultaneously stood up and said, "holy shit, comic books movies can be good!," and they were right.

Now, this would be just fine, if they replaced their character's lost personalities with something new, but they don't. In fact, one of the few reasons Christian Bale really has any special characteristics that set him apart from generic, base batman, is probably because they gave him three whole movies to develop a quirk or defining personality trait of some kind. That quirk seems to be that the batsuit makes him sound like Hulk Hogan waking up after getting his tonsils removed.

Pretty lame to go after the low hanging fruit of Bale's voice, when it's already been criticized to death, already.

They try to achieve emotion and fun in entertainment by doing it the CoD way: Everything is dark and depressing and shit. In fact, the humorous parts seem rather off-tone, as if it's in denial about the fact that it's actively trying to make you feel like you're watching something gritty and badass, but it knows deep down that you know it's all very bland and very blended together to the point where you no longer care about anything other than the explosions and the music.

Except there's so much more to the first two movies in the Nolanverse Batman trilogy. How about the performances, especially Ledger's, the costumes, the makeup, the dark humor as opposed to "so quirky" Joss Whedon-esque comedy that everyone seems to wank off to, nowadays. Or the fact that this is an absolutely excellent Batman adaptation (should've been trilogy) (at least until the absolutely gobshite that Rises was when it released).

Alan Moore was dark and gritty and badass, but that seems to be the only thing that the writers of superhero media seem to have learned from him was that darkness and grittiness and badassity sell tickets to theatres. Alan Moore could afford to be dark and gr-etc. etc. because his dark, etc. etc. worlds were more than just dark, etc. etc. They were actual worlds, inhabitted by actual characters. They got you interested and emotionally invested. The tone actually changed sometimes. Batman tried to do Moore, but ended up flanderizing itself into plain asskicking, monotonous combustion, and unflinching, ridiculous levels of seriousness with each passing movie. Christopher Nolan was to Batman a much less extreme version of what The New 52 was to Lobo: Trying to view the character's world through a pair of shades so gritty that they didn't even bother to melt the silicon sand into a lense-shape and missing the point of those characters and their worlds entirely.

Once again, I don't know why everyone is jerking off to status quo of the barrels of "funny" dialogue that gets spewed in basically every recent Marvel movie, when you can have comedy like the pencil scene in Dark Knight, that's at the same time brutal as fuck, but pretty darkly comedic at the same time. Not to mention a lot more subtle than the dialogue in Whedon movies that continually beats you over the head with "this is funny, right guys!?"

GoG, in stark contrast, is self-conscious about the fact that it's a superhero movie. It's campy on purpose, in (what is purely subjective, apparently) a charming and silly way. It's an action movie that does action, but also does comedy. The characters are really characters, and it takes place in an expansive, interesting universe that this time, actually makes you interested in learning more about that universe. It was enjoyable to watch for more reasons than "skrubs get rekt, gay cowboy is hardkoar, there is asploshun". I actually felt some vague stirrings of emotion whenever Groot blew up, rather than feeling some vague stirring of "Huh, that' was cool, I guess.) throughout the entire goddamn movie. It was clear that the guys who made Guardians put some mild effort into learning about what they were producing, but that shouldn't even matter in creating an engaging superhero movie. Tim Burton has the same amount of comic-reading experience as Nolan, but despite nipple armor, despite the fact that he sleeps upside-down on a pull-up bar or collects sets of armor, and that Jack Napier is a card-playing mafioso, or that Penguin lived in the sewers. or all the other liberties that were taken with Batman's story, 80s Batman still holds truer to the spirit of the stories and their characters, (and is more entertaining for it) than the "realistic " 21st century batman ever did. Nolan's Batman does one thing, and it does it well, and GoG does many things that work together beautifully. It tells a story that's genuinely pleasant to experience because it is a story. It's not the best story in the world, but by god, at least it is one, unlike any other superhero movie made, and most certainly unlike the oatmeal plot that was in Batman. It went places, it did new things, it had a mood that actually worked to some effect. Of the two summer-fun action-hero-fests, I prefer Guardians. It had heart and character and explosions, whereas Batman just had hype and a deep-sounding screenplay and explosions.

As above, the first two Batman movies did a hell of a lot more than just one right. I think a film should be judged based on acting, the quality of the screenplay and dialogue (if any is improvised), the cinematography, make up and costume design and all of the other technical aspects that generally get ignored, and not just how funny you think it is or how sad it made you feel (especially since making a person sad isn't actually that much of an achievement, since emotional manipulation isn't hard to pull off, anyway), but what do I know?

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

"I think saying he's a "damn good writer" is an understatement. He's one of the best writers within comic books/graphic novels, basically ever."

Eh, he's a good writer. I'd rather judge his books than the guy himself. He's amazing at what he does, but it's not like he's a god, and he's not the best of the best of the best, no person is. He's just written some really good books, and they happen to be my favorites. It's much healthier for everyone involved if you say something along the lines of "Steam's great" rather than unironically shouting "PRAISE NEWELL!" as if affordable PC gaming was something without which society ould collapse suddenly and violently.

>.>

<.<

"I see what you're saying with this, that most people go for dark and brooding with the superhero movies, but that's basically switched at this point. All of Marvel is basically fun and lighthearted, and if Suicide Squad pans out, DC will go the same route, though a more dark comedy approach."

That's not really it. I mean to say that the tone is best when it's balanced and capable of fluctuating. Unlike most Marvel movies, GoG has real downsides and the heroes' victory isn't really a foregone conclusion. There's real conflict, and actual emotions. In Batman's case, there is no fluctuation. You don't care about what's going on because there never really was anything good or worthwhile to begin with. First, it's a crapsack city, then it's a crapsack city being attacked by a mixed bag of psychos. There's no real change there, from a psychological or storytelling perspective.

"You're right, Nolan's movies contain a lot of the same tropes, but if it weren't for The Dark Knight Rises, I don't think you could claim he's made a bad movie. The guy's damn good at what he does. There's a ton of Batman comics in which there's no fun or whimsy (a few of which are some of the most famous Batman stories: The Killing Joke, Grant Morrison's Arkham Asylum, Emperor Joker, The Black Mirror, etc.)"

I wasn't saying they were bad movies, I was just stating why I think Guardians of the Galaxy is better. And what are you talking about!? Emperor Joker is about the Joker after gaining Mr.MDsghsadjghsdlkahgoraw's omnipotence! There's nothing but fun and whimsy! The same thing goes with Serious House especially! The Killing Joke, the Blakc Mirror, they all have fun and whimsy! It's very dark, machiavellian, and morally reprehensible, but it's still there. That's the point. You're aware of the fact that you're reading a comic book, and you're okay with it because it's awesome. The antics the heroes and villains of Gotham get up to are absolutely absurd, and these stories revel in it. Yes, they introduce heavy doses of reality, but that grants perspective. That's what makes comic books immersive, and you can experience and explore the bizarre and amazing world that Batman lives in... Which is why running it through a depressing brown filter and replacing exploding jack-in-the-boxes, pogo-stick-murders, disco-dancing serial killers, and other interesting things in favor of some machines out of CoD: Advanced Warfare to show you what it'd be like if Batman were really real just isn't as entertaining or fulfilling to watch. If I wanted to watch characters I'm a fan of kill the shit out of each other in "gritty" psuedo-realistic ways, I sure as hell wouldn't have watched a Superhero movie, I would've spent my money on the new Expendables instead.

"Heath Ledger's Joker was an empty shell and had all the love sucked out? His performance was absolutely fantastic, and singlehandedly, overnight, became the definitive film version of the Joker. Not to mention critics and fans everywhere simultaneously stood up and said, "holy shit, comic books movies can be good!," and they were right."

The definitive one? Right. As in, he's the Joker that everyone remembers, because everyone's seen him recently. He was the best out of all 2 of the bigtime cinematic Jokers. Yes, Ledger's performance was fantastic. His performance. That's the key word, there. Performance. He was brilliant, the Joker himself was a simple anti-character. Nothing, except his precious performance, sets him apart. There is no new spin on the joker in this iteration, except for the fact that he's even less of a character than he ever was. Sociopathy incarnate, yes, but we don't ever get to learn about him. We don't ever get to see his breaking point or his motivation, he's just another implacable madman that pursues anarchy for some reason. Batman speculated that it was probably because he was a lonely man who just wanted to prove that humans are all animals like him, but he practically laughed in his face for saying such presumptuous shit, and went on to try and blow up the boats anyway. The Joker has no features other than being a pathological liar this time around. He isn't human, he has no origins, he's just a force of nature. That's incredibly badass, but nothing else. There's no depth to him, the Joker is merely one-dimensional, like most of the characters in the film. The Joker is the Nolan movies personified, in a way: Nothing new, really. Just incredibly badass.

And yeah, this was definitely the movie that made all the moviegoers and critics agree that superhero movies can be fantastic. It's not like there were any Batman movies before this that also came with with a bunch of nerd controversey before and after their release, but by and large had everyone considering it a good movie... I bet, if such a movie as this actually existed, that it probably would've been the movie that let all the publishers and big budget movie makers know that Superhero movies really are worthwhile pursuits, and brought the genre into the mainstream as a whole... But I'll choose to believe that Nolan's were the first and only batman movies, because I too don't want to remember that dark, dark period in between the 2nd Tim Burton movie and Batman Begins...

"Pretty lame to go after the low hanging fruit of Bale's voice, when it's already been criticized to death, already."

But that's precisely the thing! In every other well-written portrayal of Batman there is, they take the time to truly establish defining parts of his personality. Be it anything as deep as his fears to as trivial as his sense of humor (or lack thereof) every story brings to light at least something above the generic Batman formula. And yet this Batman has had three whole movies to develop, and the only thing new or remotely interesting we've learned about this guy is that he sounds like Bob Dylan doing an impression of Riddick. Just like the Joker, he's badass, but nothing else.  The low-hanging branch merely connects the rest of the bunch.

"Except there's so much more to the first two movies in the Nolanverse Batman trilogy. How about the performances, especially Ledger's, the costumes, the makeup, the dark humor as opposed to "so quirky" Joss Whedon-esque comedy that everyone seems to wank off to, nowadays. Or the fact that this is an absolutely excellent Batman adaptation (should've been trilogy) (at least until the absolutely gobshite that Rises was when it released)."

The performances were amazing. The costumes were elaborate. The makeup was very convincing. It's very good. Ra's could clearly capture the larger-than-life presence of Ra's, Bale, silly voice jokes aside, perfectly captured Batman's attitude, and was an amazing Bruce Wayne, Heath Ledger was Heath Ledger, but the characters were all very one-dimensional. They were good actors, but the characters weren't really characters. They didn't sound like living, thinking beings, they sounded like writers just saying shit that they thought was vaguely characteristic of them and/or looked good on a screenplay. They may as well have been writing, "Hey, I'm Batman. Are you Ra's al Ghul?" "Yep." "Alright, just checkin'."

They were excellent actors, there were excellent costumes and makeup, but it doesn't matter if you give Pavarotti and the two other tenors electric guitars to play face-melting solos and go on to belt out the most glorious rock opera that has ever been belted out as they burst forth from the grave in a magnificent blaze of holy light and pyrotechnics displays: If you make them sing the phone book, it's going to sound like the goddamn phone book, no matter the execution.

"Once again, I don't know why everyone is jerking off to status quo of the barrels of "funny" dialogue that gets spewed in basically every recent Marvel movie, when you can have comedy like the pencil scene in Dark Knight, that's at the same time brutal as fuck, but pretty darkly comedic at the same time. Not to mention a lot more subtle than the dialogue in Whedon movies that continually beats you over the head with "this is funny, right guys!?""

I'm not trying to argue the merits of either kind of humor, since that's purely subjective. The point is that Guardians has an upside. Having an upside makes you care about what's happening, that's why Game of Thrones was fun to read for about one or two books, that's why Shakespearean tragedy is a fun read. They're very dark, crapsack worlds, but you have time to get to know characters (where in Batman you get al the time in the world, but learn nothing new except whatever you may project onto these comparatively blank slates from prior knowledge from other media) and learn about how the crapsack world is really worth fighting for. You can feel for and with these guys because you know about how it is in this realistic, relatable world. A story that has no conflict isn't interesting, but niether is a story that's all conflict. The dark humor was very effective in establishing how bad the bad guys were, and how badass the good guys, but that's all it does. That's the recurring theme here: it's badass and nothing else. When there's good times for more than a few minutes, you get to see another equally human side of the characters that makes them interesting, and gives actual impact to the low points, (which, in turn, gives actual impact to the high points) but in Nolan's Gotham, it's ALL low points, ALL the time, so it comes off as bland sequences between extended periods of awesome action and magnificent bastard villains being magnificent. The pencil trick felt like it was just another thing that happens literally all the time in Gotham. In fact, in a place like that, I feel kind of incredulous that the bodyguard wasn't expecting that shit.

"As above, the first two Batman movies did a hell of a lot more than just one right. I think a film should be judged based on acting, the quality of the screenplay and dialogue (if any is improvised), the cinematography, make up and costume design and all of the other technical aspects that generally get ignored, and not just how funny you think it is or how sad it made you feel (especially since making a person sad isn't actually that much of an achievement, since emotional manipulation isn't hard to pull off, anyway), but what do I know?"

A movie is a storytelling medium, so it should be judged on the story it tells and the manner in which it tells this story. Guardians did a whole lot of things right too, but at least the story was worth watching more than once. The technical details are all well and good, but I'm sure it was also very difficult to make Aliens: Colonial Marines, and look what that effort accomplished. The entire point of a movie is to tell a good story, (or at least tell a story well,) and Guardians does it better. Yes, making a person feel isn't an achievement, but the thing is, it was all the "emotional manipulation" of all those explosions and Hans Zimmer 'BWAAAA's that made me feel like it was, in fact, the greatest superhero movie series of all time. But after watching 2 for the third or fourth time with and without company, I realized it just didn't hold up to scrutiny, and in hindsight, neither did Batman Begins either. Guardians is an action movie, and it's not much more, but it's a very good one, and it at least doesn't pretend to be anything more.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

I liked it, however the Labyrinth remake will suck.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Yay! Goblin king is back! Hope that it will be as good as the original. But I don't think it will be. :<  What was your favourite scene from labyrinth? Mine was when Sarah went to the junkyard there .You know, the place where the Junk Lady tries to brainwash her?

Ps I don't know why this changed from David Bowie to Labyrinth.

 

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Because David Bowie was IN Labyrinth.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

David Bowie COMPLETED Labyrinth. He added just the right kind of "freaky" (maybe a little too much "freaky", though, when you realize that he actually made all of Toby's baby sounds during "Magic Dance") the setting needed to give it that eerie, otherworldly feel.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

Oh ok didn't pay attention to the credits when I was a kid hehe.

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

So Labyrinth is getting a remake.

4 years ago

............................................................................

LEARN; LEARN DAMN YOU!

.............................................................................