MOVIES ...

[ACMILAN1983]

The new Star Wars Force Awakens trailer is out...and it looks awesome:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGbxmsDFVnE

[janesill]

So, did anyone enjoyed Batman vs Superman?

[ACMILAN1983]

I plan to watch it this coming weekend. I'm hearing a lot of mixed stuff, but all of it makes me even more curious.

[ACMILAN1983]

Watched Batman v Superman today and was left wanting to watch it again immediately. I get why people hate it, or why it's divisive, but I thought it was outstanding. I won't go into detail about my thoughts on it, partly because it'll take more time than I have and partly because it will need to discuss spoilers, but what I will say is I totally get where they were coming from when making the film. I'm also a big fan of some of the influences on it, notably The Dark Knight Returns and to an extent The Watchmen and I felt this was very much in tone similar to that era of comics in general. That may not sit well with a lot of people, especially with the fact that Zack Snyder directs the film. Again, I'm a fan of Snyder, but he's someone I've grown to respect a lot over time, although initially I did think he was more style of substance (my opinion has changed over time). However, to many he often seems to be seen as a direct whose style is loud and obnoxious and is all style with no substance (I hugely disagree with this, but each to their own).

I think ultimately, if you have any interest in this film, just watch it. I saw the critics were very hard on the movie, the public seem less so, but what it seems to come down to is everyone is coming out with their own interpretation of the movie. From this view, I honestly feel it's more akin to an arthouse film than a big action blockbuster (not that the film is lacking in this regard). What I will say is don't go in expecting a superhero flick that's anything like the Marvel cinematic universe, if you do the difference will be jarring, almost like comparing Schindler's List to Inglorious Basterds. Both are set in WW2, but frankly beyond that are incomparable. Oh and I wouldn't recommend taking kids, I saw a few parents with 5-10 year olds in the cinema and I swear those kids will have nightmares for a few nights.

As I said, I loved this film, but it isn't surprising this is getting mixed responses and I'm well aware that I tend to differ in taste to often what the majority of fans like. For example, some of my favourite comic book adaptations are V for Vendetta and Watchmen (also by Zack Snyder) even moreso than Avengers and and Captain America: Winter Soldier. I also thought Man of Steel (another divisive film) was by some distance my favourite interpretation of Superman on the big screen, even more than the first two Christopher Reeves films, which I am a big fan of as well. Another one is Avatar, while not a comic book film, it was a film that I watched loved and then discussed my interpretation of, commenting that I felt it was philosophically entwined tightly with Hinduism, while most of those I discussed it with, along with many reviews I've seen thought it was pretty shallow CGI fest that was entertaining, but little else.

[reza]

To me a movie like this could be good when watching it but as a premise, idea or plot it is pretty absurd almost. Superheroes are not facing off against each other in any way, they shouldn't.
I felt kind of the same about Episode VII, the move is good and all, but the idea of evil again after the way Episode VI ended is pushing it.

So as a plot, no, it doesn't appeal to me.

[somedevil]

After popularity of shows like Breaking Bad and The wire and House of Cards, game of thrones etc, the mainstream audience's standards of plotline are higher than before. I rarely feel that the typical Hollywood Blockbusters deliver on that note. Especially those god awful summer releases.

At this time I gotta say, TV shows are trumping Movies. Still, people will never stop going to cinema halls, movies will always have their charm.

[ACMILAN1983]

Reza I'm not sure I totally understood what you meant, but I'll give my two cents on why a conflict between these characters does make sense imo.

Batman and Superman are like two sides of the same coin. While they ultimately achieve results of saving or protecting people, their motivations and ideologies don't match at all, which is often the root of their conflict. Superman is someone who is always focused on saving people and looking for the best in humanity. Batman, on the other hand, has a primary focus of stopping criminals and is pessimistic or a cynic by nature. That's why when discussing these characters, you will often hear of Superman as a saviour, while with Batman the discussion is often about his war on crime (the word "War" often being prevelant).

Therefore, more often than not, Superman works within the law and will try to work within the social, political and justice systems. Batman, having pretty much no faith in these systems, works independently outside of the law, taking much more extreme measures to bring his form of justice. He doesn't believe in the system (at least not in the state Gotham is in), just the odd indviduals such as Jim Gordon.

Taking this from the perspective of the two characters, Superman's view of Batman would often be that he's pretty much a criminal, just one that's targeting other criminals. After all, whenever you hear about Batman, it's usually about someone (or something) that's left a trail of half dead criminals with broken bones and injuries for the police to clean up. Unless you know the person doing these things, it looks like nothing more than a criminal doing some horrid stuff.

In Batman's view, Superman is part of the system that he views as failing individuals such as himself (having seen his parents murdered). More often than not, they will see common elements of their goals when they eventually "understand" each other, but they'll always have a slightly fractured relationship, as they simply view the world from different perspectives and are trying to live out different and conflicting ideologies.

On Force Awakens, I haven't actually seen it yet so can't comment on it.

somedevil, I both agree and disagree. I agree that these days TV has actually surpassed film in terms of storytelling because as a medium they have time to develop the story they are telling. However, I don't think standards for plotlines are necessarily higher and instead, people have become more accustomed to stories that have give more tangible or literal meaning. Basically, people want much more handholding through a story, whereas in film by it's nature due to the short length, complex stories often have to leave it to the viewer to interpret elements in their own way, filling in the gaps so to speak. That isn't to say I think stories in TV shows don't have anything to interpret with different perspectives or are dumbed down in any way for audiences, but how you consume and come to conclusions are significantly different.

There's a good example in Batman v Superman, as there's one really important scene in the film which a lot of critics have lambasted as a lazy plot device. These comments kind of leave me wanting to tear my hair out, because on a literal level this isn't a strong foundation in the plot, but I interpreted it in a totally different way, seeing the literal action that took place as symbolic of something far deeper and far more profound that strikes at the very core of who the characters are. This is why I said you have to watch the film and take away what you will from it, because everyone is consuming this in different ways. That's also why I'd compare this more to an arthouse film, than a typical big blockbuster. If it was tv, there would have probably been a hour long episode just to explore/explain this whole moment in the film.

I agree though that there's definitely a place for film. Certain directors, Christopher Nolan, Zack Snyder and JJ Abrams are directors who imo make cinematic experiences to be consumed as films, but those experiences wouldn't work in TV format. Likewise, a fantastic tv show like Breaking Bad would never work in a 2-3 hour film.

[reza]

Sorry for the confusion Dev, thanks for the explanation. I meant to say it is difficult to accept either as a villain of any kind, but your explanation makes it better.

In a similar way it is is difficult to accept that evil exists at all because Episode VI had a such a good, 'definitive' ending to all evil.

[ACMILAN1983]

No problem reza, yeah I think it tends to be common perception that comic book characters are just heroes with funny costumes and are always doing good. If you think about it though, a lot of the characters were created around the 40's, Batman and Superman both in the 30's, meaning you've got 70 odd years of history with these characters, often with stories relevant to real life ongoing events and with numerous writers, many of which have grown up with the characters. That means that there are varying pieces of literature regarding them, many of which contain mature and complex themes.

Even when they were first created, superheroes had depth that many of us wouldn't have guessed. Superman for example was a creation of a couple of Jewish immigrants and represents the American dream for immigrants given he's an alien from outer space. Wonder Woman was even more bizarre, the creator being in favour of the empowerment of women and was involved in the creation of the lie detector (her golden lasso basically being the same). Without going into too much detail, the creator was also into S&M and those themes were also commonplace in the comics.

[ACMILAN1983]

Finally watched Star Wars: The Force Awakens today and loved it. What really impressed was JJ Abrams has created a very modern version of Star Wars, but tonally and direction feels very much traditionally Star Wars. Unlike what was done by Lucas with the prequels, where he expanded the lore and universe, but for many lost the heart of the original trilogy, Abrams has created something that feels very close to the original trilogy. I won't delve into spoiler territory for those who haven't seen it, but I will say it all feels very familiar.

In terms of film direction, I think Abrams shows his quality as a director. The film is honestly beautiful, with the practical and special effects feeling very balanced and some shots are just breathtaking. At the same time, if you were to watch this after watching episodes 4-6, you wouldn't think it feels at all out of place. More so, in terms of the swift pacing and the unique switching between scenes, it all feels very much at heart like the old trilogy.

In terms of characters and actors, those who like the original trilogy will feel comfortable with the returning cast. They all feel like their old selves, only the characters have aged appropriately. Han Solo is a particular standout in this regard, at times leaving me gleaning with joy at the fact I get to see one of the most iconic characters in film history appearing fresh on screen. You can tell they made a huge effort to get the character right, despite the age. A film which I thought didn't do it half as well was Indiana Jones 4, where Indy felt kind of lacking or Die Hard 5 (even 4), where John Mcclane felt nothing like the original hero.

What's even more impressive imo is how well the new characters and cast fit in. They're all great, really likable characters and the actors do a great job playing them. What was great was seeing the actors play the roles with the same energy and slight campiness that was evident in the original trilogy. Daisy Ridley and John Boyega have brilliant chemistry together, Adam Drive who plays Kylo Ren is great in the role and I had a lot of love for Poe Dameron played by Oscar Isaac, he's a character I'd love to see more of. I can understand if people weren't the biggest fans of the main villain, but I thought he was a very interesting character.

That isn't to say I think the film was perfect, there were a handful of moments that left me thinking "that makes no sense" or "that wouldn't happen!", but honestly that's not what Star Wars is about. It's a popcorn flick that has a little something for everyone that you just lose yourself in the moment to. It's about having fun and being something that can be enjoyed multiple times, with cool and hugely entertaining characters who people see themselves in or dream of being.

I predicted pretty much everything that happened in this film as I was watching it and it played out almost exactly as I guessed it would. However, I couldn't care less about that fact, because it was a super fun Star Wars film, one leaving me giddy like the original trilogy, with a sense of nostalgia, but also enough of a fresh take for me to not feel that it was just copying the old films.

I feel great in that I've recently watched 2 films (BvS and Force Awakens) that I absolutely love. The cool thing is, I got exactly what I wanted from both. In this, I got a fun, slightly campy, but awesome action flick that I can have great fun with repeated viewings. With BvS, I got a serious comic book film in tone with the classic comics/graphic novels that ultimately shape what comics I enjoy the most (predominantly from the 80s era, with a little 90s stuff thrown in), that I can't wait to rewatch multiple times, but for very different reasons. I understand BvS may not be what everyone wants, especially in an era where comics and the movies inspired by them are tonally completely different to much of the classic 80s stuff, but I'm couldn't be more happy that I got a film like those books, some of which are some of my favourite books ever.