Star Wars: Entering an uncivilized era

[Myrddin]

Speaking of murderers, that Superman! I can't believe he killed Zod in Man of Steel.

 

Yes, I think he totally needed to do this within the context of the movie. Just throwing fuel on the Batman derail fire.

[sifth]

13 minutes ago, RumHam said:

It's because "Batman killed too many people!" is one of the only complaints about Batman V. Superman that can be refuted.

To be honest, I was probably more upset with Zack Snyder's take on Superman. The whole character just reminded me of Homelander from The Boys, if I'm perfectly honest.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Well, Harvey's at least, sure (as I said earlier, I'm not even sure I'd call Talia's death "homicide").  Which, again, means Bruce wasn't legally responsible and there's no real reason to cite them as an example of Nolan's Batman being overly violent.

Sure. If you think firing artillery at the vehicle vehicle she's in, which causes the vehicle to crash, is a triviality. 

And whether it's justified or not, it's not exactly compatible with the "one rule". 

55 minutes ago, sifth said:

So somehow my comment, about comparing the Justice League to Solo has devolved into some weird crap about Batman being a murderer, lol

This place is strange some days.

I'm having trouble figuring it out myself at the moment. 

[DMC]

Just now, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Sure. If you think firing artillery at the vehicle vehicle she's in, which causes the vehicle to crash, is a triviality. 

Yes, firing artillery at a vehicle is a triviality when (1) that's not what caused her death and (2) the reason for doing so is to try to stop a nuclear bomb from going off.  If you agree the "homicide" was justified, I don't know why you continue to whine about inconsequential things.

3 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

And whether it's justified or not, it's not exactly compatible with the "one rule". 

Again, his actions causing Talia and Harvey's death are absolutely compatible with the "one rule."  

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yes, firing artillery at a vehicle is a triviality when (1) that's not what caused her death and (2) the reason for doing so is to try to stop a nuclear bomb from going off.  If you agree the "homicide" was justified, I don't know why you continue to whine about inconsequential things.

You clearly aren't seeing this conversation from my point of view. 

His artillery barrage totally killed the driver of that truck. And is what caused her death (because it's what caused the crash).

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

Again, his actions causing Talia and Harvey's death are absolutely compatible with the "one rule."  

I must have missed the part where he says, "I don't kill... unless I have to. Hrrrr"

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

1 hour ago, Myrddin said:

Speaking of murderers, that Superman! I can't believe he killed Zod in Man of Steel.

 

Yes, I think he totally needed to do this within the context of the movie. Just throwing fuel on the Batman derail fire.

 

1 hour ago, sifth said:

To be honest, I was probably more upset with Zack Snyder's take on Superman. The whole character just reminded me of Homelander from The Boys, if I'm perfectly honest.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/IDGNYvFLkJKLK/200.gif

[Kalbear]

Honestly the misplaced discussion about batman morality is still better than the constant idiotic and wrong rehashing about how tlj  doomed star wars.

[sifth]

13 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

 

https://media4.giphy.com/media/IDGNYvFLkJKLK/200.gif

I'm being perfectly honest. Zack Snyder's take on Superman, feels like the guys one bad day away from turning on humanity. The fact that Snyder is alright with Superman, murdering normal humans and destroying large portions of cities, is also an issue. It's even worse in the  extended/original cut of the Justice League, where he has Superman being BFFs with Darkseid and helping him destroy the world and kill the Justice League, in all of the future scenes.

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

And is what caused her death (because it's what caused the crash).

This is like saying the police putting up road spikes and a fugitive - with a nuclear bomb that's about detonate btw - driving into the spikes then crashing "caused" her death.

10 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I must have missed the part where he says, "I don't kill... unless I have to. Hrrrr"

I don't know about you, but to me it's basic common sense that causing the deaths of people while stopping them from shooting an 8 year old boy or blowing up a nuclear bomb doesn't "break" that rule.

[Raja]

13 hours ago, mormont said:

I feel that blaming TLJ for Solo's box office is largely just making excuses for Solo.

Correct. If Solo was a good movie, and was well written, it would have done well, but unfortunately it was neither of those things. The writing in particular was quite poor and the set pieces were entirely forgettable and when you hire someone like Ron Howard to direct, you're guranteed to get completely average direction.

A heist movie in the star wars universe is an excellent premise, but they made a bland film in which Han Solo was the least interesting character. It's mediocre.

[IlyaP]

9 hours ago, Myrddin said:

That's because you've been watching the wrong franchise: Star Trek.   

I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE! *wiggles finger*

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

This is like saying the police putting up road spikes and a fugitive - with a nuclear bomb that's about detonate btw - driving into the spikes then crashing "caused" her death.

The correct analogy would be police opening fire on the vehicle, killing the driver, causing the vehicle to crash and killing the passenger. It would absolutely have "caused" her death. Whether or not it's "justified" is another question.   

18 minutes ago, DMC said:

I don't know about you, but to me it's basic common sense that causing the deaths of people while stopping them from shooting an 8 year old boy or blowing up a nuclear bomb doesn't "break" that rule.

Basic common sense says that it killing absolutely does break the "no killing" rule. Whether or not it's "justified" is another question.  

 

[Jaxom 1974]

34 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

Honestly the misplaced discussion about batman morality is still better than the constant idiotic and wrong rehashing about how tlj  doomed star wars.

Not Star Wars...Star Wars: Solo...

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

34 minutes ago, sifth said:

I'm being perfectly honest. Zack Snyder's take on Superman, feels like the guys one bad day away from turning on humanity. The fact that Snyder is alright with Superman, murdering normal humans and destroying large portions of cities, is also an issue. It's even worse in the  extended/original cut of the Justice League, where he has Superman being BFFs with Darkseid and helping him destroy the world and kill the Justice League, in all of the future scenes.

Heh. Almost had me there. You're good you.  

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

1 minute ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Not Star Wars...Star Wars: Solo...

Hey, I tried.

[Derfel Cadarn]

13 minutes ago, Raja said:

Correct. If Solo was a good movie, and was well written, it would have done well, but unfortunately it was neither of those things. The writing in particular was quite poor and the set pieces were entirely forgettable and when you hire someone like Ron Howard to direct, you're guranteed to get completely average direction.

A heist movie in the star wars universe is an excellent premise, but they made a bland film in which Han Solo was the least interesting character. It's mediocre.

Dredd was a very good film. Still flopped. Disney banked on TLJ energising audiences to want to see Solo. That backfired spectacularly, even SW fans held back. Largelyin part because its an enjoyable but not great film.

On the other hand, the Bumblebee prequel film did well despite the flop of The Last Knight because its aesthetics were Gen 1 faithful, giving it the look Transformer fans wanted

 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

The correct analogy would be police opening fire on the vehicle, killing the driver, causing the vehicle to crash and killing the passenger.

No, it's not.  That analogy is misrepresenting the intent and result of "opening fire," which only forced the driver to either stop or crash.

5 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Basic common sense says that it killing absolutely does break the "no killing" rule.

LOL, hohkay.  Yes, your basic common sense is much different than mine if you think the rule apparently means even justiciable "homicide" is breaking it and Batman must behave like Gandhi.

[Raja]

13 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

 Disney banked on TLJ energising audiences to want to see Solo.

Maybe? But I think what Solo hurt it more than anything else was that it just wasn't a good movie. If it was, whatever ill effect TLJ may have had, it would have been able to overcome it. I just thinking bringing TLJ into the conversation around why Solo failed is weird, I would blame like 10 other things first before thinking it had anything to do with TLJ.

Imo, we're giving a huge pass to a completely mediocre movie, and that is strange. If people want to like Solo, good for them and I'm all for people liking what they like ( For example, I love Prometheus and would rate it as better than Avatar, but that's for the avatar thread), but using TLJ to explain why Solo didn't do great doesn't make sense to me, and serves only to give it a huge pass.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

13 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Dredd was a very good film. Still flopped. Disney banked on TLJ energising audiences to want to see Solo. That backfired spectacularly, even SW fans held back. Largelyin part because its an enjoyable but not great film.

Alita was better then Captain Marvel. Into the Spider-Verse was way better than NWH. This wasn't reflected at the box office. Perfect examples of the importance of franchise momentum.

13 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

On the other hand, the Bumblebee prequel film did well despite the flop of The Last Knight because its aesthetics were Gen 1 faithful, giving it the look Transformer fans wanted

 

Maybe not he best example. Bumblebee was very highly rated and did reasonably well at the box office, but it's also the lowest grossing TF film. I think people were just feeling a bit of fatigue at seeing giant robots kick the hell out of each other.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

9 minutes ago, DMC said:

No, it's not.  That analogy is misrepresenting the intent and result of "opening fire," which only forced the driver to either stop or crash.

Maybe that's what the cops were doing. Shoot out the tires or put one in the radiator and they hit the driver instead. The result is the same. The causation is the same. And Batman didn't put down spike strips. 

9 minutes ago, DMC said:

LOL, hohkay.  Yes, your basic common sense is much different than mine if you think the rule apparently means even justiciable "homicide" is breaking it and Batman must behave like Gandhi.

For the third time, "Whether or not it's "justified" is another question."