thephantomstranger

Battle Royale was a surprisingly intense and uncomfortable film that delivered the brutality of the situation in an appropriately messy way.

I thought Hunger Games was fine for what it is and I'm certainly interested in where they seem to be taking the sequel but it had its own over the top concepts like mutant bear dog things or whatever those oddly explained creatures were at the end.

Wow did someone portray Kirby in Argo?

I read the Comics Alliance article a while back and it is certainly a very neat bit of history.

I don't think enough focus is put on the whole not a straight white male lead as the damning evidence that a Wonder Woman movie would not be enough of a financial success to be green-lit in the first place. It's the same reason that Marvel continues to ignore the very concept of a Black Panther movie. Every other problematic element of Wonder Woman is absolutely trivial in the face of the crippling reality of demographics.

Making something of quality is simple compared to justifying it to the wider audience that funds it.

@BlackShadowCat said:

Why don't they just make a CGI movie instead of casting big names who know nothing about the characters? I think Computer animated movies can be more visually appealing then live action ones at times.

Knowing about the characters or the source material before being cast has very little to do with the quality of the acting or directing.

OT: Hadn't considered Rain Johnson but I'd hope to see something more interesting out of him then a pre-scripted big budget movie.

This sounds like an excellent high concept. This seriously needs to get funded for so many reasons.

I'm going to go with no on this one.

Doesn't mean it's perfect. Nothing is ever perfect.

{Resisting urge to talk about Watchmen}

So...um...why don't you guys have a wiki page for Multiversity?

I'm just going to assume that it's got something to do with the style guide around here.

So yeah Multiversity is basically all those characters in a separate continuity coming together to form Grant Morrison's version of the DC universe.

I spoiled myself on what happens because I don't read Spider-man, or anything as of late due to being straight up broke, because I heard Matt Wilson talk it up and now I want to see what they do with it.

Specifically I'm interested because I've heard a lot about the very beginning of the character being an excellent treatment of character development for the time but I can't just go back in time to experience that. This whole thing has a similar set up right down to Spider-man being an evil scientist type initially. Just from the Comics Alliance article I spoiled myself with it all seems very optimistic but paradoxically disturbing at the same time.

@OutlawRenegade said:

Why does he not use (a weaker version of) Scarecrow's fear gas? It seems like it could be useful in his war on crime.

Which is more effective? the fear that is artificial and drug laced or the fear that feels as real as possible?

Why does he not use Mr. Freeze's cryogenic chemicals and gadgets?

He kinda does sometimes. Arkham City and that one episode of Justice League are good examples.

Why does he not use Poison Ivy's plants to create immunities for himself or plant-based weaponry for combat?

He likely does study the plant stuff for immunities but plant weapons might mess with his aesthetic.

Why does he not use Firefly's jetpack?

In 70 years has the character not used a jetpack?

Why does he not base his vehicles on the vehicles that Gearhead drives?

Don't know that character.

Etc. Etc. Etc.?

Also, why does he not use his Bat-summoning device from Batman: Year One more often?

Because Batman is a swell guy and doesn't want to collapse the medical industry on a bat bite bubble.

Also a lot of these things while not "technically" supernatural/super is such a stretch technology or aesthetic wise that it wouldn't serve the character very well to say that he's only human and then spring a giant magical venus fly trap that shoots ice from its mouth.

Not to say that Batman shouldn't interact with that stuff just not become it.

Never understood the need to have him say the "line" the exact same way as it's been uttered since it's first been uttered. It was refreshing the way they had it in the movie and gave it a sense of fluidity.

Also I'm in agreement that this is likely just scenes with Peter's parents in the past.