Sliders.tv → Posts by Informant
For the record, I do always enjoy our back and forth here as well. We obviously have different points of view and I think we've been doing this long enough to argue our points without anyone feeling like they're being attacked. It makes the movies more fun, I think.
Eventually, we will agree on a movie that we like. 
The trailer was pretty good. And it reminded me of another problem! When what's-his-name bad guy went to drown that other bad guy in the laundry room sink, the dude's mouth was totally above the sink line. He could have hung there forever and been totally fine if he wasn't sloshing around in the water.
Okay, but now you're just making stuff up and saying that it's my opinion. I have always argued that the frustrating thing about The First Avenger was the fact that it could have been a really good movie, but they threw it all away in the end in order to set up The Avengers.
I finally saw Winter Soldier this weekend. It was an okay movie. Certainly better than The Avengers, the Thor movies or Agents of SHIELD.
-- me, September 21, 2014
In September 2015, I commented on how the Ant-Man trailer looked bland. Fast forward and I'm saying that the movie was actually pretty fun to watch.
I'm constantly talking about Daredevil being good. I've talked about Agent Carter being fun to watch. To say that I give all DC movies 10/10 and all Marvel stuff 0/10 is simply not true. I am judging each movie on its own merits. In some cases, I've been pleasantly surprised (as you've pointed out, I was not totally on board with Man of Steel before I saw it).
And finally, when I summed up my thoughts on Suicide Squad, I said...
The movie isn't my new favorite superhero movie of all time or anything, but it has taken its place with the other DC offerings on my list of strong comic book movies that I will go back to again.
Which part of that sounds like another 10/10? In fact, I probably wouldn't even give BvS a 10/10. We've discussed a lot of the points that we disagree on, which makes it sound like I'm always defending every aspect, but I've also made it clear that it wasn't a 10/10. A great movie, sure, but I liked Man of Steel better.
The fact that we disagree on these movies means that I could say the same thing about you. You're constantly slamming the DC movies, saying that Man of Steel didn't do this right or BvS didn't do that right. I could imply that you have a bias and that you're going out of your way to slam the movie. But I understand that sometimes, people just have different points of view. I don't think that all of you have some devious plan to hate the DC movies and love the Marvel movies. It's just your opinion. It's not *wrong*, but I do strongly disagree with it.
You say that Civil War went to great lengths to show that neither side is particularly right, but that's not true. By the end of the movie, Tony is wearing villain clothes and recruiting a kid into a war that he has no business being involved in. Batman v Superman spent the entire movie maneuvering the characters into a place where their battle toward the end would make sense. Civil War didn't. The airport scene is a complete mess of storytelling. Here we have two teams of heroes completely destroying an airport, but why? They're not enemies. Half of the time, they're joking around with each other. They're not trying to hurt each other for real, which makes the whole scene completely stupid. It's one thing to cause damage while trying to save lives and stop a bad guy who wants to hurt people, but destroying an airport when half of the characters don't even seem to know why they're fighting each other makes absolutely no sense.
And then we have the Vision (or is it just Vision? I'm not clear on that) almost kill Rhodey, while actually trying to kill Sam makes the whole thing even more nonsensical. His laser beam thing missed the guy who has next to no body armor and hit the guy with the top of the line body armor, nearly killing him... yet they tried to play it off as though he wasn't actually trying to kill Falcon.
My brother told me that he thought the movie should have been called Thanksgiving Dinner: Family Squabble. That's about right.
The movie is a disjointed mess. The whole Sokovia Accords plot goes nowhere, because by the time the airport scene happens, the teams aren't even fighting over that anymore. They don't explain what is in that book of new rules. They don't explore the repercussions. They don't go into Scarlet Witch's actions and debate over whether killing 11 people while saving a 100 people in that same explosion justifies what she did. They breeze by the actions taken in past movies but never dig into this very reasonable debate, because that wouldn't have a big flashy airport scene where they all battle each other. Instead, they move on to the Bucky story, which actually has very little to do with the Sokovia Accords.
And if you want to talk about me contradicting myself, let's talk about your comments on BvS. You made comments about the lines of dialogue where it was made clear that they were fighting in abandoned areas, or that people had gone home for the night. You said something along the lines of it being a childish response to criticism of MoS. Yet in Civil War, we have the same thing happening. In fact, much worse, we have lines of dialogue trying to make light of or distract from weak storytelling (again I reference the "Turn him into a glider" line before the Vision tries to kill Falcon). They keep trying to explain that these people aren't actually trying to hurt each other, and yet they're destroying an airport! At least when Batman and Superman were destroying that empty building, they were actually engaged in real combat. Batman actually wanted to kill Superman.
My criticism of the movie is based on what was on screen. They had two plots which did not come together, and neither of which were properly explored. They tried passing them off as one plot, but it didn't work. They jammed as many characters into the movie because it would look cool, but the truth is that most of them had no business being in the movie, and taking them out would have only strengthened the arcs of the characters who did belong. They wasted time and energy on high-concept battle scenes when what they should have been paying attention to was telling the legitimate character stories, which would allow real conflict to arise naturally.
That final fight with Cap, Iron Man and Bucky could have been amazing if they had focused on the characters instead of the action. If they had developed the conflict between Tony and Bucky more naturally throughout the movie... we all knew that Bucky killed Tony's parents. There was no need to put that reveal at the "shocking twist" point in the movie.
There was such a better movie to be made here. Two better movies, actually. The Sokovia Accords would have been a great plot to explore, with Scarlet Witch's actions being the centerpiece for the debate. But neither of those better movies were made. Instead we get two halves of different movies, which don't work together to tell one complete story.
Watch the scene where Steve kisses Sharon and tell me that that moment was natural and earned, and not just awkward and gross. Tell me why it's fair to criticize Batman for not discovering Clark earlier, but it's not fair to criticize Bucky for not putting his hands over his ears and humming while that dude was trying to activate him.
What I'm criticizing this movie for is having the very good chance to make a very good movie, and throwing it away in favor "wouldn' t this be cool?", which is the same mindset that took down the Avengers movies.
Imagine this movie without hot Aunt May or Tony going to get Spider-Man. How much damage does that actually do to the actual plot of the movie? Imagine the movie without Ant-Man, or Hawkeye. How much damage does that actually do? Imagine the movie without the SWAT team, helicopter and police cars as Cap, Black Panther and Falcon chase Bucky. How much damage does that do? Imagine no airport scene. How much damage does that do?
With BvS, most of the damage to the movie came from taking scenes out when they should have been kept in. That's not just my opinion, it's what most people are saying about the movie at this point. But you can take a big red marker to the Civil War script and walk away with a movie that's shorter, cheaper and stronger than what we got on screen.
As I said, these are my opinions. They're formed by my brain, watching the movie from my point of view. We obviously have different points of view and I'm cool with that. You should be too.
My solution: Don't have Spider-Man in the movie. He was only in it because someone thought it would be neat, but his presence presented more problems than it was worth. He is supposed to be an intelligent person, yet he goes into a battle against known heroes with absolutely no comprehension of what he is doing or why. His character could be deleted from the movie with only beneficial results.
As a whole, I'm not sure about him. Hot Aunt May is weird. Squeeky-voiced Beiber-Man... I know some people liked him, but I think he is the weakest big screen Spider-Man I've seen.
Look, we all know that when it comes to the Marvel movies, I'm not a huge fan. I think they're low quality in general, and the films are secondary to the merchandising. It's Disney. That said, I have also proven that I am capable of saying good things about them. I liked Guardians of the Galaxy. It was fun and entertaining, with a solid cast. I liked Ant-Man, because Paul Rudd is a fun guy and he carried the movie. I liked the first Iron Man. I liked the second Iron Man, but less. I didn't hate The First Avenger until they sold it out in order to build up The Avengers, rendering the movie useless. I didn't hate Winter soldier. When you get right down to it, I don't think these movies are great movies, but I only actually hated The Avengers movies, Thor 2 an Iron Man 3. And if we count TV shows, I only strongly dislike Agents of SHIELD, while thinking Jessica Jones was weak. But Daredevil is awesome.
So I am not saying this because of some weird need to hate on Marvel, but...
This movie was crap. Start to finish. Up and down.
It wasn't a story, so much as a series of high-concept scenes. Many of those scenes could be easily removed without damaging the plot. In fact, it would probably strengthen the plot. I was literally cringing from the useless stupidity during the airport battle, which was pretty much the selling point of the movie.
Character motivation was weak and inconsistent. Conflicts and character arcs were once again thrown in because they sounded cool in theory, while not helping the actual plot. The car chase after finding Bucky shouldn't have involved police. It should have been a much smaller, more personal conflict... as much of the movie should have been. Instead, we have a movie with heroes fighting heroes, all because none of them want to stop to have an actual conversation. And it's not because they're not willing to talk. They're talking plenty. They're just using those moments to make attempts at humor, rather than say "We have proof that Bucky wasn't responsible..."
I hate the trope of having entire conflicts revolve around the unwillingness of the writers to have characters speak. And yes, there was a moment in Batman v Superman that was guilty of this same thing, but it was a moment, not the entire plot of the movie.
It's impossible not to compare the movies, because the plots are very similar in many ways. In BvS, we have Superman being forced to answer for his supposed crimes. In this, we have the Avengers doing the same. Except, as they showed footage of those battles, I couldn't help but think it was a stretch to blame the Avengers in most of those cases. In the battle of NY, the Avengers stopped our own government from trying to nuke the city for some unknown reason.
In BvS, everything went into explaining why those characters were fighting and how the plot made sense. Everything was about the bigger story (especially the Ultimate Edition). There was reason and purpose and consideration and real character development. Civil War didn't bother with the little things like that.
So much motivation in this movie doesn't hold up. There were obviously scenes which the writers came up with and put on a board somewhere. Concepts for fights and ideas for cool shots. And the plot was secondary.
At the end of the movie, we have a huge fight between Iron Man, Cap and Bucky. For the life of me, I don't even know why Bucky was fighting. He supposedly carries this guilt. He is supposedly a good guy. Yet, he doesn't want to own his actions and it doesn't make sense! The scene would have been so much more dynamic and emotional if he didn't want to fight it out. Iron Man would be trying to kill him. Cap would be trying to save him. It would be this highly personal battle all around, but also a physical display of Bucky's internal struggle. Instead, we get another bland and generic fight scene. It's big and super, but mean nothing.
A lot of the movie seemed like it was yet another Tony Stark emotional meltdown, this time caused by Pepper leaving. I swear, the guy has been an emotional wrecking ball since Favreau left.
The movie suffers from a lot of the same problems as other Marvel movies. The big action scenes look like scenes from any useless action movie. The fight scenes usually don't let the choreography stand on its own, relying on silly tricks (shaky cam, while speeding up the footage, and throwing in useless CGI!) to sell a fight that honestly could have held its own with just good choreography. The CGI was pretty weak in some spots. There was no sense of weight or gravity to a bunch of the scenes, making it look like a cartoon. The lighting. The directing. But we've been through this. This is the stuff that they always cheap out on, but this is the stuff that turns a silly b-movie into a real film.
Was Chris Evans wearing a ton of makeup? He looked weird in some scenes.
The romance between Cap and Sharon Carter was awkward and kinda gross.
The bottom line is, there was a real story to tell here. There were some great character moments that were right there for the taking. There was emotion and humanity. And the people making the movie shot it in the head as they went about the business of plotting a big action sequence or bringing in as many characters as possible, whether they added to the plot or not.
This was easily the worst of the Captain America movies. It was about the same level as an Avengers movie. I'm kinda bummed. This movie felt more depressing to me than BvS, because it was all so senseless (and not the intentional way). Good guys destroying an airport and legitimately trying to kill each other (well, some of them. Some were apparently just doing it for the sake of goofing around) for no reason is so much worse than Superman causing damage while trying to save the world.
And people might tell me to lower my expectations, because this is a movie that an eight year old is going to. But with the amount of bad language, arms being blown off and good guys trying to murder their own friends, I don't see how this is a movie for kids. The PG-13 rating standards have really changed over the last several years.
I would like to see that.
I wonder how long the divorce would take as well.
Plus she's probably still pissed off that the dems gave Obama the 2008 nomination. She and Bill have spent decades manipulating and scheming and playing politics, and then Obama walks in with about an hour of political experience (though decades of experience within the political machine, working with radicals, etc) and takes it from her.
She always thought that she had to at least appear to be qualified for the job. How annoying must it be to find out that she wasted all that time?
I got Civil War from Redbox. I will watch it tonight. I still find the commercials strange and baffling, but hopefully the movie will actually make some sort of sense. We'll see!
I just finished watching the season 1 finale of Arrow, so I'm halfway through the series. I'm not sure that I'll be totally finished by the time season 3 starts on October 5, but I should be a good way through the second season at least.
I have to say, the first season finale was really solid. It was a good culmination of what had come before it. It felt organic and honest (aside from the casting of Barrowman... I never liked him in this role). The death of Tommy was really an emotional moment. The island flashbacks were really true to the concept of the island in the first place. I remember why I actually enjoyed watching this show when it first aired!
I hope season 3 is as good as season 1... when season 3 premieres... October 5th.
I agree that Hillary Clinton won't drop out. Her reasons for running have nothing to do with working for America or Americans, and it is all about herself and her ego. She would rather watch this country burn than drop out.
I never went with the Parkinson's theory. People went there because she was asking questions about a Parkinson's drug in one of her emails, so I don't blame them for going there. But I think it's something more like a stroke, which can result in seizures and many other symptoms. Her behavior at times, laughing at inappropriate moments and not getting the context of a situation, reminds me of my father at times. An imbalance of medication could easily cause her to act out of it, as we have seen on numerous occasions. Obviously, a stroke can have an impact on memory, which we know has been an issue with her.
It could be some other neurological issue, but there has definitely been something wrong with her for a very long time now. Even when her doctor released a statement the other day, he was very careful to say that she hasn't been diagnosed with anything else *this year*.
The media is a mess. They report on the stories that will push the narrative that they're trying to tell. Most of the news outlets will not play up problems with national security, the economy, healthcare, etc. simply because Obama is in office. If they report on those stories at all, they breeze by them. The press is a big problem in this country. It is not serving the purpose that it was supposed to serve. It is not keeping the politicians accountable to the people, it is acting as propaganda to help cover the asses of the politicians that they like.
(for more on this issue and how I feel about the press, check out my Freedom/Hate series of novels, available now on Amazon!... I'm joking. It just felt like I was talking about my books for a second. :-) )
Anyone think that Ashton Kutcher might jump out at the inauguration and reveal that we've all been Punk'd?
Please?
But I mean... What did you *really* think?
The thing is, I wouldn't call it "exploitation" in the case of something like Chuck. Sarah was a spy who used her looks for the sake of a mission, but it served a purpose. The exploitation of Captain Awesome on the show was more blatant, but in his case, it was used for the comedy. He was the perfect spy type, but he was a doctor. Chuck was the perfect doctor type, but he was a spy. Nothing on the show was cheap and pointless like what Sliders did with Maggie.
The problem isn't sexiness. The problem is that in most cases, sexiness is used instead of creativity. The reason that you don't remember much more from that episode is that there simply wasn't much more from that episode. The flimsy excuse for a plot was just a means of getting to that slinky dress.
Chuck used Sarah Walker's sexiness quite a bit. From the Weinerlicious costume, to the Orange Orange costume, to the many bathing suits and tight dresses, they didn't shy away from Sarah's sexiness at all. But it wasn't the point of her character, or of any episode. It was a tool that she used when it would be useful.
Exploitation of sexiness is cheap, and viewers naturally reject that sort of thing. Seven of Nine didn't need to be in a skin tight outfit all the time. She was put in one that was specifically designed to accentuate every curve of her body for reasons that had nothing to do with plot.
As with anything in writing or producing a TV show or movie, motive is everything. The audience knows when you're taking them for a fool.
I was recently considering a project wherein I would rewrite some of the weaker Sliders episodes and see if I could do better with the same basic plot... But I don't think I have time for a big fanfic project right now.
I would like to do something new with my someplacethatiselse site though. It is just sitting there.
Dude, I have FIVE novels in editing (plus one that isn't mine that I'm helping on), and have covers and promoting to work on.
Okay, so we'll put that plan on the back burner.
That'd be cool... Someone make it happen.
Yeah, but it will now be sitting on the same shelf as The Flash. Great characters, great cast, high quality. They will need to seriously step up their game if they don't want to look like a Saturday morning series.
Being a family show doesn't mean that it needs to be crappy. Or that it should be written toward five year old girls alone. Very young kids can't even read the comics that these shows are based on.
Felicity served a purpose at one point. She was light and fun and useful.
Charlie never added anything to Supernatural. She destroyed every episode that she was in. She couldn't even die without ripping off Jenny Calendar's death.
Fine. She can be Queen of Hell... As long as it is never shown on screen.
Or referenced.
I think Sliders guests could do well at cons, but most of the stars probably have no interest. JRD does cons often enough for other projects, but I can't picture Sabrina going. JOC, maybe. Not sure about Cleavant.
I don't know if con organizers recognize the cult status of the show.
I think they should put Castiel in Hell, not as a king, but as a warden. It's supposed to be a prison, after all. He's exiled from Heaven, but could still serve that purpose in Hell, doing work for God. It'd be a good way to go for him, and it would solve a lot of problems. Without Castiel, the rest of the angels really don't seem to care about Sam and Dean at this point.
Charlie... I'm okay with the idea of her *being* in Hell. But making her Queen of Hell would just be highlighting the problem with her character. Nothing she does can be taken seriously. She's hokey and lame and sucks the life out of episodes. She should never, ever return. If they brought her back and not Jo or Ellen, I'd be pissed.
Maybe. But I want Crowley dethroned for keeps. He can be a demon on the show, but the throne room scenes and mustache twirling got old
I've read hints of what this season is going to bring us and it sounds really cool! Aside from Crowley and Lucifer and all that, it sounds like it is more human based and grounded. More horror stories. I'm really looking forward to it. Even seeing Mary again could add a nice dynamic to the show. For so long, the Winchester's have been forced to remain in their original forms, without starting families or changing their dynamic much at all. Mary could be a cool way to do that, but without fangirls getting upset about a woman being near the guys.
I wonder if she will remember meeting them in the past
It's true that they don't need amazing ratings on the CW, but just in terms of CW shows, do we expect Supergirl to be at the top of the rating list? I imagine that there will be a nice premiere, with people who never watched the show testing it out or some who left the show testing to see if CBS was the problem. But if the show is only as good as last year, will it beat The Flash, Arrow, Legends, Supernatural, etc?
I hated the idea of a British Superman. I still think it's a bit like an American James Bond. Plus it was around the same time as those headlines about Superman renouncing his American citizenship, so it seemed to be going in a bad direction. But he did a good job and he looks the part.
I don't hate Tyler Hoechlin as an actor, but he is wrong for this. His age is completely wrong. His build is wrong, and made worse by the casting of Jimmy Olsen. And the suit is just poorly made. The cape looks plastic. The seams just make it look like he is a kid wearing Dad's super suit. Also, the edges of the padding are visible in those shots.
http://tvline.com/2016/09/12/supergirl- … ere-photos
I just don't see it. He looks more like Superboy than a mature, experienced Superman. And the costume is horrible.
I'd love for someone to put together a Sliders panel at a convention or something. Even a podcast event would work, or a documentary. There is a lot of story to tell.
I can agree with that. They're supposed to get a fairly modest salary while in office, but they always seem to have way more money than they should. I wonder how that works.
Also, they shouldn't get to decide on their own salaries. Seriously!
It probably does. Reagan was almost 70 when he took office, right? I guess he proves that you can be older and still do the job, but I know very few people who are at their best when they're that age. At some point the balance of experience and physical capability is going to be thrown off.
We also need term limits for everyone else, but that is probably another topic entirely.
Obama was purposefully evasive when it came to his birth certificate. I don't think that was the fault of some crazy people, it was the result of his own actions. He made it an issue and then called people crazy for making it an issue.
With Hillary, we have video and photographs going back years, showing us that something is wrong here. She can't claim that people are irrational for wanting answers. Especially since she comes from a party that has spent decades insisting that Reagan was diagnosed with Alzheimer's while in office, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary.
I think it is very relevant as well. I also think that the excuses are a joke. They say that this was diagnosed on Friday, yet it is something that we have been talking about for weeks. Her needing to be held up is nothing new.
If there is nothing wrong with her, they should stop lying about it and hiding whatever the truth is. Obviously there is something that they don't want people knowing about, and it is serious enough that they can't hide it.
The episode is a prime example of the 1990's network motto, "sex sells". They bent over backwards to turn their character into a sex kitten, putting her in revealing clothes and having her slink around, simply because they thought that some 13 year old boys would get a thrill from it.
Sliders was far from the biggest example of this trope, but it is one of the bigger examples of what went wrong with the series by that point. Storytelling went out the window in favor of cheap sexiness and trying to cash in on popular movies (in this case, Species)
I just wonder if he would he as interested in seeing Sliders return in some way, the way Jerry or Tracy Torme have discussed it in the past. Would he want to be a part of whatever future Sliders has.
Hold on... I'm thinking...
I hear that Schmidt will refuse to acknowledge the election this year on New Girl. I may have to Schmidt this one out.
Movie Coulson is dead. TV Coulson is alive. They may be played by the same actor, but they're different worlds. People just need to give up on the idea that the movie and TV worlds are the same.
Daredevil does not live in the same world as Agents of SHIELD
Well that would have been a different kind of movie.
I don't know. A lot of people obsess over alternate versions and unused ideas, but I don't know what to do with that information.
Just watched Batman v Superman (Ultimate Edition) again. I still say it's a great movie. With people binge watching 10 episodes of a TV show on a regular basis these days, I don't get the complaint that three hours is too long. I would understand that complaint if they spent an hour retelling origin stories or wasting time needlessly, but I never feel like the story is being put on hold for the sake of fanboy jollies. The development of the plot is steady and always moving toward something important.
That said, it does feel like two movies in a way. By the time you get through the Doomsday fight, the Senate hearing feels like it happened ages ago. That is a good thing. The movie feels big and epic.
If the Republicans had rigged the primary, we would probably have Jeb or Christie running. They would present issues of their own, which wouldn't make the election a sure bet for them. At least now, they will blame Trump and "extreme" conservatives for the loss, making the establishment look golden in their own eyes.
But the truth is that a lot of Democrats voted in Republican primaries, and a lot of them voted for Trump.
I think it is a bit of both. We have video of her from years ago (2008?) saying that she has no interest in email after all of the investigations that she's been through. So she was thinking of ways of hiding her actions and emails, and I simply don't believe that she never understood what was confidential. How long has she been around politics? It doesn't take a genius.
But then, I also believe that she has a serious issue with her brain. I don't think that she is capable of being President... But that probably won't stop her from being elected. So, who will actually do the job?
So the head of the CW thinks that Supergirl will be a big hit for them. Maybe their #2 show. I'm just wondering how realistic that is. On the one hand, it comes with an audience from a bigger network. Even losing viewers, it should still have a following.
On the other hand, the show really isn't good. Next to The Flash or even Legends, its weakness will show more. The casting continues to be pretty horrible (I can't get over Jimmy being older than Clark). And to top it off, part of the press campaign seems to include having people connected to the show bash the big screen Superman, played by Henry Cavill. It seems petty and foolish, considering that these are people from a show that failed on CBS and had to aim smaller. It is about a month away and I'm not sure that I've seen any reason to believe that the show is turning things around or trying to he better.
If Supergirl stays exactly as good as it was before, can we really expect it to do better than The Flash, Legends, Arrow or Supernatural?
To be fair, Hillary obviously has some pretty serious neurological issues. So should she be blamed, or should we be blaming the people who got her to this point?
Dang, I was hoping to respond to the post about the Suicide Squad stuff, but it turns out that the video links work no better on my computer than they did when I tried them on my phone. I guess they've been removed.
I will say, I hope Leto isn't as upset as they're making him out to be. This reminds me of Tina Louise saying that she was tricked into signing onto Gilligan's Island because she was told that the show would be about a movie star stuck on the island... The show was still called Gilligan's Island, so she really should have known.
I'm sure that there's a lot of really interesting stuff with Mr. J that was left on the editing room floor, but he obviously wasn't going to be a star in this movie. He is neither on the Suicide Squad, nor the villain that they are trying to stop. There was no way that he was ever going to be anything more than a supporting character, and supporting characters are only used as much as they are needed. If he is very upset about this after having spent so many years in the industry, he really hasn't been paying attention.
It could happen, but I wouldn't take many of the plot rumors seriously at this point. Either way, there is a lot of ground to cover for this character, so it should be interesting.
I forgot to respond to your last post... I will do that when I get a chance.☺
But for now I'm just posting to say that it looks like Deathstroke may be featured in the new Batman movie...
https://twitter.com/BenAffleck/status/7 … 46245?s=09
That looks like a costume test more than any real filming, in my opinion. But it is definitely Deathstroke.
The fact that he got no street creds for Abed alone boggles the mind.
At least a good writer is getting work out of Marvel's death spiral.
I think that we can agree that this is obviously the end for their entire movie franchise. They'll probably have to start all over, if their company survives at all.
I mean, obviously it is a sign that the studio has no faith in their original writer, and they are now panicking over what they've seen of this movie. I hear they're turning to a cartoon company to help produce the final cut.
That's what this means, right?
(I am joking of course)
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v … gue-922508
Looks like Justice League Dark isn't dead after all! Suicide Squad brought magic to the DCEU, which surprised me. I didn't expect it so soon, and I expected it to be eased in before they really went there. But they just closed their eyes and jumped, which will make it that much easier down the line, since magic can be a hard sell, even for people who are willing to accept other comic book elements.
Ireactions, sit down before you click the following link...
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v … mon-922236
Deep breaths. Don't get too excited!
To be honest, the email thing is a farce. There's really not much there.
I'm going to have to disagree there. This is a big deal. Not only did she put national security at risk, but she put the lives of people who were helping us fight terrorism at risk. And there is a very real, solid chance that people lost their lives because of her unsecured emails. That is not a farce. And when confronted about her emails, Hillary pretty much just shrugs and plays the "I'm an old person who doesn't know how a computer machine works" card.
What she has shown time and time again is that she is not only incapable of holding a leadership position, but that when lives are lost because of her incompetence, she doesn't even have enough humanity within her withered body to pretend to care.
The press downplayed the email scandal because they want Hillary to win. No other reason. Had this happened to anyone who wasn't within the media's protective bubble, they would have been crucified. I think it is a mistake to downplay the level of incompetence and general lack of caring shown by this brain damaged woman. She isn't merely a bad choice for President. She is a monster, just like her whore of a husband.
Apologies for the strong language. I think it's needed to fully convey my disgust when it comes to the Clintons.
I guess we will have to wait and find out. I just really hope that they don't miss this opportunity.
I think that the Robin suit was enough for me. Much more than that and you need a Dick subplot with an arc of its own, or else it is just a long dangling thread, which wouldn't contribute to the story at hand. If it ever wound up in this already massive script, it would be the first thing cut.
I hope they don't skip Dick or make him the dead one. I think I read that the suit has been confirmed as Jason's. If they're smart, they'll keep Dick around somewhere. It's easy enough to explain his absence in BvS, since I imagine he isn't interested in speaking to Bruce at the moment.
I think the suit gave us a hint that there is a lot of history for this Bruce, which still needs to be explored. He wasn't just Batman, he was a broken Batman. I think they implied the Jason Todd death, which implies a lot of other history. It kept the door open for the upcoming Batman movie without directly referencing anything specific. I'm definitely curious to see what they do with it. They have a movie that is potentially very twisted and complex here... Not just with Jason dying, but Barbara being shot, Batman going crazy and beating Joker's teeth out... they could even go to the rape storyline with Dick. I mean, they could really tear into the idea of Batman and how is has torn the lives of the Bat-family apart. Was it worth it? Did they do what they wanted to do?
Batman could be trying to work his way back to them and show them what he has been working on with the Justice League. He could try to show them that it's still worth fighting for.
The kicker could be that Dick never really gave it up. Robin might have died, but Nightwing never did. Maybe he's even been working with Oracle. The only one no longer in the Bat-family has been Batman.
I think it'd be a shame to finally have a Batman at the right point in his career to include Nightwing and not go there. The way I imagine the upcoming Batman movie would have Dick out on his own after Jason died and Bruce went off the rails. As Bruce attempts to put his family back together (possibly including Batgirl) , we would get the story of how Jason died.
The question is, should Barbara have been another victim of his crusade, and now in a wheelchair? Or should she still be Batgirl?
I bet that a move to Monday would kill the show instantly
The fans of this show are really, really loyal. It had helped and hurt the show over the years. I am really looking forward to a more human season 12.
I could see that. I was thinking that he could be Nightwing, but he might be too old for that.
I think Jimmy Olsen was the ultimate in bad adaptation. They race swapped, while also completely reimagining the character in every possible way. And now when you question it, people assume you're just upset about his race. It actually irritates me when I can't just forget who he is supposed to be. It's one reason why the series as a whole is hard to swallow.
I think that adding new characters is fine, but if you remove a character that fans want to see, you're just making another mistake. Barry Allen and Iris West may not be on the Clark and Lois level, but comic fans still know them and will reject something that is not a proper adaptation.
I like Iris on the TV series, but it was a mistake to cast another black actress in the role, solidifying that one image. New Wally was rejected by fans in the comics, but they are possibly locking themselves into that rejected version on screen.
The whole thing is a mess at this point. They're trying to force diversity instead of just being diverse. They don't need to be trying this hard. It is just creating more drama than is necessary.
I don't think that it is racist. Comic book characters exist as images on a page. Certain elements of their look remain constant over the years because that is the only way for readers to connect to those characters. When they race swap, they remove everything that tells us who they are.
It doesn't always fail, but it fails more often than not. Race swapping is really no more viable than creating a new character. I think it does more harm than good, because it alienates the audience by showing them that the people creating the comic books don't respect the characters.
With TV shows and movies, I give a little more slack. I don't mind a black Perry White or an Asian Lana Lang (who was apparently playing white?). I just have to note that the redheads specifically are the ones that are swapped out. Maybe gingers don't sell well in foreign markets or something. It started off funny, but now it is just weird. I'm not going to stage a riot over it or anything, but it is weird.
Sliders.tv → Posts by Informant
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.