2,041

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

However, I think that you end up sacrificing the central theme of Justice League in favor of creating a movie where a bunch of people just come together because the movie needs them to come together. As it stands now, their coming together is what drives them to be better apart. And if you try to keep that emotional center in a JL movie after having each of them in a solo movie, you'd have to water down the solo movie and create an incomplete character arc for them.

Yeah, I just don't agree with this.  You're saying that nothing happened in any of Flash's/Cyborg's/Aquaman's lives that was worthy of a solo movie?  I just don't see that.

I think you're thinking it's going to be a paint-by-numbers origin movie, but it could be literally anything.  It could be the story of how Arthur found that fishing village and started being their protector.  It could've been a story of Barry growing up with his dad in jail, coming to terms with autism, etc, and then getting these insane powers.

Even if we got stories from all three that *don't involve superheroics*, then we'd know who these folks are.  And if we know who these folks are:

1. More time can be used telling the story because we don't have to be told who they are.
2. All the character moments have more impact.

2,042

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Then again, the Batgirl movie might be about Barbara joining Bruce as his first and only partner since Robin died. If this happens, it will be a continuation of his arc through his last two movies.

See, I can get into this.  Let's say that Dick was the only Robin and he died....that clears Bruce from any wrongdoing (and the filmmakers from touching on a *very* important part of Bruce's life).  If Batgirl is about a grown-up Barbara Gordon returning to Gotham for the first time since her childhood and working with her father....and meeting Batman, I think that could be cool.  It's sorta Barbara's arc in the Lego Batman movie, when I think about it.

The way I see it, if Dick is alive out there and Bruce didn't call him, Bruce is a terrible person.  If Bruce was trying to kill Superman, and Dick didn't call him, Dick is a terrible person.  And if Alfred didn't call Dick or tell Bruce to call them, then he's a terrible person.  So for the sake of the characters, I'd just prefer for there to be no Dick (Jason Todd was the only Robin) or for him to be dead.  It's the only way to clear everyone of, in my eyes, terrible wrongdoing.

If you're right and the call might've happened offscreen, then the writers are awful for cutting out a part that could've easily been Bruce's entire emotional crux of the movie.

*******

Everything else is sorta in that whole "personal preference" thing.  I get what you're saying about cutting off Flash/Aquaman/Cyborg's stories.  And I can see some merit in using Justice League as a launching pad so that they can hit the ground running in their own movies.  Barry now has the confidence to be the hero he wants to be - his life is starting anew.  Aquaman knows the value of trusting others and working as a team - that will drive him to face his Atlantean roots.

Victor......well, Victor was the worst part of the movie....which wasn't really his fault because it seems like the emotional core of his story might've been lost in edits.  And he's the one who's least likely to get a solo film at this point so there's that.

But I think if you carve out the stories in Justice League and create solo films from them....your story in Justice League can grow exponentially.

FLASH - I actually like a Barry that's a timid version of Clark from Smallville.  He has these powers, but his primary advantage is just being able to move so fast that people can't see him.  So he shows up, saves the day, and no one even knows he's there.  It can play into the fact that he's so fast that he doesn't really feel like he's on the Earth with anyone else.  Maybe it physically affects him (he stays sorta one half/step from the rest of the world so that he can speed up immediately if anyone is in danger).  The only time he slows down is to talk to his dad.

Over the course of the movie, he learns to control the speed, gets the courage to talk to Iris, and through his dad, decides to become a forensic scientist.

In Justice League, now he's his own man.  He's built the suit, he's taken down some criminals and he's made a name for himself.  But now he's standing beside these literal gods, and it knocks him back down.  How can he stand with these guys?  He wants to, but how can he?  He has this doubt because he still doesn't know how to fight.  And maybe, when Superman comes back, there's a scene where Barry thinks, "I'm the Fastest Man Alive.  It's what defines me.  If this guy is as fast as me but can also fly and punch steel and shoot lasers from his eyes, then what am I anymore?)

Instead of his solo movie being an extension of his journey, Justice League becomes an extension of his own movie.

AQUAMAN - You can do a lot of the same stuff.  Arthur starts in the same village, but now an Atlantean scout comes to find him to bring him home.  Maybe tie it to the World Engine in Man of Steel - it's destroying Atlantis.  So he has to face these two sides to himself and his mother and feeling abandoned and all that. And the movie ends with him in command of Atlantis and feeling good about his connection to the Earth.

Now in Justice League, he's not this lone wolf who decides to help.  He's a man torn between two worlds.  He has to fight Steppenwolf to defend Atlantis, but he also has this moment where he realizes that he's about to abandon the people he just spent a movie fighting to earn the trust of.  Can he do that?  Does he even want to?  And you can tie him in with Superman, who's in a similar situation.  He identifies with everyone else, but he has this destiny that seems so alien to him.

*****

The Superman stuff we are never going to agree on smile

*****

I started thinking about Steppenwolf and the villains, and I wonder if, in hindsight, they got the villains backwards.  What if the villain of Man of Steel was Steppenwolf?  You have to change some of the Krypton stuff around, but maybe Jor-El faught against Steppenwolf back on Krypton.  Maybe a war with Darkseid is what destroyed Krypton.  I don't know how you make it tie emotionally but let's say that's how they did it.

Steppenwolf shows up, tries to destroy the world, and Clark stops him.

BvS plays similarly.  Lex re-animates Steppenwolf instead of Zod.  And in the final fight, Clark still uses the Kryptonite spear, either because it's the strongest weapon available to him or because zombie-Steppenwolf was raised with Kryptonian tech. 

So in Justice League....Zod breaks out of the Phantom Zone (maybe there's still a scene in Man of Steel where Zod, having tried something illegal to try and win the war against Darkseid, gets sentenced there) and shows up on Earth to get revenge on Jor-El's son.  Only Jor El's son is already dead.  So he just decides to try and enslave the Earth.

Now now Batman's looking at a situation where there are three evil Supermen and no good one.  Diana maybe could fight one of them, but they're still outnumbered.  Bruce starts the team, but they realize they need Superman back.  They resurrect him, and how Clark can fight Zod.  You get this big payoff from the start of the movies that's been years in the making, and you get bad guys that are truly worth the risk of bringing Clark back.

Plus, with Zod's subcommanders, you get some fun fan stuff.  You get Flash vs. the speed of a Kryptonian.  You get Batman v Superman rematch with Bruce fighting a Kryptonian with no one holding back.  You get Wonder Woman vs. a Kryptonian.  You get Aquaman vs. a Kryptonian.  All these chances for the League to show how powerful they are up against these military-trained Supermen.

Could've been a whole lot of fun.

2,043

(431 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'd be okay with it being David Duchovny as a mentor to younger agents.  I don't really see any point in the show continuing as it is now without Gillian Anderson.  I'm also not sure the story would make sense, as things stand now, with Mulder but no Scully.

I'd end it.

I also think Carter is on record as saying that he's going to end the season on a cliffhanger either way. So look forward to that.

2,044

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Okay instead of using quotes, I'm just going to put stuff in bold and hope you get the idea.

On the Avengers model vs. the Justice League model

I still think there's some disagreement here on what I mean.  I completely understand where you're coming from, but you're still talking about "how the Avengers did it" vs. "the Avengers model."  The Avengers model is simply "Do a movie for all the main characters, and then do a movie where they team up."  Man of Steel, in effect, followed the Avengers model.  So did Wonder Woman.  So did Iron Man.  I know you don't actually like Wonder Woman, but they all followed the model of "tell a story about these people."

I agree that Avengers gets bogged down in setting up sequels, but that's not really what I'm talking about.  The First Avenger doing too much to set up the Avengers isn't a problem with the model itself - it's a problem with the movie itself.  If they'd done a "Man of Steel" film for Aquaman/Flash/Cyborg, you'd agree that that's better, right?  Because that's what I'm talking about.  If we knew these characters before we came in, we'd be more invested in what's happening.  Wonder Woman drops Steve Trevor's name without an extended flashback sequence because we know who he is.  The Atlantis/Barry prison/Victor and his dad scenes would've had a lot more weight if we weren't learning who they all were on the fly.

I feel like, because I watch the Flash, I pulled some of my emotion from that for the Henry Allen stuff.  For the Victor stuff....well, I just had to look up Silas Stone's first name so that's one problem.  I also know they cut a lot of the Cyborg stuff out, but you don't think he was in desperate need of a movie?

I said a long time ago, but I think WB could've made a cool movie where they introduced all three new heroes.  Sorta like a grindhouse movie.  Three 30-45 minute adventures setting everyone up.  It'd be super-unconventional, but at least we'd know. Even if they did an in-universe animated movie like "Gotham Knight" (before The Dark Knight was released).  Give us something.

It's like the Atlantis scene - you make a couple different theories on why the air bubble is used.  Imagine if, in Avengers, there had to be an extended sequence in Asgard so that we could understand where Thor was coming from, where he lives part of the time, who Odin is, how he can send Thor to Earth, what Loki and Thor's relationship is.....it'd bog down the movie.  They can explain certain things because we've been to Asgard.  We've seen Thor and Loki, how they grew up, and how they fell apart.  We've met Odin and know about his magic.  You can just catch us up with a line of dialogue.

The Flash

I'd completely forgotten about the Suicide Squad cameo, but looking back, it feels out of place now.  Barry seems, at least to me, like early Clark on Smallville.  The convenience store robbery seems more his style (and he was able to do that without his clothes burning off).  I rewatched the cameo, and it feels like a post-Justice League Barry.  Someone who's proved himself and has more confidence.

I know there's a difference between fighting a regular guy with a boomerang and alien monsters, but Barry (in Justice League) really flips out at the idea of even being on-location for the fight with the parademons.  He doesn't seem like the kind of guy who's been a hero long enough that he does quippy one-liners when he's with Digger Harkness. 

Again, if we'd had a Flash movie before, we'd know more about his character big_smile

Steppenwolf

He's not as bad as everyone is saying, but he was completely one-dimensional villain.  Another gray CGI person with no personality.  The only thing he brought to the table was that he was good enough to fight the heroes on his own.

This is another problem with having to spend so much time introducing characters - your villains suffer.  I don't even know if the movie would've had time for a character with any sort of backstory.

I don't think the movie was necessarily hurt by a bad villain (I like tons of movies without charismatic or interesting villains) because he was simply a catalyst to get these guys to work together....so, in that sense, he "fit the story" - but I can't imagine you're actually saying that Steppenwolf is a good villain by any means.

Bat-Family

The problem with "it might've happened off screen" is a huge problem for this character.  This is Bruce's family.  We got to meet Aquaman's family and Barry's family and Victor's family.  A huge part of this movie is about how Diana closed herself off because she lost her family.  A huge part of her story is about how desperate she is to get that back.  Superman is brought back because he has connections to other people.

If Dick Grayson is alive, Bruce has to make that call on screen.  Commissioner Gordon is in this movie.  Bruce has to call the man's daughter, if she's alive, and tell her that the end could be coming.  Same with Tim Drake, Cassandra Cain...all of them.  Again, Bruce goes on a suicide mission in this movie.  He expects to die.  Calling his family, on screen, is *crucial* to rounding out his character.

There's a moment in Max Landis' retelling of the Death and Return of Superman (I know he's got his own problems now and is probably a garbage human but get passed it for this point) where Bruce is about to go on a suicide mission, and Dick realizes that his father is about to die.  Dick swoops in to save Bruce before he does something stupid, fighting Bruce to make sure that he doesn't get himself killed.  When Dick looks down and says...."Dad....", it makes me tear up every time.  Imagine if Bruce had called Dick as he was driving toward certain death.  It would've added emotional weight.

No one called Bruce when he was fighting the darkness in BvS.  Bruce doesn't call anyone when he's confident he's about to die.  If there's a surviving Bat-Family, they're too torn apart to ever come back together and don't need to be mentioned again.  It's going to do irreparable damage to the characters.

On BvS Revisionist History

Its hard to really explain because I think the movie wants to treat BvS like it happened....the way you saw it.  The only problem is that it didn't happen that way for me.  Bruce keeps talking like Superman was a beacon for hope, but he was literally on trial for murdering civilians.  He was hated by many for what happened in Metropolis.  Bruce literally tried to murder him in the previous movie.

Superman's heroism and sacrifice might've been what eventually saved Batman, but it wasn't Superman's "beacon" that brought him out of the darkness - it was a coincidence.

I think BvS did revisionist history too.  We've talked for pages about how I can't imagine that Superman did enough to be universally loved in Metropolis after what happened at the end of Man of Steel.  it seems crazy to me that he'd have a statue that wasn't constantly being protested at.

Justice League wanted us to think that Superman was a loving, charismatic hero who was universally beloved when, on screen, he should, at the very least, be a very controversial figure who *tons* of people would be happy was dead.

Zack Snyder, at least to me, is showing me one thing and telling me another.

2,045

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

True.  I think about it like it's a standard job.  I don't consider things like Stephen Amell working on Ninja Turtles or anything.  But I imagine the "Arrowverse" show idea could give the actors whatever freedom they want.  If Stephen Amell was going to be the new Green Lantern or something, Oliver could not show up on the show for months and he could fit in his 20 episodes in some other way.  You could have long stretches where Grant Gustin carries the show while everyone is off filming movies, and then he's relieved by Melissa Benoist.

It's a crazy format, but it could work.  The 4-show, 13-episode, year-round format probably works the best.

Jan-Mar - Arrow
Apr-Jun - Flash
Jul-Sept - Supergirl
Oct-Dec - Legends

You could still sign people to 20+ episode contracts and it'd free up Gustin/Amell/Benoist for 7+ guest appearances on the other shows.  If it works out, you get a mini-crossover event.

2,046

(746 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Discovery returned last night.  Pretty exciting episode if you ask me.

But people were very upset about the (SPOILER) of (SPOILER).

2,047

(431 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It's pretty fun being an outsider in the X-Files fandom.  I just sorta watch the "My Struggle" episodes with a child-like "Okay! I guess this is happening now!" way.  Jeffrey Spender shows up and I think "Oh man, I thought he died at some point.  Maybe I'll look that up on the X-Files wiki".  And so I do that and Jeffrey Spender's page is convoluted and it looks like he did die but then was horribly scarred but now is back to normal and I just go "Okay, I guess this is happening now!"

Cigarette Smoking Man is back and seems alive and healthy and has a new name now and I thought he'd died like five times before but I just smile and go "Okay, I guess this is happening now!"

I watched My Struggle III having not seen a good chunk of the beginning of the series, a good chunk of the end of the series, and having forgotten huge blocks of the time when I watched the show religiously.  I watched Season 10 but couldn't remember what the cliffhanger was.  I just smiled like Sammy Jankis and went with the flow.

There are no continuity errors when I watch the X-Files because I don't remember enough and I'm not invested enough to worry about what's a continuity error.  It ends up making the show a lot more watchable.

2,048

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I wonder how much the 4-part crossover really screwed with everything.  But I sorta agree with the idea of limiting the number of superhero shows that run at any certain time.  I like TF's idea of cycling them throughout the year - you could even drop each show down to 13 episodes and run them one at a time with no breaks on one specific night/time.

I mean, heck, what if they got really crazy and did one show that ran 52 episodes a year called "Arrowverse" - sign each actor to a 20-something episode commitment and do it Justice League Unlimited style.  One episode, it's Barry and Cisco and Diggle.  One episode it's Black Canary and Killer Frost and Supergirl.  One episode it's Green Arrow and White Canary and Martian Manhunter.  Could be cool.

2,049

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I mean, maybe.  But if you're going to go with the Avengers "model" vs. the Justice League one*, I'd rather have solo movies for everyone before they meet.  Every scene could've had more meaning if we understood where people were coming from.  The Mera/Arthur scene could've been better if we knew anything about them.  Heck, the Steppenwolf/Atlanteans fight might've meant as much as the Steppenwolf/Amazons fight if we had any idea who those guys were (or what their power level was).  The Barry/Henry scene would've had more value if we were catching up with them (instead of meeting them both).

I mean, even small stuff....when Barry trips running, it'd either be a huge shock ("BARRY NEVER TRIPS, HE MUST BE TERRIFIED") or something we're used to ("Damn!  Just like his fight against the Reverse Flash").  Arthur getting the Trident.  Victor taking command of the Tank.  These could've all been cooler moments if we had any context for what we're getting.

Granted, this could all still happen....just, in reverse.  So maybe Barry *doesn't* trip against Reverse Flash because he's already fought against frickin' Superman.  But if we're talking about elevating Justice League, I think I'd rather know these characters going in.

* Not talking about quality of Marvel or DC....just the way their leads were brought together.  If we're being fair, Barry/Arthur/Victor are the equivalent of Hawkeye/Black Widow/Coulson/Fury in Justice League - we know them, but they're side characters more than stars.  Maybe that's how it should be for the first-ever Justice League movie (the Trinity is the stars and the others are supporting), but that's how it felt to me.

2,050

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Was Barry supposed to be on the autism spectrum?  I couldn't tell if they were going for that or him just being awkward.

I think the characters were good, but since these characters were just being introduced, I think they fell behind because we didn't get a full picture of them.  We got some parent drama with all three new characters, but it wasn't half what we knew about Clark or Diana because we got full movies with them.  You felt more when Diana mentioned Steve Trevor than you did when Arthur was talking about his mother because we have no idea what happened there.  We knew Steve Trevor and cared when he died.

So while we know Diana, we only sorta know Barry/Arthur/Victor.  I feel like we got the clearest picture of Barry.  I don't know if we really know much about Arthur except that he has a good time, he likes saying "my man", and that he doesn't feel like he belongs in Atlantis.  I know we'll get more of him in Aquaman, but if we're talking about *this movie*, then I still say that the three new characters were "guest stars" as opposed to stars

2,051

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

I was more distracted by Cavill's accent just after he was resurrected.

Yeah, I meant to comment on that.  What was up with that?

(Although I think that fight is the highlight for me.  Especially the Flash/Superman stuff).

2,052

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

I've seen Justice League.


I have thoughts.


But you'll have to sit through seventeen other half-assed posts that build up to my underwhelming comments about my thoughts... nah, I'm just joking. My posts aren't Marvel movies. But I don't have time to type them all now, so I will be back later.

Sounds like you want to talk to me about the Avengers' initiative.

Or should we just form a league of our own?

2,053

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Star Wars has never been about mysteries, and I think the bigger sin is setting up the mysteries at all.  I think Rian Johnson agreed with that, and he's stated as much.  He said if Star Wars is going to survive, it has to become something more than what it was.

The Last Jedi is divisive because it's a hard reset to what JJ Abrams did.  Which is why it's going to be such a problem when JJ comes back.

2,054

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Something I've been thinking about since I saw the movie a second time?  Does Rian Johnson hate the Force Awakens?  I feel like he took a lot of stuff from that movie and either openly made fun of it or snuffed it out.  Is it pretty consistent that people that liked TFA didn't like TLJ and vice versa?

Things I've noticed:

The Rey/Luke scene:
TFA - Treated like a huge deal/cliffhanger.
TLJ - Treated like a joke.  Luke throws the lightsaber away and walks off.

Anakin's Lightsaber
TFA -This is the key.  Why is it back after so long?  How did it get here?  Now that Luke has it, what will happen?!?
TLJ - Luke doesn't care about it.  Ends up destroyed.

Kylo Ren's Costume:
TFA - "Here's your new Vader!"
TLJ - Treated like a joke.  Snoke specifically says that the helmet and the costume is dumb, and it seems like Kylo did it on his own because he thought it looked cool.  Kylo destroys the helmet and never wears it again.

Rey's Parents:
TFA - A huge mystery.  Maybe *the* mystery of the entire new trilogy.
TLJ - They were no one.  Doesn't matter.

Maz:
TFA - This character knows everything.  Knows everyone.  She holds all the secrets if you know how to ask.
TLJ - She doesn't have time for this movie.  Get your deus ex machina somewhere else.

Hux:
TFA - Here's your new Tarkin.
TLJ - Except he's a total idiot.

Phasma:
TFA - She's a badass.  You'll see.
TLJ - Not really.  Maybe dead?

Snoke:
TFA - This dude is the ultimate evil.  Very mysterious.  Fear him.
TLJ - Wears a dumb-looking gold robe.  Cut in half.  He doesn't matter.

Rey:
TFA - Everyone loves Rey, and she's great at everything.  Always rescues herself.
TLJ - Luke wants nothing to do with her.  Suspects she might be evil.  She struggles with her training.  Has to be rescued by Kylo in the Throne Room.

Finn and Poe:
TFA - Finn is an insider with so much knowledge of the First Order.  Can use that to take them down, and Poe is the only guy daring enough to help him do it.
TLJ - Finn's plan is ridiculous and doesn't work at all.  Nearly gets everyone killed.  Poe's plans are reckless and gets tons of people killed.

Nostalgia:
TFA - Star Wars is the best!  Here's a reference!  And another!  Look, a bigger Death Star!  The Millennium Falcon!  Anakin's Lightsaber!
TLJ - "Let the past die.  Kill it if you have to."

2,055

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

One thing about DC - they put out amazing trailers.  Since seeing Justice League, I've watched a couple of their trailers multiple times.  The Suicide Squad's trailer was so good that it, for some, ended up ruining the film (because the trailer folks were asked to edit the final film).  And I still watch the final Man of Steel to this day.

I can't say the same for any of the Marvel/X-Men/other superhero films.

2,056

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

or the finale of Man of Steel lifted from the death-free Action Comics Annual 11 by Geoff Johns.

I've never heard this comparison before and googling it didn't give me much.  What happened in the comic version?

2,057

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

https://screenrant.com/justice-league-r … rner-bros/

Take it with a grain of salt, but this is potentially one reason why they didn't move the release date back.

2,058

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I listened to the Weekly Planet review.  Mason hated it but James said he had a lot of fun.  Even after all their breakdowns, I still agree with James.  It isn't a great movie, but it's a lot of fun.  Informant might not like this, but there's a Marvel quality to it.  You can tear apart something like Civil War, but at the end of the day, if you have fun...you don't want to. 

A lot of Mason's complaints were about the weird tonal shifts of the movies.  His complaints about Justice League were really complaints about the whole DCEU - which I think is fair in some ways and unfair to the movie itself.  I think some will disagree, but I think Justice League wants us to remember BvS happening differently that it did.  And once you accept that, the ride is a lot of fun and the universe makes more sense.

2,059

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, I was wrong.  Maybe very wrong.  The scene is pretty clear - Luke is reaching out (like Xavier) into Kylo's mind.  He definitely says it was on instinct that he drew his saber, and he's immediately filled with shame at the idea.

It's crazy, though.  Maybe it's sorta like the Mandela Effect, but I could've sworn it played out a little different.  Either way, I think it plays out in a pretty fair way to all the characters.  Presented as it is, it's very Rashomon.  To Luke, he was just sitting there peacefully when the boy attacked.  To Kylo, he was about to strike and he had to defend himself.  And the truth is somewhere in the middle.

The only question I have is about some of Luke's wording.  He says he was going to "confront" Ben - I don't really know what he means by that.  It's obviously late at night and Ben is asleep - why was the confrontation not done during the day?  What was the confrontation about?  What was Luke hoping would happen by confronting him?

And if he went there to confront him and found him asleep, was it there that he decided to reach into his mind?  And with all we know about Ben being torn between the light and the dark (as Rey sees), then how was Luke so horrified by what he saw?  Did he misread it?  Did he read Snoke's darkness and not Ben's?  Or, since there were no dark side users after Luke became a Jedi Master, was this simply Luke's first experience with a true dark side user and it was overwhelming?

I'm also wondering about Kylo's abilities.  Luke says that he slaughters the children and took some of them with him.  He also said that there were only 13 students at first.  So.....how'd that really go down?  Remember that we've seen Kylo in a handful of lightsaber battles, and none of them have been all that decisive.  He barely beats Finn, loses to Rey, defeats a couple of Imperial guards but needs Rey's help with the last one, and sorta draws with Luke.  So did the "dark" students overwhelm the good ones, and that's why they were slaughtered?  Were the other students, comparatively speaking, just weaker/younger?

Was Snoke in the minds of the other "dark" students as well?  Or did they join Kylo out of fear?  How is it possible that at least 25% of Luke's school was under Snoke's influence and he didn't realize it?  Or even if they weren't, was Luke such a bad teacher that the students were *very* easily convinced to slaughter each other and join Kylo?

****************

All that being said, I really appreciated the movie a lot more than I did the first time.  It flows a lot better when you know the pacing, and I think a lot of the characterization is really well done.  I might actually rank it above Return of the Jedi.

2,060

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Seeing this again today.  Gonna focus on the Luke stuff and see how it comes across.

2,061

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, it was a $4 matinee so maybe people were taking advantage of that.  Still Christmas vacation - there were some kids.

It was still top 5 as of last week, but I think the drop-off is starting.  The main problem is that the budget was so bloated (mostly due to reshoots) that it's going to be hard to make enough money on this.  Word of mouth might help (it being more kid-friendly than BvS helps), but it's such a steep cliff to climb starting so far behind.

I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't see another Justice League for a while.  I'd love to do a couple team-ups.  Maybe Flash and Superman.  Maybe Batman and Diana in some sort of mystery film.  Maybe a literal fish out of water story with Aquaman and Green Lantern?  But they should try and do smaller stories with less flaming wreckage.  In an inconsistent cinematic universe, that's the most consistent thing about it and it needs to change smile

2,062

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

No! I really, really want to see it and love it (though I have my concerns with it). It isn't a decision to not see it. It's just that I have the entire family in town, a book about to be published, an audiobook in production, work on a movie coming up, and I've spent the past month trying to get all of these plans in order.

Timing, not decision!

Note on this: I saw it yesterday in the middle of the day on a weekday, and there were a couple dozen people in there.  I know that doesn't sound like a lot, but the movie has been out over a month.  I 100% expected it to be completely empty.

2,063

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I've had some time to think about it, and I still don't really understand what people's problems with it were.  I don't even feel like ti felt like two different directors were working on it.  There was some comedy that could've been Whedon, but I went back and watched the first trailer for the movie (which would've definitely been Snyder footage), and it has the "Dressed like a bat.  I dig it." line - which is the same line of humor the film uses throughout.  I think this was going to be lighter either way.

I'm going to listen to the Weekly Planet's review in the next couple days - I already know that one of them hated it - to try and get some perspective on what they think went wrong.  But I feel like I'm not going to change my mind.

Few more notes:

1. Even though it doesn't feel choppy or two spliced-together movies, I do feel like a TON of stuff was cut out.  If you watch the first trailer, a lot of it isn't in the final film.

2. I know it's hard to judge this movie without comparing it to the previous ones - but on it's own merit, I think it's well done and fun.  I think if BvS had been this way, I think it would've been fine.  And BvS being so gloomy does help sell this universe's message.  I didn't love the road to get here, but now that we're here, I think it's set up pretty nicely.

3. Bruce's age and lack of powers is a major point in this movie - I wonder if they could sell Affleck on a mentor role?  They already alluded to a Hall of Justice.  What if Bruce became Oracle?  If all his scenes are on one set and most of them are behind a computer monitor or voiceover, would he be more likely to stick around?

4. Are we SURE that there's still Bat-Family around?  I get that Bruce might not call up Dick or Barbara when he's throwing a fit in BvS, but the world is in complete danger and he doesn't even mention them.  Not in passing, not to warn them...nothing.  Dick is literally a son to him in some cases, and he literally goes on a suicide mission in this movie.  At this point, I think it's counterproductive to have any of the Bat-Family in these movies.  There was a Robin, and he's dead.

5. I thought it was really weird that there were two no-name criminals at the start of the movie (one that Batman fights and one that Wonder Woman fights).  There are hundreds of actual DC villains that they could've used that will *never* be the main villain in any film.  I mean, make them Hush or Black Mask or someone.  Especially Batman villains - there should be a million of them, and they'd all be established by now.

6. Man, they are fast and loose with their superhero identities in this one.  I know we want them to all be friends, but they are *always* referring to themselves by their first names.  Bruce outs himself as Batman to Aquaman's village, Lois outs Clark in front of several Metropolis PD, and they call Barry by his first name when in the suit.  I don't know if Wonder Woman or Flash or Cyborg are even mentioned by name in this (or any other) film, but we know that Bruce and Clark want their identities to be a secret.  I'm not sure how they're going to resurrect Clark at the same time they resurrected Superman for people not to notice, but Clark is wearing the glasses and runs to change into the suit in the shadows at the end.  I guess they're trusting that none of those cops will spill the beans?  That the villagers are too remote to let anyone know that Bruce is Batman?

2,064

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Okay I saw it.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Its early but I think it was well done.  It was fun, and I think they did a pretty good job juggling everything.  Scattershot opinions.

- The mustache thing only bothered me because I was always looking for it.  I don't know if I would've noticed it otherwise.  I still can't believe they did that, but they did an okay job with it.

- It was short, but I liked the slight adjustments to Superman.  He wasn't as jokey as I was led to believe, but he seemed like a Superman without the weight of the world on him.  I wish they'd done the black suit, but the way they did it, the regular suit was better.

- The Marvel model is simply better.  When the Avengers got together, they were four protagonists joining forces.  In this movie, it feels like three protagonists (BvS is a Batman movie) with the three new folks as guest stars.  It was Bart/Victor/AC on Smallville....big-time heroes in Clark's show.  Nothing about the quality of either set of movies, and I'm sure DC would've done the same thing if they'd had more time.

- On that same note, they did feel like they were a part of a team and not individual heroes.  I realize that they're using this movie as a leaping point for Victor/Arthur/Barry, but I can't picture this version of Barry fighting, say, the Reverse Flash.  Again, I understand that that was sort of the point of Barry's character, but why'd he even bother with a suit if he's doing anything more than just nudging and running away?  I almost think Bruce should've made the suit if Barry was going to be this green.

- I know DC already has a lot on slot, but I'd watch an Amazon/Atlantean War movie.  I know part of that is in Flashpoint, but I'm talking a whole movie.

- Atlantis was also more bizarre than I would've thought.  Is the whole Aquaman movie going to be done underwater, and does Mera have to make one of those "talking bubbles" every time they communicate?  Or was that chamber underwater and the rest of Atlantis is open-aired?

- It was cool that we got a pretty good feel for all the heroes.  The stuff with Mera, Barry's dad, and Victor's dad was cool.

- Wonder Woman continued to steal the show.

- I don't know if Affleck was sleep-walking through the role, like I'd heard.  I think he did a fine job.  But he looked weird in several parts of the movie - I don't even know how to describe it - he looked doughy maybe? 

- It felt like a soft reboot at times.  Bruce was almost a completely different character than he was in BvS.  Superman too.

- It's weird that we got a Legion of Doom tease but not a Darkseid tease.  It was cool to see the Green Lantern in the flashback, but a cameo during the Steppenwolf fight would've been better.

- I liked that they had some parademon fight scenes, but the final battle was just the team vs. the villain.  Although I thought the villain was weak.

- All in all, I thought it was done well.  The most fun of the new films and on par with Wonder Woman.

2,065

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

Luke specifically says he felt Snoke in Kylo Ren's mind and the dark side and saw all the people Kylo Ren would kill, hence his igniting the blade. If you didn't understand that Force users are Professor Xavier-level telepathic, you may have misunderstood the scene and the dialogue.

No doubt about it.  I understand the Xavier reference better than the Force one so that helps smile

(For the record, I'm not one of the people who didn't like Last Jedi.  I liked it significantly better than Force Awakens and more than Rogue One.  I don't think the movie ruined Luke, but I'm simply speaking as someone who understands where they're coming from because of my fondness for the character.)

My only rebuttal for Luke feeling Snoke in Kylo Ren's mind is this:

1. Visually, I think it might've helped if Snoke had appeared to Luke in Kylo's room.  Especially since this is something that Luke sees with Kylo and Rey.  In fact, I think (again, visually), it would have been a nice parallel that confirms Luke's greatest fears.  It also would've given Luke a bit of an excuse for some people because it could be explained that Luke thought he physically saw Snoke as opposed to Force-feel him (I don't know if Luke could immediately tell the difference or not).

2. There's a disconnect between Luke's unending patience with Vader and his seeming lack of patience with Kylo.  I understand that you affirm that Luke never intended on killing Ben, and that he simply ignited his lightsaber out of instinct.  But I'm still not 100% sure that's clearly played (and we're another night's sleep from my viewing of the movie and my memory is continuing to fuzz on specific dialogue) - because I do remember Luke feeling ashamed at the idea that, for a second, he was going to kill a child.

Now there's definitely a time, in Jedi, when Luke wants to kill Vader.  And, like in Last Jedi, he comes to his senses and doesn't do it.  But I think people (and like you said, a blank-slate character) see Luke as a person who will always see the best in people.  That Luke was the only one in the galaxy that saw humanity in Vader, and that his willingness to see the best in people is what people love about him.  So to have him, even for a moment, think "this kid is going to be a monster, and I have to destroy him" goes against the character (in their eyes).

I don't necessarily buy that because 1) Luke definitely could've killed Vader in RotJ and 2) Luke didn't kill (or even try to kill) Ben.

***************

I'm seeing a couple of really weird criticisms of this movie from people who liked the Force Awakens.

1. Luke throwing away the lightsaber at the beginning was a slap in the face because of all the buildup from Force Awakens.  Because of how that movie ended, we were led to believe that something epic was going to happen, and it was played off as a joke.

Well, yes.  It was played off as a joke because there was no way that they could've done anything as epic as JJ Abrams wanted us to believe that we could've done.  Any line of dialogue (I'm Luke Skywalker, and I'll train you to be a Jedi....like my father before me) or action (Luke ignites a red lightsaber, signifying his fall to the Dark Side, and starts an epic lightsaber battle) would have disappointed someone. 

JJ Abrams created a ton of buzz with all his mysteries, but knowing him, he didn't really have any ideas to pay them off.  He's great at setting up a cliffhanger (oh no, all our protagonists are on a boat!  And the boat is on fire!  And sinking!  And there's a hydrophobic bomb that will blow up if it touches water!  And the president's daughter has been kidnapped!) without really worrying about a way to resolve it (that character you thought was dead flies in to save everyone with the helicopter you thought was destroyed, and the daughter saved herself because she's been taking secret karate lessons).

Sam Esmail (writer/director/creator of Mr. Robot) wrote a fun little twist into season 2 of the show (no spoilers to the twist).  He expected that some people would figure it out before the reveal halfway through the season, but he was wrong.  They figured it out the night the premiere aired.  The fans crowdsourced the answer, the answer went to bloggers and reviewers, and all the loyal fans knew the twist for weeks before the reveal.

Esmail said he wrote the twist so that it didn't matter whether or not people figured it out - the twist wasn't the point of the season and was a bigger shock to the main character than the audience - but that he was still surprised at how quickly they figured it out.  But when you have hundreds/thousands/millions of people working to solve the same equation, eventually someone's going to crack it.  And that's why twists are so dangerous in movies (and why I felt Force Awakens' incompleteness was a major issue) - because TV shows can do a cliffhanger and resolve it in a week (normal episode) or maybe a few months (season finale).  But if you treat a movie like a TV show, you're giving your fans years to work out the puzzle.

So when you set up "WHO ARE REY'S PARENTS" and then give people years to write articles about how her parents could be Kenobis or Skywalkers or Solos or whoever.....people are going to be disappointed when their favorite answer isn't the correct one.  Same thing with "WHO IS SNOKE" and "HOW DID THE LIGHTSABER GET THERE"

I know Abrams wanted to remake Star Wars and he did a pretty good job doing that.  And he wanted to set up some potential "I am your father" moments in his trilogy's Empire.  But "I am your father" was special because 1. it sorta came out of left field, even for the people making the movie and 2. there wasn't Reddit to create a thousand theories about Luke's parentage.  I'm sure there were Star Wars fans who figured out Vader was Luke's father, but there wasn't any way to get that across to people.  Now, there is.

2. People are mad about Rey's training being short.  But these are the same people who didn't seem to care that Rey was already pretty powerful in Force Awakens.  She learned to use a lightsaber on her own - she learned to defend her mind on her own - she learned the Jedi Mind Trick on her own - she was essentially a Jedi by the end of Force Awakens.  She didn't need training.

Luke took a pretty powerful blade, sharpened it a tad, and pointed it in the direction of the light.  That's all he really had to do.  It took 3 lessons because that's all that was left.

2,066

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

Everyone aboard the Death Star was a willing, complicit staff member on a planet destroying genocide machine that had blown up an unarmed and defenseless world just earlier that afternoon.

I keep thinking about the scene from Clerks.

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

Does the canon have an explanation for this?  Or does their acceptance of the job take away their innocence?  Were there any families on the Death Star?  Were there any rebel scouts or spies?  I agree that Stormtroopers are probably not innocent (although there could easily be people like Finn that didn't use their weapons and didn't agree with the cause), but some people probably didn't work on that station (slaves, indentured servants, people like chefs/janitors/service people that needed to earn a living).

2,067

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

... once again, I don't think you understand how the Force works. Luke crept into Kylo Ren's room and telepathically scanned him. He sensed the dark side, could feel Snoke's mentally projected influence inside Kylo Ren's mind. Instinctively, he triggered the lightsaber, reacting to the presence of the dark side and Snoke within the boy's psyche. Luke didn't walk into that room with the intention to kill his student.

Ha, well having just admitted to only seeing the OT movies a handful of times (and the prequels less) and admitting to not being a big fan, I'm not surprised that I don't understand how the Force works. smile

The problem with that scene is a lack of clarity and context.  I definitely don't remember exact details, but my memory tells me that Kylo was asleep.  Maybe they could've shown Kylo to be awake and having a discussion with Snoke (like he does when he catches Rey and Kylo talking).  Or maybe they could've shown flashbacks to show more of what other dark side stuff Kylo was dealing with.  I think I remember Luke saying that he had darkness inside him, but I don't remember him saying anything specific.  Maybe there's more flashbacks in the deleted scenes - it sounds like there were plenty.  And since the movie was already too long, I think it's probably a bad idea to recommend adding more.

Whether or not he intended on killing Kylo, it does seem that Luke thinks he did.  And I think people are feeding off that in their complaints.

What's funny, to me, is that Luke raising a new school is actually a very interesting premise.  And since the movie's plot amounts to "the Resistance goes a little distance and ends up escaping on the Falcon", I might've enjoyed an entire movie focusing on Luke/Rey and flashbacks of Luke/Kylo.  It would've been an even more unusual Star Wars movie, but I think it could've been great.

2,068

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I think Mark Hamill doesn't quite understand the Luke Skywalker character.

Really great analysis, but that seems to also apply to Star Wars fans as a whole.

What's funny to me is my idea of Luke as a fringe fan of Star Wars.  I've seen every movie, and I appreciate them all.  But they're not movies I've seen a ton of.  I've seen A New Hope a couple dozen times, but I'm not sure I've seen Empire or Jedi more than a couple times each all the way through (I've seen pieces of them a lot since they're always on TV).  In a recent discussion about the quality of the prequels, I realized that I think I've only seen episodes II and III once each (again, aside from scenes here and there on TV).

But, for some reason, Luke holds a place in my heart.  And as Episode VIII approached, I started to worry that Luke could die.  Or, possibly even worse, go to the dark side.  I felt that, in some way, my heart would break a little for him to not be alive.  After all, he'd been alive and young my whole life.

The movie actually handles Luke, for the most part, in a way where I was okay with him going.  After all, we know Luke will live on in the Force so he's not really gone.  And even as someone who's a fan of Luke, I wasn't really bothered by the Luke stuff in the moment.  I was surprised, but I wasn't offended.

I agree with everything you said.  Luke is, on paper, a cold-blooded killer.  I watched "Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang" the other night, and Robert Downey Jr. gives a great performance when his character shoots and kills a bad guy in the middle of the movie.  He breaks down at the idea of shooting someone....even as a career criminal who killed a truly bad guy in self defense.  As you said, Luke killed millions of innocent people but doesn't really seem bothered by it.

And yet....killing a child in his sleep?  At least Anakin did it to the younglings when they were awake and could, at least theoretically, defend themselves.

The only thing I can really think is that they wanted Kylo to have this tragic backstory.  And it really does make him a truly interesting character.  Kylo is this kid who romanticizes his grandfather (who had his own tragic backstory) and feels this pull to the Dark Side.  He has this mother who cares so much about her Rebellion and a father who's not really built for fatherhood.  Then his parents sent him away to live with his cooky uncle, while this other dude is pouring propaganda in his ear from across the galaxy.

Then, one night as he's as conflicted as ever, his uncle tries to kill him.  Whether or not Luke meant to do it or not, that's Kylo's backstory.  He truly believes his uncle tried to kill him.  And then he starts to wonder....wait, did my parents send me to die?  Is all the love I had as a child a lie?  Is the only one who has truly cared about me....Snoke?

It happens all the time.  Kid gets betrayed by his/her family and falls into the arms of an abusive relationship.

The problem with the Last Jedi is that it doesn't really excuse any of it.  Even with all the talking from Kylo and Luke, there's still not enough context to understand what really happened.  What did Kylo really do that scared Luke so much?  What did he do where Luke would even consider that Kylo couldn't be saved?

You say that Luke was working off instinct, but that's not really what Luke says.  If he'd explained it that way, I think there's a chance they could've sold it.  When I watched it, it seemed like Luke was saying that he *did* want to kill him, but it was just for a moment.  Because he definitely walks in, thinks about it, and then ignites the saber.  It didn't seem, at least to me, that he got caught up in the moment.

So to me, and to a lot of people in the audience....they turned Luke into a guy who'd consider murdering kids.  And, yes, I agree that he's probably killed kids in the past (you'd gotta think that some families were on the Death Star).  But this was so much different that that that, I think, it really bothers people.  Thus the hate.

And so I wondered, was there a way to give Kylo this cool backstory without harming Luke's legacy?  Some ideas:

1. I like the idea that he's working off instinct.  I also love the idea that Luke, flat out disagrees with the teachings of the Jedi.  So what if you combined those two things?  Luke goes to the Jedi Temple and learns an old Jedi technique for defeating evil - Force Meditation (name can be workshopped).  As a Jedi Master, Luke can meditate and enter a sort of trance where he becomes one with the light side of the Force and can seek out true evil.

Luke enters one of these trances in an attempt to find Snoke.  And in a sleepwalking state, he finds a strong Dark Side presence, and the Force Meditation draws him to it.  And draws him to destroy it.  Maybe it's Ben himself or maybe it's Snoke's Force projection.....but either way, Luke (still "sleepwalking") ignites his lightsaber.  Ben wakes up....and so does Luke.

So Luke isn't doing it...this flawed Jedi artifact did it.  The Jedi aren't interested in saving people - they're interested in killing bad people.  If the Jedi had been around to fight Vader and Palpatine in A New Hope, they'd have killed Vader and then lost to Palpatine.  It took seeing the good in Vader to save the galaxy, and that's why the Jedi are flawed.

2. Do the twin brothers.  I know in the (abandoned) expanded universe, the Solos had twins.  So maybe you bring that back.  Ben and Lando Solo are twins that are sent to train with Luke.  Ben is a quiet boy with a strong love for his family.  Lando is a wild and rebellious son with an obsession with his grandfather Anakin.  At the Jedi Temple, Lando keeps asking about the Dark Side.  He starts experimenting.  He builds a....red lightsaber.  Ben tries to talk to him, but he loves his brother.  He wants to save him from these dark thoughts.  Lando is drawn away from Ben to a new father figure - Snoke.  And through Lando, Snoke starts telling Ben that their family abandoned them.  Han and Leia don't love them.   And, one day, Luke will try and kill them.

At training, there's a tragic accident.  Lando is sparring with another student and accidentally maims/kills him.  Ben is horrified - Lando doesn't seem bothered by it.  Luke keeps an eye on him....and, yet, it happens again.  So Luke, in the middle of the night, goes to take Lando away from the Academy.  Lando defends himself with his lightsaber.  Ben wakes up, Luke loses his concentration, and Luke slices through Lando.

Luke has no time to explain.  Ben simply sees Luke kill his brother, and Snoke's prophecy is coming true.

Luke does kill a Solo twin - but it was one who was definitely a Dark Side user.  But it still drives him to exile, and it still drives Ben to become Kylo.

3. Just make it the Dark Side.  What if Snoke was influencing them both?  What if Luke starts seeing all the students turning evil....not just Ben?  Meanwhile, Ben is getting the same sort of influence?  Luke doesn't sense it, but Snoke starts feeding the lies to Luke.  "Your nephew is evil."  "Your uncle will try and kill you."

And Luke falls for it.  He lets his hate and his fear and his jealousy turn him to the Dark Side....and he tries to kill his nephew.

Mark Hamill wanted this as far back as Episode VI.  He thought it was where the saga was going and pitched it to George Lucas - so it would've been interesting to see that come true on the screen.  It wouldn't be a full Dark Luke - just enough Dark Luke to try and kill Ben.

Luke snaps out of it, but it's too late.  So he does go into isolation and close himself off from the Force - he can't trust it again, and it keeps him safe from Snoke's influence.

I think if you do something like that, you protect Hamill's vision of Luke.  Which, it seems, is a lot of Star Wars' fans visions of Luke.

2,069

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I mean, I get some of it.  Luke Skywalker, as much as almost any character made in the last 100 years, means something to people.  And he almost murdered a child in his sleep.  Luke saw so much good in his father when no one else did, and Luke couldn't see any good in his nephew.

It's a really weird part in the movie, using the series' ultimate good guy to make a new character's motivations work.  When I first watched it, I thought it might've been a Rashomon situation and a complete misunderstanding.  While it was that, in a sense, Luke fully admits he was going to murder the kid in his sleep.

It's a betrayal of the character, and even Mark Hamill has been forced to admit it.  At the same time, it's a much more human universe than we'd seen in Star Wars.  Even if he was never going to go through with it, even good guys have bad thoughts.

2,070

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It's crazy the polarization of this movie - Rian Johnson saw what people said about the Force Awakens and tried to take Star Wars in a new direction.  He tried new things.  And the theme of his movie is "forget the past.  It doesn't matter.  This is our adventure now."  If Disney is really going to make a new Star Wars movie every year, the series needs to grow beyond what's there.  He tried....and people are rejecting it.

Disney is pretty reactionary.  Going back to Abrams, I think, is going to lead to another Force Awakens: a movie that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside but contains almost no real substance.

2,071

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, I don't really think they need to do a full reboot.  It sounds like, from what I've heard (still haven't seen it, either), they sorta rebooted Superman already.  Now it's just a matter of whether or not Affleck is into it.  I'd rather do a Flashpoint switcheroo with Batman than watch Affleck sleepwalk through the role.  If it's in, he's been great.  If his heart isn't into it, either recast with Flashpoint magic or pass the cowl to Dick.

2,072

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

True.  And it could easily be a soft reboot of the whole universe if that's what they want to do.  It'd just be weird if they didn't change anything but "now Bruce is Jon Hamm" big_smile

2,073

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

In listening to the Weekly Planet podcast, they were talking about recasting Affleck should he decide to leave, and they kept talking about using Flashpoint to reboot the character.  So Flash does his Flashpoint, Thomas Wayne becomes Batman in the Flashpoint universe...and then when he fixes it, Flash would track down Bruce...played by another actor.

But.....that doesn't make any sense.  I know it's a time travel story, but no one uses time travel that way.  Butterfly extent in time travel movies never extends to "people look different" (even though it almost certainly would).  And even if it did, Barry couldn't go back far enough where he could impact Bruce's genetics.  Barry would be going back in time to save his mother....whose death would've happened after Bruce was born.

Heck, due to the fact that the timeline has Bruce so much older than Barry, there's a good chance that Barry's mother could've died after Bruce's parents are dead - it shouldn't even affect that (unless they explain that the butterfly effect can, somehow, alter events in the past as well as the future - "a ripple goes in all directions, Barry.").

It doesn't make sense.  If that's going to happen, they should just recast with an actor playing Dick Grayson.  Flash comes back and finds Batman fighting crime.  Barry finds him:

BARRY - "Bruce!  Thank God...."

Batman turns around

DICK - "Bruce....?  Did someone hit you on the head, Barry?  Bruce has been dead for five years."

Dick removes his cowl.  And he's played by....I don't know, Jared Padalecki.

So now Dick Grayson is Batman.  You get that fun twist.  And if Affleck ever wants back in, you time travel and save Batman.  Or Bruce faked is death.  Or whatever.

2,074

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, I wasn't really directing that at you (despite quoting you).  I see the "DO LESS EPISODES" stuff all the time time.  Defenders was only 8 episodes and struggled from the same stuff - it's one story.  If they do one story, 13 episodes is too many.  Eight episodes is too many.  Five is too many.

If they're only going to do one story, don't even bother doing a show.  Do a two-hour movie.

2,075

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

I just think that these Netflix/Marvel shows would benefit from fewer episodes, or more standalone episodes where the characters are fighting one-off bad guys.

I see the "fewer episodes" stuff from critics and fans all the time.  The 13-episode seasons are a relatively new concept, and a lot of shows are still happily doing 22-23....including comic-inspired shows like Arrow, Gotham, etc.

So when are we going to stop letting writers be lazy?  Are we truly saying that a character like the Punisher or Daredevil doesn't have enough material for 13 episodes?  That's ridiculous - these characters have had 50 years worth of stories in print.  The writers should have enough material for 30-episode seasons.

I think the primary problem with the Netflix shows (and the reason I'm even talking about this now is that I'm a few episodes into Punisher now and can see it happening again) is that they, for some reason, insist on telling *one* story for the entire duration.  Daredevil season 2 split the season up into two mini-seasons (one for Castle, one for Elektra), and Luke Cage split the season based on two villains (one dies and is replaced with another).

But, even in those cases, it's one story.  One villain.  What's crazy is that the show that did this the most, Jessica Jones, was the one show that has a built-in way to *not* tell those stories - the detective agency.  It's a "crime of the week" format that has made shows like these drive for decades.

On Supernatural, Sam and Dean are usually fighting one big monster for a season, but they break that up by doing small stories where they fight a ghost or a werewolf or something.  They aren't central to the main plot, but they can still be fun episodes where the characters learn and grow.  Team Arrow might be fighting Prometheus for a season, but they still take down smaller crime syndicates in the mean time.  Team Flash takes a break from fighting Savitar to fight other, smaller metas.  It's how these shows can do multiple seasons of 23 episodes.

Let Jessica Jones solve some standard murder cases.  Let Daredevil stumble upon a dogfighting ring.  Let Luke Cage beat up a drug dealer that moved into Harlem.  Let Danny Rand rescue a kid who's getting recruited into a street gang.  I know that the Punisher is a revenge-driven story (although, as ireactions points out, it isn't even that anymore in the comics), but the first episode of the Netflix show is just about him saving a kid.  They could do four of those a season and save episodes full of talking.

It would break up the monotony, and it'd give the heroes a few wins along the way.  Because half the reason why these stories feel so long is because, a lot of the time, they're getting *this* close to taking down the villain for them to slip out of the way.  I can't remember how many times Jessica Jones had Kilgrave in her grasp, only for him to slither away.

Tell stories.  Not just one story.  And you'll find that 13 episodes isn't too much.  It shouldn't be nearly enough.

2,076

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I worked in the compensation department for a Fortune 500 company.  If the CEO of a company wants something, it can happen - it basically just becomes a fire drill for the people who do the grunt work (read: us).  I know from people that work compensation at retail places that, when Target announced they were taking all their employees to $15, all of them were met the following morning with "I need you to model what this would cost to implement ASAP."  It didn't matter what the cost would be - they had to keep up and they had to keep up immediately.

Unexpected costs happen all the time, and this wasn't even that unexpected.  AT&T, possibly even with help from the Republicans writing the bill, have known about their potential tax savings for a while.  It would just be a matter of doing some simple math and throwing some things on a spreadsheet.  If it could be easily incorporated into an existing budget (a fire drill for the finance folks), then it wouldn't be that much of a problem.

Even if this was dropped on AT&T yesterday and couldn't fit in the budget, it's still possible.  It'd just be a giant headache for finance/tax/FP&A/compensation and a few other departments.  But AT&T's CEO probably doesn't care - he gets goodwill from his employees, the media, shareholders, and the party in power (since he is being used as evidence that the tax bill is doing what they said it'd do).  Even if it hurts the bottom line, it's a $200 million move for a $250 billion company.  A drop in the water.

2,077

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

pilight wrote:

They won the war, but lost the peace.  Which was inevitable, if you think about it.  The power structure was too entrenched and the one living jedi had no experience in how to unravel all that bureaucracy.  Unless Luke was going to declare himself emperor and slowly dismantle it, the galactic government was going to continue to be oppressive and cruel.

Wouldn't it be more likely that the galactic government would collapse and local/planetary governments would take over? 

That's what's sorta weird about the Star Wars universe.  There's clearly a Republic at one point, but what role do they serve?  Naboo gets literally invaded in Episode 1, and there's no "Republic Army" to defend a Republic planet.  They send in two Jedi to act as peacekeepers and nothing else.  It was basically up to the people of Naboo to save themselves.

The Empire, after the Senate was dissolved, probably had Palpatine-picked regional or planetary governors that were in charge of....collecting taxes?  And standard leadership stuff?

I'd assume when the Empire fell that those governors would be given the boot, and each planet would then elect their own leadership.  Planets that already had trade (?) relations, would probably form small versions of the Republic.  Maybe, this time, with actual forces to defend themselves.  Maybe a captain of a Star Destroyer from Tatooine (which, we know, has an Imperial academy) would decide that, with the Emperor dead, he has more loyalty to the new Tatooinian government and enlist his ship to his new government's defense.

So instead of a Republic, you'd have a collection of different "states" that would operate independently until a more centralized government was established.  It'd take a long time to rebuild to the Republic, but it'd move in that direction.

My guess is that the Empire would move to the next in the chain of command, but the Empire lost so much of their chain of command (losing both Death Stars, Tarkin, Krennic, and their top two leaders).  So I'm guessing imperial leadership would be a street war of different captains of commanders at an identical rank (plus political leaders - like the different governors I'm talking about) fighting each other. 

Imperial soldiers, from grunt stormtroopers to commanders of smaller ships, would have to fight between loyalty to the now-scattered empire, their own home-planet governments, and people vying for control.  We're talking a civil war between several factions with giant weapons.  I don't think that gets sorted out very quickly.  And even when it does, it'd wipe out a ton of the Empire's weapons.  Even if someone (Snoke) rose to take command very quickly, I still think the Empire would be too weak to have complete control over the galaxy.

What seems to have happened, however, is.....nothing.  Snoke, who almost-certainly had to have been a key member of the Empire who already had power and respect, took command of the Empire's forces and renamed it the First Order for his own reasons.  Even though the war was over and their leader was dead, the millions/billions of stormtroopers remained loyal and nothing across the galaxy changed.  One star system declared themselves "the new republic" but didn't have connections (politically or militarily) to any part of the rest of the galaxy.  The remainder of the Rebellion simply renamed their forces to be the Resistance and kept doing what they were doing until they were whittled away to nothing.

In a universe as simplistic as Star Wars' seems to be, I guess it makes sense.  What might've been more interesting would've been for Snoke to have led some sort of "Outer Rim" military to take over while the Empire was in chaos and the Republic was fledgling.  It'd give the filmmakers the ability to redesign scary-looking new ships that could terrorize both the Republic and the remnants of the Empire.  Maybe the Resistance would be a combination of imperial forces and the rebels - working together to try and defend themselves.  Imagine the Resistance having a Star Destroyer that's easily destroyed by one of Snoke's new ships.

But what's clear to me is that Abrams just wanted to remake a New Hope and didn't care about drawing a line between the Force Awakens and Return of the Jedi.  Like ireactions said, he wanted the Empire and the Rebels.  And he got it....except he renamed it the First Order and the Resistance.  For some reason.

2,078

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

http://www.superherohype.com/news/40956 … t#/slide/1

Interesting thoughts on Man of Steel 2 if Matthew Vaughn had gotten control of it.  Informant would've hated it since it would've been done by a Donner-lover smile

2,079

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Brief Agents of SHIELD spoilers....


So I think the show has gotten much better since they stopped rubbing in the MCU connection in our face.  They do their own stories in the background, and they don't depend too much on making their worlds mesh.  Inhumans are a big-enough deal that it should affect the Avengers, but no one on either side worries about it.  SHIELD is a big-enough deal that it should be in the MCU, but no one worries about it.  They share some common themes and every once in a while, a name or idea gets dropped....but it's fine.

This season.....there should be a bit more name dropping.  So....what happened to the Avengers?  Were they all killed?  Was Thor killed?  Was the Hulk killed?  Did none of them survive and try to save humanity?  For that matter, how far in the future are we?  Is someone on this ship a Stark?  A Banner?  A Barton?

I get that this is an alternate future that will get retconned (unless they somehow tie it into the Avengers: Infinity War and it's Thanos that destroyed the Earth and then someone blamed it on Daisy?) - but shouldn't we be a little worried about what happened to the big heroes?  And if Daisy is anywhere near as powerful as they indicate....wouldn't she be a huge recruit for Tony?

2,080

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I really like that.  And I think it makes sense....I wish that was conveyed by the movies themselves, though.

A lot of my problems are simply a lack of context that the movie needs to provide.  You know my disdain for "here's the product....if you want to understand it, here's your extended universe homework" stuff.  And I think a lot of this stuff doesn't have to have grand, Episode-I like political discussions.  I think small snippets of dialogue can help.  The problem is that The Force Awakens didn't even give us much of any background.

The Republic was small and weak -

CHARACTER 1 - "They're going to attack the Republic's home system!"
CHARACTER 2 - "The Republic?  They're still around?"
CHARACTER 3 - "I thought they collapsed years ago."

Was it corruption?  A lack of resources?  How do you go from a galaxy *starving* for freedom (as the end of Return of the Jedi shows) to a Republic that is only really active in one star system?  I was expecting a failing government (think the League of Nations or the United States under the Articles of Confederation).  What we got was....the state of Petoria?

http://familyguy.wikia.com/wiki/Petoria

Was the First Order a new thing or a rebranding of the Empire?  How was that sold to people? 

CHARACTER 1 - "They sold the First Order as the New Republic.  Using the enemy's old weapons to bring peace and freedom to the galaxy."
CHARACTER 2 - "People needed to feel safe.  They chose to believe Snoke's lies."

What's the difference between the Resistance and the Rebellion?

CHARACTER 1 - "This is it?  This is the Rebellion that took down the Empire?"
LEIA - "The Resistance.  When the Empire fell and was replaced by the First Order, the Republic was too weak and too scared to start another Galactic War.  So they signed peace treaties.  We're the only ones fighting them, and we have to stay strictly off the books, or the First Order will crush what's left."
CHARACTER - "The Resistance?"
LEIA - "The Empire rebranded.  So did we."

I like the disillusionment of the galaxy.  They won something big and then realized that the enemy was still as strong as ever.  So why keep fighting?  *Cue Sonic Youth song*  It isn't worth it.  I'm done fighting.  Done trying.  Who cares?

It would just be nice if the characters in the movie would fill in the gaps for me smile

2,081

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

STILL SPOILERS

*
*
*
*

I do worry about what JJ will do with the series where it is now.  I've read a lot of people criticizing The Last Jedi because it "wasted" a lot of the potential of The Force Awakens.  That it doesn't answer/address several critical questions that JJ set up. 

But, as someone who thinks TV-style questions in movies (even episodic movies) is insulting to the audience and ridiculous in today's Reddit culture, I think Rian Johnson took all the parts of the Force Awakens that he thought were interesting and moved forward with it.  I don't know how much freedom he had to answer anything he wanted, but some of it would've required some backbending.

For example, I've seen people upset that they don't answer how Maz got the lightsaber.  I don't think that was supposed to be some big mystery - she's a "person" who knows everyone and who deals with scavengers and smugglers on a daily basis.  Someone on Cloud City found it.  JJ Abrams didn't answer the question in his movie because a) he/the writers couldn't think of an answer or b) the answer doesn't matter.

Or there have been complaints that Rey's parents were a letdown.  Why did they use Ewan McGregor's voice if they weren't going to reveal that she's a Kenobi?  Why was it made to be such a big mystery if the answer was going to be so dumb?  But I think the answer is perfect - as someone on the Internet said, it completely fits the narrative.  Rey and Kylo are opposites.  Light and dark.  Male and female.  But, most importantly, Kylo is this princely character born of these insanely significant figures, and Rey is.....no one.  People wanted her to be significant, but her insignificance is crucial to her character.  The last shot of the slave (?) boy on the Casino World is exactly the point - anyone can be a hero in the galaxy.  You don't have to be a Skywalker or a Kenobi or a Solo.  Just embrace the Force and embrace the light and even you can blow up the Death Star.

And now that JJ is back for IX, I think he's going to take things in a more traditional direction.  But Rian Johnson didn't really set up anything for him.  The plot has been left in an interesting place, but there aren't mysteries for JJ to solve.  Which is the way I think it's supposed to be.

2,082

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Not sure if we need a new post or not, but thoughts on the Last Jedi.  Please keep in mind that, after seeing Force Awakens a couple of times, I really didn't love it.  Better than the prequels, worse than the originals.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

I think I'm going to see it a second time, but I thought it was a lot better than Force Awakens.  Instead of just being a retread of Empire Strikes Back (and, trust me, there were times that it really wanted to be that), it went about things its own way.  It took risks!  It made the characters gray and interesting, even though it feels a little weird in Star Wars, where it feels more natural to be black and white.

I thought killing Snoke was a great twist, and it'll be interesting to see what happens with Kylo at the head of the First Order.  It might've been too much, but as a writer, I might've chosen to have Kylo and Rey leave together.  So the First Order would have no leadership, and the Resistance wouldn't have had Rey.  Might've been cool, but it would've been really out there.

And I thought Luke was handled pretty well.  It sucks that he died, but I don't know if there would've been a satisfying way for him to die in battle.  He dies on his own terms, like Yoda and Obi-Wan.  Which is cool.  The Yoda cameo was also great, and we better get something similar to it with Luke in IX (and we almost certainly will).  I only wish Luke could've been slightly more badass in the movie...or, at least, show him at the height of his power.  He doesn't really do much....especially when you realize his coolest achievement (taking all that blaster fire) wasn't really an accomplishment.  I guess it'd feel like watching Obi-Wan in A New Hope after watching him in the prequels, but we never really got to see Jedi Master Luke....which is disappointing.

All in all, I thought it was fun, and I'm excited to see where they go, actually.  I almost saw this movie because I felt like I had to, not really because I wanted to.  Now I actually feel energized to see where they go next.

Some talking points:

- It was way too long.  It's 2:30, and it feels like it.  I think the main problem is that it feels like almost two full movies, and there are multiple moments that feel like a climax.  I don't like when movies feel like they're about to be over and then keep going for another 30 minutes.  After the great action and tension of the Throne Room scene to then have an entirely new set piece and have so much happen just felt tacked on.  I almost wish it'd happened differently., with Hux leading the attack on the rebel base and the Throne Room stuff happening simultaneously.  Although that would've been a lot like RoTJ and after all the retread talk of TFA, I guess I could see why they didn't do such a similar parallel.

- So was Benecio Del Toro actually the codebreaker that Maz wanted them to find?  I kept waiting for them to reveal that (maybe he lost his jacket at the casino), but they didn't reveal that, did they?

- The Leia stuff was sad, and I wonder if they considered just killing her when the bridge blows up.  With such a small group of Resistance fighters, after losing so much leadership, I think that's going to be a devastating blow.  Although I guess Poe will just take over.

- I still do not understand what's going on in the universe.  We still have no idea how the First Order got so much control, how the Republic was so weak after 30 years in control, and why the Resistance is so small.  We saw in the celebration scenes in Return of the Jedi that the entire galaxy celebrated the end of the Empire.  The Republic should've had a ton of new soldiers willing to fight for them.  Did the First Order take all of them?  Did they somehow convince people that they were the good guys?  How did any of that work?  No one in the galaxy came when Leia was in danger?  No one?  I get that they were talking about the spark of hope being so small, but I still don't understand what happened post-ROTJ that led to the First Order being so powerful and the Republic being weak enough to be destroyed in one fail swoop.  Especially after Starkiller Base was destroyed.  I wish they'd just kept Empire and Rebellion and just said "look, killing the Emperor was cool and all, but Snoke just took his place as Emperor and the machine kept turning for another 30 years"

- I thought it was weird that Hamill's force ghost came back with a dark beard - it sorta ruined the surprise that he wasn't really there.  I'm also not sure why he died when he did.  Was it just too much effort to send his spirit across the galaxy.  I wish they could've sewn some seeds that something like that was possible but really dangerous or something....so that it would've paid off a little better.

- I liked the twist with Rey's parents being nobodies, and I really hope they don't retcon that in a future movie and say Kylo was lying.

2,083

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

That's actually pretty great.  You actually might be able to do it a little differently and sell the metaphor even stronger.

What if the first scene in an X-men movie/show is a different terrorist attack by a human on some sort of mutant facility/school/camp/etc.  Everyone - the news, random people on the street - assumes that it's a mutant attack.  Mutant-on-mutant crime.  The idea that it'd be a human doesn't even come to anyone's mind.  Mutants are violent and this has to be them.

It'd really sell the idea that a) there's a war between certain humans and certain mutants and b) people treat mutants like some people treat Muslims.  Then maybe Magneto takes credit for it (mimicking ISIS/Al Qaeda) because taking credit for it advances his motivations.

It could be really good if done well.

2,084

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Where does Gotham film, by the way?

Legion might benefit them, but it's so weird and out there.  I'd suspect, if they're going to reboot the X-Men, they're going to do things their own way and get rid of whatever Fox was doing.  Which sucks because FOX was actually, sorta, figuring out the X-Men universe.  Yeah, the "main" movies suck, but they're actually branching out and doing some cool stuff. Legion is a trippy drama, Deadpool was a crude comedy, Logan was a violent, gritty western, and the New Mutants is a horror movie.  Say what you want about some of the crap they've produced, but some of their new stuff could be moving the superhero genre in new directions.

Americans is done after this next season, and they've already talked about not doing more Fargo.  Existing shows will either wrap up or find a way to work with disney - what I'm more concerned about is the next idea.  Whether its American Horror Story, the OJ miniseries, Fargo, Legion, The Americans, The Shield, Always Sunny, The League, Sons of Anarchy, etc....FX has produced a ton of great TV.  It took chances on some weird concepts by some great artists, and it's paid off.  If Disney is going to kill it, something else needs to step in and take its place for shows that are great but a little out there.  AMC might get to take some of it, but they think they're pretty artsy.

2,085

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Now that Disney has the Fantastic Four and the X-Men, I wonder how they'll handle it. 

I'd be interested in a complete reboot of the X-Men.  Maybe something in Avengers 4 causes X% of the human population to mutate, and they start exhibiting powers.  The only problem is that I'm not sure how you do that without just redoing First Class in modern times. 

They are talking about bringing in the multiverse too...so maybe an Earth with established mutants merges with our Earth.  That way, you can have an established X-Men incorporated into the MCU without saying "Oh, by the way, there were mutants the whole time."

2,086

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, the network isn't a part of the deal, but (I think) the TV studio is.  In reading a lot about the television side, the only way these shows make money is if they save money on studio costs (by owning the studio that makes the show).  That's why you always hear "XXXX might be on the cancellation block because they're owned by YYYY studio and so ZZZZ is a cheaper show to keep" at cancellation time.

In that case, *every* show would be owned by another studio since Fox would be a network without a studio.

From what I'm reading, Disney might be inclined to keep shows that work with their "brand" like The Gifted and shows like The Simpsons and Family Guy that are cheap and big moneymakers.  Maybe they could sell off something like Gotham to the CW, but I think that'd kill the feel of that show (you'd probably lose some of the cast and a great deal of the budget).

Apparently this deal might take a year or so to complete, and I feel like Gotham could be ending in the next couple of seasons.  Maybe Disney will let some FOX properties end on their own terms before changing directions.

My worry is about FX - it has produced a ton of stuff in recent years that I've loved, and I don't want Disney to dismantle it.

2,087

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, Hillary would be a disaster...not only because polling still strongly implies that people still don't like her, but she'd embody the secret civil war going on between Hillary supporters and Bernie supporters.  Bernie supporters hate Hillary so much that they'd happily vote for the next Jill Stein or sit out again.

What's scary for Democrats is that the Bernie Bro skews young and the Hillary Bot skews old.  And if they aren't careful, they could disenfranchise an entire generation of people who are actually pretty active and interested in politics.

It'll be Hillary vs. whoever the Republicans run in 2020 (I'm not convinced Trump will be the nominee, either because he's resigned, because he chooses not to run, or someone else beats him in the primary).  And unless the Democrats get their act together, the Republicans are positioned to win again.  Which, if you're a Democrat, has to be maddening....because the map is positioned to make a Democratic president *so much* easier than a Republican one.

2,088

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

With Disney buying FOX, what does that mean for.....everything?  I know people are excited about Marvel, but what about the entire FOX network?  What about shows like the Simpsons and Gotham and the Orville and Brooklyn Nine-Nine and the FX shows?

Are these going away?  Some moved to ABC?  What's going to happen?

2,089

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

That one might've been the weakest, but I still thought it had a lot of good things to say.  The end might've been a bit telegraphed, but I still thought it had a powerful message.

2,090

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

The first episode is great in a lot of ways, but it's so much different from the rest of the episodes that it's a hard judge of anything.  I guess it's still focusing on technology in the sense that we're so distracted by the news and being grossed out or whatever....and that's what sets up the ending.  But, still, it doesn't even have the same "feel" that pretty much every other episode (even the 3rd season ones) has.

A lot of people didn't like the "bikes" episodes or a couple of the new Season 3 stuff, but I think every episode they've made so far has had merits of one kind or another.

2,091

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Basically, I viewed the episode as a campfire story about the world that we're creating. I didn't view the police in the episode as though they were intended to be the good guys.

I'm on your side.  I think it's definitely supposed to be a fear-based (or, at least, a hesitance-based) glance into what our future can be.  It's a "Black Mirror" into the world we envision with further technological advances.  There's only one episode (in season 3) that doesn't really operate that way (it has a positive ending), and only one episode really doesn't work the technology angle as much (the very first episode).

Wouldn't it be great if we could record everything that we see?  Yes!  Except it might drive us crazy and drive away the people in our lives.

Wouldn't it be great if we could preserve people we'd lost prematurely?  Yes!  Except it might creep us the hell out eventually.

Wouldn't it be great if we could punish people with (something technological)?  Yes!  Except it could be abused or lead to unforeseen consequences.

2,092

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It's been too long since I've seen it to get too specific.

I don't think Jon Hamm's character was a very good person, and I liked the way his punishment fit.  He's a good-looking, charming, and suave guy who can't use any of that anymore.  He used people to get by, and he can't do that anymore.  I know he ends up getting a guy killed, but I thought his treatment of the "cookie" was the most damning to his personality. 

The other dude....I can't remember if he kills his father in law on purpose or accidentally.  But I don't remember thinking his crime was unjust.

2,093

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Question for anyone who watches Black Mirror:

What is your takeaway from the Christmas episode? How do you view the characters and their stories in the episode? My brother and I are having a disagreement about the intended purpose of the episode. I'd say more, but I don't want to sway the conversation. smile

The Christmas episode is my favorite.

I don't really know what you mean by your question, though.  I feel like the intended purpose is the same as every episode - technology drives us further away from each other, and the "god" of technology has his own, twisted version of justice.

2,094

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Agents of SHIELD is so bizarre this season.  Not bad....just really bizarre.  The space angle and the "end of the world" angle is just a really weird place to go with this show, especially since this could easily be the last season.  Very Fringe, honestly.

And I've finally decided that bringing the MCU to the small screen was a bad idea.  They've done a good job making the universe their own, but I just don't buy that the universes are connected.  The AoS world seems just as different from the world of the Avengers as the Netflix world does.

And I wonder about the "time travel" angle they're going with - I almost would've preferred to send them out to deep space and have them be a part of the Cosmic MCU.  Especially since that's allegedly where things are going in Phase Four.

2,095

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

I almost wonder if this is a kind of test run for CW.  Imagine one or two slots per week dedicated to DC programming, and it rotates.  One week it’s Arrow; next week it’s Flash.  And if they crossover more, it’s really like one big DC anthology show broadcast 52 weeks a year.  Doing it in that staggered schedule would make production breaks overlap another show’s filming and that could make crossover production easier as an actor could pop in for a week during their months off.

Now that'd be interesting.

I do think that something like this should be an option for streaming services.  Where if you decided to binge watch "The Arrowverse", you'd get Arrow at first....then you'd start getting some Flash.  Then you'd get Legends and Supergirl until you're eventually watching every episode by air date.  You'd watch it all the way we all did....as it happened.  I'm sure you'd have to work out some sort of system where cliffhanger episodes are arranged next to each other (because, otherwise, people would do it anyway).  So when Zoom nearly kills Barry, you don't have to check in with the Legends before you find out what happens.

*****

Regarding Arrow.

I think the Olicity stuff needs to just be let go.  Maybe she wasn't designed as the female lead, but she's there.  It's over.  She and Oliver are married, and that's it.  I'm much happier for it to just be over, with no more "will they, won't they?"  They did.  Now let's move on.

I think the beginning was a lot, but since the wedding technically took place on an episode of Legends of Tomorrow, I think they wanted to have an appropriate "wedding" on the show itself.  And while I think a lot of fans treat her like Seven of Nine, Felicity was actually there from the beginning so it's not like she showed up and kicked someone off the show - she "battled" Laurel for the spot, and she "won"

With Laurel back and a complete badass, I think that's what they're giving the Olicity haters.  Although, while there was a *very little* movement on the "can evil Laurel be saved* front, that story is moving at a glacial speed.

***

Regarding Vigilante, I wonder if he's some sort of mole.

2,096

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

http://www.superherohype.com/news/40913 … e#/slide/1

This is a weird strategy.

2,097

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I'm not sure I would really compare LEGENDS' characterization to the other shows except to say that Dr. Stein's post-mortem was indeed well written and a nice coda to Victor Garber's exit from the series. While I was fine with Stein's exit, I'm glad that the subsequent episode gave Slider_Quinn21 everything I tried to share.

You were convincing, but it's the show's responsibility to sell it.  You were more eloquent, but they did a good job.

And the only reason I say that Legends is better at characterization is that...there's forward momentum.  Arrow is probably the real answer (as they've evolved the "team" to a point where they had a whole stretch of episodes, not devoid of action, where Oliver didn't even fight).

But whereas Flash moved to a place where they've given powers to a Cisco and Caitlin and added versions of Wells, that show is still mainly Cisco/Caitlin/Wells assisting Barry as the Flash.  I'm not even sure Barry, honestly, has really grown as a character.  They added Wally with no impact.  They added a romance subplot and let everyone in on the secret, but the show really hasn't grown.

(Of all the shows, I think Flash could benefit from sending a character or two to another show.  Their team needs a shakeup)

Supergirl, while fun and adding new elements all the time, also is pretty status quo-ey (which, I know, isn't a word).

Legends, on the other hand, at least tries certain stuff.  It delves into the Legends' childhood to explain why Mick is such an asshole or why Ray is so upbeat and positive.  It's used Damian Darhk too much, but it's a character that the star of the show (Sara) has a deep, emotional connection to.  Even bringing Earth X Snart to deal with Mick was better character building than we've got out of Caitlin (especially on a night where they tried to do a Caitlin character episode).

Legends is probably the worst show of the four, but the Firestorm exit was about as good as anything that the Arrowverse has done.  Of course, with so few actual deaths across any of the shows, I guess it's not that hard.

2,098

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I actually think Legends answered the whole "why kill off Stein when he could be happy?" question pretty well in the fall finale.  Yeah, death sucks and Stein didn't want to die, but he lived a full life and was ready to accept that it was his time to go.

Since Jax is leaving the show too, seemingly, it might've been better (read: more tragic) to have Jax be the one who dies (hopefully, more heroically), allowing Stein a bittersweet homecoming.  Maybe Stein leaves the Waverider, Jax tries to be a hero on his own, and he dies.  So Stein will always have to wonder whether or not he made the selfish move or not.

Either way, I feel a little better about the decision.  And I started wondering....is Legends actually handling character growth the best of the four series?

2,099

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

I still haven't seen Justice League. Soon, I hope. I'm avoiding spoilers as much as possible. A lot of people seem to like it... so I'll probably hate it. smile

Something just hit me.

What if DC makes so many changes to appease people who didn't like MoS/BvS that they alienate the people who did like it?  I'm sure there are DC fanboys who will love whatever they put out, but Informant is their target demo.  He loves the movie but isn't fanatical about them.  What if, in an effort to get people like me, they offend people like him?

And what if, in that case, they end up losing both of us?

2,100

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah but my response would be to buy *none* of the sets hahah.

The shared universe is cool if you're up-to-date but it's gotta be a nightmare if you're not caught up.  And probably not worth the time.