Sliders.tv → Posts by Slider_Quinn21
A New Hope is certainly brilliant with its simplicity 
And, yeah, I guess I'd forgotten the iconic shot of Luke staring up at the twin suns. That's definitely one night. I'd always wondered if they slept on the way to Alderaan or if there was a big gap between the Empire discovering the rebel base and getting there.
Next Star Wars question I've always had. Can the Death Star travel at hyperspeed (is that what it's called in SW?)? It has to, right? That would've been quite the visual.
I was actually asking about the timeline of Star Wars. How many days does A New Hope take place during? It almost seems like it's one day.
I just thought it was funny that Finn and Poe act like they're best friends when they're reunited, but they've only known each other for, seriously, ten minutes. And Finn doesn't seem all that upset (if at all) when he thinks Poe died on Jakku.
I LIKED FORCE AWAKENS
I think we've reached the point, length-wise, where we just have to agree to disagree. I'm going to just chalk it up to not liking certain things about Star Wars and the Force and so on.
In my original post, I said that she was "a bit boring" - I've said at least a couple times that I liked the movie and thought it was fun. This is not the hill I'm willing to die on, but I like that you, as well as millions of hardcore Star Wars fans, loved the film
Ha, well now that I've actually gotten off my ass and read it, now I can say "well, maybe I'm like Laurel Hills and am watching some version of the movie that no one else knows about"
And I can really only go off my (limited) memory, but here we go.
- Rey starts the movie alone, but I didn't really get the sense that she was struggling. She had food, she had shelter, and she was a very capable scavenger. When BB-8 shows up, she confidently brushes off the raider that has come for the droid, and he runs away. She's clearly a known/respected entity, and he's afraid of her. We know she can fight, this is fine.
- When she goes to sell the parts, the pawn shop owner does take advantage of her. But from my memory, she doesn't seem devastated or hopeless about it. It'd just mean she'd have to go back to the destroyed Star Destroyer and find more stuff. Or just sell BB-8, which would've made her relatively rich from the context. When people are sent to kill her, she fights them off with such efficiency that Finn is impressed. Then she starts chasing him. He runs away, terrified. This could be the Force, but being able to handle herself, training or not, is fine.
- Escaping in the Falcon. She did run into some stuff when they first took off, but she mastered it really quickly from what I remember. For someone who'd "never flown anything like that before" - she did a really good job. Now I have no idea what experience she had flying something, but if you threw me in a cockpit, there's probably a better chance that the plane catches fire than it getting an inch off the ground. If it's a matter of my Air Force buddy moving from his cargo plane to a 747, then that's forgivable. But that shot of the Falcon maneuvering was in the first trailers - people all assumed it was Han flying it. It wasn't clunky, and she out-maneuvered First Order pilots in much more maneuverable ships. If that's the Force, that's fine.
- The mess with the mercenaries. I agree, this part was dumb. But in the stretch between leaving the planet and the speeches with Han about the Force, Rey says "hey, let me try this" or some variation a bunch of times. And in every situation, it works like a charm. Whether it was releasing the monsters to save Han from the gangs or killing the monsters, everything Rey "tried" worked immediately. If that's the Force, that's fine.
- On the Maz planet, the Force clearly guides Rey to the lightsaber. That's definitely the Force, and that's fine. And, yeah, she's overwhelmed by the visions and runs out into the wilderness. This is the first time she's actually seems out of control in the movie (spoiler alert, it's also the last). She's panting, she's out of breath, she's terrified, and she's easily captured by Kylo.
- On the ship, Kylo *attempts* to "mind-rape" her but fails spectacularly. After the torture sequence, it's Kylo who runs off, overwhelmed and terrified. He's a Sith Lord, and she/her latent training/the Force protects her completely. Poe got mind-raped. In the clips I was able to find, Rey looks confident and powerful. Not struggling at all. If that's the Force, that's fine.
- The Jedi Mind Trick - Again, I'd like to think, based on the previous six movies, that the Jedi Mind Trick is not Jedi 101. It's used only a handful of times in the six movies, and it fails as often as it works. But if we want to credit it to latent training or the Force itself, that's fine. I just wish there'd been a scene earlier in the movie where she was able to convince the Pawn Shop owner to give her the extra credits or something. It felt out of left field.
- Her rescue. Leia was a badass in her own right, but she still had to be rescued. When Rey is rescued, she's just out walking around. She got no resistance getting out of her cell after that *one* guard walked away. From the looks of things, there were only about 8 people on board the Starkiller at the time (Kylo, Hux, Phasma, Rey, Han, Chewie, that one stormtrooper, and maybe another). It's played off as a sort of coincidence, but if that's the Force, that's fine.
- The lightsaber battle - Yes, Kylo was conflicted. Yes, he'd just killed his father. Yes, he was shot with the bowcaster (which killed tons of people throughout the movie and Ren just sorta shrugged it off). I get that. But Kylo is obviously trying to kill both Rey and Finn. I took special care to pay attention to that the second time I watched it - he's out for blood. If the injury is bothering him, the fight doesn't really show it. He still acts like he's able to physically do everything that he wants to do. He just can't kill either of them. He beats Finn, but there's no reason that fight should've lasted as long as it did (imagine Han picking up a lightsaber and fighting Vader in Empire. Or, heck, just remember the one time Vader and Han fought in the entire Original Trilogy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHH6YVHGh90 ). But then Rey basically kicks his butt.
- The ending. Okay, so I get that Leia is force-sensitive and Rey is force-sensitive. That's fine. But Leia walks *right by* Chewbacca. She doesn't say anything to him. She doesn't even acknowledge him. This is Han's wife and Han's best friend. Chewie and Leia go back decades. And she walks by him to hug a stranger that knew Han for, what, a few hours? Honestly, how long did they even know each other? They meet on the Falcon, they have three conversations, they get to Maz's, and then she's captured.
(Side note - a lot of people are insanely quick friends in this movie. I thought it was bizarre that Finn and Poe were so happy to see each other since their previous friendship lasted less than ten minutes. I know Finn and Poe saved each other's lives, but it wasn't like Finn was devastated when he thought Poe was dead).
- Then there's the whole ending. Rey inherits the Falcon (not Chewie, not Leia) and travels to meet Luke alone. No Leia. No Chewie. Just this girl that, according to the story we have, he doesn't know. This is probably the second-most scared she looks in the whole movie, I guess. Wouldn't Luke like to see Leia (and vice versa)? Wouldn't Luke like to see Chewie (and vice versa)? Were they afraid too many people showing up would scare him?
I don't see any instance in the film where she's struggling. She's alone, yes. But it seems like she's chosen to be alone until *whoever* comes back for her. She is captured in the movie, but it's the only time she comes close to defeat. And she follows up her capture by overriding Kylo's "mind-rape" and flipping it around on him, performing a perfect Jedi Mind Trick on her first-ever try, and then dominating a lightsaber battle with a trained Sith. Seemed like a pretty nice day, all things considered
Well, I mean I've already stated that these movies aren't necessarily for me. If that's how we want to write it off, that's fine. But I think a lot of the characters you mentioned are all boring in the same way that Rey is boring. It's why I like a Batman Begins more than I like a Dark Knight, which seems a bit crazy. But I like the person who is on the upward slope - not someone who starts out being pretty awesome at everything. I don't like Bond movies. I only really liked the first Bourne movie. I've seen the Indiana Jones movies about as many times as I've seen the Star Wars movies.
When your hero has no room to grow, I'm just not that interested. If the next time Rey is in a fight, the Force is always going to save her, then that's not intriguing to me. And you can say that Kylo was injured and that's accurate, but I don't fear Kylo Ren in any way. They didn't establish anything with Snoke to fear. Phasma was irrelevant in the movie.
So you have a movie where the primary hero is good-to-great at everything and the villain is generally pretty weak (I've complained that Finn does as well as he does - Ren should dominate him, injury or no). By all means, now that Luke and Rey are together, the First Order should be destroyed pretty easily. With more training, Rey easily beats Ren again, and Luke can handle Snoke. The last movie can be about Poe making lemon squares for everyone
I don't know. I don't even know if Abbie is the more interesting of the Mills sisters. She's a good character, but the actress wanted to leave. How can you blame the show when their hand was forced? How do you know that they won't replace her with another character that's just as good? Or even better?
Well, I can't speak for Landis. If he's sexist and veils it with talk of character, that's his problem.
I thought everything in Phantom Menace was a disaster so I had issues with everything. And I do think that there was an outcry when a kid blew everything up. That Anakin shouldn't have been on the trip to Naboo in the first place. That it was all played terribly for humor. I mean, to this day, Jake Lloyd hates Star Wars because the hate for young Anakin was so great. So to say that everyone loved Anakin or had no issue with Anakin in Phantom Menace is a bit too far.
And Landis said that if Rey were male, he'd be one of the worst characters ever, and people would absolutely hate him. The fact that she's female is what's shielding her from criticism. Again, his words, not mine.
To me, and you can believe this if you want and dismiss it if you don't, I just thought there was a lot that she was very good at to start. Fixing things, fighting, piloting, force-pulls, jedi mind trick, lightsaber dueling. Everyone loves her as soon as they meet her. Han wants her to stay after being with her for a few hours (and Han didn't bond like that with anyone else that fast). Maz has a special connection immediately. Hell, when everyone returns to the Resistance base, Leia walks right by Chewbacca and hugs Rey! And they hadn't even met!
That was my issue. And it wasn't that it wasn't set up properly. I can believe that she's a great pilot because she's grown up near a spaceport. That she's great at repairing because she's a scavenger. That she's great with the Force because it's either in her blood or she's been trained. All of that is great. But between a character that is already good-to-great at everything and a character with some room to grow, I'd rather have the character that has room to grow.
And if "well she's great with the force so that makes her great at everything" is just Star Wars.....well, then I guess that's the reason why this series isn't my favorite And I'm clearly in the minority in that respect so my opinion can't be that great anyway
Note - there are going to be spoilers from a lot of things in here, I bet. It's going to start with spoilers from Arrow, Sleepy Hollow, and maybe The 100 (although the spoilers from that won't come from me - I don't watch it) - stop now if you don't want to see spoilers for those. Maybe some Force Awakens considering the revival of the Rey conversation. But I want to talk about characters dying so there could potentially be spoilers for anything where people die. Be warned.
*******
So there were a few deaths this week on TV this week. Abbie Mills died on Sleepy Hollow. Laurel died on Arrow. Someone important died on the 100 (there's the spoiler, again I don't watch it so I can't comment but it's included in the discussion). And in addition to these all being relatively big deaths on genre shows, they all were followed up with a phenomenon that's sorta bizarre to me - the exit of the show by many of its fans.
Television seems to be trying to make moves towards being a more diverse place. Especially genre shows. Whether race-swapping certain characters like the Wests on the Flash or simply creating a new character like John Diggle on Arrow, shows are trying to be inclusive of everyone. And it isn't just race - LGBT characters are showing up more often (Curtis and Sara on Arrow/Legends of Tomorrow, at least one character on The 100, a couple characters on Walking Dead). And it's all written where it's no big deal. Because it isn't. Here's Curtis and here's Curtis' husband is treated just like "here's Curtis and here's Curtis' wife." It's cool.
But as we add more of these characters, I'm seeing a trend that's a bit bizarre to me. When any of these characters either die or are talked about potentially dying, there are people who post that they wouldn't watch the show anymore. There are people who are going to quit watching Sleepy Hollow because Abbie died (not because it might get cancelled or because it isn't as fun as it used to be). There are people who are going to quit watching Arrow because Laurel died. There are people that are going to quit watching The 100 because someone died. When the grave plotline on Arrow was first announced, I thought Diggle might die - I was told by a black friend that he would quit watching if Diggle died.
Clearly, people want to be represented on TV. And while it's taken way too long and is going much too slowly, I find it a bit odd that some people are getting so upset when certain characters are killed off.
And I'm just trying to get some clarification as to why it's so important to some people. Now I completely understand the need for heroes of all races and genders. Little girls were empowered by Elsa on Frozen and Rey in Force Awakens. Black Panther, Miles Morales, Luke Cage, the new Asian Hulk, and many other superheroes are inspiring children of color. And while race-swapping heroes like Johnny Storm, Wally West, Nick Fury and others has been controversial, I think it's good in the long run. Unless race is essential to some character (as was the argued case in the casting of a white Iron Fist recently), it doesn't really matter if they're black or white.
But as we have more female protagonists and protagonists of color, some of those characters are going to die. And while it's clearly empowering to have characters like that, why is it equally disheartening when one of the characters is simply treated like a character and killed off?
Because I feel like we're about to get to a weird area where the only characters that are allowed to die are going to be the white male ones. Shows are going to need diversity, but all those characters are going to be off-limits to any consequences. Especially in today's social media - driven society where showrunners and fans can interact with each other.
And isn't that a bad thing? And I mean that in both ways - people watching a show just because it's diverse and people leaving the show because it stopped being diverse? And in a lot of ways, it doesn't really matter if the show stops being diverse. I asked my black friend if he'd still stop watching if John Diggle was replaced by Andy Diggle in the main cast - he said he'd still stop. I asked if he was replaced by both Andy *and* Curtis (making the show more diverse). He said he'd still stop. Sleepy Hollow is one of the more diverse genre shows (with five main characters being people of color, three of them being women), and it still affected them.
Full disclosure - I'm a white male, and I've never had to worry about not being represented on TV. I never lacked for any white male role models in entertainment. And keeping in mind any privilege I have, I would just like to know if you guys have any insight on this. Because to me, a great character on a great show is awesome, no matter who they are. Male, female, young, old (believe it or not, ireactions), gay, straight, black, white, brown, green, whatever. And if a great character dies, that sucks. But I've never quit watching a show because a great character died. I mean, hell, we all kept watching Sliders as one-by-one, they got rid of 3/4 of our favorite characters.
So what's going on? Is this phenomenon justified? Do you see it being a problem in the future if showrunners start protecting certain characters?
Now regarding Rey, I don't think she's a bad character. I just didn't find her to be all that compelling. I could be perfectly wrong, but it seems like Rey was trained and is already a Jedi / Jedi Master. Which is fine....but I would've appreciated that information being in the movie. And we aren't really watching the growth/triumph of a character as much as the realization of what she's already been. Again, all that is totally fine - I just don't think it's all that interesting if Neo already was The One and just needed someone to tell him.
(For the record, I didn't find Neo to be all that compelling of a character either).
And I don't think it has anything to do with her gender. I find a lot of characters (many of whom are/were also called Mary Sues) to be pretty boring if they start the story as crazy powerful. John Wick, John McClane, Superman. If Batman always has something in his utility belt to get him out of any situation, why would there be any reason to worry about him?
If Episode 8 starts with Rey as the ultimate Jedi warrior, fully unlocked who goes around mowing down First Order troops and restoring peace to the galaxy.....only to be defeated by a souped-up Kylo Ren or an in-person Snoke.....cool. If they're setting her up to be a badass only to be torn down so we see who the *true* badass is....cool. But if they're just gonna say "Anakin was powerful. Luke was better. Rey is the best." then I just think that's boring.
I still liked the movie.
Oh, God, here's that 2013 interview. I just re-read and need to take a bath.
https://web.archive.org/web/20131005120 … max-landis
To be perfectly fair, Max has come out and said that he's embarrassed by a lot of what he said in that interview and that he's grown since then.
Well, I haven't seen Force Awakens since my last post here. It's really hard to really defend/discuss whatever opinions I had then, but I would like to defend a couple points. As per usual, you've done a better job than me of really breaking things down, but here's my two cents.
1. First of all, I'm by ZERO means a Star Wars fanatic. I've probably seen A New Hope 5 times all the way through. I might have seen Empire 2-3 times. Return of the Jedi twice. Maybe. The prequels one time each. Now this is Star Wars and they're on all the time, so I might have seen bits and pieces of the movies a dozen or so times. But sit down and watch Star Wars - it just never connected for me. I can see the allure but cannot identify with it.
So, yes, my memory of the original trilogy required more use of Wookiepedia than actual memory of the movies. And to me, I always thought Luke was a bit of a wimp and a wuss in the first couple of movies. He's brave in the sense that he wants to get out there and is willing to go to great lengths to rescue his friends. But I never got the sense that he was really a hero in ANH or Empire. In the first movie, he wants to do more but his parents and his mentor get killed with him being powerless to do anything. He accomplishes very little in the rescue of Leia. Yeah, he blows up the Death Star, but at the time of watching it, I almost give Obi-Wan's ghost more of the credit. In Empire, the very first scene of the movie, Luke has to be rescued. Then he runs off to train, and all of the action happens in Cloud City. Luke comes to rescue his friends, doesn't save Han, and has to be rescued himself after he's owned and disfigured by Vader.
If you just go by the first two movies, Luke sorta sucks. If you're picking people to go on a mission, I'd rather have Leia than Luke. She's more creative and just as brave. I sorta feel like Luke would've given up the real location of the Rebel base. It isn't until Jedi that he really feels like someone you want to bring into battle (although his plan to rescue Han goes horribly wrong and, again, has to be rescued)
With Rey, I just felt like she was never in any real danger. In Empire, I think there was a real fear that Vader would kill him. Even when Ren had his lightsaber to Rey's neck, I figured she'd get out of it. And she struggles....kinda. But it's the little things - that Han loves her instantly. That *she* is teaching *him* how to fix parts of the Falcon. That she has all the good parts of Han and all the good parts of Luke and all the good parts of Leia. I don't hate her character - I just thought her character was boring.
2. Yes, I agreed with Landis. Yes, I have agreed with him in the past. I don't actually like him that much as a writer (Chronicle was pretty good, American Ultra was fun but forgettable, I haven't seen Frankenstein and don't really want to, I have no interest in Me Him Her, I'd only see Mr. Right because of Anna Kendrick, etc), and he seems like an arrogant asshole most of the time. But I value his opinion because I really think he cares about a lot of this stuff, and I think he comes at it from an interesting angle. I thought it was a bit crazy that he got so much fire on that whole thing, and I guess it's just because so many people loved the movie and didn't want anyone to say anything bad about it. And that we'd been waiting all these years for a female hero in Star Wars, and it felt like cheapening what was supposed to be a historic moment.
So, yeah, I don't think I was just taking his words and vomiting them as my own. Since he's presumably seen the Star Wars saga more than 12 times all the way through, I respect his opinion on the matter more than my own. And since his opinion melded with my original thoughts, I thought I'd let him explain moreso than me.
Now if the Force, as it was originally visioned, is supposed to give the Force-sensitive the ability to either be instinctively good/great at pretty much everything with or without any teaching, that's fine. But I just felt like Rey had so many times where she just seemed to *know* what to do without being taught that it seemed a bit off-putting. Many times in the movie she just "gives it a try" and pretty much succeeds every time.
Now the explanation is probably that Rey has latent training. But I guess I have an issue with pretty big things in a movie having to be explained in a second movie. Hinting at something bigger is fine, but I don't even think they went that far. But in today's film culture, I guess that's just to be expected.
Well, I have a question and it's something that I struggle with too. As writers, do you guys struggle with judging how a show *IS* because you're too concerned with what a show *SHOULD BE* in your eyes?
Because, Info, I know you're a writers and you've got great ideas (and I think either of you would make terrific showrunners) but a lot of the problems you're talking about are expectations for what you thought the show should be. Expectations for what Laurel should be or what was coming. That Laurel would become *the Black Canary* - that there could be a Team Black Canary in, say, Coast City and Laurel comes back one day as an equal to Oliver and not a sidekick.
And if that was ever the plan and it fell apart, I can see judging that. But what if it was never the plan? Can you really get mad about an "unkept promise" if it was never really a promise to begin with? You might think their plan is stupid, but don't you still have to judge it by what it is?
If Laurel was a character who was a good lawyer, lost her way, and then found it again through crimefighting - then her arc is fine. It's tragic, but at the time of her death (if she's dead, which, again, I doubt) she was content. She'd done something with her life. Saved lives. Felt alive. A lot of us live 70 years and never experience that. To her, she'd already done it.
Was her character bland? Yes. At times, I forgot she was on the show. I thought her transition to a member of the team was sloppy and, honestly, unrealistic. She took a handful of boxing lessons and suddenly was an equal on the team. That was bizarre to me. But she was friends with Nyssa and maybe it was in her blood....I don't know. But I still think there's an arc there. It's not a great arc, and it's not worthy of (supposedly, I honestly can't say) one of the better female superheroes. But it is an arc.
Another thought on shipper outrage -- I think it's stupid.
Agree 2000%. I have a friend who is a Olicity hater, and he was prominently retweeting #NoLaurelNoArrow tweets all day. And I just don't understand that. And the Olicity fangirls seem even worse. I think there are people who think Felicity is annoying, and I think there are people who are just huge fans of Black Canary. And those people were annoyed that Oliver Queen was ending up with someone else. I think a lot of them see GA/BC as one of the greater comic couples around, and they want to see that romance on Arrow.
And, on the other side, I think a lot of girls see themselves as Felicity. An awkward, shy, nerdy girl who can get the big handsome man. So she's an audience insert, and they like that. It's funny...when my roommate would walk by when I was watching Arrow in the living room, he'd stop when Felicity was on the screen. And I'd say something like, "She's the nerd." And he'd look confused because Emily Bett Rickards is clearly very attractive. And I'd point out the fact that she wears glasses and makes pop culture references, and he'd just shake his head and walk away.
What's sad, in a way, is that the show is so divisive, and the two sides are so entrenched, that the show's kinda screwed either way. If Laurel had died telling Oliver he was the love of her life and said nothing else (especially nothing about Felicity), I think it would've been better for "Lauliver" fans because "she died the love of his life." But what happened was they set themselves up where you have people actively hating one character because she's the rival of your character. It just ends up hurting the show, and I don't know how else the show could move passed it besides just killing off the character they view to be less valuable.
That being said, I've convinced myself the the Laurel death is a fake-out. I think whatever was in the pouch is something to stop her heart or whatever, and it's a fakeout. And maybe the "secret" she told him involved telling her dad (I hope, to spare poor Lance) what was going on.
(SPOILERS)
Now I know the next couple episodes are supposed to revolve around trying to bring Laurel back, but that could all be part of some plan to get Dahrk.
(END SPOILERS)
I don't know if I love that any more, but that's how I think it'll go. My guess is actually that it's still Felicity who dies - Curtis was promoted to a series regular, and I still think he's the one who ends up as Overwatch. I don't see any other reason to promote him, and making Felicity the new Black Canary would be insane.
I've been posting on the boards for years (as in, when the show was still airing). And, yes, there have been multiple boards. This iteration was started after the Sci-Fi Channel (back when it was called that) closed their board. This one has been saved multiple times, at times being kept afloat by half a dozen people.
A lot of the time, we get by talking about random stuff. Comic book movies and TV shows. But we still talk Sliders a lot of the time. A few of us are pretty good writers (I will exclude myself from that, although I did some Sliders fanfic a while back).
If you want to know the heart of this board, it's ireactions. He should be credited with keeping this thing going.
No that's absolutely true. But they, at least, know that Dahrk is more dangerous than anyone they've faced before since he's actually killed. Ra's never managed to do it. Merlyn's killed before, but his murder of Sara was sorta roundabout.
I just think there needs to be consequences. It actually could've been an interesting creative move if they'd had someone like Laurel die out on a routine night out via one of the Ghosts. Maybe Oliver has them out there working too hard, and Laurel gets tired and gets lazy (sorta like Batman in Knightfall). At the end of the day, this is Oliver's story, and Laurel's death should advance his story. He should intensely go after Dahrk, but he also has to be careful about who he sends in.
Exactly.
Yeah I've thought about the Grammer thing too. But he's had 20 years to get something done if he really wanted. There's "being a fan of something" and "willing to pour my heart and soul into something." I mean, honestly, this stuff has to be viral in a lot of ways. I absolutely agree that Grammer could get the ball rolling, but unless he's producing it himself and doing all the legwork, it takes him being a superfan, rallying troops, and then convincing X number of people to join his cause. It would eat up a ton of his time and energy, and he probably has bigger fish to fry.
I mean think about all the shows and movies you consider yourself a fan of. Now how many are you willing to write fanfic for? How many are you willing to talk about on a daily basis? And how many would you be willing to say, "I'm putting my life on hold to devote to this?"
Now you guys are absolutely right - if a Sliders reunion panel was created at ComicCon, that's a place where the ball gets rolling. Whether the cast gets together and starts talking and seeing when their schedules might be free. If the panel is packed with super-high energy and tons of interest in a new movie or whatever, then you have the beginnings of something. Because there's a huge difference between Jerry O'Connell or Kelsey Grammer or whoever calling and saying "hey, you guys should do some new Sliders" and a studio exec finding out organically "Hey, there was a huge panel at ComicCon with all the original Sliders and people were really excited about it. What if we decided to try and do something with the rights?"
Well, Felicity was shot in an ambush. That's not really what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is this team going out, week after week, with no one coming back even injured most of the time. Thea made a joke about excuses for bruises, but it was in reference to sparring with Oliver.
To compare it to Walking Dead again, the regulars on that show are all basically Navy SEALS at this point. They come up with a plan and execute it perfectly every week. The problem is that there's no drama there. And I've found myself more and more likely to look at my phone during a fight scene because there's no longer any drama to it. It's just going to be Team Arrow or whoever doing some punching or kicking, and then we're on to the next scene that might mean something.
I was thinking last night that Thea and Laurel got ambushed by League of Assassins and came out okay. These are the top killers in the world, and Thea and Laurel fought them off like it was nothing. Yeah, the League got what they came for, but that's where Laurel could've easily been killed.
If the League of Assassins or these Ghosts are supposed to be so tough, they can't be relegated to Puddies from Power Rangers. We have to see what they can do, and the best way to do that is to show them kicking one of our guy's butts. And that's, honestly, yet to happen. Ra's, Merlyn, and Dahrk have been able to win against our guys, but that's about it.
Yeah, they could've just had someone leave, but how many times is Team Arrow going to hit the streets and come back unscathed. In these action shows, I think people need to die, or the action pieces become pedestrian. Roy left the show alive and well. If you also have Diggle or Laurel or Thea leave, then Team Arrow becomes indestructible. I think Oliver really needs to learn that he's putting himself and his closest family in danger. And that's why I would've picked Diggle. I would've kept Andy good (or brought in someone else) who could serve as a surrogate father and take baby Sara out of harm's way.
I honestly don't hate Olicity. What I don't really like is the drama. So if Laurel's death gets rid of a character that the writers had no use for and pushes Oliver and Felicity to a better place with no drama, then I think it could be fine. What's odd is that Curtis is getting promoted to a series regular next season, and he fills in the same role as Felicity. So unless he's going to train and become Mr. Terrific, then I don't know where he fits in.
Well, here's the situation they had in front of them - kill a regular or cop out and kill someone less significant. Prior to this, you said you were most worried that they would kill someone small - like Lance or Felicity's mom. I was in the same boat. Is this better than that?
So if we are talking about regulars, it's Oliver, Thea, Felicity, Laurel, Diggle. Technically Lance and Merlyn are regulars, but we're talking about Team Arrow here.
Oliver - It wasn't going to be him. They sorta tried it last season, and it was a mess.
Thea - You could make the same argument with Lance women and Queen women. Oliver lost his dad, lost his mom, and this would be losing his sister. Stripping down his character would be fine, but you'd see a lot of the same criticisms with a Thea death as a Laurel death.
Felicity - Let's face it - this is the one you wanted. And I don't necessarily disagree with it as the choice. But these guys aren't idiots. They see ratings, they do polling, they do focus groups, they sell DVDs, they look at social media - while there are definitely people who hate Olicity, enough Olicity fans exist that they had to know that Felicity is a major force in their success. I'm with you - I don't get it. But there are hardcore fans on both sides of the Olicity debate, and if they were going to kill a primary member of Team Arrow, there was a 50/50 chance it was going to be one side of the Olicity debate.
Diggle - This was my vote. Diggle is awesome. He's cool. He's funny, but he's also the backbone of Team Arrow. Hell, Oliver is the badass star of the show, and DIGGLE IS HIS BODYGUARD. Diggle is his right hand. But imagine if last night's episode had gone the same way, but it's Diggle that dies. Because Oliver didn't do enough to prove that Andy was a traitor. Diggle dies because Andy betrayed him. I can see the anger in Oliver's eyes. But also the fear. Whenever Oliver was in a dangerous spot, Dig had his back. Now he's got to face the most dangerous foe he's ever faced without anyone watching his back. He's going to look behind him and realize, "holy crap, my backup is my sister and my ex. Both have been in the field for only a couple of years. If Diggle can die, ANY of us can die."
Laurel - And here's the last one. If Oliver is off the table and Felicity is too popular, then Laurel was the easy choice. I didn't think they were going to do it because I thought Laurel was the Lois to Felicity's Lana. That Oliver had to go through Felicity to get to the real love of his life. And that's why I was surprised - moreso than I would've been for anyone else. I thought she was safe.
But if this show only has one more season left, even if they killed Felicity, do you think there was enough time to salvage Laurel's character? Even if Felicity was gone and replaced by Curtis (who you also don't love), haven't they already burned through enough of your goodwill? Could the show really ever be salvaged?
What's crazy to me after looking at the #Olicity and #NoLaurelNoArrow hashtags last night, is the VITRIOL on both sides of the debate. I guess it's good that people care enough, but Olicity fans were cheering the death of Laurel while I saw Laurel fans throwing away DVDs, burning merchandise, condemning the show and its writers. All over a fake romance? That just seemed bizarre.
And that's why I would've picked Diggle. I know I would've been declared racist, and I know people would've left then. But is Arrow like Walking Dead now? Where the show simply isn't good enough and so people are only watching for one or two characters? So the show was literally damned no matter who it killed?
Torme does not appear to be that guy. He is way out of the picture in Hollyweird these days, and seems far more wrapped up in UFO's.
And that's basically my ultimate point re: Jerry. If Sliders is ever going to return, in any form, it needs a champion. Someone who will go into the important offices with a pitch and make things happen. That's how this stuff works.
You're right: Torme isn't that guy anymore. If he was, it would've been done already. And my point has been, Jerry might not be that guy, but he's the best chance the show has as far as we know. He's the only one talking about it.
Example: Battlestar Galactica. It's another small sci-fi show with a cult following. Its star, Richard Hatch, spent years and years and years trying to get a continuation produced. Made comics, made novels, made a teaser trailer for a continuation called "The Second Coming". He got really close a few times. And while he never got his version on screen, he knocked down enough doors that Universal decided to make the reboot. And it got a new champion in Ronald D. Moore.
So if Jerry goes around Hollywood and shops Sliders enough, anything can happen. But that's where it has to start. Petitions might work, but the one I found has 70 signatures. I signed it, but 70 isn't going to get anything moving. Kickstarter could work, but you have to have people attached for people to be willing to pay money for it. For these things, you still need a champion.
Now it's true that Jerry might not be the best champion for Sliders. If a Carlton Cuse or a JJ Abrams or Vince Gilligan or Chris Carter or Shawn Ryan or any number of TV producers wanted to get a Sliders reboot off the ground, they probably could. But usually, those things take something smaller to get them off the ground. Richard Hatch had to pitch BSG so many times before Moore found out they were doing it and thought, "Yeah, I could do something cool there."
And maybe Jerry has to go into a room and say "here's my idea. I'm Arturo with a bunch of great young actors." And he has this glossy cool-looking promo art, but the Universal exec brushes him off. But then the next meeting is Cuse for Colony Season 2, and he sees the promo art sticking out of a folder on the exec's desk. "You're doing SLIDERS? That's awesome, I loved that show!" "Well, not really. But is that something you'd like to work on?" "Absolutely!"
And that's how you get Sliders: TNG.
Is there any truth to the idea that WB worked hard to get Bale back for BvS, and it was SNYDER who shot it down?
Well.....damn.
I'm not sure I'm as upset as some (there's a really big #NoLaurelNoArrow hashtag going on now) because I'm not all that familiar with Laurel from the comics. I don't like the idea that a character should be off-limits because they're a big deal in the comics. If they need to kill Oliver (for real, not like last time) and it serves the greater Arrowverse story, then that'd be fine with me. But I think the problem for me is that Laurel was never a great character on this show. I don't think the writers knew what to do with her, they stumbled on this female character that was easier to write (Felicity), and then that grew into a monster. Guggenheim basically said tonight that they did all they could with Laurel/Oliver, and they needed to close the book on it.
I still say the death should've been Diggle. I think it would've meant a lot more to the team because Laurel barely felt like a team member in the first place. She meant more as an ADA and a reason to keep Lance around. Now....I don't really know what this changes.
I tend to agree. I was trying to think of a way to reinvent the series, but I'm still enjoying it as is. When Info pointed out the duplicity in the series, I nodded because he's right. But I also haven't really noticed it because I enjoy watching it. I watched "World's Finest" the night it aired because I was *excited* to see what they'd do with him. And I smiled the whole time watching it because Kara and Barry looked like they were having such a great time working together.
If we never get another crossover, Supergirl is going to have a place in the Arrowverse. And that's cool. Kara, and by connection, Clark is now in the universe started by Oliver Queen. That's awesome. But Supergirl isn't like Constantine - I don't see it as a failure that needs to be reabsorbed by the CW. There's things that Supergirl does better than its cousin's shows on the CW. And I'd love to see it continue so that we can get Stephen Amell over on CBS and Melissa Benoist on the CW.
For the record, the idea of killing Alex made me sad. I think she's a good character. And I think that's why I picked her - she's the one who would need to die to shake up the show show. Killing off anyone else wouldn't do the job.
I do think Spider-Man is better suited for TV. His story is really deep and unique, and I think it would do better to unfold over 100 episodes of TV instead of 6-10 hours of film.
And my problem with Uncle Ben's killer is that Peter never follows up on it. There's being obsessive about finding him (and ignoring those who need his help more) and there's letting a killer go free. If there's more important matters than finding his killer (and, yes, the Lizard is one of those things), that's fine. If he grows beyond needing revenge, that's fine. But if that's the case, do a follow-up in ASM2. If you don't want him to personally take down the killer, have a scene where Peter gives a dossier of all he knows about the killer to the police. Or, hell, have Peter pick up a newspaper to find that the killer was found by the NYPD without his help. He smiles, knowing that justice was served.
But the idea that Peter just decides to abandon his search was really off-putting to me.
Jerry doesn't own the rights to the property. He doesn't have a real choice in the matter.
True. But I'm saying Jerry is the best chance the series has of continuing. All other avenues, so far, have failed. The only new sliders we've gotten since 2/4/2000 is the Kickstarter or Die video (starring Jerry as Quinn and no one else). Jerry doesn't have a ton of clout, but he's the best chance that the series has. A Sliders: TNG with an all-new cast would be great, but who's making it? Who's clamoring for it? We've been talking about this every couple months for 16 years, and nothing has gotten done.
Jerry talking about Sliders is the biggest pub this property has had in years. And maybe there's a guy out there who'd do it without any help, but I'm guessing the best way to get Universal (who does own the rights) is a script written by Torme and a commitment from Jerry O'Connell to star in it. If there's a better way, none of us have thought of it in 16 years.
Haha I don't hate old people!
Yeah, but that's my point exactly. Jerry would need to be the force behind any reboot. Torme alone wasn't able to get it done. Weiss tried and couldn't get it done, and he was a pretty big producer for a while. Cable ratings, DVD sales, and Netflix views weren't enough to get any traction going. It's been 16 years, and the only traction we've ever gotten on new Sliders is the Kickstarter or Die video that Jerry did.
So if this thing is gonna get done, Jerry is going to do it. And I don't think Jerry would want to do it for the love of the property. Doing a bunch of work to get the project off the ground and then doing a cameo doesn't seem like Jerry's style. It's probably best for the property, but I think Jerry is going to want to be involved. It's probably his best chance to star in something, and it's probably nostalgia-driven for him too. He could be the star of Sliders again.
So if Jerry's going to be the force behind something, Jerry is going to need to be in it in a starring role. And the rest has to be written around it.
But if The Powers That Be did allow Jerry to be a part of it, I can't see him taking on the Arturo role - he just doesn't have it in him. I agree with the Quinn Snr / Jnr thing that could be done - allowing him to still have his place within the multiverse. So Mr Mallory almost perfected sliding and got himself lost in the process. Years later, Quinn Jr completes his work and goes searching for his/her father. That allows Jerry to have a recurring role, still be a 'Quinn' and have a significant impact on the story and events - but allows the fab 4 to be seen and embraced by a new generation of viewers and fans.
Well, the only reason I bring up Jerry in a lead role in each of my scenarios is the fact that I'm assuming Jerry would need to be a driving force behind the revival. Jerry probably has the most clout out of anyone that has worked on Sliders in a while. Torme has tried (and failed) to get anything done. Weiss hasn't produced anything in a while. JRD might be a more familiar face to some, but no one knows his name.
If anyone has the potential to get this off the ground, Jerry has the name-recognition and the connections in Hollywood to get it done.
The next question would be "what capacity would Jerry want to work in?" And my answer to that would be "probably star in it." The only reason I say that is because he's only produced/directed/written for two things in his career - Sliders and a 2004 film "First Daughter". All 10+ years ago. So if Jerry can get it off the ground, I'm guessing he wants to do what he's been doing in the last 10 years - acting.
So if Jerry is working to get this off the ground and wants to act in it (and, presumably, anyone helping him would want him to act in it), you have two options. Either he's playing Quinn or he's throwing out all the continuity and you're recasting him as someone else. If Sliders is Quinn/Wade/Rembrandt/Arturo, then Arturo seems the natural fit if Jerry wants to be a star of the show. JRD would presumably help him work on the mentor role if Jerry called, and it wouldn't necessarily have to be the exact same Arturo that JRD played.
The issue with him playing Quinn is a) continuity baggage and b) the age of the rest of the original cast. The problem with all of these reboots/rebootquels is that Sliders has much less nostalgia factor than "Boy Meets World" or "Full House" and that the original cast is in their 40s or older. I don't know many people in the target demo of something like Netflix that would tune in to watch a cast of all 40+ actors with very little star power. I just don't think you'd get much of that audience. Like Girl Meets World and Fuller House, you'd have to work in younger stars to match the demographic.
That's why I think Jerry should be in the main cast for any idea, and that's why I think Jerry is probably the only returning original cast member. I bet Cleavant, JRD, and Sabrina could/would return in some guest star capacity. I just can't see any legitimate project getting off the ground with the four original sliders, reboot or not.
Strictly within Planet ireactions -- if I had to do a SLIDERS reboot/revival but could only get Jerry O'Connell, I wouldn't have him play Quinn Mallory. To me, SLIDERS is Quinn, Wade, Rembrandt and Arturo. SLIDERS is about the sliders -- these sliders. These people. The geekboy adventurer. The shy firebrand. The out of date showbiz icon. And the wise professor.
Would you be okay with Jerry as Arturo? That's how I saw him in my pitch.
I guess the question is what form this series takes. Is it a reboot or a next generation? If it's a straight reboot, I don't have any issue with four new stars and putting Jerry in some other role. I'd even be okay with Jerry playing the "Michael Mallory" role but still playing Quinn (with "Quinn Jr" as the new lead) so that Jerry could still play Quinn in the multiverse.
If it's Next Generation, make Jerry the mentor. Either Quinn is the REDUX version or a previous slider guiding a new team. Because, yeah, Sliders didn't leave much of a legacy. But Quinn is still a potentially great character, and if it's' going to exist in the same canon (and it's a multiverse show, it sorta has to - like how the Shipp Flash is still canon on the CW Flash) and Jerry is going to be on there, make him Quinn. A different Quinn possibly. But still Quinn.
Ha, well whatever it is, you could write it. You understand the characters better than most, and you've shown (with various TV shows/movies) an understanding for how character and story should work.
For me, I think the idea doesn't need to be complicated or even directly connect to anything from the original run. The only thing we have to include is Jerry. So I think you have a Quinn (not necessarily *the* Quinn) who slid for a while and ended up staying on some world that was "close enough." He's a professor at a college, and one of his students is starting to get pretty close to replicating his work. Quinn tries to divert him, but he's also curious. Maybe he's married to Wade and she comes along. Maybe none of the other Sliders are on the trip. You'd probably have to go with a younger cast with Jerry as the mentor character with the occasional guest spot by Rembrandt, Wade, or Arturo.
And that's what I'd do. Like with the original, you'd need to find a time in history that's currently relevant. In the mid-90s, it was the end of the Cold War. Now? Terrorism? A world where a seemingly-oppresive empire in the Middle East keeps interfering with the developing religious states in North America because of the oil located on the continent. Quinn is the leader of a militia trying to drive out the infidels. Something like that?
Point is.....maybe it's the same Quinn from any of the seasons. Maybe it isn't. It doesn't really matter - we know there were endless groups of our sliders out there who could've had any number of adventures. Quinn can mention going to a world where dinosaurs were alive, and it could be referencing "Dino Veritas" or it could be some adventure his group had. As long as it's vague enough, it can be a fun line for old fans while still adding value to new fans.
It is pretty cool - he does seem jazzed about it. He has some buddies in Hollywood, and it really doesn't have to be an expensive project. Either get Torme to write something cool or pay for something ireactions did. You'd give a discount, right Ib?
Well, on FOX, it would actually be her working with a policeman. Both as her regular job and her secret job. Jimmy would've quit his job as a photographer to work as a cop in National City (because that's what his dad was or something). And Kara would be an expert on alien life or something, and they'd solve cases together. Like Minority Report. And Lucifer. And Almost Human. And Sleepy Hollow. And this new Houdini and Doyle show. And so on and so on and so on.
But, yeah, I see what you mean.
Sadly, being a CBS show likely means that there will be no drastic changes to the formula, so this is what she is stuck with for the rest of the series.
It could be worse. It could be a FOX show, and Kara could be police consultant. Like every show on their network.
I'm just not sure how I'd go about restructuring the series at this point.
I think it'd take an incident where Alex is killed. Maybe with J'onn responsible. So he goes off on his own (sorta like his arc on Justice League Unlimited) to live among the humans. And because Kara truly has lost everyone (I assume Dean Cain stays/is dead at this point too). So she goes off on her own. Leaves CatCo and National City and does her own thing. Maybe have her travel the country like Supernatural for a year before she settles somewhere else. Or maybe she goes on some season-long journey as part of her job at CatCo so Winn and James could continue to guest star.
Other than that, I think the status quo will continue.
Question about Daredevil - do people know that he's blind? On the show there's a limited sample to work with, but in the comics is it something that is known?
I'm liking season two so far. Just finished episode 4. They've done a good job with Frank Castle.
I actually agree with all that. Kara's character doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And another one - they want Superman to be a presence in the show, but they don't want him to be in the show. They want it to sorta be in the DCCU but also be its own thing. Which leads to a ton of problems. When Kara goes evil, Clark is either trusting J'onn to do what was necessary to save National City, or he's allowing the 2nd/3rd most powerful being on the planet to run amok.
I'm not sure I could give you five reasons why I like Supergirl. I just think it's enjoyable to watch
Well, here's the thing. Amazing Spider-Man has two primary villains before the Lizard even really develops - Uncle Ben's killer and Dr. Ratha. Ratha is really a villain to Connors (who is a good guy until he transforms), and Uncle Ben is clearly a villain to Peter. Once the Lizard transforms and turns evil, both of these villains are literally forgotten. Dr. Ratha was dealt with in a scene that was eventually deleted, and I have no idea if Uncle Ben's killer was ever dealt with in any version. There's a huge point to Spider-Man trying to find his uncle's killer....*the* reason he goes into crime fighting....and it's completely forgotten by the end. It's never mentioned or followed up on in the sequel. Uncle Ben gets murdered, and the guy gets away with it.
To release a reboot so soon after the Raimi series, they needed to make it different-enough so that it didn't just look like an excuse to keep the rights. In my opinion, they didn't do enough different. And from ireactions' stories, the stuff they *did* get in had to be fought for. Which is weird because all the posters kept calling it "The Untold Story." When I finally saw it (I skipped seeing it in theaters), it was just a generic reboot.
There was some good characterization, and Garfield/Stacy are great together. But my other problem is that Peter is already cool and fun when he gets bitten. Becoming Spider-Man made a great life even better for Peter, and that was odd to me. He's already a fun skateboard kid, pretty popular, when he gets his powers. I like the idea of a Spider-Man where he chooses to help people to the detriment of his social and personal lives. It seemed like, in ASM1, that Peter could've gotten Gwen regardless of any confidence he gets from the spider bite. Something about that was a bit bizarre to me.
Okay, let me try and tackle all that.
SUPERGIRL - I agree that Kara had better chemistry with Barry than anyone on her show. While that's a problem, it's not necessarily a huge problem. I think Melissa hit a high point with her character (she was so much fun), and they just need to channel that with the existing characters. As far as success goes, on TV Line's Renewal Scorecard, Supergirl was recently upgrade from "A Safe Bet" to "A Sure Thing." He's usually right so there'll be a renewal.
LEGENDS - I liked the Chronos reveal too. Once again, a season-long baddie ends up being a former hero, but that just seems to be par for the course in the Arrowverse. I liked this last episode a lot, and I think it did much better than the previous 1950s episode. The whole 2-year thing was pretty cool, and it'll be interesting to see how it affects Ray, Kendra, and Sara. Regarding the cast for next year, Michael Ausiello (TV Line again) said that he doesn't believe there will be a wholesale change in the cast to season two. So it won't be an anthology series....which is both fine and disappointing.
ARROW - You still hate this show more than I do. I thought this last episode was pretty good. I don't love Curtis either, but he was fun like Felicity used to be. And it seems like we'll find out who's in the grave this week.
FLASH - The past was changed but not really. I think we're supposed to believe that Hartley is supposed to be the biggest change. Outside of that, Barry didn't change much. Thawne knows, but I think Barry covered that. The team knows, but they know not to mess with history too much. Not much else was changed, was it?
TALIA - Well, Talia would be way older, right?
Well, I respect Garfield for sticking to his principles. Sony ruined what could've been a fresh take on the character....twice. Hard to rectify that.
Still would've been interesting to see a Sinister Six movie. That's about it, though. All the teases that Sony wanted so desperately weren't all that enticing.
Yeah, I've seen that before. There's something wrong about Peter's dad being alive in my opinion. It'd be like if Thomas Wayne was secretly alive. It just seems like it undermines a core part of the character (although it'd be much worse if it was Uncle Ben who wasn't really dead since Ben's death is what really makes Peter Parker embrace his destiny).
It's a well-acted scene. It's pretty beautiful, and you're right, it really does make a lot of the movie work a lot better. Although ASM and ASM2 are just so tampered with that I don't think either film really got a chance to do much. We chronicled the tampering the studio did with the first movie that made it almost impossible to follow and understand. The second movie is so concerned with setting up Sinister Six and a cinematic universe that it fails spectacularly in almost every way. It's just as confusing and bogged down.
I liked Garfield as Spidey. I liked Emma as Gwen. I thought they did a pretty good job of trying to tell the story in a different way from Raimi's Spider-Man. But I think Sony sabotaged and tampered to the point where both movies are just disasters.
I absolutely see what the first reviewer is saying. And, honestly, I think all that is in there. Batman kills people in them middle of the movie. He's branding people and sending them to prison to die. He's absolutely lost his way. And at the end, the implication is that Bruce is changed. That he let Superman down but won't anymore. It's all in there.
But both reviews are right in that Superman is portrayed as someone who is so cold and distant that he can't possibly be that beacon of light. Instead of offering Bruce the chance to save Martha instead of killing Superman as a way to bring him back, it came off as confusing to me. Superman could've easily saved Martha in ten seconds without any of the destruction and/or possible death we ended up seeing. Superman couldn't possibly know that Luthor had a Kryptonian monster so Batman should've been the one to confront Luthor. I absolutely see what the script was trying. But as I've been saying, Snyder is just not the right guy for this job.
I think the problem is that Snyder wanted to do a Batman movie. So the movie is a Batman movie with Superman in it. For the Batman movie to work, Superman can't be a guy who's clearly a good guy. He can't be smiling with kids and babies. He can't be saving Air Force One or protecting a bunch of innocents. When he rescues people, he has to have dead eyes. Otherwise, Batman really is a psychopath who is attacking the greatest hero the Earth has. There has to be doubt. Superman has to be portrayed as the bad guy. And for most of the movie, he is. In retrospect, the bathtub scene is way out of place because it shows a Superman who has fun. Who smiles. Who legitimately cares. That Superman is completely absent the rest of the movie.
I don't blame Cavill. I think he's just doing what he was told.
So I've allowed myself to read and listen to some of the more harsh reviews of Batman/Superman. From Max Landis to Kevin Smith to the guys at the Weekly Planet, I think people are definitely being a little too harsh on the movie. Some of the motivations are lame and weak, and the characterizations aren't great. But I felt like this was a movie that people were eager to tear apart, as opposed to something like Force Awakens, where people were willing to forgive.
That being said, whether or not the movie succeeds, the film was designed as a launching pad for an entire DCCU. And as some people have shown, there are some huge issues with that. I know we've done a bunch of spoiler tags, but I feel like this one is important.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
Regardless of what you think about Batman killing, he seems to be doing a lot of it. And, yes, Batman has killed before, but this one seems to be a lot more intentional. If that's this version of Batman, that's fine. But it does affect a solo Batman movie. If Batman is willing to kill a couple dozen thugs for Lex, what's to stop him from immediately trying to kill the Joker (or the Penguin or whoever) the second they step out of line? Is this a Batman whose first move is to kill? Would that ruin a Batman solo film?
So Superman is dead. We all know that he's not, and the last shot of the movie hints at that. But it wasn't just Superman who died - Clark Kent died too. I don't remember how this was handled in Death of Superman, but it was in the Daily Planet. They buried him. Not only that, they actually buried the Clark Kent version in Smallville. People would've seen the body go in the ground. How would they explain Clark Kent's resurrection when Superman comes back? Is the secret identity done? I realize the secret identity isn't a big part of this universe, but you gotta think that affects Man of Steel 2, right?
The Justice League tease. So in the stolen data, there's the info on the Justice League, right? There's files on Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg. So it's obvious that Lex has information on these super-powered people. First, why doesn't Lex include them in his plan to kill Superman? Why use Batman to kill Superman when he has so much info on these other, more powerful people? He already blackmails Superman and manipulates Batman. Couldn't he do the same with them.
Then the weirder one. In the data, the headings are the various logos for each hero. It's first used as a tease, and then the movie uses the logos to show each hero. WW symbol is Wonder Woman, lightning bolt is Flash, A is Aquaman, etc. But these heroes aren't active. We don't see Barry saving someone in his costume, he's in street clothes. Aquaman is just out swimming. Cyborg isn't doing anything. As far as we know, these guys aren't active yet. Lex seems to know more about their powers than anything. Did Lex create their logos? Did Lex give them their superhero names? Isn't that a little crazy?
Fair enough. I realize the whole "breaking one movie into two movies theatrically" is relatively recent, but it's such a pervasive thing now that I figured that's what they were doing. Good to know I was wrong.
According to a November 2015 interview, they're not being filmed back to back.
That makes much more sense. But if that's the case, the titling is a bit bizarre. Oh well, my mistake.
Well, Alan Sepinwall had a great point. Supergirl's numbers jumped when Flash was on board. Meaning that CW fans came over to watch Barry on Supergirl. In other words, CBS (the #1 network) depended on the CW to boost their ratings. That's simply incredible, and it shows how the CW has really done well in terms of producing original programming. They really took advantage of the superhero craze, and the other networks either failed to take advantage or simply failed when they tried.
And I'd like to see more crossovers. What's interesting is the complete lack of overlap in the two universes. If Kara or Clark exist in the Arrowverse (and Rip Hunter implied Superman exists), then they haven't made themselves public. And they flat-out said that Flash, Green Arrow, and Black Canary don't exist in Supergirl's universe. Not only that, but none of the Flash cast existed.
I know it was done to avoid more crossovers in that episode (because Barry would use Team Flash to get home instead of Team Kara), but it is interesting that they've basically set up a Venn Diagram where nothing really crosses over. Although I gotta think that Kara looked up Barry on her earth, and Barry looked up Kara when he got home.
I'm not a Felicity hater, but the team was so much more fun with Curtis in the "Overwatch" role.
Wait.....wait....wait.
So the next movie is Suicide Squad. Cool. Looks fun.
Then Wonder Woman. Awesome. She was teased in BvS. Looked great. Looking forward to seeing her first movie.
Then Justice League Part One. Cool. We've set everyone up. We know Batman. Know Superman. We'll know Wonder Woman. We got teases of the others. Awesome.
Then....Flash? Then Aquaman? Then Shazam?
THEN Justice League Part Two? Wha....?
So how is that even going to work? Are Justice League Part One and Justice League Part Two not connected? Is it going to be like Avengers and Avengers 2? Because it seems like they're doing it like Mockingjay or the last Harry Potter or Infinity Wars - where it's one long movie that they're splitting in two as opposed to two separate movies. But if Flash and Aquaman are having solo adventures after part one, then part one can't end on a cliffhanger, can it? So it can't be one long movie, I guess?
Because when they announced it, I'm picturing Darkseid standing on Superman's neck, about to kill him. An army of parademons flying above a devastated Justice League. To be continued in Part Two. Which really doesn't lend itself to a fun Flash solo adventure taking place after it.
So is the titling not the way that it looks? I know the 2-part thing is a pretty new development, but I thought for sure that's what they were doing with Justice League.
Yeah I read that too. I didn't hate it as much as he did, but he does point out most of the film's flaws.
I've seen several reviewers who have been accused of giving certain story elements from Star Wars: The Force Awakens a pass but then punishing Batman v Superman for the same stuff. And while I didn't love BvS, I'm in complete agreement. And most of the critics seem to agree with the sentiment too, with not much more than "well, it's just how I feel" as their counterargument. I guess it's because Star Wars was fun and BvS wasn't? Because while I agree with that, I think Batman v Superman was better than The Force Awakens.
The Supergirl/Flash crossover worked really, really well. I thought it was great. The way the fight ended was super cheesy, but most of the Barry/Kara scenes were pretty great. I also thought it was a bit silly how he ended up in the Supergirl universe, and I thought it was a bit silly that they assumed running fast would send him back. But, oh well, it was worth it.
I do wonder if it's going to have any impact on the Arrowverse. Will Barry try and look for alien life? Will Kara ever reference the Flash again?
Jessie becomes a speedster too, right?
You could easily shave 45-minutes off of this film and lose nothing.
Yeah. I do think they did a decent job of tying most things back (whether they were tied well, like your example, is another matter). There were times when I was watching and wondering if we had time for Batman to take down a Russian mobster or if we had time for a Lois investigation. Or if we had to meet Wallace, the Wayne employee. And all those things ended up playing a role in the story. And I was never really bored with the movie - I just felt like it thought it was more important than it actually was. And these days, important = long (see The Revenant)
And like I said in one of my posts, this movie desperately needed a Superman Returns - like scene where Superman saves the day in some thrilling, extraordinary way. It would've injected some fun into what ended up being a somber story.
There's a moment in the end where Wonder Woman is fighting, and she smiles because she's facing an enemy she respects. Even though it's a dangerous situation, she's having fun with it because she probably hasn't had to fight like that in decades. And she shows more personality in that three seconds than Superman shows in the whole film.
For some reason, they've been showing Superman III on SyFy recently, and I watched about three minutes of it the other day. It was the scene where Clark and Lana are out with her kid bowling. And it's a stupid, ridiculous scene because Clark ends up using a super-sneeze to knock down all the pins for Lana's kid, and the pins explode and everyone has a laugh even though it's an insanely over-the-top scene. And while I agree with Info that the Reeve movies aren't the golden level that everyone says they are, I think they captured the spirit of Superman there. A kid was getting bullied, and Clark used his powers to make the kid feel like a superhero. He inspired the kid and made him feel like Superman for a second. That's something I associate with Superman...making people feel better....that Snyder's Superman doesn't have any of. I see no reason to love Snyder's Superman. I'd be terrified of him.
Thanks
Was Jessica Alba good in Dark Angel? I never watched it.
Deserve or not, Hunter and Bobbi are getting a pilot for a spinoff. Not sure how far along it is, but that's why they were disavowed.
I don't get the last episode of Agents of SHIELD. Why would Bobbi and Hunter have to be disavowed by an organization that has already been disavowed? Aren't all of the SHIELD agents already considered terrorists by the world?
Because spinoff.
I went home and watched THE FLASH and ARROW afterwards and was pleased to be reminded that superheroes can actually be FUN.
Pretty much.
Well, I mean I guess it depends. The military's position on Superman (in both the movie and the prequel comic) is "well, what are we supposed to do?" The surveillance they were trying at the end of the last movie is either nonexistant or irrelevant. He seems to have no capacity within the government (think the DEO in Supergirl), and it doesn't appear that the government has done anything in response to the Battle of Metropolis.
And, yeah, it rippled through the movie. It was definitely the catalyst. But what was the real impact? Metropolis seems like business as usual. There's a memorial, but it seems like everything else is pretty much rebuilt (keeping in mind how long it took to rebuild the Twin Towers, New Orleans after Katrina, etc). The movie made a big deal about the talking heads dealing with Superman, but the public opinion seems to be the public opinion of mainstream Superman. Yeah, he's powerful, but he'd never hurt us.
When I saw the government scenes in the trailers. "Today is a day for truth." "This committee finds him responsible." I, naturally I think, assumed that he was going to stand in front of a committee for the Battle of Metropolis. But in the movie, it's a significantly smaller incident that he's having to face the government for. If there was any sort of hearing, it's not referenced in any of the pre-movie materials or the movie. That was a little frustrating.
So most people in the movie just trust Superman, despite the fact that Superman doesn't have the warm, media-friendly persona in this universe that he seems to have in every other version of the character. There are some protesters, sure. But you get the idea from the movie that it's not a widespread thing (or there'd be more protests at his statue). In fact the statue is regarded in the movie as "beloved" - not even "controversial"
So the people in the movie who are anti-Superman are Wallace (who is manipulated by Lex), Lex (who approaches the government first), and Bruce (who immediately wants to kill him). It's just weird that Bruce is in the same boat as Lex, and Bruce seems the angrier/more violent person. When Batman and Superman fight, it's usually about a disagreement in how to handle something. It's a disagreement on how things should be done. Batman has always kept kryptonite on hand just in case, but I think he understands that Clark is a good person.
Mr Sunday Movies said that the disagreement they have would've been easily resolved with a one-minute conversation between two hyperintelligent people. And Bruce had 18 months to follow Superman and see if he's really such a bad guy. And, I'd think, a mid-40s Batman (1981 is when the Waynes died....if Bruce was 8, he was born in 1973 and would be 43 in 2016) would be more reasonable than a young, mentally-unstable Lex Luthor Jr. Instead, Bruce starts the movie in the typical Lex Luthor "yeah, he's saved people, but he's a threat to everyone!" mindset. And that was odd to me.
And, yes, Superman learned from his mistake. As soon as he can, he flies Doomsday away from people. That was good to see. However, I thought it was a bit ridiculous that the movie kept reinforcing that no one was around. It was after hours, so the business district was empty. That island they landed on between Gotham and Metropolis was uninhabited. The warehouse at the end was abandoned. We get it - you want to make sure we know that no one is around. It got distracting by the end to the point where I felt like the writers were almost making fun of the people who complained about the death in the first movie.
I'm able to overlook alot of its problems, but I do wish we would have been given a more visual example of what I think happened to Bruce in this movie. A montage of Batman's 20 year career so far could have shown us how his heroic ideals were slowly chipped away until all that remained was the vigilante; that each loss made him cross more and more lines until finally he was at a point where he felt no remorse in killing Superman. This journey for Bruce was hinted at (especially through Alfred's dialogue), but I think the montage would have done a much better job of making this clear.
Yeah, I think it would've been a lot more helpful than another version of the death of the Waynes. I don't know what it is about that sequence that makes people want to film it again and again. I did read a theory that since two semi-high-profile actors (Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Lauren Cohan) were playing the Waynes that they might eventually play around with Flashpoint. Not sure if that would happen or not.
In my review, I asked all the questions I wanted to know about Batman. There's a ton. And I almost wish they'd just cast Affleck as Nolan's Batman and just pretended that all took place in the same universe. Because then, at least, we'd know the backstory. For a 2:30 movie mostly about Batman, we know surprisingly little about him. I think a lot of it is just supposed to be assumed, but this is a Batman who seems to casually kill people. Who disturbingly decides to use guns in the Knightmare. And who seemingly is so overwhelmed with rage that he makes no effort to investigate whether or not Superman is a good guy or a bad guy. I know he's assisted by a cold/alien Superman who never smiles, but the movie just lumps Batman with Lex and some protesters in the only group of people who think Superman is dangerous. Even the military, who seemed somewhat concerned with Superman at the end of Man of Steel, doesn't seem that worried about him until the very end. I thought that was very odd.
So I was thinking about the DCCU vs the MCU, and I kept coming back to the idea that Marvel seems to stay true to the comics with their cinematic universe and DC isn't. That we're basically getting "canon" versions of the Avengers (with some updates but no major changes). In the DCCU, we have quite a few changes, from "updates" to Bruce and Clark's "no killing rules" to a more-alien Superman to an older (but still very-much active) Batman to a Lex Jr. / missing Lex Sr. etc.
And I started thinking about why there are these tweaks. Why we can't just have traditional versions of these characters, and I think I might've figured it out. Before 2007, Iron Man wasn't really anything in pop culture. Marvel fans liked him, but no one outside of comics had heard of him. People had a casual understanding of Thor and Captain America, but people like Black Widow/Hawkeye/Scarlet Witch/Vision were all relative nobodies.
Meanwhile, Man of Steel is Superman's 6th movie. He's one of the most (and in some cases, the most) popular superheroes around. Dawn of Justice is Batman's 8th movie. All in a span of 30 years. The part has been recast five times in eight movies. People know Batman.
So is the reason why this DC cinematic universe doesn't feel like a DC universe because they had to try something different? Just doing a standard version of either of those characters just wouldn't work because we already know all their is to know?
Sliders.tv → Posts by Slider_Quinn21
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.