3,301

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

For the record, I've decided to write my own mega-synopsis version of Batman v Superman.  So far it's only 3 pages long (I'm through the end of act 2), but it's more along the lines of the movie I'd like to see.

3,302

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Re: Flash

Any idea who the guy in the mask in the prison cell on Earth-2 was?  My first thought was Earth 2 Diggle (when we briefly saw him in the first Earth-2 episode) but now I have no idea.

3,303

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, as I've said in many comic-based arguments, I don't know these characters all that well.  I don't read many comics, and most of my knowledge comes from sources like cartoons/movies/TV shows.  And when you look at the guys who have played Jimmy, and the ways he's been presented in other media, I never saw a muscle-bound male model guy.  Heck, when I think about photographers I know in life, there's a reason they're behind the camera and not in front of it smile  Mehcad Brooks looks like he would've spent his career as a TV anchorman.  He'd apply for jobs as a photographer, and they wouldn't let him.  Heck, I'm surprised that Cat is allowing him to be behind the camera.

I just think of Jimmy as being short (5'7) and nerdy.  It's like Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man.  It was hard for me to buy because he was presented as a fairly-popular, athletic, attractive, skateboarding guy before he got bit by the spider.  James' line in the show might say that he's spent years being scared, but I just don't see it.

Now I love the idea that he has super-PTSD.  And I do agree that even the manliest of men can have it.  But, first, I don't think we've seen enough of that (I just watched episode nine so maybe there's more).  But in episode nine, he goes toe-to-toe with Maxwell Lord - he's definitely not shying away from a fight or a dangerous situation.  Second, I think the character could've been *so* powerful if Jimmy/James came to National City literally broken.  And maybe the romance between Jimmy and Kara isn't based on "he's attractive and smart and brave and talented and amazing" and more like a Florence Nightingale situation.  Clark trusts Kara to take care of Jimmy, and she's helping rebuild his life because Clark legitimately thinks Jimmy will snap if he lives one more day in Metropolis.

And for that, I'd go with someone less physically imposing.  I was talking with my friend and I might've switched the casting on Mr. Terrific on Arrow and James on Supergirl.  And the more I think about it, I actually think Grant Gustin would've done an incredible job in that role (although he's also 6'2).

3,304

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Re: Supergirl.

I actually really like this show.  I'm surprised at how much heart is in it.  It definitely feels like the Flash to me, and that's a great thing.  And the introduction of some other DC characters really helps the show click.  Maxwell Lord is a good analogue for Lex Luthor, and "Henshaw" is a great character.

Two things bother me.  First, I hate the casting of "James Olsen" and it has nothing to do with racial-swapping.  If they wanted Jimmy Olsen to be black, that's fine with me.  My problem is that Jimmy Olsen apparently chose photography as soon as he was done with being a GQ model.  Changing Jimmy's race doesn't really affect the character - changing his personality does.  And the actor does a fine job, but he's playing the wrong part.  When Jimmy admits that he was always scared in Metropolis, I don't buy it.  He's a physically-imposing, in-shape, attractive guy.  There'd be virtually no reason for him to be the coward that he claims to be.  I can understand wanting to hire an attractive guy to be the male lead, but it'd make more since for Winn to be the tall, handsome one.  Or make it another character.  Changing his character like that seems wrong.

Second, I'm not sure I like the way they're using Superman.  I love that he's not on the show - that would be too much.  And I'm sorta glad they didn't go the "Birds of Prey" route, where Batman was just missing.  I like the use of instant messenger to make him a presence on the show without actually showing him.  I like that he's essentially giving Kara her space to be her own hero (I liked how it was handled in both episode 3 and episode 9, where Clark checks in but promises to stay out unless she asks).

But when there's an army of Kryptonians?  When Kara's lost her powers?  Aren't these situations where Clark should show up? 

If I sorta put those two things to the side, I really like it.

3,305

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

"Sliders BBoard - come for X-Files discussion, get barbecue suggestions."

Let me know if you enjoy it.  I've been a bunch and love it.

3,306

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

http://www.ten50bbq.com/

It's East Texas style barbecue - you can/should order by the pound, and they just cook as much meat as they have.  Really good sauce, really good sides, delicious desserts.  They also have bacon-wrapped stuffed jalapenos (chicken or brisket) that are fantastic.,  They're supposed to have the best fried okra in Texas, but I'm not a fan of fried okra.

3,307

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Texas might have crappy pizza, Chinese food, bagels and seafood, and the salt water taffy sold here may be a joke, but it is still a big, modern, civilized state!

The Mexican food is good. And the steaks are... I saw a steak for sale in Georgia, and I took a picture because it was so laughably small to me.

I can direct you to some good pizza (NY or Chicago style).  And I've had some decent seafood - not in DFW but closer to the coast.

We do barbecue (I recently found my new favorite spot in North Dallas), Mexican food, boutique tacos, and burgers really well.  I'll buy Carter some pretty solid brisket if he ever wants to visit.

3,308

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Carter has never depicted Texas well. In the first movie, it was just poorly filmed (they used deserts and mountains as their Dallas location. Not remotely accurate). In this case, he allowed his disdain for Texas show through like a spotlight. His version of Texans, with their cowboy hats and their blind hatred of anything that wasn't white, is arrogant, self-righteous, and wrong. This episode was based on the attempted attack in my own town (though the outcomes were quite different). There are a lot of Muslims around here, and the number seems to be rising. We don't just go around giving them the evil eye or making comments about their color, or else we would have no time left in the day. Newsflash: We have quite a lot of non-white people around here!
Also, nobody wears cowboy hats and boots, unless they're going to a country-themed club or they actually work on a ranch. Even then, probably not. People claim that this episode was racist toward Muslims. I disagree. All that stuff was based on the news, and Carter went out of his way to sympathize and humanize them. If anything, the episode was racist toward Texans.

Had the exact same thoughts.  I'm from Texas too, and it was annoying to see the same, tired stereotypes.  Has Carter really never been?  I don't own a pair of boots or a Cowboy hat.  I was born in Texas, and I've lived here my whole life.

The first movie drove me crazy with their version of "Dallas"

What was weird about this one, outside of the honkey-tonk stereotypes and the overtly-racist Texans, was the oddity of the location - where was it supposed to be?  I think they mentioned "southwest Texas" at the beginning, but every other reference was just "Texas."  "Our flight to Texas."  "You'll have to meet me in Texas" Then, to top it off, the airport just says "Welcome to Texas."  I wouldn't put it passed a Texan airport to say this, but "Texas" is a pretty big place with a diverse geography.  Not that Carter would know anything about that.

3,309

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Regarding Snyder....I don't know.  I think 300 is visually a good film, and I enjoyed it the first time I watched it.  I tried watching it again and was sorta bored by it.  It just didn't hold my interest.

I liked Dawn of the Dead.  For some reason, I watched that movie every time it was on when they showed it on premium cable over and over again.  Like most zombie movies, the ending was clunky, but I think it was pretty good.

Watchmen was fine.  I thought he did an amazing job translating it from the book to film, but I just didn't love it.  I think the accurate translation actually exposed some of the narrative problems in the book. 

I liked Sucker Punch more than most people, but that was a movie most people didn't like.  Visually stunning and a pretty fun story, but I can see problems regarding the way it was presented.

All in all, Snyder's movies are all breathtaking from a visual standpoint.  Every one of them has a unique look that suits it, and I think he knows how to make a movie look great.  His action sequences are pretty great, and I think he does care about character.  But while I've generally enjoyed every one of his movies, I don't know how much re-watchablility they have.  I've still never really re-watched Man of Steel - only watched bits and pieces.

My main problem with BvS are the creative choices they've made.  I'm going to judge the movie based on what it is, not what it could be.  But a lot of the choices he's made are just so frustrating to me.

3,310

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Ha, well I'm sorry about that.  As we've chronicled here, I'm *very* worried about this movie.  I could list a dozen creative decisions that I'd label as missteps - but it's still Batman and Superman on the same screen.  It's still fun Dark Knight Returns imagery, Wonder Woman on the big screen, and a move towards the Justice League.  It's awesome.

I hope Snyder made a great movie.  I hope he can make a great Justice League movie.  But based on his prior track record (in my opinion), I'll unfortunately have to see it to believe it.

3,311

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I mean, I see that.  But I still say the seeds were planted a while back.  Marvel doesn't make character a priority, but we have seen a lot of these characters.  This will be Tony Stark's sixth movie (and let's be honest, he was the main character in the previous five).  It will just be Cap's fifth, and even though Winter Soldier is probably the best overall movie in the MCU, there's still not much to Cap's character besides doing the right thing.

I think a disagreement that blows up into a "war" was sorta inevitable in the series.  I'm a little surprised that this wasn't the plot of Avengers 2, but there's still seeds in that movie that lead directly to Civil War.  So even if it wasn't announced until later, I think it was planned a while back.

BvS should be the superior film.  Snyder worked a bit more on character (although, honestly, I still don't think MoS took the devastation of Metropolis any more seriously than the Battle of New York - Avengers had schwarma, MoS had "I just think he's hot."), and Batman/Superman have way more cultural coin than Cap/Iron Man.  DC wanted to finally make them fight, and I think it's just a coincidence that it happens to come out while Civil War was coming out.

3,312

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It's hard to say that Civil War was affected, at all, by DC's plans.  Tony and Cap have been bickering since the first Avengers movie, and it's pretty obvious that Marvel has wanted to go in the direction of Civil War since the beginning (it's one of the biggest events in recent history - they're, of course, going to want to take things there).  Also, there's no way Civil War can compete with Batman vs Superman on a cultural level.  The Avengers are having their biggest moment in the sun, and they're possibly still not on the same level that Batman and Superman have been on for decades.  So that's really not a competition (at least, as far as most adults are concerned).

Now have they been at each other's throats?  No....but sorta?  In the first Avengers, they are about to fight numerous times.  In the second Avengers, they disagree time and time again.  The only reason they don't fight is because, basically from the beginning, they have bigger fish to fry (Strucker - then Ultron).  In fact, the second-oddest scene in the MCU is the final scene between the two of them in Age of Ultron because they're acting much friendlier than they ever have.  The oddest will be the scene in Civil War where Cap says "...but (Bucky's) my friend." and Tony will respond "....so was I." because they haven't liked each other since the moment they ran into each other.

"War" is probably a bit of a misnomer because, in the original comics, neither side wanted the other to die.  Just to surrender.  When Cap dies in the end, Tony is devastated.  The Super Bowl spot sorta confirms this.  Bucky looks to try to assassinate Tony in his street clothes, and when he fails, Tony's shocked.  It looks pretty clear to me that Bucky crossed a line that Tony didn't think they'd cross - actually trying to kill each other.  I'd expect it'd be the same thing if, say, Rhodey tried to kill Cap.  So I think the "Civil War" will be a "Civil Spar" just like it was in the comics.  And just like in BvS, the actual "title match" will only be in the first two acts before they unite to fight a bigger enemy.

3,313

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, if BvS is good, it won't matter.  If it is a bit of a mess, the rumor gets confirmed.  I can't imagine it'd affect box office numbers (in fact, with lowered expectations due to the report, it could look better - "I heard it sucked, but it was actually pretty good"), and a report wouldn't really affect the WB's plans until after the movie comes out.

And even the HitFix report really only talks about how the Justice League movie would either be pushed back or go in a different direction creatively.  Which, based on 95% of the decisions that have been made for BvS, might actually save a Justice League movie.

3,314

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well I did a bit more research and Eisenberg definitely said it.  And the Fortune article, if canon, definitely says it.  Makes it seem like Lex Sr. is dead and Lex Jr. inherited the company.  No idea if Lex Sr. will play into the movie at all, or if he even survived to see Superman show up.

3,315

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Like I said, it's hard to judge what we haven't seen. But based on what I have seen, nothing about BvS feels completely wrong to me. I'm still questioning their decisions regarding Lex Luthor, but I won't know until I actually see the movie.

I don't have time right now for another essay, but I have thoughts on both Marvel and DC.

But I wanted to mention - have we talked about the fact that Eisenberg isn't playing the traditional Lex but his son?  It's apparently been confirmed that he's playing Lex Luthor Jr.  I didn't get a ton of time to research it, but it was mentioned in the Fortune article and I think in an interview with MTV.

3,316

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah and that'd work.  I just like the idea of throwing these guys into a situation they can't control.  Because, let's be honest, they're basically Superman when it comes to most monsters.  To the point where the actual fight in the episode is the most boring part.  I meant to mention it, but I'd definitely *seriously* injure one or both brothers in their first fight.  Not dead and not even something that would be ongoing for too long.  But I'd want to raise the stakes.  Imagine Dean walking into a den of vampires, limping a bit, with Sam acting sorta like Oracle because he's too hurt.  All by himself.  Armed to the teeth but with no idea how to take them out.  Rock salt shotgun blast?  Nope - tosses it to the side.  Bronze knife?  Incapacitates him but nope.  Golden bullets as he's surrounded?  Nope.  One jumps him from behind and is about to bite him when he grabs a crystal dagger which kills the vamp immediately.  After that, it's a piece of cake as usual.

3,317

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Anyway, even if the movie flops, I can see DC fliddling with things here and there. Maybe they'd replace Snyder for the Justice League movies. But I don't see them trashing the whole slate and starting from square one. They really can't. They made a huge presentation of their plan in front of millions of people. If they make that presentation irrelevant, it will make them look like a sinking ship and nobody will get on board. They would be better off scrapping the whole plan and never making the movies at all.

That's sorta what I'm talking about.  I actually think this would've been done better with a gentler hand and more buildup.  Maybe there should've simply been "Batman vs Superman" - not "Dawn of Justice" - you get Batman (again, I'd have him be younger but that argument is played out) to show up in Metropolis to investigate Superman.  You have a Clark who's deeply remorseful about what happened and trying desperately to make it right (maybe even to the point where it's affecting his life as Clark Kent).  Clark's act is so genuine and nice and "truth, justice, and the American way" that it makes Bruce and Lex suspicious.  Bruce comes as a detective who wants to believe that someone can be that good - that Clark was just sloppy (having watched the footage a billion times).  Misunderstanding happens.  Bruce fights Clark thinking he's found the secret.  Lex activates Doomsday or his mech suit or whatever.  Clark convinces Bruce.  Combine to fight bigger threat.  End of movie.

No Wonder Woman.  No Flash.  No Aquaman.  No Cyborg.  If you want to tease these things, that's fine.  Wonder Woman needs a tease, I guess.  Maybe mention weird things regarding the ocean where Zod's gravity thing was going off.  Tease these characters but don't show them.  There are two characters in this world - Batman and Superman - and just hints of others.

Then Suicide Squad to introduce a different element.  Then Wonder Woman gets her own movie.  Bam, now you have a Trinity.  Once you have that in place, you can do Justice League.  It's already two parts so you can spend the first act getting these guys together.  Flash doesn't need a full movie to be introduced - he runs fast.  You might spend some time on Cyborg, but I'd spend a lot of time on Aquaman.  Set up Atlantis and some of that stuff because it needs explanation, and it'd be fun.  Maybe even make the reason for the Justice League *be* Atlantis attacking - that could be a whole movie before Darkseid shows up.

(this is the part where I'd say Green Lantern was canon and cast Ryan Reynolds.  I'd also have cast Bale as Batman if he has to be old and I have all the power int his hypothetical.  That way, these characters are already established)

I love the idea of taking the material seriously.  What I don't like is not having fun with it.  And while Man of Steel was a better movie than most of the Marvel movies, it wasn't much fun.  And Superman needs to be fun.  *Especially* the way they made the ending.  Imagine Man of Steel where Clark spends the first half of the movie just having fun with his powers.  Almost like Spider-Man except more wonder and less dickish.  Then he gets hit with the whole Kryptonian stuff - meets Jor-El, meets Zod, learns the true weight of an entire planet's destruction.  Then he goes to fight Zod and wins but the whole city has been destroyed.  Clark has to learn to take this whole hero thing seriously but we still know, at heart, that he's a fun-loving, genuinely good guy.

And it's the same thing with BvS - which, the way it's being presented, doesn't look very fun.  When you compare it to Captain America: Civil War, which does look to be character-motivated, it looks dark and violent.  All the fights in Captain America are during the day with bright colors.  All the BvS fights are sepia-colored with big explosions and/or set at night or in the rain.

All I'm saying is that there's tons of middle ground between the MCU and the Dark Knight Trilogy that could've been used for a world that Batman and Superman share.  Instead, it seems like they took the Dark Knight model and put the rest of the DC universe in there.  When, honestly, the only DC characters that fits in the Dark Knight world is Batman.  That's why Bruce is a part-time Justice Leaguer and an outcast. 

Just my two cents.  I don't love these characters as much as you do, so I could be wrong in my interpretation smile

3,318

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

No, I get that.  I didn't really hate any of the Phase 1 movies for the reasons you and ireactions didn't like them.  Especially since I don't necessarily care for Thor or Captain America as characters, the fact that they were living in a world with Iron Man (a character I did like) was pretty cool. 

The issue I see is with a foundation.  Iron Man set up the MCU really well.  It's fun but a little fantastic.  It's sarcastic and doesn't take itself too seriously.  And, for the most part, people loved Iron Man.  So even though their movies weren't great, Thor and Captain America followed a similar lead.  It also was fun and didn't take itself too seriously.  And the MCU was able to succeed with these movies that are fun but not necessarily great.

The problem with the DCCU is that it's foundation is Man of Steel.  A movie that is, at best, mixed.  It's an odd tone for a Superman movie, and the way Superman was represented wasn't universally accepted.  So if BvS also has a mixed reception, then I totally agree with the HitFix video, and everything will ride on Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, and the Batman solo film.  Because if the foundation of the universe doesn't work, then there's nothing to build on.

I think the part of the video I agreed with the most was the idea that the DCCU needs a Kevin Feige.  Say what you will about the MCU, but it definitely feels like a streamlined universe.  X happens in Movie 1, and it affects Y in Movie 2 and gets played on in Z in movie 8.  It might cheapen all eight movies, but it makes the universe feel real and contained.

And I disagree that BvS isn't just a prequel to Justice League in the same way that Iron Man 2/Thor/Captain America were prequels to Avengers.  In fact, Zach Snyder has come out and confirmed that BvS is exactly that.

3,319

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, I think it just depends on where you're coming from on this issue.  Superman and Batman mean so much to so many people, and I think people want it to be perfect.  So if you didn't like Cavill or you don't like Affleck or you don't like Eisenberg as Lex or Snyder's tone/feel then the movie is already starting off on a bad foot.  And then you have people that are sorta rooting for the movie to fail before it comes out.

I dislike a lot of the angles they took - I admit that.  But I also really want this to be good.  I'm a bigger DC fan than a Marvel fan.  I religiously watch the Arrowverse, and I recently started Supergirl after they finally connected the DC universe together (the only outlier is Gotham and that doesn't really fit with the others).  I enjoy the Marvel stuff too, but I've always been DC > Marvel. 

But I think the problem with this approach is over-ambition.  They planned all these extra films based on the success of a sequel to a movie that wasn't universally loved.  Marvel didn't do that until after "phase one" succeeded.

3,320

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

That would be interesting.  I still really like my idea for a season where the rules get rewritten somehow.  Maybe they defeat the Darkness, and it throws the universe into chaos to the point where all the lore is worthless.  Wooden stake doesn't kill vampires.  Silver doesn't kill werewolves.  Nothing that used to work works.

So you have this situation where Sam and Dean are fighting, say, a wendigo (because that's the example they always use).  Something they could kill with their eyes closed.  Except it doesn't work.  They find a way to kill it, but they have to get creative.  Reading a book and finding the magic bullet doesn't work anymore.

But while Sam and Dean are able to survive because they're the best, a TON of hunters around the world are dying.  They show up expecting one thing, and it isn't working.  I can see this montage of hunters from all over the place using tricks we've seen and then dying.  So Sam and Dean look around and things are bad.  And they realize that the hunter community needs them.  So they start working together.  They're traveling around, establishing a network of hunters, and they're sharing info.  Every week, they'd pair with a new hunter or face an old monster in a totally new way.  "We heard Linda in the Czech Republic says gold bullets work on vampires.  And Hideo in Japan says that rugaru can be taken down by iron weapons"

And what would be cool for me is the idea that you'd have this international community of hunters.  You could spin off a show, or you could keep the show going indefinitely once Jensen and Jared get tired of it.  Or if you just want to end it there, you have these boys really living John's legacy - literally writing the book on hunting like John's Journal 2.0.  The season would be almost all monsters - very small and intimate with not much tying it together besides building this community and learning what kills what.

And, yeah, maybe heaven and hell get closed off during this time.  So no angels and no demons.  But my favorite part would be watching these two guys struggle again.  Because whenever it's a ghost episode, the conflict is always just figuring out what it is.  Once they see it's a ghost, they get salt and iron and it's over.  But what if figuring out it was a ghost was only half the problem because they had *no idea* how to kill it?  So they're using gold and silver and wood and water and throwing everything they can think of until it works.

And maybe you'd even get the monsters figuring things out.  Because werewolves know to stay away from silver - it's in their DNA.  But what if it wasn't dangerous anymore?  But literally anything else could be.  You could have an episode where vampires are dying out because human blood is poisonous now (like dead man's blood was before).  They don't know what to eat anymore.  They're starving. 

I know I've thrown this idea out before, but it's so cool to me.  And I know reaction to it has been lukewarm, but I think it hits so many areas that you'd want in a season, Info smile

3,321

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I watched a video on HitFix today, and they were saying that Warner Bros. is *very* worried about this movie being a springboard for the DCCU.  That there are two things that work in the movie - Batman and Lex.  And that everything else sorta falls flat.  And if this last trailer is any indication, they're hoping to drive that point forward.  That, hey, this might be the best Batman we've ever seen on screen.  That, hey, this is really BATMAN vs superman.  And that maybe we'll see Justice League pushed back, and DC is going to let the real foundation for the DCCU ride on Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, and the new Batfleck solo film.

And I can definitely see that.  I think it was you who said that you expected to see a Batman trailer, a Superman trailer, and a joint one.  And what's weird is that we know there are Clark-centric scenes in the movie.  We see him and Ma Kent.  We see him and Perry.  But even those scenes paint Clark in an odd way.

What's bizarre to me is that this is so the opposite of how this relationship usually works.  Superman is the freakin' boy scout - everyone loves him.  Batman is the Dark Knight - he's often painted as a villain even in his solo work.  Gotham has this uneasy relationship with him because he's this vigilante.  No one ever calls Superman a vigilante.  So the idea that this movie is somehow Batman as the hero and Superman as the villain is just so backwards to me.  But for most of the trailers, that's sorta what we're seeing.  Clark is distant and menacing and very alien.  Batman is this underdog who puts on the suit to show this guy what humans are all about.

But it's also playing the more traditional angle - "Bat vigilante" - "trampling on civil liberties" - "thinks he's above the law" - but these are all quotes from Clark.  So it almost plays into the villain side of things - Clark is jealous of Batman for some reason, and he uses his job at the Daily Planet to battle for the public's admiration.

I know Superman isn't the villain, but if this were an original property, it's definitely how I'd think it was set up.  Batman is the hero and Superman is the villain. 

I've been skeptical about this movie from day one - I just want it to work out so well, but I just wasn't a big fan of Man of Steel.  I wasn't a fan of the Affleck casting.  Wasn't a fan of older Batman.  Wasn't a fan of so much so soon (Superman...and Batman!  And Wonder Woman!  And Lex!  And Doomsday!  But also Aquaman and Cyborg and Flash!  But also Superman's side characters!  But also Alfred!  And maybe Robin!...etc).  Wasn't a fan of the Eisenberg casting.  Wasn't a fan of the darker tone.  And now I'm worried that it isn't going to be as fun as this movie *needs* to be.  I think the tone is going to be wrong, and I think the creative direction is going to be wrong.  I don't think Zach Snyder is the right guy for this.  I watch that trailer and it's *so close* to exactly what I want, but I find myself almost wishing it was closer to this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsmqc4RhSQY) more than what we're getting.

3,322

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

So the final BvS trailer came out.  An, honestly, I'm surprised we didn't get a trailer from Superman's perspective.  In every single trailer we got, Superman is pretty much the bad guy.  Batman thinks he's the bad guy.  Lex thinks he's the bad guy.  The US government thinks he's the bad guy.  You have the weird dreamlike sequence where Superman is menacing with guards and rips off Batman's mask.  You have him walking/standing alone in a defendant's podium in a courtroom.  There's the weird sequences where he's hovering over flood victims and standing/doing nothing while people worship him.  There's the threats to Batman "If I wanted it, you'd be dead already" and "The Bat is dead."  There's even the odd scene with Ma Kent where she tells Clark that he never owed the planet anything.

The only truly heroic thing we've seen in any of the promotional materials is him saving the NASA-looking rocket.

Snyder has said that this isn't a sequel to Man of Steel.  And we all know the controversy regarding the end of that movie where audiences have criticized how Superman handled the last fight.  But I'm just really surprised that we haven't seen much defending Superman in this movie.  Clark tries to vilify Batman, but it seems like Bruce and Perry are there to defend Batman when he does. 

So I wonder if that's what this movie is.  Batman's story where Superman is sorta distant so it seems like he's worse than he is, Superman convinces Batman that he's good, and they team up with various Justice Leaguers to fight Doomsday.

Because that's just another weird artistic choice that I don't necessarily like.  Just throw it on the pile, I guess.

3,323

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Also to be fair, the two cities are 600 miles away from each other. It probably makes less sense for Team Flash to call Oliver than it would make for Team Arrow to call Barry. smile.

True, but they did some prep before going to Earth-2.  There would've been time for Oliver or Roy or Diggle or whoever to get on the jet/train and get to Central City in a few hours.  It's just so weird that, in both episodes, they chose the more-dangerous route without even considering the alternatives.

I think, in theory, I love the idea that superheroes let each other do their thing.  That Superman could solve all of Batman's crime in ten minutes, but he lets Batman do it.  And Barry is sorta doing the same thing with Oliver.  But I like that Oliver lets Barry struggle at things, and Barry lets Oliver struggle at things because it makes them better heroes in the end.  And for the most part, that's how I go about non-crossover episodes.  But both those examples really stood out to me.

3,324

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, I don't want every episode to have a mention.  And you're right, they have plenty of throwaway lines to show that they're a united universe.  Heck, last night's episode had nods to every part of the DC TV multiverse, including the original Flash TV show and Supergirl (would've loved a Smallville reference, though). 

But instead of a throwaway line about Cisco or a joke about Barry, these were two situations where life was literally at stake because they didn't make the reference.  If Roy had died, Barry would've been *furious* that they didn't call him on something that would've been no problem for him.  If Velocity-7 had killed Jay and people had died, Oliver would've been *furious* that no one called him to help.  The more crossovers they do, the more they're forming a Justice League.  They've all met each other now, and there's no excuse to risk lives when they just need to make a phone call.

And the reason why I think it's a problem in these two situations instead of any other is the fact that they *couldn't* have mentioned it off-screen.  In the Arrow situation, we saw the whole conversation.  There was no time for Felicity to check, and there was no conversation on the team about calling Barry.  In the Flash one, we saw the whole conversation with Caitlin/Joe/Jay, and they didn't consider calling Oliver (caveat - those three characters have had the least interaction with Oliver and they might've legitimately not thought he'd say yes).  Now the part that could've happened off-screen is Barry checking to see if Oliver can watch the city, but two things contradict that.  If Oliver said no (and he would've had to have), Barry still leaves the city unprotected, and even if he did say no, Oliver would've checked in considering Geomancer said he'd been causing earthquakes for days.

Now, of course, they're real-life logistics, and I think these were two situations where they could've made in-world explanations.  Barry can't get to the warehouse to save the day in 4 minutes because villain of the week.  Oliver can't come or spare anyone from his team because they're working on Dahrk.  It's not an argument that they should have more mentions in-universe - just that they should save them for situations like these - where they're being irresponsible by not making the call.

3,325

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

William has been brought up so much that he's gotta play into the endgame

3,326

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It happened again! 

(SPOILERS for tonight's FLASH)

So Barry is gone, Earth-1 is undefended, and a metahuman shows up.  Immediately, the first thought was to use a formula to give Jay powers to fight him.  Which is fine.  But no thought was given to call Oliver and company.  Which is bizarre for a couple of reasons - first, you'd think Barry would've had someone in place to defend the city in his absence.  He's really worried about protecting Earth-2 Joe and Iris, but he leaves Earth-1 Joe and Iris undefended.  His first call should've been to Oliver.  Second, again, they're risking a life when it's unnecessary.  Geomancer was powerful, but he wasn't powerful enough that Oliver and company couldn't have taken him down (Joe basically does all by himself). 

Now I get why they didn't have Oliver and Team Arrow show up (although this could've been a great time to use Colton Haynes again to step in as Red Arrow to fill in for Barry).  They can't have a crossover every week.  But these are teams that have been shown to work together.  And, in both cases (the one from Arrow and this one), they don't even try.  It's the perfect chance to drop a crossover hint, do some cross-promotion, and explain why they aren't always popping up in each other's stories.

3,327

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Oliver's "death" is still the most bizarre storyline I've ever seen on TV.  They killed off their main character and then sorta hoped everyone forgot about it.

3,328

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Now that Flash is going to guest star on Supergirl, I started watching it.  Pretty good.  Although I hope Barry has to travel to a parallel Earth to get to her.  I don't think "Earth 1" meshes with the world on Supergirl.

3,329

(90 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

So apparently the second half of season two is subtitled "Wrath of the Villains" - answering my question of whether or not "Rise of the Villains" was the official subtitle of the show or not.

3,330

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Interesting.  I guess I wasn't paying enough attention to the Malcolm line.

Regarding the writers, I think this is the problem with spinoffs.  You have a strong group of writers for one show, and you split them up to do two shows.  Both shows suffer because neither show has the strong writer's room the original show had.  Add a third group, and it gets even more diluted.  I don't think Arrow is as bad as you think it is, but it's definitely worse since they spun off Barry's show.

My problem with Legends is that the show isn't streamlined.  I get that these are a bunch of people with wildly different goals, but it's really odd to have three stories in one episode that aren't really connected.  Snart is out trying to fix his own past, Ray and Stein are connecting about their shared past while saving Kendra, and Rip is trying to take down Savage.  They're good stories....but they aren't a team.  There are too many characters in the reality of the show (Rip goes to kill Savage by himself at least once...what's the point of even bringing a team when half the team is off doing their own thing) and on the show (they have to find something for Jackson to do, for example, so he tags along on the Cold/Heat Wave story).

If it was me, I'd leave Heat Wave and Firestorm out.  Let Ray be the brains.  Let Sara be the muscle.  Cold is the wild card.  The hawks are the secret weapons.  The other characters are unnecessary if you ask me.

3,331

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

On Legends of Tomorrow (which, quick review, is good but has too many characters), Sara is dealing with the bloodlust.  But in the last episodes, they said that John Constantine cured Sara of the bloodlust, and that's why it's a harder situation for Thea. 

Seems like a weird contradiction in the same week of episodes.

3,332

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

Of course they should have the all-star writers come back, but it could also be interesting to see episodes written and directed by people who actually grew up with the show. They could play up the aspects that they loved the most and tell stories from a perspective that I don't know that the original writers possibly could.

I'm sure I've said this before, but long-running series have benefited from this immensely in the past.  The two best examples that I'm aware of are SNL and the Simpsons.  Both were able to have renaissances once the kids/teens that grew up watching the show get old enough to write it themselves.  SNL had a revival in the late 80s/early 90s when people who grew up with the late 70s gang.  Same thing with the Simpsons, as episodes became more about the thing that people loved when the show was new.  A lot of people say the Simpsons sucks now, but they're mostly talking about a similar lull that SNL had in the early/mid 80s.  I've watched the last 3-4 seasons pretty religiously, and the show still is able to hit pretty high notes these days.  It was also harder to notice as much of a dropoff when the whole "Every Simpsons Ever" happened on FXX.

3,333

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I haven't watched yet, but I'm relieved that you liked it.  When I heard Wayward Daughters, I thought it was something you might not be a fan of.

3,334

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Tonight's episode of Arrow is exactly why there's issues with merging Oliver's world with Barry's.  It's fun to put them together, but Barry is a Deus Ex Machina that Team Arrow is irresponsible for not using more.  I get that Barry has his own life and his own problems, but tonight's situation at the end was the perfect time to call Barry.  Or at least bring up how that's not an option - especially since they made the "just because you're wearing red doesn't mean you're the Flash" joke with Arsenal.  There was plenty of time to radio STAR Labs (which there'd certainly be a communication line open at all times with) and see if Barry could speed down there.  It's been established that Barry could've been there in plenty of time to either detonate the C4 and get out or carry Roy out.  There was simply no reason to risk Roy's life there.

Logistically, I get why they didn't.  And maybe it's better left just left alone and not open up that can of worms.  But, realistically, they need to be calling him if it's life or death and a problem that Barry is specifically set up to defeat.

"Cisco, it's Overwatch!"
"What?  Who?  Felicity?"
"Overwatch!"
"Okay.  I didn't sign off on that one!"
"We need Barry.  Now!"
"Barry's dealing with this week's villain of the week.  No can do."
"It's a matter of life or death."
"So is ours.  Sorry.  We owe you one.  Good luck."

Something like that.  Or even truncated without including Cisco.  "I checked with Cisco.  He says Barry is busy with his own life or death matter.  And he hates my call sign.  Sorry, you guys are on your own."

3,335

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I think it was a joke too.  Because, well, the whole episode was a joke.

It was a totally bizarre episode, and I thought it was so much fun.  As soon as I understood exactly what was happening, it was just insanely awesome.  Plus, I have a horned frog on my license plate - it was fun to see one on TV.  Although I'm pretty sure they're endangered, so Fox would've been in pretty big trouble if he'd actually killed him.

Rhys Darby is so funny.  Love that guy.

3,336

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well I guess the Arrowverse got a directive to keep things from getting confusing with the new Suicide Squad movie, huh?

3,337

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I don't think doing THE X-FILES set in 2012 would work if the show airs in 2016. THE X-FILES tries (and often fails) at realism, and the point of the series was that all these strange events take place in visually and physically plausible environment that's our world. It's not really worthwhile to strand THE X-FILES in the past just to get around the alien invasion deadline when it's a dead end anyway.

I could see that.  But it also necessarily wouldn't be that much of a stretch.  Gotham takes place at an indefinite time period.  There are tons of period pieces.  And 2012 from 2016 wouldn't really be that big of a deal.  For the most part, things are identical.  It'd be slightly smaller iPhones and slightly different models of car.  Same president.  The ages of David and Gillian would still add up.  It'd just be a matter of it being, slightly, a period piece.  And I don't think that's a stretch for Sci-Fi folks.

But, yeah, I can see why they didn't go that route.

I do like the idea that humans somehow defeated the colonists, though.  I've been watching Colony, and it's a sort of post-colonization world.  And the aliens are unseen and everyone is terrified of them.  The arrival happened in a matter of hours, apparently.  You can almost plug it into the X-Files timeline seamlessly.

But now imagine that these aliens who were so powerful over the course of the series.  So scary.  Such a force to be reckoned with....were simply defeated.  You might feel safe for a second knowing that the big threat is gone....until you realize that someone who beat an invincible enemy must be pretty damn scary themselves.

3,338

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

What if they'd just set the reboot in 2012?  Do the lead up to December and colonization.

Or what if everything from season 1-9 happened the way we thought, but between the end of the show and 2012 the humans won?  What if the human conspirators found a way to defeat the alien colonists, and then they took over whatever operation the aliens were doing?  So there were aliens but now it's all a bunch of shadowy humans that have already out-smarted more-advanced aliens?

3,339

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I think I read something about him being in the suit (is that your eyes comment)?  But I wasn't sure if that was supposed to be who he's supposed to be.

I think something's up with Jay.  But it'd be pretty similar to Wells/Thawne in season one - speedster who "can't run fast" who helps the team but is the guy they're chasing.  So I hope that's not it.

3,340

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

So is Jay Zoom or is "Hunter Zolomon" Zoom?

3,341

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

It was very kind of you to say that I should be working in TV -- but if you'd read the original SLIDERS REBORN outline (and you're welcome to see it), you would eat your words.

I'm more of an editor, I think. When people have ideas, I'm good at helping them present those ideas with visual impact and emotional resonance. "I want to reveal that Seasons 1 - 9 were all a trick and there's no alien invasion!" I can help you do that. "I want to have my two heroes locked in the trunk of a car for 12 pages but I can't come up with a good reason!" I can sort that out for you. When it comes to coming up with original ideas, however -- eeeek.

Well I'd already written everything for my pilot (fully edited) and 9 additional episodes.  I'd have just needed you to tell me all the stuff that was stupid smile

3,342

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Wow, that would've been great. smile

3,343

(90 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I had to look up what even happened.

I am excited to see what they do with Mr. Freeze, though.

3,344

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

My question is: With this new mythology that is all about splicing human DNA with alien DNA and all of that, are they going to tell us that all of the X-Files were alien related? Was lightning kid another genetic experiment? The witch girls? The Texas vampires?

Almost certainly hmm

3,345

(438 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions, that post was super-impressive.  Kudos to you.  You need to work in television, my man.  I think you have an intimate knowledge for how stories work and, more importantly, HOW, they work.  If I ever sold my television pilot, I'd have wanted you to be in every writer's meeting to make sure everything worked. 

I agree with the majority of what's been written here, but I keep coming back to the same conclusion.  Both Info and ireactions are super-fans, and Carter is trying to make this for more than just super-fans.  Maybe I Want to Believe showed him that he can't just make it for super-fans.  I don't know.  But if you were to survey the populace about "what the X-Files is about", I think you'd get three distinct categories:

- Super-fans would cite ireactions' stat - 67/203 were about aliens.  Less than a third.  Most people's favorite episodes wouldn't be about aliens.  They'd probably admit that, while the alien arc drove the show, it was a convoluted mess and best left that way.

- Casual fans would say that aliens were the big deal.  They'd remember/acknowledge the monster of the week episodes, but they'd either be disregarded as important or less cool.  Being casual fans, they'd probably have a lesser grasp on how convoluted the alien plot became or how stalled the storyline ended up.  They'd expect any sequel series to be heavily about aliens.

- Non-fans would think the X-Files was all about aliens.  Every week they'd do alien stories and chase down abductions/UFOs.  They'd expect the sequel series to be all about aliens because that's the entire series.

And I think that's the problem.  You have a show that was, for the most part, at it's best when it wasn't doing the alien arc.  But a show that is primarily known for the thing it did the worst (or, at least, did increasingly worse as time went on).  The first movie was aliens.  And if you only knew about the X-Files from promos while you were watching NFL football on FOX, you'd only really be reminded when a big episode happened.  And the big episodes were always aliens.

So it puts Carter in a bit of a bind.  He wants this to be successful so he needs more than just super-fans.  He needs casual fans, and if possible, new fans.  And as time goes by, the show's backbone is all people really remember.  And the alien arc was the backbone.  I watched the show pretty religiously for a great deal of the run, and as I was writing this, I had to struggle to remember some of my favorite non-alien episodes.  I wanted to do what Info did and do a re-run through the entire series.  But I already watch 15 or so shows at any time - to rewatch 9 seasons of television is time I choose to use elsewhere.  So I rewatched the pilot and that's all I did.

So he makes it about aliens.  He ties it into the current landscape.  Ties it into the way media works now.  Ties it into the political conspiracies of the day.  Makes it about the NSA and drones and surveillance because that's the scary monster for certain people.  I see why he did it, and I see why he had to try and come up with *something* to explain why, in 2016, colonization wasn't 4 years underway.  Why he'd want to reboot/retcon what happened during his run.

3,346

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I don't think it's that bad, but I see your complaints.  And it worries me that the writers don't know who's in the grave or who Zoom is it.  I have NO idea how you can write like that.  My friend and I wrote a TV pilot with TONS of seeds planted, and we had answers for all of them.  Even stuff that wouldn't even be answered for a while.

When they say they have no idea, you have to think it's just a disagreement in the writer's room, right?  Like they were sitting around in the room and they each have who they think would be best to move the story along, but they couldn't agree (it should be Felicity so we can bring in Barbara Gordon to fill her place!  No, it should be Diggle so the danger is real!  Thea!  Take the last family member Oliver has left!)

It reminds me of when the Simpsons said they were going to kill off a major character, and it was Krusty's dad.  I mean he was a somewhat-emotional character, but it's a side character to a side character.  Hardly newsworthy.

Informant wrote:

They will kill off someone that we don't care about, like Donna Smoak or maybe Quentin (since they ruined him anyway). But whoever it is, it won't make sense that Oliver is that upset or that Barry needs to show up. It won't be earth shattering.

Well I've been thinking about it.  If it's Donna, I think Barry would show up for emotional support.  Remember that going to Star City would be like walking down the block.  He could get in a suit in a second and be there in a few minutes.  And Felicity is his friend, so he'd be there to support her.

And maybe it's Donna and Quentin.  They're together, and it'd be emotional for Laurel and Felicity.  But it'd be minor in the grand scheme of things.  If it's not Felicity, then I guess the next best emotional gambit would be Diggle.  It'd be personal but also raise the stakes since Diggle is such an imposing figure.  But I doubt they'd do that.

I felt like maybe some of the better writers went to Flash, but if they don't know who Zoom is then they aren't much better.  I just think they might've spread themselves a bit too thin with two (now three) shows.

3,347

(55 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Informant wrote:

I thought that he shared Malina's power at the end, but none of it really makes sense. He took Claire's power and killed her. Then he took Hiro's power. But they never really said which kind of leech he was. They didn't seem to care.

I mean, maybe?  It seemed like an entirely new power - not just "pushing" the flare away.  And his taking away of powers was permanent, right?  So if he leeched Malina's power, he would've leeched it when they were kids too.  In fact, that was the reason they were split up.  So why be un-split up later? 

But, yeah, it doesn't matter.  They didn't seem to care.

3,348

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

I wouldn't worry too much about longevity, though.  Rumor is that this essentially will be a mini-series.   The rumor puts forth that Legends will follow the American Horror Story model and be a completely different show each year.   The thought makes sense; the title chosen for this series was taken from a DC anthology title called Legends of the DC Universe

Okay, that's *exactly* what this needs to be.  They could focus on some characters that really need focusing on.  Although if that's the case, it's a little strange that they're doing it with such a big cast.  It might've been a little more fun to do a Captain Cold/Heat Wave crime miniseries on their own.  Sort of a focus on villains in the Arrowverse, which could be interesting.  Like why metahuman villains seem to stay away from Star City.

3,349

(55 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Deux Ex Childrena?

How come time travel powers + wind (?) powers = Fifth Element powers?  If Nathan/Tommy's power was to leech powers (like his uncle and grandfather), then why doesn't he ever do this again?  Does he only steal one power once and that's the one he gets forever?  How come the lab technician was killed immediately after he touched Nathan/Malina, but HRG just goes white and then dies?

Why would any of these reboot/sequels EVER end on another cliffhanger?

3,350

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I watched the pilot for Legends of Tomorrow.  It's okay, although I think they're pressing their luck with this one.  Could be really fun, but it could be an absolute mess.  I really think it should've just been a miniseries or maybe a series of miniseries to fill in the winter gap (sorta like Agent Carter but maybe a smaller scale).

One thing that's bothered me about Hawkman/Hawkgirl: what is the current mythos for them in the comics?  Because in the DCAU, they come from a different planet (Thanagar).  But the origin in the Arrowverse is totally different.  What's the more-correct answer?

3,351

(0 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Next month, the Deadpool movie hits theaters.  And like Guardians of the Galaxy before it and like Suicide Squad after it, I think it's going to be a bit of a risk.  This is *not* a character that many are familiar with, and those that are seem to worry about how well a character like Deadpool can carry a movie.  That Wade works a little better as a supporting character than a main one.

The other issue at hand is the rating.  This is a movie that begged to be rated R, but the marketing has only hinted at how violent and profane the movie is going to be (the red band vs green band trailers show a huge discrepancy).  R-rated movies, as a rule, make less money.  Not only have you cut out a segment of the market, but it's also a segment of the market most likely to see a movie more than once (kids/teenagers).  It's also a segment of the market most likely to see a costumed movie.

So while the movie looks exactly the way that a Deadpool movie should look (and has matched almost exactly the look/tone of the test footage that Ryan Reynolds shot a while back), I wonder what kind of money it would be made to be successful.  I haven't found an exact figure for the budget, but extremely rough estimates put it between $50-100 million.  Let's say that it's $100 million - less than 150 movies ever have made $100 million.  Less than 40 have made $150 million.  Less than 15 have made $200 million.  $200 million being the budget of X-Men: Days of Future Past.

So if Deadpool can make a profit, it probably won't be a huge profit.  Is that okay?  If the budget really is $50 million and it makes the amount that, say, Elysium made ($93 million) is that a success?  Would "success" mean we'd get more "niche" superhero films before the genre's bubble bursts?  Do you think it'd have an impact on future DCCU or MCU movies?

3,352

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Suicide Squad does look fun.  It looks crazy, and I hope that carries over.

My big question is: does it appeal to the general public?  Was Guardians of the Galaxy successful because it was fun, or was it successful because it was in the Marvel brand (so far, there is no DC brand)?  Is Will Smith enough?  Is buzz going to be enough?

Because I see a ton of comics people getting excited, but I wonder if that extends beyond comic people.

BvS seems to be touching a lot of the right bases, but have you heard that Jesse Eisenberg based his Luthor on Max Landis?  I'm a big fan of his and that's still super weird to me.

3,353

(55 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Is Volume 4 the Circus?  If so, it was better.  So much of the in-between stuff was a mess for me that it blends together.  All I remember is that Sylar basically power-raped Claire (with actual rape imagery) and still was semi-treated as a redeemable character.

And I agree - I think he needs someone to focus him a little bit.  What's interesting to me is that I liked the idea that it was a new story with new characters when it was announced - that our main characters from the original run would be there but would be supporting instead of leading.  But I found myself so uninterested in the new characters that I actually perked up more when we saw Mohinder or Angela or Parkman. 

His ideas are good - I thought it was pretty clever that Tommy and Malina ended up being the twins.  It was a neat twist that I didn't see coming.  I think the world they set up was pretty cool, and I think it perfectly played off how season 4 left off.  I LOVE that he left Sylar out of it.  And, for the most part, the Petrellis. 

But the new characters weren't interesting, entire plots (the luchador guy) went nowhere, and the acting has been pretty weak.  For the most part, I think Zachary Levi is the only one that seems interested in being there.

3,354

(55 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I've read what you've wrote, and I've really been unable to get enough emotion together to really be upset or disappointed in the series.  It's not good, and it hasn't improved on the mistakes that made seasons 2-4 the disasters they ended up being.  It's television that's entertaining but forgettable. 

"Company Woman" seems to cross over the line to just plain bad.  And it does some things that this show simply doesn't need to do.  I'm invested enough in this series to follow along and not much else.  I don't remember character names, even main ones.  I don't remember what happened to HRG except that he disappeared in the storm.  Was it someone we knew?  Was it clear who it was?  Why hasn't he been mentioned the last couple of episodes?  Isn't he the reason most of us are still watching this?

And in a show like that, when we don't care enough to learn the characters' names, why are they trying to make a 3-dimensional bad guy this late in the game?  I don't care about Erica (whose name I know because it's mentioned 10 times an episode).  When Tommy (a name I had to look up and he's a lead) asks her if it's true that she's been behind everything, she goes "Does it matter?" with an evil grin.  And I thought, okay....at least she's a bad guy now.  But then you throw these weird flashbacks in that makes us try and relate, but it's way too little way too late.  A villain can't be 1-dimensional all the way and then made interesting all the sudden.  She's not an interesting character, and this stuff didn't make her any more interesting.

The sins of the first season finale was that they set things up too well.  We'd seen everything and knew what was going to happen - we were just waiting for the puzzle pieces to finally land.  This one seems like a total mess, and there's just 40-minutes left.  And now that it seems pretty clear that this is the end, I don't think we're going to get any sort of resolution.  It's just another 13-episode glimpse into a world that has a lot of potential that it's failed to tap into over and over again.

Matt as a bad guy?  Is it a betrayal of the character?  Honestly, I don't know.  Or care.  We're talking about a 4.5-season show that has been good for most of one season.  There's probably 30 episodes that are good, and almost all of them were in season one.  Almost every character has been run through the ringer, and I can picture any of them going crazy and evil.  There's no consistency.  Heck, when it was hinted that Mohinder was a terrorist, I believed it.  Why not?

(Side note - I've made same argument about Sliders - there are only a handful of good episodes, and they're all basically the first season, if you count season 1-2 as one season).

Heroes:Reborn was just a bad idea.

3,355

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

What I find super-weird is your peculiar fixation on Batman's age. I admit, I didn't find your feedback on SLIDERS REBORN to be super-detailed aside from being your usual encouraging and positive self -- but I was half-expecting you to protest Quinn being 43-years-old given your odd animosity towards Ben Affleck being 43-years-old.

Yeah, I mean it's definitely weird of me.  But it's just so bizarre that Batman and Superman aren't contemporaries.  I'm almost to the point where I want to write an alternate version of the DCCU where a teenage Clark idolizes Batman and sneaks off to Gotham in his spare time (he has super-speed so it'd be like running down the street) to watch Batman do his thing.  Something happens where Clark reveals himself and fights his way out of it.  Bruce is impressed and makes him a Robin. Clark is beside himself and throws himself into being Robin (even lying to his parents about some sort of summer camp/internship/whatever).  When fighting some random minions, Clark loses control for a second and seriously injures one of them.  Batman looks at him with fear, and Clark runs off.

3,356

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

SQ21 Complaint 9548 regarding Old Bruce / Young Clark:

In the universe, Bruce can call Clark "son" and it's not super weird.

Ugh.

3,357

(2 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yes.  Love it.

3,358

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah but Han was around when Jedi were still active and plentiful.  I have no idea what Han's backstory is, but even if he was raised in a place with no Jedi, Chewie has for sure experienced the Force.  Maybe they never talked about it, but that didn't seem like the first time Han had given that speech.

3,359

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

pilight wrote:

Rey knew the legends of Jedi and the Force, including the Mind Trick.  Her encounter with Luke's light saber and Ren's mental probes had let her know she had Force sensitivity.  So she gave it a shot.

Rey thought Luke was a myth - that's the only thing she ever mentions in the film about it.  There's a pretty good chance there have been zero Jedi for her entire lifetime.  There's definitely a way to connect A to B to C to get where you are, but the problem is the movie doesn't show it.  I've seen it twice, and there's just not anything in the actual movie that tells you this. 

The problem with "the legends of the Jedi and the Force" is that we know nothing about what the general population knows about anything.  In fact, a line *from* A New Hope makes it seem like the galaxy was basically mind-wiped about the Jedi.  Han says he's never seen or heard of anything like the Force.  And in the context of solely ANH, this might make sense.  If Obi-Wan was one of the final Jedi, he might've retired before Han was born.

The prequels show that the Jedi were a *huge* deal during Han's lifetime.  Heck, during Han's childhood.  Chewie, his best friend, fought alongside the Jedi.  Chewie was on a first-name basis with Yoda.  That would be like people alive now talking about the Soviet Union like they were a myth.

My point is that information in this universe seems to be really hard to get a hold of.  And Rey seemed particularly uninformed since she didn't even know that Luke was real.

And, again, all this is easily fixed with a line or two that set it up later.  Maybe when Finn mentions Luke the first time, she says to herself "The Jedi are real?  Lightsabers, Jedi Mind Trick, all of it?"  And when Han confirms that he knew Luke, you show a moment of realization in Rey's face, and it pays off later.  But you actually have to show Chekhov's gun for the payoff to make sense.

In the movie itself, all we know is that Rey has heard of Luke Skywalker.  Doesn't show any indication that she knows he's a Jedi.  Then Han confirms that the Jedi and the Force are real.  Then Kylo uses Force powers on her, which would've been her first true indication that the Force even exists (outside of the vision she had when she touched the lightsaber).  Then she experiences a completely different way of mind-bending (I'll call it the Sith Mind Trick).  Then something happens in her head that we aren't privy to.  Then she successfully does something we've never seen an untrained Jedi do.

Not everything needs to be explained in a movie.  Over-explaining in a movie is just as bad as under-explaining.  But when you have someone who is as naturally talented as Rey, some level of explanation is needed on how such a thing is possible.  We all know how it's possible because we've seen the movies.  But she hasn't seen the movies.  And if she knows because she's heard all the legends, then tell us that.  If she knows because she saw Kylo do it, then tell us that. 

That's what Obi-Wan's ghost was telling him to do.  Luke of A New Hope certainly never questioned what anyone else told him to do.

All Obi-Wan says is "use the Force" - guiding the torpedoes seems way more difficult than simply trusting the Force (which is how I'd always interpreted it).  Keeping in mind that it isn't until Yoda's training that he can move anything other than his own lightsaber.

3,360

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Ha, don't give me my opinion.  But I certainly value yours.