As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Look, up in the forums! It's [Superman]!

189111314

Posts

  • Options
    The Lovely BastardThe Lovely Bastard Registered User regular
    meanwhile, i don't understand how a single movie being good or bad could be intrinsically linked to who you are as a person.

    7656367.jpg
  • Options
    Oniros25Oniros25 Registered User regular
    Antimatter wrote: »
    it could still be a terrible movie in your opinion, but still popular, and you'd have to deal with lots of people liking a version of the Man of Steel that is something you don't, leading to that interpretation sticking around for a while.

    My point originally which seems to be lost in people saying that the lack of quality in GL was inherently obvious (hindsight sure is 20/20) is that until I see this movie, it could be anything. It could promote an entirely unwholesome version of the character (like, say the Bat God that came out of Morrison making batman somewhat more capable coupled with the insane boost in popularity he recieved at just about the same time) it could be a flop and then it's Superman Returns all over again. Until I snuggle down into that theater chair and watch this sucker, I'm not willing to rule out any eventuality because I remember the buzz before GL too. They were talking about how critics loved it (most of them seemed to change their minds later...or the positive critics never existed in the first place) they were talking about how GL 2 was greenlit and a sure thing, they were talking about how it was going to be a springboard toward a JL movie (hmmmmmmmmmmmm, that sure sounds familiar!)

    I want to like this. I want to love this. Until I see it, though, all I'm going to feel about this movie is terror at the potential implications...and maybe just a little sliver of hope.

    Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
    3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
  • Options
    Oniros25Oniros25 Registered User regular
    meanwhile, i don't understand how a single movie being good or bad could be intrinsically linked to who you are as a person.

    Only in so far as I want to enjoy many nice Superman things and the popularity of this film absolutely will determine how much of that I get. Even if it's only in the short term. If it is successful, then I benefit, if not...well, I get to keep going with what we've got. Which is not at all shabby, don't get me wrong. I'd just like Superman to get that day in the sun he's long been missing. That's all I was trying to say.

    I tend to overexagerate for comedic effect. This would be one of those times.

    Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
    3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
  • Options
    The Lovely BastardThe Lovely Bastard Registered User regular
    superman returns didn't flop

    it made as much as batman begins, but the budget was absurd as it'd been a running tally since the burton and mcg versions fell apart.

    7656367.jpg
  • Options
    The Lovely BastardThe Lovely Bastard Registered User regular
    like, it made nearly 400 mil in the box office, but the combined budget was. close to 300 mil

    7656367.jpg
  • Options
    Oniros25Oniros25 Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    superman returns didn't flop

    it made as much as batman begins, but the budget was absurd as it'd been a running tally since the burton and mcg versions fell apart.

    I didn't say SR flopped. I said if this movie did, the social circumstances would be similar to how Superman was percieved after that movie (which reguardless of the takes was not generous.)

    Edit: more importantly, takes matter little to me. It didn't capture the public's imagination or passions, thus it was a failure. Probably rightly so. It was basically Donner-verse fan fiction. There are moments in that film I like, but overall it's not a great movie.

    Oniros25 on
    Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
    3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
  • Options
    nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Oniros25 wrote: »
    Antimatter wrote: »
    it could still be a terrible movie in your opinion, but still popular, and you'd have to deal with lots of people liking a version of the Man of Steel that is something you don't, leading to that interpretation sticking around for a while.

    My point originally which seems to be lost in people saying that the lack of quality in GL was inherently obvious (hindsight sure is 20/20) is that until I see this movie, it could be anything. It could promote an entirely unwholesome version of the character (like, say the Bat God that came out of Morrison making batman somewhat more capable coupled with the insane boost in popularity he recieved at just about the same time) it could be a flop and then it's Superman Returns all over again. Until I snuggle down into that theater chair and watch this sucker, I'm not willing to rule out any eventuality because I remember the buzz before GL too. They were talking about how critics loved it (most of them seemed to change their minds later...or the positive critics never existed in the first place) they were talking about how GL 2 was greenlit and a sure thing, they were talking about how it was going to be a springboard toward a JL movie (hmmmmmmmmmmmm, that sure sounds familiar!)

    I want to like this. I want to love this. Until I see it, though, all I'm going to feel about this movie is terror at the potential implications...and maybe just a little sliver of hope.

    Its not a hindsight thing.

    Go back to the forums right before GL came out. Morale was fucking low. When the trailer with the scene of Hal casting his costume was released the only thing anybody was talking about was how fake it looked.

    Quire.jpg
  • Options
    The Lovely BastardThe Lovely Bastard Registered User regular
    no one left the theater after superman returns worried that kal-el was a deadbeat dad. and they were still pursuing batman vs superman at the time well after it came out.

    superman returns didn't do dick to superman's rep, warner brothers being incompetent did.

    7656367.jpg
  • Options
    Oniros25Oniros25 Registered User regular
    Oniros25 wrote: »
    Antimatter wrote: »
    it could still be a terrible movie in your opinion, but still popular, and you'd have to deal with lots of people liking a version of the Man of Steel that is something you don't, leading to that interpretation sticking around for a while.

    My point originally which seems to be lost in people saying that the lack of quality in GL was inherently obvious (hindsight sure is 20/20) is that until I see this movie, it could be anything. It could promote an entirely unwholesome version of the character (like, say the Bat God that came out of Morrison making batman somewhat more capable coupled with the insane boost in popularity he recieved at just about the same time) it could be a flop and then it's Superman Returns all over again. Until I snuggle down into that theater chair and watch this sucker, I'm not willing to rule out any eventuality because I remember the buzz before GL too. They were talking about how critics loved it (most of them seemed to change their minds later...or the positive critics never existed in the first place) they were talking about how GL 2 was greenlit and a sure thing, they were talking about how it was going to be a springboard toward a JL movie (hmmmmmmmmmmmm, that sure sounds familiar!)

    I want to like this. I want to love this. Until I see it, though, all I'm going to feel about this movie is terror at the potential implications...and maybe just a little sliver of hope.

    Its not a hindsight thing.

    Go back to the forums right before GL came out. Morale was fucking low. When the trailer with the scene of Hal casting his costume was released the only thing anybody was talking about was how fake it looked.

    Fine, fine. Touche. It was an example meant to illustrate that anything is possible, admittedly not the best one. Even if MoS's trailer is better that GL's, the movie could still be bad. I've seen pleanty of trailers that psyched me up only to be royally disappointed when I saw the film. The Fountain comes to mind. That was the concern and for me it still stands. Doesn't for you? Sweet. Wish I was there with you. I look forward to (if there is any justice) being pleasantly relieved right next to everyone that believes absolutely.

    Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
    3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
  • Options
    Oniros25Oniros25 Registered User regular
    no one left the theater after superman returns worried that kal-el was a deadbeat dad. and they were still pursuing batman vs superman at the time well after it came out.

    superman returns didn't do dick to superman's rep, warner brothers being incompetent did.

    If you say so.

    Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
    3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
  • Options
    The Lovely BastardThe Lovely Bastard Registered User regular
    literally any movie you haven't seen yet runs the risk of being something you don't like. having panic attacks and being dour about a movie you wanna like because you can't be absolutely sure you'll love it is an exercise in exhaustion and masochism and just fucking the most negative way to be.

    7656367.jpg
  • Options
    The Lovely BastardThe Lovely Bastard Registered User regular
    like do you want to secretly be right because goddamn it sounds like you'll be happier hating the friggin' movie.

    7656367.jpg
  • Options
    vagrant_windsvagrant_winds Overworked Mysterious Eldritch Horror Hunter XX Registered User regular
    The trailers look like it could be decent. It could also be great or terrible. But it's not obviously terrible from the trailers like GL was.

    And on one hand Snyder made Watchmen and 300 which were both quite good.
    On the other hand he made Sucker Punch, which is one of the most offensively terrible hollywood movies I've seen in my life.

    // Steam: VWinds // PSN: vagrant_winds //
    // Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
  • Options
    ZyrxilZyrxil Registered User regular
    Eh, 300 and Watchmen were pretty good, which is a rung below quite good. Really 300 only sticks around because of some of its quotability, otherwise its ultimately decent but forgettable.

  • Options
    DarcsteelDarcsteel Wildcard NC United StatesRegistered User regular
    The trailers look like it could be decent. It could also be great or terrible. But it's not obviously terrible from the trailers like GL was.

    And on one hand Snyder made Watchmen and 300 which were both quite good.
    On the other hand he made Sucker Punch, which is one of the most offensively terrible hollywood movies I've seen in my life.

    300 and Watchmen were both fun 300 more so for action and Watchmen for story. I think he can hit a good mix for both in superman.

    Sucker Punch wasnt a bad movie. It took a minute to figure out just what the hell was happening but all in all it was an interesting watch. I could recommend it as a rental at least

  • Options
    RansRans Registered User regular
    where was Luthor's scars in Unchained #1 and why wasn't he in his mega crazy prison built just for him? doesn't seem to follow established continuity at all.

  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    mmFpOZml.jpg
    0cjMIlVl.jpg
    FmjadJvl.jpg
    rGGHXsql.jpg

    I wish they still made comics like this

  • Options
    LuxLux Registered User regular
    Hey! Quick question about Superman origin continuity:

    I've never liked the idea that Jor-El sent Superman to Earth on purpose with the idea that he would be a protector/hero/whatever and also there's a computer/fortress that explains his origin to him. But I understand that's been the status quo since the Reeves movies, I didn't even really like it in Birthright where Clark studies a Kryptonian iPad in his free time.

    But for some reason I can't draw upon a memory of other ways Clark learns of his history. It's just a blank in my memory/reading, but other than having it explicitly and confidently stated by computer fathers, what other ways has he learned about Krypton?

  • Options
    lionheart_mlionheart_m Registered User regular
    Man, I'm a bit fuzzy on the details but since MoS (which was after the first movie) it's always been like that.

    3DS: 5069-4122-2826 / WiiU: Lionheart-m / PSN: lionheart_m / Steam: lionheart_jg
  • Options
    SolarSolar Registered User regular
    "female Judas"

    weeeeeaaaak

  • Options
    KyouguKyougu Registered User regular
    Huh. I didn't realize the whole "We sent you to protect earth" was part of the comics.

    Yeah, I don't like it either.

  • Options
    RansRans Registered User regular
    I know the Byrne reboot in the 80s had Superman learning of his Kryptonian origins years after he had already become Superman, so Jor-El's motivations for sending him to Earth (whatever they may have been, I don't remember) did not factor into Clark becoming Superman. That was all the influence of the Kents. Pretty sure Jor-El manifested as a computer hologram and gave him an infodump of Krypton stuff, still.

    I don't think Clark's method of learning about Krypton has been covered in the new 52. It was certainly suggested in Morrison's Action Comics that he didn't really have a clue where he came from (other than the Kents telling him they had recovered him from a rocket) until he encountered his rocket for the first time in General Lane's military holding base. The rocket probably informed him of everything (although if it was by way of a Jor-El hologram, I don't think was established) and he may have learned more from the Collector's spaceship.

    Can't remember if Morrison established a Jor-El motivation in flashbacks.

  • Options
    Werewolf2000adWerewolf2000ad Suckers, I know exactly what went wrong. Registered User regular
    In the very first "Superman learns his origins" story, in Superman #61 (1949), he travels back in time, following the path of a Kryptonite meteorite from a swami's turban. Prior to the "hologram from Jor-El" type stuff, he tended to learn information about Krypton through either time travel, Kryptonian artifacts, or using comic book science to collect light waves from Krypton's past.

    There was very nearly a "Superman learns he's from Krypton" story in 1940 - It's fascinating to read about that, and contemplate how differently the last 70+ years would have looked if it had been published.

    steam_sig.png
    EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    XZMqDkul.jpg

  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    Hahaha, "Man that porcupine planet is annoying! Let's destroy it!"

  • Options
    Werewolf2000adWerewolf2000ad Suckers, I know exactly what went wrong. Registered User regular
    Just for a second there, it looked to me as though the planet was tiny and they were poking it with sticks.

    steam_sig.png
    EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
  • Options
    LuxLux Registered User regular
    Hahaha, "Man that porcupine planet is annoying! Let's destroy it!"

    Lookit this dumbass planet, all spiky & whatnot. Let's fuck it up.

  • Options
    Garlic BreadGarlic Bread i'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm a Registered User, Disagreeable regular
    If I were writing Superman, his origin would be the one from Red Son
    baby Supes is sent in a rocket from Earth in the far future and goes through a wormhole/timehole/whatever and lands in the present

    And he would never find out why he's different, because it wouldn't matter to him. He just does good with what he has because that's how the Kents raised him.

  • Options
    nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Kyougu wrote: »
    Huh. I didn't realize the whole "We sent you to protect earth" was part of the comics.

    Yeah, I don't like it either.

    Its not. In Birthright he is sent there only to save himself.

    In the new Action COmics which is the current canon right now Jor-El simply looks for the planet where he will best thrive.

    Quire.jpg
  • Options
    OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? the foot of mt fujiRegistered User regular
    Birthright is the best one

    That or TAS

    All other origins are lamer by comparison

    signature-deffo.jpg
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    As I keep reading pre-crisis Superman I am becoming convinced that pre-crisis Superman is the greatest fictional character ever created

  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    Action comics #402 is the greatest comic book I have ever read

  • Options
    lionheart_mlionheart_m Registered User regular
    I never read anyone besides MoS. Since it's on sale...is Birthright/Secret Origin worth it?

    3DS: 5069-4122-2826 / WiiU: Lionheart-m / PSN: lionheart_m / Steam: lionheart_jg
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    yes to birthright, no to secret origin

  • Options
    chiasaur11chiasaur11 Never doubt a raccoon. Do you think it's trademarked?Registered User regular
    Secret Identity, on the other hand, is worth shanking someone for. Or, you know, it would be. If shanking people wasn't bad. Superman would disapprove.

    Quite good.

  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    mebNdxll.jpg

  • Options
    AtomicTofuAtomicTofu She's a straight-up supervillain, yo Registered User regular
    I never read anyone besides MoS. Since it's on sale...is Birthright/Secret Origin worth it?

    Ditch Secret Origin and pick up Red Son instead as a companion to Birthright.

  • Options
    Oniros25Oniros25 Registered User regular
    glithert wrote: »
    mebNdxll.jpg

    "You shouldn't try to kill yourself because you can't." Is like the most goosey way to keep someone from beeing suicidal I've seen in a long while, I have to say.

    I feel like the jumper is saying, "Whelp, looks like I have no choice but to live now. Guess I might as well..."

    I also imagine his dialog in Eeyore's voice for extra comedy.

    Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
    3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
  • Options
    Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    I'd love an entire issue of Superman interfering with this guy's suicide attempts, freezing lakes with his breath so the man can't drown and using super-speed to replace the bullets in his revolver with jelly beans.

    Just because you're helping people doesn't mean you can't still be a super-dick.

  • Options
    Werewolf2000adWerewolf2000ad Suckers, I know exactly what went wrong. Registered User regular
    Funny thing is, making it inconvienient to kill yourself turns out to be a really good method of preventing suicide.

    "After three people leapt from the Ellington in a single 10-day period in 1985, a consortium of civic groups lobbied for a suicide barrier to be erected on the span. Opponents to the plan, which included the National Trust for Historic Preservation, countered with the same argument that is made whenever a suicide barrier on a bridge or landmark building is proposed: that such barriers don’t really work, that those intent on killing themselves will merely go elsewhere. In the Ellington’s case, opponents had the added ammunition of pointing to the equally lethal Taft standing just yards away: if a barrier were placed on the Ellington, it was not at all hard to see exactly where thwarted jumpers would head.

    Except the opponents were wrong. A study conducted five years after the Ellington barrier went up showed that while suicides at the Ellington were eliminated completely, the rate at the Taft barely changed, inching up from 1.7 to 2 deaths per year. What’s more, over the same five-year span, the total number of jumping suicides in Washington had decreased by 50 percent, or the precise percentage the Ellington once accounted for."

    "Obtaining a Police Department list of all would-be jumpers who were thwarted from leaping off the Golden Gate between 1937 and 1971 — an astonishing 515 individuals in all — he painstakingly culled death-certificate records to see how many had subsequently “completed.” His report, “Where Are They Now?” remains a landmark in the study of suicide, for what he found was that just 6 percent of those pulled off the bridge went on to kill themselves. Even allowing for suicides that might have been mislabeled as accidents only raised the total to 10 percent."

    Suicide is a more impulsive act than people think; make a method more difficult and the people who would use it don't go elsewhere, they just give up.

    steam_sig.png
    EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
Sign In or Register to comment.