I like how Arrow started out with him basically just killing everyone who got in his way and he didn't really turn into a hero until season 2
i think it's dumb/contrived that he stopped killing people
especially since diggle is killing people all over the place because he is using guns all the time?
it's not like being a vigilante killer is that much worse than being a hyperviolent vigilante who brutalizes and tortures criminals
but he still shoots people all the time so really it's fine
i disagree
the whole superhero "i don't kill people" shtick really only works for superheroes who are so exceptionally powerful that it's a matter of discipline more than practicality
for a street level guy who's actually handicapping himself by using a silly outdated weapon it just doesn't make sense
i think they could have gone there by a different route and had it be more convincing, but the motivation they gave him for it was pretty bleh (that character/relationship was just awful though, that's part of it)
The motivation is the best part of it. Like with the Nolan Batmans that are clearly a huge inspiration to the show, they don't just set it in stone at the start. They create it. They establish the motivation behind it and explain it.
So it's like Nolan's Batmans? I'm now less interested.
it's really not like Nolan's batmen.
I'm back to being interested again. Likening something to the Nolan Batmen is a huge turnoff for me.
superheroes bend over backwards to not kill people because then they can have a revolving cast of characters who go to jail then escape and it broadens the potential audience by having people get politely knocked out rather than killed
this is because the guys who 'don't kill' could never actually be 100% non lethal they would for sure be accidentally killing people left and right
it tends to be really awkward and strikes me as archaic limitation of when comic books couldn't tell complicated stories with violence. there's a happy medium between grimdark and boyscout
like Arkham City you're breaking a guys arm and legs in a freezing prison colony of a city? Yeah you might not be murdering him but that dude is fucking going to die
I like how Arrow started out with him basically just killing everyone who got in his way and he didn't really turn into a hero until season 2
i think it's dumb/contrived that he stopped killing people
especially since diggle is killing people all over the place because he is using guns all the time?
it's not like being a vigilante killer is that much worse than being a hyperviolent vigilante who brutalizes and tortures criminals
but he still shoots people all the time so really it's fine
i disagree
the whole superhero "i don't kill people" shtick really only works for superheroes who are so exceptionally powerful that it's a matter of discipline more than practicality
for a street level guy who's actually handicapping himself by using a silly outdated weapon it just doesn't make sense
i think they could have gone there by a different route and had it be more convincing, but the motivation they gave him for it was pretty bleh (that character/relationship was just awful though, that's part of it)
The motivation is the best part of it. Like with the Nolan Batmans that are clearly a huge inspiration to the show, they don't just set it in stone at the start. They create it. They establish the motivation behind it and explain it.
So it's like Nolan's Batmans? I'm now less interested.
it's really not like Nolan's batmen.
I'm back to being interested again. Likening something to the Nolan Batmen is a huge turnoff for me.
What about it?
Everything. I find them to be bland, poorly acted, excessively dark with confusing cinematography in every action scene (especially the second film), with annoying characters I don't give a shit about and contrived plots I don't give a shit about.
superman is exactly the kind of superhero for whom a no-kill rule makes 100% perfect sense
he is cosmically powerful, and the rule doesn't really make things more practically difficult for him - it's just a pure test of his resolve and dedication to principle. the question isn't "can he stop him without resorting to murder," it's "can he resist the urge to go too far with his immense power"
Like I derived absolutely no enjoyment from any of the three films, and I watched the first two twice just to be sure. Don't think I can bring myself to watch The Dark Knight Rises a second time.
Probably best not to open this can of worms here, though.
superman is exactly the kind of superhero for whom a no-kill rule makes 100% perfect sense
he is cosmically powerful, and the rule doesn't really make things more practically difficult for him - it's just a pure test of his resolve and dedication to principle. the question isn't "can he stop him without resorting to murder," it's "can he resist the urge to go too far with his immense power"
but arrow isn't as opposed to killing as batman or superman
again
he was prepared to kill slade's entire army but he was thwarted by summer glau
like Arkham City you're breaking a guys arm and legs in a freezing prison colony of a city? Yeah you might not be murdering him but that dude is fucking going to die
I think that's totally modern superhero. I mean he wears bullet resistant armor, not nylon or leather. That's a hallmark of modern hero
I think you're meant to assume some of the dudes are dying.
like Arkham City you're breaking a guys arm and legs in a freezing prison colony of a city? Yeah you might not be murdering him but that dude is fucking going to die
it is crucial to completely ignore the real consequences of violence in almost any work of fiction involving violence
knocking someone out with a blow to the head, any gunshot, any arrow wound, any major fracture, even a relatively short fall, all these things can easily kill someone immediately or over time, and even more likely have a huge debilitating effect on their lives
superman is exactly the kind of superhero for whom a no-kill rule makes 100% perfect sense
he is cosmically powerful, and the rule doesn't really make things more practically difficult for him - it's just a pure test of his resolve and dedication to principle. the question isn't "can he stop him without resorting to murder," it's "can he resist the urge to go too far with his immense power"
Superman's super power is being a good person. There are virtually no good stories about Superman that revolve around how he punches things so hard or has laser eyes that shoot so many lasers.
Two goats enter, one car leaves
+2
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
I remember when I saw the trailers for The Flash I was like, the kid's hot, maybe I'll watch it. Then I felt gross and looked it up on IMDB to see whether I was being a pedo, and, ehhhhh right on the edge.
superman is exactly the kind of superhero for whom a no-kill rule makes 100% perfect sense
he is cosmically powerful, and the rule doesn't really make things more practically difficult for him - it's just a pure test of his resolve and dedication to principle. the question isn't "can he stop him without resorting to murder," it's "can he resist the urge to go too far with his immense power"
but arrow isn't as opposed to killing as batman or superman
again
he was prepared to kill slade's entire army but he was thwarted by summer glau
yeah he kind of relaxed the rule a bit later on
like i said, it's not even that bad anymore
it's more like "sure, i don't kill people. you know, on purpose. mostly. unless they're really bad."
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I like how Arrow started out with him basically just killing everyone who got in his way and he didn't really turn into a hero until season 2
i think it's dumb/contrived that he stopped killing people
especially since diggle is killing people all over the place because he is using guns all the time?
it's not like being a vigilante killer is that much worse than being a hyperviolent vigilante who brutalizes and tortures criminals
but he still shoots people all the time so really it's fine
i disagree
the whole superhero "i don't kill people" shtick really only works for superheroes who are so exceptionally powerful that it's a matter of discipline more than practicality
for a street level guy who's actually handicapping himself by using a silly outdated weapon it just doesn't make sense
i think they could have gone there by a different route and had it be more convincing, but the motivation they gave him for it was pretty bleh (that character/relationship was just awful though, that's part of it)
The motivation is the best part of it. Like with the Nolan Batmans that are clearly a huge inspiration to the show, they don't just set it in stone at the start. They create it. They establish the motivation behind it and explain it.
So it's like Nolan's Batmans? I'm now less interested.
it's really not like Nolan's batmen.
I'm back to being interested again. Likening something to the Nolan Batmen is a huge turnoff for me.
it's really too complicated to be boiled down to yes/no internet bullshit
the show takes some cues from the Nolan movies in terms of like, making comic stuff kind of pulpishly mundane? Like, hypothetically, Arrow might fight a comic book villain called Doctor Lazer, who in the comics is a mad scientist with the actual superpower of shooting lasers from his hands, but in the world of this show is now a regular-ass drug dealer called "The Doctor" whose hideout is a club called The Lazer House
but then that kind of gradually gets dialed back as the series progresses. the villains and situations become progressively less mundane until we enter the realm of for-real comic book science fiction and magic and superpowers, although Green Arrow is a street-level dude so he will always kind of focus on street-level villains in his show
the show also takes a page from Batman Begins, in particular, in trying to explore the underpinnings of how a superhero might "really" work. So there are some plot elements about how the Arrow finds criminals to fight, about how he recruits support, how he gets new equipment and a place to hide out and change clothes and all that stuff
but is it tonally like the Nolan movies? No, not really. It's not a story that constantly gropes for analogues to real-world terrorism or whatever, and characters are not prone to editorializing about The Burning Issue of the Day. It has a general tone of kind of, I don't want to say camp because it never really crosses that line, but High Melodrama - the sort of show where the two plotlines of an episode are a samurai duel to the death atop a skyscraper and also a woman is about to give birth but ninjas have caused a city-wide blackout oh noooo
+2
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
superheroes bend over backwards to not kill people because then they can have a revolving cast of characters who go to jail then escape and it broadens the potential audience by having people get politely knocked out rather than killed
this is because the guys who 'don't kill' could never actually be 100% non lethal they would for sure be accidentally killing people left and right
it tends to be really awkward and strikes me as archaic limitation of when comic books couldn't tell complicated stories with violence. there's a happy medium between grimdark and boyscout
Batman is not seen to be 'killing' people in the Arkham games. But a good percentage of them are definitely not waking up from their comas. I think that game, being a good action game, is the height of the accidental comedy of the no-kill creed.
I like how Arrow started out with him basically just killing everyone who got in his way and he didn't really turn into a hero until season 2
i think it's dumb/contrived that he stopped killing people
especially since diggle is killing people all over the place because he is using guns all the time?
it's not like being a vigilante killer is that much worse than being a hyperviolent vigilante who brutalizes and tortures criminals
but he still shoots people all the time so really it's fine
i disagree
the whole superhero "i don't kill people" shtick really only works for superheroes who are so exceptionally powerful that it's a matter of discipline more than practicality
for a street level guy who's actually handicapping himself by using a silly outdated weapon it just doesn't make sense
i think they could have gone there by a different route and had it be more convincing, but the motivation they gave him for it was pretty bleh (that character/relationship was just awful though, that's part of it)
The motivation is the best part of it. Like with the Nolan Batmans that are clearly a huge inspiration to the show, they don't just set it in stone at the start. They create it. They establish the motivation behind it and explain it.
So it's like Nolan's Batmans? I'm now less interested.
it's really not like Nolan's batmen.
I'm back to being interested again. Likening something to the Nolan Batmen is a huge turnoff for me.
What about it?
Everything. I find them to be bland, poorly acted, excessively dark with confusing cinematography in every action scene (especially the second film), with annoying characters I don't give a shit about and contrived plots I don't give a shit about.
I really don't know what to say then, cause none of that is particularly about style or content or anything.
Like, Arrow is not the same as the Nolan movies, but it is clearly somewhat inspired by them and borrows ideas and some of the tone from them. But it's also it's own distinct entity with it's own tone and it's own pulpy feel, especially as it goes along, and some CW-esque drama in there too in S1. (S2 several times feels like it's about to play the CW-drama shit and then reveals that it's just kidding around and goes "No, we all know that would be dumb, fuck that kind of plotting")
It's not a bad show and keeps improving, but I have no idea from this description if you'd like it or not.
I feel like an assassin who wanted an accurate, long-ranged, silent weapon would still not use a bow? they'd use a crossbow or a rifle with some quieter alternative for delivering the payload.
I remember when I saw the trailers for The Flash I was like, the kid's hot, maybe I'll watch it. Then I felt gross and looked it up on IMDB to see whether I was being a pedo, and, ehhhhh right on the edge.
1990? He's two years younger than me. What are you, 50?
Like I derived absolutely no enjoyment from any of the three films, and I watched the first two twice just to be sure. Don't think I can bring myself to watch The Dark Knight Rises a second time.
Probably best not to open this can of worms here, though.
Yeah, you didn't like the Joker in DKR at all? that's OK, but it does kinda demonstrate the, depth, of your dislike of the trilogy.
They moistly come out at night, moistly.
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
Broadcasting no viewers so sad. I think I really like streaming and I have interesting things to say. How can I promote this! I better make a........ Tumblr? No!
It has Paul Blackthorne as a scenery chewing street detective snarling at these damned vigilantes. It has ninjas and mysterious powers of the Orient. It has strange serums and evil scientists. It has conspiracies involving evil city officials and corrupt aldermen. It has a hero whose lair is built underneath a nightclub he owns. That's the kind of show it is.
I like how Arrow started out with him basically just killing everyone who got in his way and he didn't really turn into a hero until season 2
i think it's dumb/contrived that he stopped killing people
especially since diggle is killing people all over the place because he is using guns all the time?
it's not like being a vigilante killer is that much worse than being a hyperviolent vigilante who brutalizes and tortures criminals
but he still shoots people all the time so really it's fine
i disagree
the whole superhero "i don't kill people" shtick really only works for superheroes who are so exceptionally powerful that it's a matter of discipline more than practicality
for a street level guy who's actually handicapping himself by using a silly outdated weapon it just doesn't make sense
i think they could have gone there by a different route and had it be more convincing, but the motivation they gave him for it was pretty bleh (that character/relationship was just awful though, that's part of it)
The motivation is the best part of it. Like with the Nolan Batmans that are clearly a huge inspiration to the show, they don't just set it in stone at the start. They create it. They establish the motivation behind it and explain it.
So it's like Nolan's Batmans? I'm now less interested.
it's really not like Nolan's batmen.
I'm back to being interested again. Likening something to the Nolan Batmen is a huge turnoff for me.
it's really too complicated to be boiled down to yes/no internet bullshit
the show takes some cues from the Nolan movies in terms of like, making comic stuff kind of pulpishly mundane? Like, hypothetically, Arrow might fight a comic book villain called Doctor Lazer, who in the comics is a mad scientist with the actual superpower of shooting lasers from his hands, but in the world of this show is now a regular-ass drug dealer called "The Doctor" whose hideout is a club called The Lazer House
but then that kind of gradually gets dialed back as the series progresses. the villains and situations become progressively less mundane until we enter the realm of for-real comic book science fiction and magic and superpowers, although Green Arrow is a street-level dude so he will always kind of focus on street-level villains in his show
the show also takes a page from Batman Begins, in particular, in trying to explore the underpinnings of how a superhero might "really" work. So there are some plot elements about how the Arrow finds criminals to fight, about how he recruits support, how he gets new equipment and a place to hide out and change clothes and all that stuff
but is it tonally like the Nolan movies? No, not really. It's not a story that constantly gropes for analogues to real-world terrorism or whatever, and characters are not prone to editorializing about The Burning Issue of the Day. It has a general tone of kind of, I don't want to say camp because it never really crosses that line, but High Melodrama - the sort of show where the two plotlines of an episode are a samurai duel to the death atop a skyscraper and also a woman is about to give birth but ninjas have caused a city-wide blackout oh noooo
Cool, thanks for the breakdown.
I'll catch the first couple of eps soon, try to make up my own mind I guess. Sounds like I could like it.
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
I remember when I saw the trailers for The Flash I was like, the kid's hot, maybe I'll watch it. Then I felt gross and looked it up on IMDB to see whether I was being a pedo, and, ehhhhh right on the edge.
1990? He's two years younger than me. What are you, 50?
Posts
What about it?
the no-killing stood out as particularly silly when they were trying to keep the show kind of serious and grounded, IMO (kind of)
Now go watch Apocalypse now @Dread Pirate Arbuthnot
points for the new superman imo
but I know how most people feel about it
like Arkham City you're breaking a guys arm and legs in a freezing prison colony of a city? Yeah you might not be murdering him but that dude is fucking going to die
Everything. I find them to be bland, poorly acted, excessively dark with confusing cinematography in every action scene (especially the second film), with annoying characters I don't give a shit about and contrived plots I don't give a shit about.
he is cosmically powerful, and the rule doesn't really make things more practically difficult for him - it's just a pure test of his resolve and dedication to principle. the question isn't "can he stop him without resorting to murder," it's "can he resist the urge to go too far with his immense power"
Probably best not to open this can of worms here, though.
but arrow isn't as opposed to killing as batman or superman
again
I think that's totally modern superhero. I mean he wears bullet resistant armor, not nylon or leather. That's a hallmark of modern hero
I think you're meant to assume some of the dudes are dying.
it is crucial to completely ignore the real consequences of violence in almost any work of fiction involving violence
knocking someone out with a blow to the head, any gunshot, any arrow wound, any major fracture, even a relatively short fall, all these things can easily kill someone immediately or over time, and even more likely have a huge debilitating effect on their lives
Superman's super power is being a good person. There are virtually no good stories about Superman that revolve around how he punches things so hard or has laser eyes that shoot so many lasers.
yeah he kind of relaxed the rule a bit later on
like i said, it's not even that bad anymore
it's more like "sure, i don't kill people. you know, on purpose. mostly. unless they're really bad."
it's really too complicated to be boiled down to yes/no internet bullshit
the show takes some cues from the Nolan movies in terms of like, making comic stuff kind of pulpishly mundane? Like, hypothetically, Arrow might fight a comic book villain called Doctor Lazer, who in the comics is a mad scientist with the actual superpower of shooting lasers from his hands, but in the world of this show is now a regular-ass drug dealer called "The Doctor" whose hideout is a club called The Lazer House
but then that kind of gradually gets dialed back as the series progresses. the villains and situations become progressively less mundane until we enter the realm of for-real comic book science fiction and magic and superpowers, although Green Arrow is a street-level dude so he will always kind of focus on street-level villains in his show
the show also takes a page from Batman Begins, in particular, in trying to explore the underpinnings of how a superhero might "really" work. So there are some plot elements about how the Arrow finds criminals to fight, about how he recruits support, how he gets new equipment and a place to hide out and change clothes and all that stuff
but is it tonally like the Nolan movies? No, not really. It's not a story that constantly gropes for analogues to real-world terrorism or whatever, and characters are not prone to editorializing about The Burning Issue of the Day. It has a general tone of kind of, I don't want to say camp because it never really crosses that line, but High Melodrama - the sort of show where the two plotlines of an episode are a samurai duel to the death atop a skyscraper and also a woman is about to give birth but ninjas have caused a city-wide blackout oh noooo
Batman is not seen to be 'killing' people in the Arkham games. But a good percentage of them are definitely not waking up from their comas. I think that game, being a good action game, is the height of the accidental comedy of the no-kill creed.
I really don't know what to say then, cause none of that is particularly about style or content or anything.
Like, Arrow is not the same as the Nolan movies, but it is clearly somewhat inspired by them and borrows ideas and some of the tone from them. But it's also it's own distinct entity with it's own tone and it's own pulpy feel, especially as it goes along, and some CW-esque drama in there too in S1. (S2 several times feels like it's about to play the CW-drama shit and then reveals that it's just kidding around and goes "No, we all know that would be dumb, fuck that kind of plotting")
It's not a bad show and keeps improving, but I have no idea from this description if you'd like it or not.
Hopefully, this can skip a lot of dumb arguments.
Ooooooohhhhhh
I thought it was a really well organized robbery (they all looked plainclothes) and the dude in the middle had something valuable.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
WHAT
WHAT
WHAT
WHAT
WHAAAAAAAAAT
1990? He's two years younger than me. What are you, 50?
all the time
i want to see that all the time
singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/this-urban-jungle/accident-at-bukit-batok-west-turns-out-to-be-drug-bust-by-cnb
yeah they don't really sound or look like cops, do they
I think you can safely fuck anyone in their 20s always
Yeah, you didn't like the Joker in DKR at all? that's OK, but it does kinda demonstrate the, depth, of your dislike of the trilogy.
It has Paul Blackthorne as a scenery chewing street detective snarling at these damned vigilantes. It has ninjas and mysterious powers of the Orient. It has strange serums and evil scientists. It has conspiracies involving evil city officials and corrupt aldermen. It has a hero whose lair is built underneath a nightclub he owns. That's the kind of show it is.
Cool, thanks for the breakdown.
I'll catch the first couple of eps soon, try to make up my own mind I guess. Sounds like I could like it.
Just turned 29.
He's closer to my undergrads than he is to me.
that dude is like 24!
there is nothing creepy about wanting to bang him!
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.