brigade
Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 32
|
Post by brigade on Sept 16, 2011 16:26:21 GMT -5
Superman will represent what the powers that be tell the writers to represent, not what some fanboy stupidly demands.
And don't call somebody stupid because they have a different opinion than you.
|
|
Kanzu
New Mutant
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
2Fast
Posts: 63
|
Post by Kanzu on Sept 16, 2011 16:27:32 GMT -5
I continue to be mystified by the mentality that "it's a different medium, therefore it's acceptable to ignore everything that the fans know and love about the original." That's just plain stupid. I call it Peter Jacksoning. "Let's see... Lord of the Rings is the best selling fantasy novel of all time, and one of the best selling books of any kind. So... CLEARLY I need to make changes to make it more acceptable to audiences!" *facepalm* In the case of YJ though, it's not just the problem that there are changes... its the problem that so many of the changes SUCK. You yourself stated why Peter Jackson changed things around when adapting the books to movies. He needs to make it more acceptable to audiences, or else more than half the people that went to have seen the films would have been turned off by them.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Sept 16, 2011 18:13:20 GMT -5
Superman will represent what the powers that be tell the writers to represent, not what some fanboy stupidly demands. And don't call somebody stupid because they have a different opinion than you. ... so in other words, quality writing and consistency don't matter, and you're defending that. Got it.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Sept 16, 2011 18:14:45 GMT -5
I continue to be mystified by the mentality that "it's a different medium, therefore it's acceptable to ignore everything that the fans know and love about the original." That's just plain stupid. I call it Peter Jacksoning. "Let's see... Lord of the Rings is the best selling fantasy novel of all time, and one of the best selling books of any kind. So... CLEARLY I need to make changes to make it more acceptable to audiences!" *facepalm* In the case of YJ though, it's not just the problem that there are changes... its the problem that so many of the changes SUCK. You yourself stated why Peter Jackson changed things around when adapting the books to movies. He needs to make it more acceptable to audiences, or else more than half the people that went to have seen the films would have been turned off by them. ... no... what I said was that would be what Peter Jackson would claim. Too bad it's a load of crap. Lord of the Rings is one of the best selling books of all time. It needs Peter Jackson to "re-interpret" it for audiences to get it? No. Peter Jackson needs to "re-interpret" it so that he can get credit for being brilliant.
|
|
Kanzu
New Mutant
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
2Fast
Posts: 63
|
Post by Kanzu on Sept 16, 2011 19:44:52 GMT -5
You yourself stated why Peter Jackson changed things around when adapting the books to movies. He needs to make it more acceptable to audiences, or else more than half the people that went to have seen the films would have been turned off by them. ... no... what I said was that would be what Peter Jackson would claim. Too bad it's a load of crap. Lord of the Rings is one of the best selling books of all time. It needs Peter Jackson to "re-interpret" it for audiences to get it? No. Peter Jackson needs to "re-interpret" it so that he can get credit for being brilliant. ...Really?
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Sept 16, 2011 19:54:06 GMT -5
Yes. Really.
|
|
|
Post by Black Sam on Sept 17, 2011 0:51:02 GMT -5
Hafta agree with WK on this one...I think P.J.'s reinterpretation was purely an issue of ego on his part. Mind you, I'm not actually a fan of LoTR either. I appreciate the setting and stories, but the writing grated on me. I'm not entirely opposed to changing "classics," mind you but I believe completely that this instance was Jackson trying to put his stamp on someone else's work.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Sept 17, 2011 5:22:01 GMT -5
not what some fanboy stupidly demands. And don't call somebody stupid because they have a different opinion than you. Just noticed this (bold is mine). Brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by Beacon on Oct 1, 2011 21:37:39 GMT -5
Well the CN site has locked this show to everyone but the subscribers of a handful of cable and satellite companies. I guess I’m out until they put out season sets on DVD.
Pity, I seem to be the only one on this board who was enjoying it (though I still think they should have called it “Titans” and/or used Secret instead of "Meg").
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Oct 1, 2011 22:16:58 GMT -5
Episodes are available on YouTube. Sometimes they're flipped horizontally (so words look backwards) but that's just in attempt to avoid being taken down.
Just watched episode 12 tonight.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Black Sam on Oct 2, 2011 1:45:27 GMT -5
I've only been watching it sporadically, but I enjoy it well enough. To paraphrase a worn out conversation from many other threads, I watch these things with the fact in mind that our favorite comic universes are only one part of a multiverse -- shows like YJ are merely alternate realities of cannon, so it doesn't bother me that things are different.
There are some annoying bits in YJ, but overall I like it well enough.
|
|
|
Post by Beacon on Oct 2, 2011 1:52:23 GMT -5
Episodes are available on YouTube. Sometimes they're flipped horizontally (so words look backwards) but that's just in attempt to avoid being taken down. Thanks. *Facepalm* Why didn’t I think of that? I used to do that all the time before the networks started putting up shows officially. Just saw 11. The therapy session was interesting. The fourth wall joke about problems being solved in a half hour was pretty amusing. It also highlighted my problem with Superman’s treatment of Superboy thus far. I’m not as bothered by it as some here are but it’s a little annoying that what we’ve seen has been so one-sided. I actually wouldn’t mind Kal giving Conner the cold shoulder if we had some idea WHY he was doing it. I know this isn’t about the JLA but I’d really like to know what’s going on in Clark’s head*. It’ll be interesting seeing how the other characters (by which I mean Kid Flash) react to how close Superboy and Miss Martian are getting. So Riddler is part of the master plan? Interesting. The one negative: I was all set to declare that this is the best portrayal of Amanda Waller since the (recently retconned out of existence) Secret Six comic but then they ruined it at the end by letting her be manipulated by a bunch of super villains (its supposed to be the other way around). Still, at least they didn’t make her a stick figure this time. *Hey, maybe we will now that Superboy is (possibly) dating a telepath.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Oct 2, 2011 6:57:19 GMT -5
*raises hand*
Amanda Waller has been the manipulatee as often as the manipulator.
In comic books, there is always a bigger fish, and sometimes you get caught on the hook by a lesser fisherman anyway. Some of the best storylines in comic books happen when someone you don't expect much from manages to pull off something because they're underestimated, on both sides of the fourth wall. The Riddler is a classic example of this; terrible character (2nd rate Joker at best), but he's been in some of the most memorable storylines, and in the driving seat of a few of those.
The Justice League (and I'm talking about the real crew of heavy hitters) was once locked out of it's own Watchtower by a motley crew of it's most pathetic enemies.
Nobody, especially The Wall, should be immune to a reversal of fortune. Her ego makes her ripe for the picking.
|
|
|
Post by Beacon on Oct 2, 2011 11:16:53 GMT -5
I was more bothered by WHO it was. Hugo Strange shouldn’t even be in the Wall’s league (he’s the poor man’s Scarecrow) and Icicle is the kind of schmuck she’s supposed to strap an explosive collar into and send on suicide missions. Waller shouldn’t often win against actual heroes and she can only come ahead of her government superiors so many times before she’s out of a job but she should never lose to a third rate villain.
Still, if my guess about the Light is right then this thing was masterminded by Lex and I can absolutely buy that.
And the Riddler isn’t a second rate Joker. They’re completely different. The only thing they really have in common is gimmicks and that they crave Batman’s attention (and that’s true for most of his villains). I mean, I’m sure guys like Mr Freeze and Penguin would be happy if he never saw Batman again but they’re the exceptions rather than the rule.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Oct 2, 2011 11:29:13 GMT -5
Hugo Strange has outsmarted Batman. Hugo Strange has outsmarted Deathstroke. How is he not in Amanda Waller's league? Hugo Strange isn't a cut rate Scarecrow... he's everything Scarecrow wishes he had the brains to be.
Riddler, by contrast, is very much a cut-rate Joker. Not in every possible way, obviously, but their use in storylines has always been pretty similar, and in fact multiple Batman writers have talked about starting a storyline they'd intended for Joker, and then realized that the Joker was being used elsewhere or that the storyline wasn't sinister enough, and chose to use The Riddler instead.
While they're not precisely the same, Joker and The Riddler share a basic function as characters; they confound Batman with a plot that's almost never about what it first appears to be about. The Riddler is less psychotic and has a more laughable gimmick, but at the end of the day they're almost interchangable except in the esteem of the fans. The actual biggest difference between them is that Riddler is consistently characterizes, whereas Joker tends to be a story prop more than an actual character unto himself. Any stupid @$$ thing the writers want Joker to do, they justify by saying "screw it, he's crazy" which is lazy writing on an epic scale.
|
|