• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Warner bros announce superhero films through 2020

Kai "the spy" said:
Again. Soldiers. Bullets. Granades. Lots of them. Real danger.
Click to expand...

Then show her getting hit by bullets and getting actually hurt instead of never getting hurt. The MCU movies weren't afraid to hurt Cap, Ant-Man, Iron Man or Spider-Man.

They understandibly didn't want to take half an hour for that flashback, so it's obviously condensed. But it took the armies of Atlantis, Themyscira, the "tribes of man", Green Lanterns, and the Greek Gods, including Ares.
Click to expand...

The combined armies weren't doing any damage to him, just cannon fodder to occupy his Parademons. The Lantern did nothing to him but die, the only damage we saw done to him was Zeus' lightning bolt.

Also see how easy he had it taking the Mother Boxes from the Amazons and Atlanteans, and he was established as pretty damn powerful.
Click to expand...

The Amazons aren't that tough, seeing how a WWI Group of Germans killed them in combat. We don't know how tough Atlanteans are.

In-universe, it could be explained with Superman coming back from death more powerful than before.
Click to expand...

I can see why some think that, but nothing suggests it.

I guess whether they accomplished it is a matter of taste, so debating it is moot without established criteria.
Click to expand...

I suppose.
 
I've never really known, in comics or movies, if Wonder Woman is bullet proof. We're always told she's almost Superman level, I know I've seen her handle explosions in the comics that are definitely stronger than bullets, and punches from super beings too. I wonder if her durability is purposely vague so writers can go in more directions if they choose to?
 
crookeddy said:
I feel like most posters here stopped reading comics in the 60s. DC heroes aren't just flawed these days, they are mostly murderous assholes...
Click to expand...

Honestly I can count the number of comics I've read in my life on ... yeah, probably my fingers and toes. I have no real attachment to any source material, anywhere, of any kind.

Although the "murderous asshole" thing in Batman v. Superman is one of the reasons I like it so much (the Ultimate Cut, anyway ... the theatrical is hot garbo), and I feel it's a reason there was so much pushback against it. The Nolan trilogy had a running line of subtext that got steadily more in-your-face with each movie, and Beavis simply took that subtext and made it explicit text: Batman, as a concept, is supremely fucked up and makes things worse, not better. Like, in his first confrontation with Superman, Superman literally stops him in the middle of a murderous rampage and exposes him for the impotent fool with a power fantasy that he really is.
 
The Realist said:
"Beavis." :guffaw:How have I never encountered that before? Or if you coined it yourself, congrats.
Click to expand...

BvS = Beavis.

Interesting Batman critique, too.
Click to expand...

It's not my critique, because as I said, the Nolan movies get explicitly louder about it (literally nothing in The Dark Knight or Rises would have happened if Bruce hadn't gone on his rich man power trip), and then Beavis just flat-out says it. I mean, Batman is the front-and-center villain through almost of Beavis, and he uses 12-step language when he's monologuing to Diana Prince at the end of the movie: "We can do better, we have to," is straight out of AA literature. In this case, Bruce was addicted to pain and violence. (And wine, if Alfred's quip is anything to go by, although in honesty I wonder if that was a subtle jab at Affleck's drinking.)
 
M'rk son of Mogh said:
I've never really known, in comics or movies, if Wonder Woman is bullet proof.
Click to expand...

Apparently she's more bullet-resistant than a normal human, but not bulletproof:

https://www.cbr.com/wonder-woman-bulletproof-or-not/

A couple of recent issues show her shot through-and-through by high-caliber sniper rounds that would probably be instantly fatal to a human, but she's only moderately wounded and able to keep standing and fighting. So bullets won't kill her, but they aren't exactly pleasant for her to be hit by.

Then, of course there's Kerry Callen's explanation:

http://kerrycallen.blogspot.ca/2015/04/bullet-bouncing.html
 
Captain of the USS Averof said:
40 years later and it’s still one of the best comic book movie adaptations. A true motion picture milestone in every sense of the phrase. Christopher Reeve’s portrayal of Superman is iconic.
Click to expand...

Sadly, it's the ONLY truly good Superman movie. Superman 2 had too many characterization flaws to be held up that level.
 
Captain of the USS Averof said:
40 years later and it’s still one of the best comic book movie adaptations. A true motion picture milestone in every sense of the phrase. Christopher Reeve’s portrayal of Superman is iconic.
Click to expand...

His portrayal is great, but holy moly does that movie take a sharp dive when the setting moves to Metropolis; the move into camp and shallow comedy is so horribly incongruous with the rest of the movie.
 
Timby said:
His portrayal is great, but holy moly does that movie take a sharp dive when the setting moves to Metropolis; the move into camp and shallow comedy is so horribly incongruous with the rest of the movie.
Click to expand...

I agree, I really like the first half of that movie but the 2nd half especially the last act is down right terrible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top