Justice League official "Zack Snyder" cut on HBO Max

[fireproof78]

As for Pirates of the Caribbean, those pirates are fairly toothless. With only a few exceptions, they're nowhere near the levels of moral reprehensibility of the real pirates of that era. But more importantly for my argument, they still make sure that the pirates in those movies are fighting for a good cause, either against an evil authority like the East India Trading Co. or against other people that are far worse.

The point is it romanticizes such of a life style, especially since Jack Sparrow specifically states pillaging and the like, things that have very specific context in the real world. Does the popularity of the films reflect poorly on the morality of the audience?

It's one thing when you take an R-rated movie and then create a sanitized cartoon version. But it's even more bizarre when they take R-rated movies that don't have a cartoon and give them a kids toy line anyway (i.e. Aliens and Terminator 2).

Aliens almost got a cartoon and got a comic and full toy line.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

The point is it romanticizes such of a life style, especially since Jack Sparrow specifically states pillaging and the like, things that have very specific context in the real world. Does the popularity of the films reflect poorly on the morality of the audience?

It's not about how the characters behave from an objective moral standpoint. It's about how they're depicted within the relative morality of the film. The pirates fight against people who are worse than them, making them the relative heroes of the story and upholding the social value of defeating evil. Joker features morally dubious people being murdered by people who are far worse. Evil triumphs and the movie tries to justify it by claiming that society is getting what it deserves.

 

[fireproof78]

It's not about how the characters behave from an objective moral standpoint. It's about how they're depicted within the relative morality of the film. The pirates fight against people who are worse than them, making them the relative heroes of the story and upholding the social value of defeating evil. Joker features morally dubious people being murdered by people who are far worse. Evil triumphs and the movie tries to justify it by claiming that society is getting what it deserves.

I don't see the difference. Neither are good.

 

[Sci]

I felt that Jor-El's speech to Kal-El in Superman felt very Messianic.

Also, the whole El surname implies divinity.

On the other hand, the finale of Superman (1978) is very much a rejection of that equation of Superman with divinity. When faced with a choice between being super and being a man, Clark defies his Kryptonian father and uses his powers to reverse time and save Lois. Clark very definitively choses to be a man over being a "god" in the 1978 film.

OK, so I signed back up for HBOMax and am getting ready to start Season 2 of Titans, which has once again reminded me of the fact that darker adaptations of DC comics characters is not a bad thing.

I could not stop laughing at the trailer for S1 of Titans. Robin going, "Fuck Batman!" It came across like an angsty 14-year-old's idea of sophisticated writing.

By contrast, Harley Quinn seems to understand how to do "adult versions of kids characters" a lot better. And Doom Patrol looks fun.

I have to admit, I'm honestly a little confused by why they still market superhero stuff to kids. I don't think any of the movies have had a rating lower than PG-13 in at least as long. I know comics used to be seen as a kiddy thing, but that hasn't been true since at leas the 1970s or '80s.

I mean, yes and no. I got back into comics in 1999, and while they were certainly trying to write reasonably sophisticated stuff in the main titles, they were also very clearly designed so that kids could still read them without it being totally inappropriate. And before that, I was given (and read) The Death of Superman trade paperback as a younger kid in the early 90s -- there was bit of blood but it was all very moderated so that kids my age (6 or so at the time) could still read it. Detective Comics and Action Comics and such were certainly things adults could read and enjoy without the story being "dumbed down," but children were still a part of the target audience too. That's why there were "for mature audiences" imprints like Vertigo.

Similar situation with superhero films. For every Blade, there have been far more examples like Spider-Man 2 or Captain America: The First Avenger or Iron Man or The Avengers, with mostly sanitized violence and plots designed for both children and adults. Even Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy is careful not to have too much blood or gore (to an unrealistic degree) so that kids can still watch.

Zack Snyder is really an outlier in his desire to make mainstream superhero character films for mass audiences that are actively inappropriate for children.

 

[Sci]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[captainkirk]

Captain America: The First Avenger or Iron Man or The Avengers, with mostly sanitized violence

I mean, Cap did totally blenderize the guy in the plane.

 

[Mudd]

I'd recommend seeing it before trying to defend it. There's an argument in the movie somewhere about the social issues that you're describing but it gets buried by the fact that our main protagonist is a murderous psychopath who is far worse than the society that he rails against. Gotham didn't make the Joker crazy. It may have turned a harmless crazy person into a murderous crazy person. But I'm not sure what the solution is supposed to be besides pumping him full of drugs that would make him near-catatonic. But in the midst of all of the injustices of Gotham, the movie can't come up with a better answer than: Kill people because you're mad.

I've seen it. Great movie, although short of brilliant because of its superficiality relative to the subject matter. Phoenix, of course, fully deserved his Oscar for this one.

 

[fireproof78]

On the other hand, the finale of Superman (1978) is very much a rejection of that equation of Superman with divinity. When faced with a choice between being super and being a man, Clark defies his Kryptonian father and uses his powers to reverse time and save Lois. Clark very definitively choses to be a man over being a "god" in the 1978 film.

Sure, but the framing is still messianic, and the whole choice between man vs. god seems reflective of "The Last Temptation of Christ."

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

On the other hand, the finale of Superman (1978) is very much a rejection of that equation of Superman with divinity. When faced with a choice between being super and being a man, Clark defies his Kryptonian father and uses his powers to reverse time and save Lois. Clark very definitively choses to be a man over being a "god" in the 1978 film.

Using his otherworldy powers to change the natural course of human history--including Lois' death--was Superman playing God, which is what Jor-El's order (apparently of a Kryptonian edict) warned him against doing. Superman's time reversal took the natural fate of humans off of its course. One can argue that his selfish decision (and it was) made him more "human", but he knowingly changed history for everyone as if it was his right, world and people to guide in that manner. That was hardly an example of Superman being more "man" but a selfish being abusing his power at the expense of a world's population. Not a heroic act by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[valkyrie013]

I remember a radio program from maybe.. egh a year ago?.. Well, a host was in a 2nd/3rd grade class, so he asks, what is your favorite movies.. and to the surprise of the host, and me, they named IT, and Freddy Kugar, all R rated movies.
So, it seems, that parents just put the kids infront of the boob tube, and don't pay attention to what they watch, or the kids just watch what they want and parents not caring.

Growing up, Super Hero's were only in Cartoons and Comic books, with the odd superman, batman movie, and they were a bit campy.

 

[Morpheus 02]

Sorry i am late to the conversation... but my thought is that though you could have adult versions of the IP... the reality is that it is a UNIVERSAL type of property. Girls (and i think boys) have as their first underwear the option of wearing them with the SUPER logo, and kids for AGES have done the "SUperman" on the swing , and some have used a towel or blanket as a cape , in the style of Superman. And even SOldier Boy had a hit with his Superman ("Yoooooouuuuu!"), popular with little kids.

I will need to edit later, but i agree with the person who posted who noted that the movies the MOST VISIBLE iteration of SUperman, even moreso than TV. If there is ever a version you want to appeal to the most people, it would be the movies, especially at the beginning

The MCU has been able to grow into the stage, where they can experiment with just about anything they have...and phase 4 seems to be very heavy on a multiverse, which , in theory could give us an R-rated Captain America (the hero equivelent - character wise, to SUperman).

Will the R Rating really make it a better movie? Definitely less appealing to many people . It will be shown to less people, and with that, less buzz about it and the general DCFU.

The DCFU should be parallel with the MCU with success, but they have just messed it up over the years.

 

[fireproof78]

I remember a radio program from maybe.. egh a year ago?.. Well, a host was in a 2nd/3rd grade class, so he asks, what is your favorite movies.. and to the surprise of the host, and me, they named IT, and Freddy Kugar, all R rated movies.
So, it seems, that parents just put the kids infront of the boob tube, and don't pay attention to what they watch, or the kids just watch what they want and parents not caring.

Growing up, Super Hero's were only in Cartoons and Comic books, with the odd superman, batman movie, and they were a bit campy.

And reading Batman's story about killing his parents' killer was rather eye opening in 8th grade after having grown up with Adam West. I avoided Burton like the plague.

 

[Captaindemotion]

IIRC, the BBFC (British board of film classification) had to introduce the 12 certificate specifically for Burton’s Batman, as they didn’t feel it was PG-friendly, but were under some pressure not to give it a prohibitive 15 certificate. Given the hype that film got and the huge marketing push for toys, etc, the 15 could’ve resulted in a lot of disappointed kids and parents standing outside box-offices!

 

[Sci]

I mean, Cap did totally blenderize the guy in the plane.

And that was also an example of sanitized violence. It's not like we got a realistic depiction of how much blood and gore would be involved in such an act.

Sure, but the framing is still messianic, and the whole choice between man vs. god seems reflective of "The Last Temptation of Christ."

Sure, but the difference is that Donner's Superman rejects divinity and chooses to be a man, while Snyder's Superman is too "divine" to even relate to humanity.

And reading Batman's story about killing his parents' killer was rather eye opening in 8th grade after having grown up with Adam West. I avoided Burton like the plague.

I grew up on Burton Batman and Adam West Batman. I never saw a contradiction between them. (My mother tells me that I was introduced to the 1966 Batman series because she had taken me to see the 1989 film when I was about four. We had arrived home, and I climbed up onto a step-ladder in order to announce that I wanted more Batman!)

Anyway, even the Burton films are clearly mediated in their depictions of adult themes so that kids can watch them without it being outright inappropriate. The amount of blood and gore, again, is not realistic for the kinds of violence that are depicted in the film. We never actually see Selina and Bruce take their clothes off. These films are prime examples of how sex and violence can be depicted in mediated ways for children to watch them, even if some scenes go over their heads. Which is a very, very different thing from Snyder's desire to just go out-all and disregard the child segment of the audience entirely.

 

[fireproof78]

Sure, but the difference is that Donner's Superman rejects divinity and chooses to be a man, while Snyder's Superman is too "divine" to even relate to humanity.

I think we are nitpicking points here so I'll just say you make a good point.

I grew up on Burton Batman and Adam West Batman. I never saw a contradiction between them. (My mother tells me that I was introduced to the 1966 Batman series because she had taken me to see the 1989 film when I was about four. We had arrived home, and I climbed up onto a step-ladder in order to announce that I wanted more Batman!)

My larger point is that not all Batman stuff is for kids. At least in my experience. So, I don't find Snyder's disregard as all that strange, I guess. Honestly, I prefer the honest idea that than filtering stuff in that "goes over kid's heads" which doesn't always depending on the kid. See Star Trek's "Wink of an Eye" for another one I picked up on that was "getting past the censors." Mostly because I think parents needs to be aware that just because a franchise has kid friendly aspects doesn't make all material open to kids.

And the list of things that are distinctly not for kids being marketed as such is getting longer and longer. Ghostbusters, Jurassic Park, Aliens, Walking Dead, are all ones I've seen lately with deliberate marketing towards kids in cartoons, toys and comics. And that's not including Rambo, Demolition Man, or Robotcop.

I never liked Burton Batman. So no idea if there is a contradiction or not but it simply never appealed after watching Adam West.

 

[JD]

I mean, yes and no. I got back into comics in 1999, and while they were certainly trying to write reasonably sophisticated stuff in the main titles, they were also very clearly designed so that kids could still read them without it being totally inappropriate. And before that, I was given (and read) The Death of Superman trade paperback as a younger kid in the early 90s -- there was bit of blood but it was all very moderated so that kids my age (6 or so at the time) could still read it. Detective Comics and Action Comics and such were certainly things adults could read and enjoy without the story being "dumbed down," but children were still a part of the target audience too. That's why there were "for mature audiences" imprints like Vertigo.

I was talking about the current comics, and some of DC's comics have gone pretty far, even in their regular issues. I haven't read anything past the New 52 series, but even with those we had things like The Joker getting his face cut off, and then eventually reattached in a way that was pretty disturbing, the Aquaman comic got pretty bloody in the storyline with The Trench, and I haven't read it, but there was also a Batman comic, I think it was The Dark Knight, which was heavily criticized for a scene with Batman and Catwoman having sex in their costumes. It's been a while since I read it, but there was also some gory and disturbing stuff in Azarello's Wonder Woman.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Sure, but the difference is that Donner's Superman rejects divinity and chooses to be a man, while Snyder's Superman is too "divine" to even relate to humanity.

I'm sorry, but you are forgetting that Donner's Superman was always supposed to have a two-movie arc, and the second movie finds Clark seeing the cost of his choice to become more human, and ultimately chooses to sacrifice his happiness and humanity for the sake of all mankind. It is very much a messianic take on the character.

A take that had been done in the comics by writers like Elliot S! Maggin, and even more so during the Death & Return saga in the early 90s. Bryan Singer also had Superman seemingly sacrifice his life to save Earth from the kryptonite island, while striking a crucifixation pose before falling from orbite.

It is true, though, that Snyder did it more obvious than ever, even with things he didn't have obvious control with. I noted back at the time that BvS was released on Easter weekend, and Superman sacrifices himself at the end, so Superman died on Good Friday.

 

[theenglish]

IIRC, the BBFC (British board of film classification) had to introduce the 12 certificate specifically for Burton’s Batman, as they didn’t feel it was PG-friendly, but were under some pressure not to give it a prohibitive 15 certificate. Given the hype that film got and the huge marketing push for toys, etc, the 15 could’ve resulted in a lot of disappointed kids and parents standing outside box-offices!

And in the US only a few years before, Gremlins and Temple of Doom were responsible for the PG13 rating.

 

[theenglish]

DC was graphic before the New 52. Dr. Light raping Jean Palmer was shocking. And I remember Solomon Grundy ripping Red Tornado's arm off back when he wasn't an android.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Weirdly a second Jean Loring showed up on the Flash last year, except it was John Loring, a bank robbining Asian criminal dude.

The first Jean Loring was Oliver's lawer in an early season of Arrow played byTeyrl Rothery, Doctor Fraiser from Stargate.

Although, despite wondering what the final fate of Sue Dibney might actually be... It's actually Hartley Sawyer's racist tweets.

HARTLEY!!!