Indeed. And it would be a lot cooler if some didn't take it so personally when someone else criticises the version they like.
Very well said.
Indeed. And it would be a lot cooler if some didn't take it so personally when someone else criticises the version they like.
Indeed. And it would be a lot cooler if some didn't take it so personally when someone else criticises the version they like.
And if some didn't insist that their experience of the source material is the only possible and legitimate experience or continually rant about how the version of a character they dislike must be considered an unequivocal failure and should never be allowed to referenced in any way.
Or insist that nobody wants to see the versions they don't favor (usually while talking to someone who clearly does).And if some didn't insist that their experience of the source material is the only possible and legitimate experience or continually rant about how the version of a character they dislike must be considered an unequivocal failure and should never be allowed to referenced in any way.
Probably because people feel dismissed. Online discussions are so impersonal that there is a feeling of dismissal of a work (or variation of a work) and there are a lot of emotions wrapped up in this thing (comics, Star Trek, Star Wars, Tolkien...take your pick. There's plenty of more). It's kind of an immature attachment to the subject matter that the only way it can be successful is if all acknowledge it's greatness and my feelings on the matter. A more mature view is recognizing that not every point of view is going to be shared. But, since this feels so personal on the one hand, yet people take opinions so personally when they can't be possibly personal on the other, it creates a lot of emotional reactivity.God yes! Why is it so hard for people to accept different opinions on certain characters? I can understand you have a personal preference, but why would one take is personal when their point of view isn't agreed on?
Or insist that nobody wants to see the versions they don't favor (usually while talking to someone who clearly does).
Apparently, WB head David Zaslav, DC Studios co-chair Peter Safran and MoS-producer Chris Nolan had lunch with Steven Spielberg. This caused a bit of internet speculation that they were discussing the new Superman movie, which in turn started some new speculation that Spielberg might direct it. Again, speculation, and probably a lot of wishful thinking involved, as well.
At least with Martin Scorsese he really wasn't the type to direct those kind of movies, so I wasn't to disappointed.
I thought Spielberg was one of the people who had talked about how much he dislikes superhero movies?
Back in 2016, he said:
"We were around when the Western died, and there will be a time when the superhero movie goes the way of the Western”
“It doesn’t mean there won’t be another occasion where the Western comes back, and the superhero movie someday returns."
And Westerns were popular for several decades.
Oh, OK, that's not as bad as I thought. I thought he was had more or less called them trash that only idiots liked. Which would have been kind of hypocritical since stuff like Jurrasic Park or Ready Player One aren't really that far off from superhero movies.Back in 2016, he said:
"We were around when the Western died, and there will be a time when the superhero movie goes the way of the Western”
“It doesn’t mean there won’t be another occasion where the Western comes back, and the superhero movie someday returns."
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.