[Primateus]

amphibian, on 05 May 2015 - 08:41 PM, said:

It's in large part due to Frank Miller. I'm researching a large article on the illogical and toxic asshole in my spare time right now.

I'm really, REALLY happy that others share my intense dislike of that person!

[amphibian]

polishgenius, on 05 May 2015 - 08:54 PM, said:

I know TDKR is partly based on The Dark Knight Returns, but, even if you dislike that story (which I don't - Miller's an arse sure but he used to write really good stuff and this was perhaps the best of it), I can't really see how any of the problems in TDKR can be attributed to Miller.

The article to be focuses on Daredevil, but I make many references to all of his well known works on Batman, Sin City, 300 and even Martha Washington.

The crux is that Miller has extreme problems with writing people who aren't white men. His main cast women characters are 99% lethal assassins or prostitutes - both of whom always need rescuing by the white male protagonist - and they get very little to do plot wise, his views on crime and people of color are abysmal and the constant violence to propagate vague ideas of American supremacy against people of color and/or the rising tide of criminals and scumbags/islamists is chilling.

I'm getting a Marvel subscription to determine his effects on Daredevil characters pre and post his runs - particularly Born Again in which he reduces Karen to a drug addicted prostitute who needs to be rescued by Matt's kiss. So that's where I'm going. The subscription is needed bc I don't have the full Daredevil run from the 80s to the mid 90s.

I also note that works based on Miller's comics seem to get an order of magnitude more funding than other comic book productions. Not sure if this is bc the buying public response is higher or bc the funders like his works more or some combination of the two.

So that's what I'm working on and I'm including references, specific situations and so on. Not sure of eventual platform, but this should be good.

[polishgenius]

I'm aware of Miller's issues. I just don't see how they have anything to do with what's wrong with TDKR. They weren't really present in Batman: Year One or Returns in any case that I recall, but even if they were, they weren't brought across to the movies. The problem (well, the main problem) with that film is that it tries to cram three or four separate story arcs, two of which were very long in the comics, into a single movie.

I think you'd find it very difficult to seriously argue, despite the massive problematic elements in much of what he wrote, that Miller had anything other than a net positive effect on either Batman or Daredevil tbh. He did ruin Karen, sure, but from what I know he also introduced basically everything that's iconic about the character today.

I'll be interested in the article whenever it happens, mind.

[worry]

The real problem with TDKR is:

Spoiler

[Aptorian]

As a person who've read a whole bunch of old, old daredevil ( I mean back in the day when he was fighting a baboon man who could seduce all women) and not much new daredevil I am curious about the Karen Page hate here.

I'll put this in a spoiler box because I suspect this subject is going to be big plot line in season 2 or 3 of Daredevil.

Spoiler

This is me going off of memory from reading daredevil in my early teens in the late 80s, mid 90s. Danish comic books were always coppled together issues consisting of several comics edited into one book. So there might be material that was left out.

I barely remember Karan Page in the old Frank Miller stuff. In that mini-series Electra was the focus I recall.

I do however remember Karen Pages return when the Kingpin basically destroyed the Daredevil. I don't know what happens before this event begin but when she comes into the story she's strung out on heroin somewhere in Middle America. She sells Daredevils secret identity for a fix, they try to kill her, she regrets what she did and returns to New York to save Matt. Instead of hating her or disowning her, Matt Murdock helps her through withdrawal and just when things look like they might be okay, the Kingpin bombs the apartment complex leveling the house with Karen in it. Last thing she does is to hand Daredevil his costume after he digs her out of the rubble. End of story.

That was a powerful story as far as I remember. This was back in the day when comics were starting to go from all sunshine and rainbows to gritty fucking ultra violence. I remember being shocked at how dark this story was and how ballsy it was to have the Kingpin "win".

None of what I read back then came off as misogynistic. It was two old friend and lovers who found each other again only for Karen to get blown the fuck up. Now you could argue that this is weak damsel in distress type of material. I'd say it was pretty fucking effective storytelling. I mean I know prior to this we had people like Gwen Stacy or Jean Grey dying on page but the death of Karen Page was brutal.

What is specifically about this story line that was bad?

This post has been edited by Apt: 06 May 2015 - 03:27 PM

[amphibian]

I have Born Again and I went through it several times just last week to make sure I had the facts right. I also hated giving Miller money for that, but it's needed to do things right.

You are giving Karen more agency and things to do than she actually had in the Born Again storyline. You also kill her when all she had was a broken leg.

Her character is totally reliant upon men to do anything - even to betray Murdock. From the beginning panel of the comic, she's visually presented as small, afraid and threatened by male presence - while in the story later on, nothing she accomplishes is of her own doing. Her character is simply a generic female presence that men in the story use to do what they want. Her "return to New York" is hitching on with a serial abuser/pimp who pays their way to New York. She is in surprisingly few panels or pages of Born Again, despite being the spark that begins everything. Everything Miller does with the character is either weird in a reduction of the character's previously established skills and abilities, wrong in a woman-hating way or both.

Simply reading Born Again may not set off the warning bells in one's head, but when you look at Sin City, 300, Martha Washington (what a colossal pile of shit this was) and the various Batmans, you realize that Miller has serious, serious problems (in particular with women and even more specifically with shoving almost all non-assassin women into roles of sex workers written very badly) and yet his works get outsized funding in comparison to other comic-based projects.

What went wrong with The Dark Knight is not necessarily that several plot lines were squeezed into the movie - it's that the manner in which they were resolved was classic Miller (which means that it makes no sense beyond the initial "using violence vs masses of thugs to create vague yet good change").

This post has been edited by amphibian: 06 May 2015 - 07:33 PM

[blackzoid]

Wow, what a coincidence! I reread Born Again a few days ago, really loved it all over again.
That and The Dark Knight Knight Returns are my favourites by Miller. Was never too big a fan of Year 1.
Never got the whole fuss on that one.

[polishgenius]

It turns out that my previous statement that a Hollywood film has never been shot entirely in IMAX was just in time.

[QuickTidal]

polishgenius, on 07 May 2015 - 05:43 PM, said:

It turns out that my previous statement that a Hollywood film has never been shot entirely in IMAX was just in time.

I saw that and was very close to posting it as well. It's cool news...but I wonder how bloody expensive that will be to shoot ALL in IMAX. Crazy.

[McLovin]

Re-watched THOR THE DARK WORLD. Still not one of my favorites, but not horrible and at least they don't drag out the final battle.

[Gothos]

Shelter / 6 Souls (2010), supposedly a horror film starring Julianne Moore and Jonathan Rhys Meyers, but in truth a cautionary tale about how important it is to indoctrinate your kids in the christian faith. One of the most bleak, painfully average horror films I've seen in my life, which gives less of an incentive to recommend it to friends than complete trainwrecks like The Last Exorcism 2 and Oculus. You can more or less guess the movie premise/reveal/story about 15 minutes into the runtime when you meet Adam. The only remotely interesting parts after that is whenever Rhys Meyers is on screen, which becomes more and more scarce as this reel of mediocrity advances its subpar, uninspired and simplistic cookie-cutter plot. I also feel insulted by the way the movie is trying to pose as a smart one. Holy shit, what's western horror gone to these days?



(Into the videogame industry, G-man. Oh right, yes, now I remember.)

[Gnaw]

Briar King, on 08 May 2015 - 09:26 PM, said:

Finally in theater to see Av 2...

spoilered to make a joke based upon a previous BK post in another thread.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Ultron loses.

And there's a helicarrier.

[Gothos]

I went to see Age of Ultron yesterday. I was absolutely blown away. What a fantastic spectacle. And yes, I'm going to completely ignore any possible faults in the story (I'm not a comic buff so I don't care) and logic (because fuck it, Avengers!). I liked it better than the first one. More than any Marvel movie so far.

[Salt-Man Z]

Saw AGE OF ULTRON over the weekend. Like others have said, it was good, and a lot of fun, if not particularly memorable. Still a solid entry in the franchise. Some great character development for most of the cast, though Thor and Cap didn't really get much, if any--even though Cap (if I recall the article) had the most screentime. Thor was fun to watch in action, but otherwise was just there for setting up the Bigger Picture--much of which ended up getting cut for the final film, leaving his arc a little rushed and undercooked.

QuickTidal, on 02 May 2015 - 11:32 AM, said:

Spoiler

Although, fuck Joss Whedon for not letting Cap say the whole "Avengers! Assemble! phrase.

I loved how they cut it like that, though: it leaves you hanging, but you know what he's about to say. And in fact,

Spoiler

I just read an interview where Whedon says he didn't even shoot Evans saying "assemble" because he didn't want the studio heads to think he trimmed it out.

[Andorion]

Saw Age of Ultron. A really good movie, but Avengers 1 was better.

What I did NOT like was Black Widow's story arc

Spoiler

Dammit she is nobody's Damsel in Distress!

[McLovin]

Once more with feeling: finally going to see AGE OF ULTRON tonight, barring any orthodontic emergencies.

[Aptorian]

Andorion, on 12 May 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

Saw Age of Ultron. A really good movie, but Avengers 1 was better.

What I did NOT like was Black Widow's story arc

Spoiler

Dammit she is nobody's Damsel in Distress!

Generally I think she's completely missplaced in the Avengers roster. She works in a SHIELD agent capacity but the Black Widow has never been meant to be fighting on the front line of a superpowered struggle. Same thing with Hawkeye considering they're not using gimmick arrows, but I think they did right by him in this film. He had some of the best lines and the most sympathetic moments.

Now what I am waiting to see is when the Giant serum is introduced and who gets it.

This post has been edited by Apt: 13 May 2015 - 03:10 PM

[Illuyankas]

So, Antman film then.

[QuickTidal]

Apt, on 13 May 2015 - 03:09 PM, said:

Andorion, on 12 May 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

Saw Age of Ultron. A really good movie, but Avengers 1 was better.

What I did NOT like was Black Widow's story arc

Spoiler

Dammit she is nobody's Damsel in Distress!

Generally I think she's completely missplaced in the Avengers roster. She works in a SHIELD agent capacity but the Black Widow has never been meant to be fighting on the front line of a superpowered struggle. Same thing with Hawkeye considering they're not using gimmick arrows, but I think they did right by him in this film. He had some of the best lines and the most sympathetic moments.

This gets to the crux of the biggest classical problem with the Avengers as a team. Black Widow should NOT be front and center with her Superhero counterparts...and why Marvel didn't choose an actual female superhero to BE on the superhero team is bizarre.

That said, moving forward we have Scarlet Witch...which is cool. Captain Marvel is on her way...and with her I HOPE we see Ms. Marvel (Khamela). The Avengers team is male-heavy classicly. I'm hoping that the new squad will continue to move away from that male-heavy dynamic. I love the new team in the comics (coming for Secret Wars) which features not only Ms. Marvel and female Thor (Jane Foster), but it's possible that Pepper is in the Iron Man Armor.

I'm glad that Marvel is branching out diversity now...but that means I think Black Widow was a mistake for the main team (she's GREAT in Cap2 and IM2 though...because she gets to do street level spy/SHIELD stuff...which is what she's made for as a character). Joss should have opted for a different female hero to introduce on the original Avengers team in the first movie I think.

Just my two cents.

[amphibian]

If you look at the sales in terms of merchandise and so on, the Frozen and Maleficent gear is nearly flying out of the stores long after the movies came out. The Avengers gear (almost all the male heroes) is also selling well. It's not necessarily to entirely unlinked groups of people either.

The split between the two is weird and I don't understand the business choices behind it.

I think having a truly good female villain might be the right next move. The Frozen/Maleficent dynamic works so well because they are not paragons of goodness - which people, especially tween girls, looooove. Not sure which ones are out there for Marvel to use going forwards. Those of you who know the storylines and universe better might have ideas.