Red Mosquito

cutuphalfdead wrote: So just because you can't create better art you're not allowed to criticize art you find to be poor? So I should just keep watching shitty tv shows and shut my mouth because I couldn't produce a better one? Or I shouldn't care that a movie sucked because I'm not a director myself?

Of course not. But to say a lyric is bad would imply that the writer failed to get his meaning across or convey the idea. While you may not care for the words that were chosen if you get the meaning and emotion, the lyric has succeeded and can't be bad.

Batman V Superman is a shit-turd for a movie. The writer and/or director did a piss-poor job of conveying any kind of story where any kind of motivation is seen by any characters. Indeed, the characters were written and directed in such a way as to be unrecognizable to anyone that is familiar with them. It is a bad movie. Ed's lyrics, while some may not be everybody's cup of tea, aren't really bad if the thought or emotion they are meant to convey is carried across to the listener. Even Hitchhiker.

wease wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote: While you may not care for the words that were chosen if you get the meaning and emotion, the lyric has succeeded and can't be bad.

this sounds like a bunch of horse shit

You keep Batman V Superman out of your filthy mouth, wease.

Kaius wrote:You keep Batman V Superman out of your filthy mouth, wease.

Gladly.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

wease wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote: While you may not care for the words that were chosen if you get the meaning and emotion, the lyric has succeeded and can't be bad.

this sounds like a bunch of horse shit

It may very well be...

wease wrote:

Kaius wrote:You keep Batman V Superman out of your filthy mouth, wease.

Gladly.

Thank you

wease wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote: So just because you can't create better art you're not allowed to criticize art you find to be poor? So I should just keep watching shitty tv shows and shut my mouth because I couldn't produce a better one? Or I shouldn't care that a movie sucked because I'm not a director myself?

Of course not. But to say a lyric is bad would imply that the writer failed to get his meaning across or convey the idea. While you may not care for the words that were chosen if you get the meaning and emotion, the lyric has succeeded and can't be bad.

Batman V Superman is a shit-turd for a movie. The writer and/or director did a piss-poor job of conveying any kind of story where any kind of motivation is seen by any characters. Indeed, the characters were written and directed in such a way as to be unrecognizable to anyone that is familiar with them. It is a bad movie. Ed's lyrics, while some may not be everybody's cup of tea, aren't really bad if the thought or emotion they are meant to convey is carried across to the listener. Even Hitchhiker.

So you're saying that Batman v. Superman is objectively bad? Is it possible for art to be objectively good or bad? We should have a discussion about this.

Kevin Davis wrote:So you're saying that Batman v. Superman is objectively bad? Is it possible for art to be objectively good or bad? We should have a discussion about this.

I think so, yes. If it fails on points it's trying to achieve, I guess, objectively, it is bad. BvS fall squarely in this category.

not this again

BVS is a fucking masterpiece so you're wrong

A masterpiece? The story makes no sense and the characters are so OUT-OF-CHARACTER it shouldn't even have their names in the title. Wonder Woman was good, but she was totally shoehorned into the movie and her appearance made no sense at all. The best effect in the whole movie was her Magic Lasso. It did have the best Batman fight sequence ever on film UNTIL BATMAN GETS A GUN AND KILLS PEOPLE WITH IT. I think Affleck could play a damn good Batman. I even think Cavill could play a good Superman. It's just a shame neither of them were given an opportunity to do so.

The story makes perfect sense and so do the characters.

Then, obviously, you don't know the characters. Batman doesn't murder people. Superman doesn't just stand there while people around him are killed. They're better than that. They're called HEROES for a reason.

But if they aimed for Batman to kill and Superman to stand around then they succeeded and the movie is therefor objectively good.

wease wrote:Then, obviously, you don't know the characters. Batman doesn't murder people. Superman doesn't just stand there while people around him are killed. They're better than that. They're called HEROES for a reason.

Their characterizations in other artworks have no bearing on their characterizations here.

This is why I like the movie: http://www.filmcolossus.com/batman-v-su ... of-justice

Batman has murdered people. Also, whether the movie's characterization is consistent with the comics has no bearing on the quality of the movie.

i die inside a little bit every time i need to pass on this discussion. stupid movie

stip wrote:i die inside a little bit every time i need to pass on this discussion. stupid movie

I may not survive you watching this movie

cutuphalfdead wrote:But if they aimed for Batman to kill and Superman to stand around then they succeeded and the movie is therefor objectively good.

Touché.

theplatypus wrote:Batman has murdered people. Also, whether the movie's characterization is consistent with the comics has no bearing on the quality of the movie.

It should. Otherwise, why call him Batman? If you're adapting a property from one medium, shouldn't you try and represent that property as best you can?

My god, these are the (arguably) two best known superheroes in the world, and I can't even take my daughter to see the movie that bears their names.