Yuku free message boards

Count Karnstein wrote:

---

Joe wrote:

Still means nothing. Just because A,B,C,D,E, and F haven't gone the way you'd like, there is no absolute guarantee that "G" will follow suit, though it may be a "safe bet". Still, it is not the same thing as "knowing for certain without seeing".

I guess it's a hard concept for me to explain. You predict things based on patterns, and identical patterns yield identical results. Only when you change a pattern do you get a different result. Now again, this does not mean that it is literally and totally impossible for me to like the Iron Man movie. It just means that the possibility is statistically insignificant.

Look at it like this. I don't know any billionaires, and I am not related to any billionaires. So far, no billionaire has bestowed his wealth on me as his heir when he dies. It is possible that a billionaire may come along and bestow all his wealth on me tomorrow. Anything is possible. Theoretically, it's possible for me to find a 200 carat flawless diamond in the closet, left behind in my new apartment by an eccentric hermit who used to live there. But it would be absurd (indeed insane) to expect that. Likewise, until I become good friends with or marry into a billionaire's family, ie changing the pattern, I can predict accurately that no billionaire is going to bestow all his money on me. To even entertain the possibility is absurd beyond words. Likewise, since the pattern has not changed, it would be absurd for me to even consider the possibility that they're going to do a great Iron Man movie.

What you're asking me to do is to play the lottery and actually believe I'm going to win, when the odds are billions to one against me.

But even here, you do use the words "so far they have not", which would indicate that they could, at some point, change.

Yes, if they hired me to do the movie. I'm dead serious, and not just blowing ego around. It would literally take me, or someone just like me (there may be a few others who fit the bill), to actually do a superhero movie that was both well done and faithful to the comics, ie no changes for the sake of ego, no changes unless there is a truly and honestly compelling reason to do so. You simply won't find that today in Hollywood because the people directing the movies and the comic companies themselves have no respect for, love of, or history with the characters.

I'm just wondering something.... let's say you go on record officially now as saying "I know THOR will suck", and then you see it and you're surprised that you actually liked it. Would you eat crow and admit it?

Absolutely! I've already fallen on my knees and prayed to Odin to force me to publicly eat crow (though eating raven would be more Norse! ) by making the Thor movie great. I want to be wrong about the Thor movie so badly that I'd damn near sever a testicle with a dull rusty spork and sell it on the black market, if it meant getting a great Thor movie. But I know it won't happen. I'm willing to bet anything, because the odds are so in my favor that it isn't funny. Same for Iron Man. If by some miracle the director has an epiphany and does a really great job, I'll admit it. If he does an OK job, I'll admit it. If he does a pretty good job, I'll admit it. Here, in public. Just don't bet the kids' college fund that it's going to happen.

Or is your desire to steadfastly hold on to your sense of accurate prediction so strong that you would almost, unconsciously I'm saying, think you don't like it?

Nah, that's not me at all. When I'm wrong, I admit it. I was religiously vegetarian for many years (actually vegan for awhile) until it was proven to me that a vegetarian diet is not healthy and that a paleolithic diet is far healthier (lots of meats, eggs, etc). I mean, that was like a Catholic suddenly arguing there is no Jesus! So no, I don't have an aversion to being wrong. It doesn't happen often enough for me to have an aversion to it!

Hell, if anything, I go the opposite way. I go into a movie I can predict I most likely will not like, and try to like it, try to remain open to it. I went into Xmen and Spiderman saying (to myself) "Ok, so it's not going to be as faithful to the comic books as you want, but why not see if you can enjoy it anyway. It's a movie, and unrelated to the comics, doesn't change anything, etc." I liked the very beginning of Spiderman. It quickly went downhill and kept sliding downhill along with my hopes. I left nearly in tears of rage. So if it looks like even a smidgen of a chance that I'll like Thor, I'l go see it. I'll definitely go see Iron Man because I'm hoping to at least enjoy the battle scenes.

But what if the Black Sabbath song isn't in the film, and just a gag for the trailer?

Actually, I'm starting to like the idea of the song being in it, as Stan Lee bragged about the song in a Soapbox column once. Why not? It's a superhero movie, and a tad bit of humor won't hurt. See? I'm open minded!

What if the jokes Stark is making are left out of the finished film (ever see a trailer that has scenes not in the end result?) or that even though he makes the occaisonal one-liner, there is much more seriousness to his character the rest of the time that allows you to put up with the jokes? What if the new origin, while not faithful, somehow works within the conext of this filmed version?

And what if I find that 200 carat flawless diamond in my closet later tonight when I go digging for some comics? And what if Bill Gates comes across my business card by a 1-in-300,000,000 chance and for some inexplicable reason decides to just "gift" me with a billion dollars or so, in order for me to make a truly faithful Thor movie (with lots of money left over!) because he read my post here and he's also a huge Thor fan? We can play "what if" all day. It doesn't change the pattern, the outcome, or the statistical likelihood that the movie will disappoint me.

So you really know none of these things officially yet.

I guess we have different definitions of the word "know". I don't depend on facts alone to know something. Intuition with no factual information whatsoever to back it up has saved me life so many times that I no longer need "proof". You can know things without having to experience them first hand. My tortured children example from earlier.

Jeez, what was so different about Superman in 78 that this one film was okay with you while the others were not? I gotta tell you, Count, there is some definiite stubborn self-fulfilling prophecy stuff here in this last quote!

I think you read that wrong. Or actually, I stated it confusingly. I didn't like the Superman movie from '78. In other words, starting with that movie and onwards, they've never made a good superhero movie. Or at least, not a great one, a faithful one. I enjoyed Christopher Reeves as Superman. He is Superman as far as I'm concerned, and anyone else is simply a poor faxsimile. But the movie sucked, the origin was changed, the powers changed, the villains were poorly done (this coming from a huge Gene Hackman fan), etc. The sequels sucked even more. The 90's movies sucked (Spawn, etc), and the Spiderman, Xmen, FF and Hulk movies all sucked (some much more than others). To be totally clear, the last truly great, truly faithful superhero movie was Batman (1966). I pray that either Iron Man or even moreso Thor is a truly great, faithfully done superhero movie. It won't be though, because I'm not doing it.

It's like you're convincing yourself you won't ever like another superhero movie ever again, and that's just that. If you're literally betting your life on it, you HAVE to be correct every time.

Not at all. First, I consider the Batman (1966) movie to be the finest superhero movie ever. Totally correctly done, faithful, etc. But I hate Batman! Well, not hate, but he's probably not even in my Top 100 Comic Book Characters of All Time. I'd much rather be able to say that Iron Man, Hulk, the Fantastic Four, or best of all Spider Man, was my all time favorite comic book movie. Spiderman especially stands about 7,000 levels above Batman in my book of favorite characters. I wanted Spiderman to be the best ever, and I went in with high hopes even though I knew I'd have to ignore those absurd and needlessly changed organic webshooters.

And you know how much flak I get for claiming Batman (1966) is the best superhero movie of all time. It would be nice to be able to claim a movie that others would agree on. Put it this way. I'd much rather be dead wrong about Iron Man, and much rather be dead, period, than have a sucky Thor movie.

Ok, a of hyperbole there for those concerned with my mental health.

But I'd much rather be wrong and be able to enjoy a truly faithful, great Thor movie than to be totally disappointed and angry, and say "I told you so". Being dead wrong would be a pittance of a price to pay for a great Thor movie, and I'd gladly pay more than a mere pittance for that!

You also keep saying "nothing has changed to make me feel differently", but A LOT has changed in the way these movies have been approached since 1978! I mean, SUPERMAN III is just goofy -- but look at the dark BATMAN (89) and BATMAN BEGINS. See how different they are from BATMAN AND ROBIN. I mean, do you really feel these have all been the "exact same pattern"?

Absolutely. The exact same pattern. Hire directors who don't have respect for the characters, who did not grow up reading them, who have egos the size of Ego the Living Planet, who believe they can "improve" the characters, who believe things about the general public without having any proof of those beliefs, or who believe things about the public that are just absurd, who use those delusional beliefs to justify their tampering, who have an incessant need to tamper with the characters in order to "make it their own" etc. Let the comic company ok these terrible changes because they look at the characters as products to be manipulated and abused at will in order to make a quick buck, and to hell with being faithful. Litter the movie with stupid modern social slang and idiocies (including music) and tons of product advertising. Formulate the movie so that there are enough changes to the character to justify a new line of stupid toys. It's always the same pattern.

Count, you and I are always on the same page with "yesterday vs. today".... but man, when it comes to this "I know for sure and there's no way I'll be wrong" stuff.... we're miles apart!

Well, if we were on the same page on everything, people would confuse us!

Again, I did say there was the possibility I could be wrong, just that the possibility is so remote as to be statisticalyl insignificant and therefore not worth considering.

Also, why is there no supervillain in this movie? When the hell are we going to get a well done supervillain in a comic book movie? I've been waiting since 1966. If they do Loki right in Thor, that would be miraculous and I'd be ecstatic, since he's one of my all time favorite villains.

Earl wrote:

SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE is the absolute pinnacle of superheroic movies for me. It captures all the wonder and excitement...to say nothing of disarming innocence...inherent in the Man of Steel, wrapping it around a truly moving depiction of human relationships. This is the item that took Superman to a whole new level. It packs all the emotional resonance now that it did when I first encountered the film as a very small child.

I suppose if George Reeves is the father-figure Superman, then Reeve is more like your benign big brother. His heartfelt expression of sincerity to Lois, "I never lie", captures the essence of Superman in three simple words. Indeed, with due respect to the competition, he'll always be my Man of Steel.

While I feel the very opposite on the movie, I can't agree more on Christopher Reeve. He's the only reason I can stomach the movie. He's so Superman, they should have buried him in the costume. No other Superman actor has ever come close to capturing all the positive things about Superman.

HalLane wrote:

Did you notice that he wears the gold armor too?

Contrary to popular perception, I am very flexible when it comes to liking superhero movies. I really don't care for his modern armor, not at all. His traditional 70's armor is the best. This is Iron man:



Nose and all! That's the armor I want!

However, I am perfectly willing to overlook the "new style" of armor if they do a great movie, a faithful movie. It won't be perfect, but it can still become the best superhero movie ever done, if it was done right. It won't be. And that sucks.