04-03-2016, 05:11 PM
04-03-2016, 05:39 PM
brety gud, can't wait to pirate.
04-03-2016, 05:49 PM
(04-03-2016, 05:39 PM)Ghenry Wrote: [ -> ]brety gud, can't wait to pirate.
Longer trailer. Avoid if you do not wish to take in too much.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDj4zGFf4F8
07-25-2016, 12:51 AM
Saw it.
Meh. That's all I can really say.
It just wasn't that memorable to me. Honestly, it just makes me want to read the novel really. I refuse to believe that this movie is a representation of a novel that "everybody" jizzed over for.
But yeah, I just don't give a fig about the film.
Meh. That's all I can really say.
It just wasn't that memorable to me. Honestly, it just makes me want to read the novel really. I refuse to believe that this movie is a representation of a novel that "everybody" jizzed over for.
But yeah, I just don't give a fig about the film.
07-26-2016, 04:41 AM
Okay, so the next best thing I can do at the moment is look up a Youtube video that had shots of the novel and some people doing the voices. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO0hNziyAs0
So yeah, like I thought, there's a big difference between the animated film and the novel. And that big difference is literally fucking unnecessary. Really, what set off a red flag for me is that Barbera Gordon had a gay friend she talks to at work. Which I knew there was no way this happen in that novel.
[SPOILERS]
In the animated film, they added a Batgirl filler,I'm sure to please the feminist before they get butthurt later on so that you will feel sorry for her when THE scene happens later on. The filler was about Barbara Gordon a.k.a. Batgirl hanging out with Batman and doing things. Batgirl would end up doing shit not to Batman's liking and as always, stop me if you heard this before, Batman doesn't like that and tells his side-kick to fuck off and stay out of things unless told otherwise.
Anyways, Batgirl is like "You can't tell me what to do. Hmph". This goes on and on for a few nights.
If I recall correctly, Barbara's whole point of being Batgirl was because she admire Batman so much as a youngin'. But apparently in this film, her admiration has gotten to the point that she wants to be a couple (Ooh Jeeezus).
Now this, which I JUST realized, this pissed a lot of people off, and caught everyone off guard.
Because there's an infamous scene where she takes down Batman, and they fuck. And the film writer's excuse for that?
"lol the novel has a controversy moment (Joker shooting Barbara), so we wanted to add our own controversy scene lololololol".
Yeah, go fuck yourself spawn of Christopher Nolan. Interesting enough, there's a picture of the Joker found in the background of a scene recreating the scene from the Dark Knight of the Joker sitting in a jail cell. So yeah, if Christopher Nolan can fuck up an established story, why can't we!? Hurrdurrr.
So after the sex scene, Batman ignores Batgirl's calls for a few nights. Like a b0ss. And Batgirl is all like "I dun goof'd.".
So she stalks Batman one night out and gave him her stuff and quits. Now we get to the Novel story. They made Barbara into a hormonal woman and add onto an established novel's story and implied that Babara became paralyzed because she fucked Batman a few nights before and later quit (otherwise she would had been out of the house crime fighting on the night it happen). What-the-fuck is with Hollywood's problem with sticking to the main source? Stop adding shit that didn't happen. Stop rewriting background history, just look at the source of material, and go with *that*. Fuck me, if construction workers did the same shit to buildings as Hollywood does to film-adaptations, that shit wouldn't fly.
So yeah, like I thought, there's a big difference between the animated film and the novel. And that big difference is literally fucking unnecessary. Really, what set off a red flag for me is that Barbera Gordon had a gay friend she talks to at work. Which I knew there was no way this happen in that novel.
[SPOILERS]
In the animated film, they added a Batgirl filler,
Anyways, Batgirl is like "You can't tell me what to do. Hmph". This goes on and on for a few nights.
If I recall correctly, Barbara's whole point of being Batgirl was because she admire Batman so much as a youngin'. But apparently in this film, her admiration has gotten to the point that she wants to be a couple (Ooh Jeeezus).
Now this, which I JUST realized, this pissed a lot of people off, and caught everyone off guard.
Because there's an infamous scene where she takes down Batman, and they fuck. And the film writer's excuse for that?
"lol the novel has a controversy moment (Joker shooting Barbara), so we wanted to add our own controversy scene lololololol".
Yeah, go fuck yourself spawn of Christopher Nolan. Interesting enough, there's a picture of the Joker found in the background of a scene recreating the scene from the Dark Knight of the Joker sitting in a jail cell. So yeah, if Christopher Nolan can fuck up an established story, why can't we!? Hurrdurrr.
So after the sex scene, Batman ignores Batgirl's calls for a few nights. Like a b0ss. And Batgirl is all like "I dun goof'd.".
So she stalks Batman one night out and gave him her stuff and quits. Now we get to the Novel story. They made Barbara into a hormonal woman and add onto an established novel's story and implied that Babara became paralyzed because she fucked Batman a few nights before and later quit (otherwise she would had been out of the house crime fighting on the night it happen). What-the-fuck is with Hollywood's problem with sticking to the main source? Stop adding shit that didn't happen. Stop rewriting background history, just look at the source of material, and go with *that*. Fuck me, if construction workers did the same shit to buildings as Hollywood does to film-adaptations, that shit wouldn't fly.
07-29-2016, 11:03 AM
The movie pretty much did its job. The main issues I had with it are the ones everyone is talking about, so no need for me to get into that.
It's great seeing Conroy and Hamill at it again, but the animation was really disappointing. The style was mostly fine, you can tell at times that these are some of the same people behind the 90s Batman and Justice League series, but at points embarrassing.
Best example would be the iconic scene from the original comic when Joker first emerges from the acid chute. The fact that they tried to replicate that COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STYLE made it seem very out-of-place. They should have just kept to what the entire movie looked like. There's also a lot of points when they're clearly using Flash to cut corners, and those horses on the carousel? Jesus christ, they looked like they belonged in a PSP game. How did they think that looked okay? If it was a minor background piece that would only be on-screen for 2 seconds, I'd find it forgivable. But that was a lit up (literally) center piece for a big scene.
Anyway, certain scenes and monologues were enjoyable, but now I feel like this movie was unnecessary. The comic itself was still done a lot better.
It's great seeing Conroy and Hamill at it again, but the animation was really disappointing. The style was mostly fine, you can tell at times that these are some of the same people behind the 90s Batman and Justice League series, but at points embarrassing.
Best example would be the iconic scene from the original comic when Joker first emerges from the acid chute. The fact that they tried to replicate that COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STYLE made it seem very out-of-place. They should have just kept to what the entire movie looked like. There's also a lot of points when they're clearly using Flash to cut corners, and those horses on the carousel? Jesus christ, they looked like they belonged in a PSP game. How did they think that looked okay? If it was a minor background piece that would only be on-screen for 2 seconds, I'd find it forgivable. But that was a lit up (literally) center piece for a big scene.
Anyway, certain scenes and monologues were enjoyable, but now I feel like this movie was unnecessary. The comic itself was still done a lot better.
07-29-2016, 03:46 PM
(07-29-2016, 11:03 AM)Ghenry Wrote: [ -> ]There's also a lot of points when they're clearly using Flash to cut corners, and those horses on the carousel? Jesus christ, they looked like they belonged in a PSP game. How did they think that looked okay? If it was a minor background piece that would only be on-screen for 2 seconds, I'd find it forgivable. But that was a lit up (literally) center piece for a big scene.
I noticed that too. I talked to my friend and I was like "ew, wtf, why does that look weird!?". The contrast is so clear, the carousel background thing was like out of place looking compared to what the whole film looked like, meanwhile, there's Batman doing what he's doing drawn the way it is right in front of it.