Movie Captain Marvel, starring Brie Larson: 03/08/19

Bobobie

Registered User
I could give a shit, but you wanted to know when. According to this Ley guy, this is it. I thought it was funny that someone actually found something to be outraged about in this game and remembered your comment. Do you seriously think I'm outraged?
Do you want me to care about this?
 
Last edited:

ruckstande

Posts mostly from the shitter.
Donator
It's a cool game, but I doubt I'll ever come close to finishing it. I remember playing the first two Arkham games for hours/days and then never even opened the third one.

I've been pondering the invented cycle of outrage. This guy pretends to get upset about a video game character helping cops, and people pretend to get upset because he has a strange opinion on a video game. And the majority of it is just to get clicks. And I understand that - @Neon is obligated to have an opinion on it because it's part of his responsibility to his followers to get outraged or mock those who are outraged. The weird part for me is when regular folks like @Bobobie get outraged. I guess looping regular people in is part of the cycle of outrage. Like if that guy posted that article and nobody tweeted the link or even mentioned it, it would just sit out there for a few hours and then that would be that. Why do people allow themselves to get manipulated into taking a side on one person's meaningless opinion?

Like that whole stupid thing with Battlefield. If @ruckstande lived in a media vacuum and got the game and just started playing it, he probably wouldn't have noticed or cared that there were female characters in the game. Maybe a little "sign of the times" shrug and that's it. But the people whose responsibility it is to whip people into a froth have done so and now he may not buy a game he would have otherwise enjoyed. That's just weird to me. Nothing against ruckstande in particular, it's just an example.
Would the same treatment of films not bother you?
 

LiddyRules

Johny Charro Card Holder #1
It's a cool game, but I doubt I'll ever come close to finishing it. I remember playing the first two Arkham games for hours/days and then never even opened the third one.

I've been pondering the invented cycle of outrage. This guy pretends to get upset about a video game character helping cops, and people pretend to get upset because he has a strange opinion on a video game. And the majority of it is just to get clicks. And I understand that - @Neon is obligated to have an opinion on it because it's part of his responsibility to his followers to get outraged or mock those who are outraged. The weird part for me is when regular folks like @Bobobie get outraged. I guess looping regular people in is part of the cycle of outrage. Like if that guy posted that article and nobody tweeted the link or even mentioned it, it would just sit out there for a few hours and then that would be that. Why do people allow themselves to get manipulated into taking a side on one person's meaningless opinion?

Like that whole stupid thing with Battlefield. If @ruckstande lived in a media vacuum and got the game and just started playing it, he probably wouldn't have noticed or cared that there were female characters in the game. Maybe a little "sign of the times" shrug and that's it. But the people whose responsibility it is to whip people into a froth have done so and now he may not buy a game he would have otherwise enjoyed. That's just weird to me. Nothing against ruckstande in particular, it's just an example.
My old computer couldn't handle Arkham Knight, and I'm not sure if my new one can. I'd like to play it because I liked the previous three games (including Origins), but not enough to check if my new machine can handle it. Besides, I have a crapload of smaller games I can play if I'm in the mood for a distraction. But I do want to try Knight at some point, but I don't have the time to warrant buying a whole new machine. If I was to do that, it would be for a Switch because that seems different than my computer.

As for Battlefield, it's one of those situations where I hate both sides, so trying to be the rational voice makes me an enemy of both. EA is a fuck stick company for many reasons, and I will acknowledge that there is some SJW catering going on in its structure (though Loot Boxing the hell out of everything is far more egregious fuckstickery). However, I'm far more annoyed by the "B-B-B-B-B-BUT GIRWELS IN MY VIDEO GAME!!"



whiners. Get the fuck over yourself. Like you explained, no video game will replicate the "experience" of WW2 so the realism argument is out. (And video games are a far different medium from even movies, so any "how would you like a girwel in Saving Private Ryan?!?" is a false equivalency for me.) But responding to complaints with "you better educate yourself" just continues the social justice outrage cycle. If he had said "stop being fucking babies," which is really what he should have said, I would have far more respect for that side.
 
But I’m totally fine with it.
It says Jude Law plays him in the film.

Might have been cool if they gave Mar-Vel his own movie and let the death story line hit people harder that way. I guess hes just a minor part of the film and his death has little impact beyond the passing of powers. Basically like Hal Jordan getting the first Green Lantern ring.
 

LiddyRules

Johny Charro Card Holder #1
It says Jude Law plays him in the film.

Might have been cool if they gave Mar-Vel his own movie and let the death story line hit people harder that way. I guess hes just a minor part of the film and his death has little impact beyond the passing of powers. Basically like Hal Jordan getting the first Green Lantern ring.
I don't think Mar-Vel is interesting enough for a movie, and I don't think giving him his own film would let his death become more powerful. It would be equal powerful; maybe even less so since they'd be wasting a movie on a guy just for him to die in the next one. Mentors don't get movies. Would you want to see Hunger Games: Woody Harrelson: Origins?

And if you did, I'd be totally cool with that because you're a human being with your own opinions, and I respect that you have your own point of view even if I disagree with it.
 

LiddyRules

Johny Charro Card Holder #1
You'd have to ask Piggy on that. I don't know the character very well.
Eh, neither do I. But I don't think Green Lantern: Origins: Abin Sur: Origins would be that fun. Or maybe it would be because he was a purple hippo man.
 

Bobobie

Registered User
Makes me wonder.
Will there be a Stand-Alone cable movie?
 

crippledalbino

The God of 42nd Street
Donator
Makes me wonder.
Will there be a Stand-Alone cable movie?
The only reason you'd do a stand-alone Cable movie is to do the whole Stryfe thing, and they've already said that's going to be a part of the next Deadpool movie, or X-Force, whatever they're doing. Is there any other story that you'd give a shit about that's solo Cable?
 

LiddyRules

Johny Charro Card Holder #1
The only reason you'd do a stand-alone Cable movie is to do the whole Stryfe thing, and they've already said that's going to be a part of the next Deadpool movie, or X-Force, whatever they're doing. Is there any other story that you'd give a shit about that's solo Cable?
The year is Thanksgiving. Cable has to make it to dinner at Marsden/Jansen house and at RPO/Sansa house.
 

Bobobie

Registered User
The only reason you'd do a stand-alone Cable movie is to do the whole Stryfe thing, and they've already said that's going to be a part of the next Deadpool movie, or X-Force, whatever they're doing. Is there any other story that you'd give a shit about that's solo Cable?
I don't think Cable or Deadpool existed when I still read comics. He looks like an interesting character, but from what I'm hearing everyone thinks he's only good as a sidekick or Foe.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
I'd have to ask Piggy on that. I don't know the character very well.
The problem is that all the things that make Carol Danvers interesting (her getting space raped and giving birth to her lover, Rogue stealing her powers and her identity, her alcoholism, etc) won’t be covered in the movie. So they’re essentially just inventing a brand new character for the film, which is...fine. But Mar-Vell is far more “do-able” without changing everything about him. Which they clearly are, so...yeah. But I’m totally fine with it.
 
The problem is that all the things that make Carol Danvers interesting (her getting space raped and giving birth to her lover, Rogue stealing her powers and her identity, her alcoholism, etc) won’t be covered in the movie. So they’re essentially just inventing a brand new character for the film, which is...fine. But Mar-Vell is far more “do-able” without changing everything about him. Which they clearly are, so...yeah. But I’m totally fine with it.
You had me at space rapye.
 

ruckstande

Posts mostly from the shitter.
Donator
(And video games are a far different medium from even movies, so any "how would you like a girwel in Saving Private Ryan?!?" is a false equivalency for me.)
For you. Not for millions of others.
 

LiddyRules

Johny Charro Card Holder #1
For you. Not for millions of others.
They're wrong.

I'm not saying that video games are a lesser medium, just that they're a different medium.

The problem is that all the things that make Carol Danvers interesting (her getting space raped and giving birth to her lover, Rogue stealing her powers and her identity, her alcoholism, etc) won’t be covered in the movie. So they’re essentially just inventing a brand new character for the film, which is...fine. But Mar-Vell is far more “do-able” without changing everything about him. Which they clearly are, so...yeah. But I’m totally fine with it.
I might see The Predator tonight, FYI.
 
Top