LogFAQs > #927561854

Aaantlion posted...

but then I was even more surprised to see Apocalypse there. Wtf? Since when is he a hero?

I don't actually know anything about the specific context of the book, but I DO know that there's a kid version of Apocalypse running around that has been generally presented as being a bit more "good", so it might be him instead. If so, he's probably going to call himself Genesis.

Or it might be an outgrowth of the Age of X-Man storyline where Apocalypse 60s-era hipster - maybe he "redeemed" himself in some way and is now a good guy, at least until the next writer comes along and decides to undo any and all character growth.



Aaantlion posted...

When was the last time you watched it, though? 1992? Are you sure your disdain will hold up against Devito's delightfully off-key performance as the Penguin and Chris Walker's deadpan delivery of "Bruce Wayne? Why are you dressed up like Batman?

But again, that's sort of confusing "good movie" with "so terrible it's fun to make fun of" movie.

I REALLY dislike DeVito's performance in Batman Returns, and Walken is kind of terrible. I'm also not a huge fan of Michelle Pfeiffer in general (and I really dislike the interpretation of her character in this), and I was never really that big a fan of Michael Keaton as Batman (though I do think he's good as Bruce Wayne). To some extent, I dislike Jack Nicholson's performance in the first movie in the same way, for the same reason - it feels like Nicholson doesn't even remotely give a fuck (because he didn't, and has admitted this - he also encouraged DeVito to not give a fuck and just cash the check as well).

I CAN enjoy those performances - in the same way I can enjoy Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze - as ridiculously over-the-top weirdos blatantly fucking around and devouring the scenery like giant hams. But that doesn't make the movie as a whole GOOD - to the contrary, it makes it worse.

Almost any bad movie can be enjoyable if you laugh at it or mock it in an MST3K sort of way, but it's still a bad movie.

Burton's movies are mostly just self-indulgent gothy weirdness that happens to have Batman in it.
It seems pretty clear that Burton finds Batman to be the least interesting part of those films.



Aaantlion posted...

When X1 came out, I defended the leather outfits (which some friends called bondage gear or gimp suits), but XM: First Class kinda showed that they didn't have to go that spartan with the outfits.

Yeah, but even there, they change them and justify them to some degree. In X1, the X-Men are trying to be more of a covert team, so the black looks more subdued and doesn't draw attention as much. Whereas in First Class, they're wearing tactical suits provided by the government as officially sanctioned operatives, so they're willing to be more visually obvious. But even there, the costumes have been changed from the comics - in the comics they're skin-tight spandex, but in the film they're more like certain types of sporting gear.

Ironically, the best possible scenario might be if they had suits made from the same material as the tactical outfits in First Class, but black like the X1 suits. Which would sort of make them look like Rumlow in Winter Soldier. That would make the most sense from a tactical perspective, and could be more easily passed off as government, military, or SWAT/police officers if they're trying to maintain a bit of subtlety (which you don't get as much from leather gimp suits).

But I've always been a proponent that most comic costumes don't look as good in 3D in a more realistic-style film. Even the MCU feels the need to adapt.

---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family