Why does Cred Forums hate fun?

>why is an office environment not gloomy as shit like a warehouse

kys faggot

>a warehouse is gloomy
step outside once in a while you mongoloid. They're actually brighter than a office.

>Loling @ your life here

>the tone of DC is real cinema, Kubrick film

I love that one DC movie where the Hero went through a dark patch in his life roaming the world until he reconnected with his past and decided to become a symbol that changed the lives of those around him after losing his family to a tragedy in his past.

It was such dark and gritty retelling of a story that's been in the movies before while having a element of realism to it.

SO MUCH BETTER THAN THAT MARVEL COOKIE CUTTER SHIT.

not in a snyder film they aren't.

The tone of Marvel is comic book movies. What you see is what you get. They please fans, general audiences and critics like them. They don't try to "elevate" the genre and failed like DC. If you have any problems with how Marvel movies are then you have a problem with how comic book movies are.

DC is basically the same as its core fanbase. They try to convince themselves their heroes and stories are more than just kids stories, that they are mature and have depth just so they can feel better about liking guys in spandex fighting each other.

At least Marvel knows what they are. Whether you like them or not that's on you.

Kubrick lighting like Marvel, ironically. Ridley is more like DC.

this

back to my original point then, at least he bothers to get someone who gives a shit about lighting.

What TV show is that in the Marvel picture?

anyone with eyes can see the shit cinematography that marvel has

it looks like cloverfield or blair witch project i.e. a college film project

why do 20+ """"men"""" constantly talk about movies made to children ?

>made to children

your english sucks

Batman v Superman clearly wasn't made for children. Maybe Warner Bros thought the same as you and then balked at the cut showing a political story and the chain reaction of Superman's entrance to the world.
I really do not think the DC films and Marvel films have the exact same demographic

I love how you think you're right, or that those movies are so bad it's insultive to films that they exist, when neither of them are true, and Blair Witch Project was a movie that's closer to Citizen Kane then Sharknado no matter how much you FEEL

kek marvel flicks look worse than sitcoms

Are you talking about Batman Begins? Because as a comic book fan, Batman Begins and TDK are great movies. But you have to understand my point. That kind of realistic tone, it works with Batman. Superman should be a polar opposite to Batman in terms of ideology. It just didn't feel that way for me in BvS.

I gave Man of Steel the benefit of the doubt, because I was curious to see if that kind of tone could work with Superman when he was starting out and then see him developed in MoS2 to the Superman we all know. I was excited for BvS when the trailers came out as well. I expected Superman to become an inspiration and see that Superman we all know. I was really hopeful for the senate scene with Superman actually addressing the world and standing up for what he believes him. Instead we got him killing a man in cold blood, threatening to break Lex's bones and being confused and broody the whole movie. It was just a disappointment for me.

>comparing a Marvel movie with the Blair Witch Project

This is it, folks. This is how much knowledge the average DC fan has of filmaking and genres. They can't even tell the difference between an action movie and a scary movie.

i am right though. marvel makes their movies look like tv shows. they half ass their fans with no name shit directors and you defend them lol

are there ever threads here on marvel directors? nope.

it's always Zack "Kubrick" Snyder threads

Howard the Duck, Elektra, first Captain America,Man-Thing , any Fantastic Four movie, Ghost Rider, Punishers or Daredevil, Blade Trilogy.

But X-men movies were not as terrible,

But that's what you meant right.

or do you mean all like 45 movies are worse than sitcoms?

You have quite an expansive idea for such a small comment.

if he cared to make it authentic then it should be brighter not darker?

or is it just that snyder is shit and thinks that putting a dark filter on everything and literally making it darker means his films are dark.

they did that with the last few harry potter films too, these are dark now lets make it literally dark.

what a fuckign hack.

>This is it, folks. This is how much knowledge the average DC fan has of filmaking and genres. They can't even tell the difference between an action movie and a scary movie.
I think this reply says more about your intelligence that you cannot understand the user wasn't talking about the script or story, but the production values.

No it's true, you don't know what GENRES are.

youre making your own argument now. Are you even reading what the user or I wrote?

anything after mcu is pure shit, the old flicks are ok tho

Comparing Kubrick to Snyder always confuses me, I would say Snyder is his own director I've liked a lot of his other work, but it's funny you think Kubrick is a compliment. He was a very rigid director, but Snyder likes to do more 'video game' inspired movies that is NOTHING like a Kubrick movie, that is more like

Paul Anderson or Christopher Nolan is more like Kubrick.

I mean 300 is nothing like Spartacus.

Michael Bay should direct the marvel movies if you want them to be watchable to cinema fans. otherwise they will always be dismissed as shit children's movies. they need an actual director with talent

with Bay, the airport scene would be much better straight away

Oh if we are talking about production values the guy is still wrong. You couldn't have done Blair Witch with Civil Wars budget(You could have but the movie wouldn't be the same) and you couldn't have done Civil War with Blair Witch's budget. Saying the two are alike and comparable shows no knowledge of what makes the movie work and how different genres have differences to them as to what they need.

If he would have said that Marvel Movies have the same look production wise to the last shitty Seagal movie that came out then that would have been a fine comparison. They're both action movies, in his opinion they could have both been shot horribly. Things like that.

i compare Kubrick to Snyder because they both put esoteric symbology in their films

these subliminal messages go unheard to the marvel redditor

*tip*

The MCU is the change in quality. Other then the Raimi Spider-man, you're saying x-men and fantastic four and the punisher and the first hulk movies were good, compared to iron-man, thor, the second hulk movie.

I mean, just clarifying. You obviously know, I just wanted you to know how ridiculous it sounds.

I have no dawg in this fight, but to me, the top picture looks like two guys cheesing for a promo shot, and the bottom picture looks like two guys working together; they both look bright-eyed and engaged. The guy on the left in the top picture could easily be hissing 'this isn't over, bitch' to the guy on the right.

>Batman v Superman clearly wasn't made for children.
men in rubbercloths, horned costumes taking themself serious is the biggest problem
"wasn't made for children." ridiculous. how can the fans not feel it?

fuck. Ive never been tipped before. Was it really tip worthy?

>dismissed as shit children's movies

And what's wrong about being children's movies? They're movies about Superheroes with fantastical powers fighting evil beings. Courage, friendship, overcoming odds and learning to be a better person, the hero's journey. Things that translate to people no matter what age they are.

People that complain about comic books movies being for children are the same people that are in to "graphic novels", the ones that try to convince themselves that their hobby of reading comic books for kids is actually mature.

Marvel movies are for kids, they also appeal to a wide demographic. Again, how is that a bad thing. Critics enjoy them, they make money and audiences love them.

I would watch the shit out of a Hulk movie directed by Michael Bay.

If this were true, I would watch Marvel movies and enjoy them THOROUGHLY. But Marvel is no less pompous and heavy-handed than DC, they just have a lot of stupid Bob Hope level repartee for dialogue which some people mistake for light-heartedness.

there was a lot of dialogue and alot of stuff that would go straight over kids heads. I know what youre saying that a film about Superman and Batman should have been made for kids, but this wasn't. They were more than likely going for over PG-13 crowd but it still didn't have enough action for that type of film

>Kubrick
>symbolism

KEK you're one of those people that say Room 237 and thought that Shining was 'steeped' in symbolism. Yeah, you're like a little baby just learning about film.

Other then Eyes Wide Shut there's not really any deep esoteric symbolism, and if you think the symbolism in Snyder movies is at all subtle let alone esoteric you're an idiot.

I mean the symbolism in BvS was so jumbled and mixed up that to the idiots like you it must seem cryptic. At least Kubricks wasn't so clumsy to leave confusing symbolism but actually orginal symbols, in confusing movies.

>But Marvel is no less pompous and heavy-handed than DC

Marvel has never staked claims as overblown and pretentious as Snyder's (Not even DC's, "Suicide Squad" was a whole different tone). The worst is the Russos saying they viewed "The Winter Soldier" and "Civil War" as superhero movies with a strong undercurrent of political thriller and a psychological thriller, respectively.

Yes, they have the exact same demographic, and the proof of that is that both the Marvelcuck and DCcuck camps on Cred Forums have seen everything both studios have put out. You watch the same retarded drivel, and then either put a sad or happy face on when you walk out depending on which camp you're in, but you both avoid any films involving real adult drama LIKE A PORTENT

>but you both avoid any films involving real adult drama LIKE A PORTENT

You don't really believe there's someone that only watches superhero movies, right?

You could if most of the money is falling directly into a few kikes' capacious pockets, which is exactly what occured on Civil War, which is objectively cheaper looking than Blair Witch. Shit, it's objectively cheaper looking than The Last Broadcast!

>mfw I JUST NOW realized that batman is standing next to a monitor and not holding a turret gun.

because I want to see tits, ass, blood, gore, bondage, rape, senseless killings in a comic book movie

that type of superhero movie is not meant for kids. and why should all superhero movies have the same family friendly formula? why cant there be adult oriented superhero movies?

Capeshit is and always will be capeshit. And hiring aflek as batman, what a disaster

>but you both avoid any films involving real adult drama LIKE A PORTENT
are you an idiot?

Marvel films are for Nu-Males and DC films are for Chads.

They're both equally shit.

> objectively

Nope. Learn to dictionary faggot.

pushing the Justice League was lame as fuck and in poor taste blatant shilling that makes the BvS fans just seem like they have distaste for Goys.

>DC films are for Chads

Their main audience is women and minorities, proven by polls.

people have been dissecting The Shining for 35+ years

are you so stupid to think the theories started with Room 237?

They don't make those claims verbally, but aesthetically, the pomposity is suffocating. Every second of a Marvel movie is about telling you to worship these loathsome characters. They're unsuitable for children in my view - kids should not be invited to feel awe for some manlet with a dye-job and his overdog buddies.

There can be adult oriented comic book movies. The Nolan Trilogy worked pretty well. The Blade Trilogy also worked. The Punisher movies as well. Deadpool is another example. You also have Preacher, The Walking Dead, The Strain also being comic books that are gory and violent.

It works if the source material allows it to work. Superman could have worked with a darker tone, hell thats what I was expecting from MoS and a possible MoS 2 like I said before, to eventually see Superman step out in to the light as a beacon of hope. Instead we got BvS, trying to shoe horn so many things and it turned in to a CGI shitfest at the end like every other comic book movie. I had hopes for Suicide Squad as well, but with the cuts, reshoots and editing completely ruined the movie.

There's is literally no one else other then you saying that any marvel movie ever made ever in all time has looked anything like Blair Witch Project ever and you know it's bullshit.

ALL HAIL TO CW! CW AKBAR!

No, I think you also watch horror and some sci-fi. And Jaws because Spielberg did it. And The Godfather because of received opinion. But basically, capeshit is your jam.

It's hyperbole for humorous effect. But conincidentally, it's also the literal truth.

The theories were never taken seriously, and nor were the people whose yaps they quacked out of, until that movie gave them the oxygen of publicity. I think they should have been denied the oxygen of publicity. Arguably, they should also be denied the oxygen of oxygen.

not him. but i only watch Nolan and Snyder capefilms. you're the type to watch ALL comic book movies which is why you are offended by BvS because its not true to the source material. i could care less about comic books and how true Snyder stays to them

> wasn't made for kids
> PG-13

Some semantic antics here.

you sound like a weirdo.

Don't know who you think I am but I never said anything about BvS, I don't watch any capeshit.

Nope, I've been dissecting it too, but since Room 237 (which is a terrible movie that might as well be a youtube compilation video that is incorrect in almost everything except for the native symbolism, and I've seen a lot of better theories) now people think that Kubrick is the rebirth of Eugen Bracht.

Nolan is more like Kubrick in where they have a distinctive vision they want to capture.

Kubrick isn't known for symbolism, except for Eyes Wide Shut, most of the 'symbolism' in The Shining was more part of the tone and atmosphere that didn't really relate to the story or plot that was already in the hotel before.

Snyder might use symbolism a bit more, but I wouldn't say he's been successful at it, but he's attempted to use it.

I mean if you didn't a concussion from Man of Steel saying that

>SUPERMAN IS JESUS CHRIST

then yeah, you might think that symbolism is esoteric. And if BvS was the movie that made you go back and rewatch MoS and "BOOM" you understood that symbolism for the first time, then you're kinda new to movies in general.

Exactly, the movie wasn't an example of the 'theories' but more an example of how idiots think there was esoteric symbolism in the movie.

I refer to kids such as anywhere up to 10 years old. I would call the pg-13 crowd teenagers, wouldn't you?

It's strange to think that people watch stuff other than fanboycore shit, I know.

you've just proved what a shithead you are with that post, that people shouldn't be allowed to critique a movie

the way you word your argument tells me all i need to know about your atheism and your sword, fedora, comic book collection

Teenagers are kids.

>Captain America is a more upbringing character than Superman.
Ask your parents. oh wait !

>ratings has meaning

The Others, Sixth Sense, The Ring, Drag me to Hell, What Lies Beneath, 1408 were PG-13

Kubrick did the moon landings and you know it

let's not lie to ourselves, while all being bad movies, marvels are especially sterile and bland visually

Critique is crucial, and everyone has a right to formulate it. Conspiracy theories aren't critique.

all those sound like films for teenagers, rather than kids, so I dont' understand the point youre making.
if youre a pedantic wanker on the verge of losing an argument, yes.

Oh, and none of those things apply to me.

conspiracy theory has a negative connotation to you. why?

No, no pedantry is involved in saying that teenagers are kids. Making a distinction between kids and teenagers is more like pedantry.

I didn't say that, I said that conspiracy theories aren't critique.

a marvel redditor reply would be

>but they are fun for families
>critics love them. look! RT ratings

ok fair enough.

telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/5833633/Apollo-11-Moon-landing-conspiracy-theories-debunked.html

no

how are they not critique? whenever you're trying to find out what the director meant by a movie that's a form of critique

don't be so terrified that you might be wrong about something

>MSM

well that solves it. case closed. pack it up boys!

No, when you're riffing off of stuff that reminds of other stuff that you're predisposed to see there because you're a conspiracy theorist, that has nothing to do with critique. Especially if you're so culturally illiterate that you think adult creatives spend their time secreting references to bullshit in their work. All valid criticism treats the work as a system which will give you everything you need to understand it, providing you pay attention and don't jump to conclusions.

...

reminds *you

Saved.

Fun doesn't matter if you can't write/direct a good movie

>dragging based kubrick down into this cancer

And this is why I fucking hate you lots. kinoposter are the worst.

pleb

>movies have no deeper meaning and are spelled out for you as if you were a child

lol

>the monitors behind evans are greenscreened
>there is no interface that looks like that
>nor would they be that clear on camera

HAHAHAHAHAAHA

which Kubrick?

Stanley Kubrick or Zack "Kubrick" Snyder?

I hope you're baiting, because it would be tragic if you thought that 'deeper meaning' meant 'references to conspiracy theories'.

hope your trolling

im not

yikes

why do you lie? i asked if you had a negative connotation about "conspiracy theory"

you obviously do

References to something that have no proven relationship to the film being used, recursively, to analyse the film, their relevance being pre-supposed, are obviously going to result in bad criticism.

>the tone of DC is real cinema, Kubrick film

Zack Snyder IS Michael Bay if he had zero self-awareness. They both basically make 2 hour long music-videos

>the tone of DC is real cinema, Kubrick film

That's a nice bait.

And you deserve to die slow and painfully.

IT WORKED YOU FUCK, GIVE TONGUE TO MY ANUS