Dawn of Justice!
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
That gonna stop me from saying it?
Just look at the criteria of what makes one medium good, and then see how close the piece gets to meeting them. Do the same for the other. Whichever is closer wins. Simple.
Nope. But its gonna tell u I couldnt care less. Straining ur fingers for no reason.
As for the comparing youre proposing, thats still not comparing the 2 to each other. Youre measuring each work by its own merits and after you got the score for both you tally them.
Youre comparing scores achieved through comparisons with the same medium not the works themselves. Conparing means examining 2 things in relation to each other. Something your way doesnt do.
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
It's always funny when people say "I don't care," and keep on responding. Don't care? Don't argue.
Except you are comparing them in relation to each other. You're comparing how well they fill their criteria. Saying "BvS only meets 3 of 5 criteria, and Daredevil meets 4/5 of its criteria, so DD is better" is comparing the two in relation to each other.
I dont care what u think of me. I care about the argument.
Exactly, yore tallying the scores. Scores you gained by comparing a tv show to a good tv show and a movie to a good movie. Not a tv show to a movie or a movie to a tv show.
You must be registered for see links
^ ur comparing results of previous comparisons rather than actually comparing the 2 to each other youre comparibg each to something else.
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
It's a comparison between how they do when compared to other shows in their respective format. Not how they do compared to each other. It appears terminology needs to be settled here.
- to compare
verb (used with object), compared, comparing.
1.
to examine (two or more objects, ideas, people, etc.) in order to note similarities and differences:
to compare two pieces of cloth; to compare the governments of two nations.
- compare meaning
to look at (two or more things) closely in order to see what is similar or different about them or in order to decide which one is better
2. To examine in order to note the similarities or differences of: We compared the two products for quality and cost. The article compares the recent recession with the one in the early 1990s.
To compare two objects means to examine them in relation to each other. When we examine 2 objects we compare the properties and attributes of one to the properties and attributes of the other. In the example of movies/TV shows, you compare writing, cinematography, editing, acting, soundtrack and other stuff of the movie to those of a TV show.
That's what it means to compare one thing to another. In our case, we're comparing a TV show to a movie and a movie to a TV show.
What you're proposing is that we take the TV show and the movie, and seperate them from each other. Then we compare a TV show to other TV shows and rate it accordingly. We then take a movie and compare it to another movie and then rate it accordingly. Then we take the results of these seperate comparisons (in this case numbers - grades) and compare them.
This isn't the same as above, as in your procedure we're comparing attributes of one TV show to those of another TV show. Likewise, we're comparing the attributes of a movie to those of another movie. We're doing 2 comparisons here of certain works with other works of the same format. Not 2 works of different format to each other.
Your proposal to tally the score is but an illusion of comparison between the 2 as you've simply arrived at the same format ( a number in our case ) and are comparing it to another number, which is something that is allowed. The problem however, is how you have arrived there.
The point here isn't to compare 2 TV shows or 2 movies. It's to compare a movie to a TV show. Something, I argue, cannot be done appropriatelly as the 2 are different and as such are both judged and made by different criterias.
So no, comparing the results of 2 seperate comparisons isn't the same as producing a result of one comparison.
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
You're not very quick are you? Comparing the scores of two things is comparing them. The similarity and differences you're looking for are how they complete their criteria.
A student who earns a 4.0 is a better student who earns a 3.0. How are GPAs determined? Scores/grades that are determined from even further comparisons. Just because you can't figure out how to do it doesn't mean it can't be done.
Oh Riker, all bark but no bite.
Your way of comparing things is faulty as you're really not comparing them and your analogy actually goes to strengthen my point that only things of same type can be succesfully compared. Both students are given grades on the same principle. If they pass the test they get a good grade if they don't they get a bad grade.
Actually, when one thinks more about it, your analogy totally fails in the scenario that we're talking about students who go to different schools. If one goes to a school that is incredibly easy and has terrible education value, while the other one goes to the hardest school in the world with a great level of education and work necessarry, then even if the student from the bad school has better grades, the student from a good school (on the assumption of him studying longer and harder than the other one) is a better student.
Also, grades aren't the only thing to determine which student is better as behaviour and activity is also a huge role. Even in this example, you can't fairly judge the 2 as the bad school will be handing out grades a lot easier than the good one.
Jazzy Stardust
Banned
Awards
Far from the best this year. In fact, I'm putting it on the list for worst this year. Story was terrible, nothing made sense, there was to much information trying to be packed in, the cameos of other heroes were disappointing at best, the battle between Batman and Superman was short last and ended terribly, and above all, BATMAN KILLED COUNTLESS PEOPLE! Batman is dark, he's brutal, he can torture, he knows he's a criminal. However, what separates him from most others is HE DOESN'T KILL, he refuses to kill, no matter how evil his enemy is, he will not kill them. Instead, they turned him into the freaking Punisher for christ's sake.
Zach Snyder is simply becoming the new Michael Bay, no story or a terrible one at it and lots of action and explosions.
Zach Snyder is simply becoming the new Michael Bay, no story or a terrible one at it and lots of action and explosions.
MAN OF SIN
Active member
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
I think CinemasinsJeremy's review sums up the problems of the movie. Snyder traded in style for substance. It's all about iconic imagery and great looking shots and action without a story to tie it all together, or at least, not enough focus on the story. This film is fantastic on paper, being a film about Luthor, Clark, and Bruce all dealing with their respective mental illnesses and how they collide, but was executed horribly.
Same issue this movie has TASM 2 had: It focused too much on establishing sequels and a universe. It was too excited. The order of the DCEU should have been a Batman stand alone of Batman when he first starts fighting crime 20 years ago so we'd have a baseline on who Batman was in this universe. Then we follow that up with Man of Steel, and then Wonder Woman, showing Diana returning to the worldd after seeing the destruction Superman caused.
That way, we see Bruce's evolution into the savage Batman that we have now. Seeing that evolution in reverse by showing savage Bat first and then showing him in his beginnings, while it could work in theory, was a failure in Snyder's execution. It'd have been way more effective to see Bruce at the beginning of his vigilantism because seeing him turn into the savage Batman would have been a shock. Now when the Batman stand alone comes out, the evolution won't be as effective because we know where it's gonna end up. Should have started with something like Death of the Family, where we see Robin die.
Then, we have Man of Steel, the destruction happens. Diana hears of the destruction from her kingdom, and seeing that metahuman threats are back and could potentially harm her world, undergoes a personal journey that prompts her to return to the majority human world, which we see in the WW stand alone. BvS then overlaps them all. WW is in the movie conducting research on metahumans, Bruce is doing research on Clark, their paths cross. We now are shocked by the Savage Bat and see what losing Robin and 20 years of fighting has done to him. Boom, BVS can unfold without shoehorning in Batman's origin and Diana's purpose, and it runs so much more smoothly.
Same issue this movie has TASM 2 had: It focused too much on establishing sequels and a universe. It was too excited. The order of the DCEU should have been a Batman stand alone of Batman when he first starts fighting crime 20 years ago so we'd have a baseline on who Batman was in this universe. Then we follow that up with Man of Steel, and then Wonder Woman, showing Diana returning to the worldd after seeing the destruction Superman caused.
That way, we see Bruce's evolution into the savage Batman that we have now. Seeing that evolution in reverse by showing savage Bat first and then showing him in his beginnings, while it could work in theory, was a failure in Snyder's execution. It'd have been way more effective to see Bruce at the beginning of his vigilantism because seeing him turn into the savage Batman would have been a shock. Now when the Batman stand alone comes out, the evolution won't be as effective because we know where it's gonna end up. Should have started with something like Death of the Family, where we see Robin die.
Then, we have Man of Steel, the destruction happens. Diana hears of the destruction from her kingdom, and seeing that metahuman threats are back and could potentially harm her world, undergoes a personal journey that prompts her to return to the majority human world, which we see in the WW stand alone. BvS then overlaps them all. WW is in the movie conducting research on metahumans, Bruce is doing research on Clark, their paths cross. We now are shocked by the Savage Bat and see what losing Robin and 20 years of fighting has done to him. Boom, BVS can unfold without shoehorning in Batman's origin and Diana's purpose, and it runs so much more smoothly.
Norman Bates
Active member
Mother & I completely agree with Mr. Riker. Iconic imagery may be enough for some people, but we prefer story with a heart, characters who are the characters we fell in love with in some form, and a plot isn't rushed and that makes sense.