Infinity Wars–2

There will still be spoilers, but if you read the last post,  you probably don’t care or you’ve already seen it, so we should be good.

So clearly there were a lot of deaths to talk about in this movie. My first question is if they were all necessary?

thr heartbreaking ones wee definitely Gamorrah’s, Spiderman’s, and Vision’s. Even if like me you never liked Vision, it was still pretty sad to see Scarlett Witch first kill him and then watch him die again  thanks to Thanos. That does make it seem meaningless.

But Thanos sacrificing Gamorra in order to get the soul stone that was both repulsive and emotional. Though personally, I don’t think she’s dead. I think she’s in a coma, because a fall like that shouldn’t have killed someone so enhanced, plus the whole thing felt like a cop-out of sorts. And there was that vision of her he had at the end, I think the Soul Stone has Gamorra in some sort of suspended animation. (Ask your nerd friends if you don’t know what that is, it’s a comic thing.)

Gamorra is so coming back, so it wasn’t so bad with her. And Spiderman too. Vision, probably.

But do their deaths add anything to this movie?

Spiderman’s? Not really. It adds to Tony Stark’s many issues to watch his yong protegee dissolve,a long with a bunch of other people. But it doesn’t have a lot to do with the movie’s themes.

But with the other two I have more to say. An ongoing theme in this movie was sacrifice. Thanos wants to sacrifice half of all the life in the universe just so the other half can go on to survive and thrive. he claims that when he did this, with Gamorra’s help, the planets went on to be lush and people no longer starved.

I guess Thanos has never heard that we actually have enough food for everyone on this planet, we just do not distribute it. Killing half the people is more likely to make that worse, not better. Collapsing civilization as we know it will cause more starvation as people struggle to put their systems back together. I don’t know what fantasy world Thanos is living in…one of his own device it seems. Since he can alter reality.

however, if he could alter reality, why not turn all the garbage dumps in the universe inot farms? Why not make the landscapes more fertile? Get rid of the Sahara? That’s just on Earth, but you can imagine in this world it would apply to all the inhabited planets.

Thanos is gong to live forever anyway, if he was so benevolent, he could have worked something out that wouldn’t have thrown off the balance of the universe.

It’s laughable that he blames his won planet for rejecting him, sure Thanos, that’s why the gravity and orbit was off, it had nothing to do with messing with the forces of nature. Just keep telling yourself that.

Now it doesn’t take much thinking to see the inherent problems with Thanos’es solution, but my beef with  this movie was that it’s more thinking than any of the good guys did.

In what is becoming the predictable Marvel fashion, no one in this movie had a good counter argument for Thanos. Gamorra clearly thinks what he is doing is wrong, but she only calls it murder, she does not go farther into it. Are we just meant to assume that murder makes it wrong?

And I would agree that murder is wrong, and this kind of genocide is insanely evil, but I would not just say that. I would have a reason for it.

I only know Murder is wrong becuase I know that God is life, I know that we are made in His Image, and that he forbids murder and it is never a good idea to disobey God. Because His rules govern the universe. That would be what I would say to Thanos.

But when Thanos is laying out his whole twisted philosophy, all our supposedly brilliant heroes can do is stare stupidly at him in horror, and then say they’re going to stop him. Well great, but why? So far we see no reason to think he’s wrong…other than it seems an overly complicated solutions compared to just rearranging things so there would be more resources.

Thanos’es philosophy matches that of many people in the real world, which as I said to my family, is the really carry thing about him. That he’s big purple, and powerful isn’t a problem, its that he represents real ideology.

Even scarier is that lots of people think that we are over populated. They don’t even question it. It’s not actually true. Our cities are over crowded, but the world itself still has plenty of room. Plus people are dying everyday, all the time. We kill each other so much, we don’t need some big bad guy to do it for us. We have enough of those already.

Vision tells Ultron he is on the side of life, and that is all the Avengers can seem to come up with in this movie. Never, ever, let people die.

Ironically, Vision is the first to realize that death can be necessary. Thanos is right about that, but murder is not. Self Sacrifice is not the same thing at all, to lay down your life for your friends or the greater good, that’s a noble thing to do. No one should disparage that. Gamorra tries to do this, and to his credit, Peter Quill was going to do as she asked and kill her before Thanos got the information out of her, but Thanos stopped him.

Captain America is so hesitant to let anyone die, at least since the Winter Soldier, or Ultron. Which is silly. He’s a soldier, he should understand the necessity of sacrifice to stop evil.

Then Gamorra herself fails when she sees Nebula being tortured. Now, I give her a bit more leeway since it’s just terrible to watch that, worse than a quick death scene. But then Quill later blows their chance to depower Thanos when he finds out Gamorra is dead…and Nebula didn’t whack him over the head because…?

yeah, there are some issues I have. Thanos makes his sacrifice, I agree that he didn’t really love Gamorra, but he thought he did. What he considers love, of course it was never going to be her if it came before her and the stone.

The Dr. Strange says he will sacrifice Tony ad Spiderman to protect the stone, and he doesn’t. Perhaps he has his own reasons for that, but it seems the movie is saying that the Avengers cannot let people die or else they would not be the Avengers.

That’s…stupid.

You have go consider stakes. It is not evil to let someone sacrifice themselves in a war, especially not if the whole galaxy is at stake and they can help.

There is simply no point in risking your lives as often as the Avengers do if you are not prepared to let someone lose it if they have to. You cannot live dangerously and fear death.

I am not saying we should be heartless and not care. I think on the contrary we care more when someone goes out nobly, and there is some meaning in it. Better that then the pointless carnage at the end of this film.

See, if three, or four people had laid down their lives willingly, half of the population would have been spared. Think about that.

Yet again we wonder who our real heroes are, if they cannot even make that kind of sacrifice.

Whosoever seeks to save his life shall lose it, an whoever loses it for My Sake and the Kingdom’s shall find it.

Jesus said that. And I think it fits. Int eh end if a few good guys had died for the sake of all, then more good guys would have survived.

Hopefully the second movie will clear all this up. Because life does not have true value unless it valued but  not so much that it cannot be given up.

Until next time–Natasha.

Advertisements

Infinity Wars!

It’s finally time! I have it in writing that I have been anticipating this since before Justice League came out. (See Expectations for the New Justice League.)

 

HD Wallpaper | Background Image ID:909185

(Image from Google and WallpaperAbyss)

                                Infinity Wars!

Spoiler Warning. Seriously. Do not read further if you are planning to see it.

Okay, with that out of the way, let’s talk.

I would like to preface this by saying I still prefer Justice League, but that is completely my own bias and I am not saying it was a better movie, I am also not saying it wasn’t. You’ll have to figure it out.

So, the Avengers movie where people finally died, right? (You were warned.)

Not that I believe for a second that any of them are staying dead. My bet is that they will all come back, and then some of them will die again just so Marvel writers can say there were lasting consequences. I mean some of these people don’t have their quota of three movies in yet, so we know they’re coming back.

But if you walked in not knowing what to expect, unlike me, since I saw spoilers, which I regret now, then the death toll of this movie would have knocked your socks off and not in a pleasant way.

I actually almost choked up when Gomorrah and Peter Parker died. I don’t like Peter so much in this new version, but he was 15, and it’s just hard to watch a 15 year old dissolve into ash even when it’s a movie.

You might wonder if I think that these deaths added stakes to it? Yes and no. I think it guaranteed we would all come back to see the sequel. Of course now we want to know what happens.

I guess MArvel has the right to market what they know will sell.

Forgive my cynicism, but I still can’t believe it really happened or that it will last. Especially with such a serious out.

But you might want a little more detail. If you aren’t going to see it, here’s the plot in a nutshell.

After Thor Ragnarok, Thanos shows up, slaughters all the Asgardian we spent the whole of that movie trying to save–including Valkyrie we presume–and then kills Loki off like a sucker and sends Thor floating into deep space, where he is later rescued by the Guardians of the Galaxy. Whoa t first aren’t sure what to make of him. but as soon as he explains about Thanos, Gormorrah is all set to do whatever it takes to keep Thanos away from the remaining Infinity stones. Thanos has two, thanks to Loki. The purple one and the blue one if I remember correctly.

Meanwhile, Dr. Strange has called Tony Stark in to tell him of their impending doom. Strange has the Green Time Stone, and he says he must keep it away form Thanos, he’ll need help, and Tony needs to assemble the Avengers. Of course since the whole mess from Civil war, Tony isn’t on speaking terms with half of them. And naturally his typical selfish behavior is to hesitate because he’s afraid to call them up. Just when he’s going to finally dial Cap’s number, Thanos’es five horsemen of the Apocalypse show up. Only, it’s just two of them for now. (Yeah, they aren’t really explained any better in the movie, they are just there, and they’re despicable.)

They fight, Spiderman hears the commotion, and dives out his bus window to get in on the action, much to Iron Man’s consternation. I was a little sad that Zendaya didn’t get even a cameo int his, but I figured she wouldn’t have been in it long enough to make it worth paying her.

Anyway, Doctor Strange gets taken by Squidworth (As Iron man dubs one of the buddies) and out into this weird acupuncture trap. Iron man goes after him, Spiderman follows, kind of by accident. Then Iron man gives him his Iron Spider suit to protect him from the atmospheric conditions. Once he realizes he’s stuck with Spiderman he says “Congratulations kid, you’re an Avenger now.” Nobody cheered by the way. Even Peter just looks happy for second then you can tell he realizes this may not be a good thing at the moment.

To make a long story short, they go to Thanos’es planet, upon Iron Mans suggestion, to face him. Eventually they are joined by half of the Guardians of the Galaxy. After getting their rear ends handed to them by Thanos and losing Gomorrah, the Guardians cam there to find him, I guess. I’m not sure they even said why.

Then back on Earth, Vision and Wanda have finally started their relationship. Not married of course, though they should be to be comically accurate. And yes, it was as out of left field as Black Widow’s and Hulk’s. But at least it had a basis in the comics first. Then the horsemen of the apocalypse show up to take Vision’s Infinity stone. The other Avengers show up, Cap, Natasha, Falcon, and they kick their rear ends. Then they all go join Rhodes, or War Machine if you prefer, to go to Wakanda and try to get the stone removed from Visions forehead without destroying him.

And if you think you’re confused, imagine watching it.

The horsemen show up in Wakanda with an army of alien drone dogs things, we find out Thanos was behind the Chitarri invasion of earth, and he’s been in Iron Man’s head for years, and presumably Loki’s too. Everyone put s up one heck of a fight. Thor shows up after a trip to a magical forge guarded by peter Dinklage (sorry, a giant space dwarf. Their words, not mine.) He’s got his ax now, and some people know he had an ax in some renditions, including the old animated movies of the Avengers, so that was a bit of eye candy for us geeks.

Rocket and Groot helped him, by the way, so now they’re on earth. I will say, when they all showed up and Thor blasted the bad guys, everyone in the theater started to slow clap. I think my family began it, but we all couldn’t help it. Thor really is awesome.

Then Thanos shows up and kills half of them. The end.

Not really, but you’ll have to read the net installment to get the rest of my take on it.

See what I did there?

Natasha will return in Infinity Wars part 2.Avengers: Infinity War, Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Loki, War Machine, Vision, Scarlett Witch, Falcon, Bucky, Black Panther, Doctor Strange, Spider-man, Star-Lord, Gamora, Drax, Rocket, Teenage Groot, Mantis, Nebula, 4K

 

The Legends and the Myths.

Oh my gosh I feel like it’s been weeks since I posted, sorry, I have big college projects swirling around. BU tI am going to take some time to attend to this today!

Can you tell it’s my first time dealing with finals?

Anyway, I have plenty I could write about. The trick will be picking one thing. I’ve been researching superheroes of all things to write a paper on it.

Professors have come a long way; I imagine if 20 or 30 years ago I suggested superheroes as the subject of a research paper, my professor would have given me a look and said “That’s not a real subject.”

But now, it totally works. And with the Infinity War Craze of the past two weeks, and the subsequent Deadpool 2 craze, what more proof do you need that superheroes are relevant?

I haven’t seen either by the way, but look for a review of the first one sometime in the near future.

Though I think I will still prefer the cinematic inferior Justice League to all this glamour of the Avengers. At heart, I still prefer even a partially good DCU flick, to a saturated MCU one.

Enough about that, the point is, superheroes are difinitely in. And those of us who are not in the swim about them maybe should undertake to know at least a little about what fans are crazy about.

Chances are you know someone who is nuts about superheroes. Likely you know someone who is too nuts about them. IF you’re like me, you don’t buy all the merchandise or see every film in theaters, bu you keep up with the comic books world at least enough to know the context of most of the stories.

I read the original Spiderman comics, which hold up even today, and the Silver Age Superman ones, 50s-60s, and of course the 70s Mr. Miracle. I have yet to find a Wonder Woman comic, but I would love to check that out sometime.

Funny story, I remember getting a Wonder Woman comic from the Library back before I could even read. Actually I think my mom got it just because I was looking at the picture. And I started at the words and really wished I knew what they were saying. But all I got twas the vague idea that she was a kid growing up with her mom.

And I can’t believe I didn’t remember that when I read “Superman and Me” by Sherman Alexie, since he had the same experience with Superman.

I’ve always wanted to find that comic, which I now realize had to be the original one, and read it knowing the words. SO in a strange way, comics have been a part of my reading experience almost from the beginning, and Wonder Woman has intrigued my also.

And my mom was not a superhero person, and still is not except by proxy, since she has to listen to us go on and on about it. My mom is smart, she has learned over the years to take at least a mild interest in everything we get obsessed with so that she preserves her sanity.

Superheroes will always be considered somewhat ridiculous, even by the people who love them. Not because they are ridiculous as a characters, but because the idea of one is just odd to us. A caped costumed character is funny. The whole underwear on the outside thing. By the way, did you know that they looked more like that because men used to wear suspenders that kept their pants up higher? When supers were created, that look would have been more normal and wearing nothing over that are would have been indecent. It’s not about underwear at all.

And yes Wonder Woman wore a swimsuit, but even then there were worse ones.

Still, it’s funny to dress in a flag. The pint is, they aren’t meant to be taken seriously.

That’s why we love them. You don’t have to believe they are real in order to get real ideas and emotions from them.

As I have pointed out to others, superheroes are for those who dream. They are a modern mythology. And I would have to acknowledge this even if I hated them, because there is no getting away from it. They are ubiquitous.

I think I love superheroes more than I care to admit on this blog, but I don’t love them just for their flashy fighting and quippy dialogue, though I enjoy that.

I love them because in nowhere else  in our modern world do I find so many characters held up to a real standard for good. And they challenge us to meet that standard. I love the heart behind many of them, the honest look at hardship that many of the creators had to take in writing them out. Mostly, I love myths.

And I’m a dreamer. Without fail, people who dream that I know, they like superheroes.

People who do not dream don’t, or are at best ambiguous.

I’m not kidding, I know people as old as my dad who like superheroes, but they are dreamers; and I know people who think they’re stupid, they aren’t dreamers. And those who are ambiguous also don’t dream.

IS it possible to be a dreamer without liking supers? I am sure it is. But  I do not think it works the other way. What use are superheroes with their outlandish exploits if you do not wish to accomplish things that seem outlandish to you?

Fairy tales will always be mocked by those who do not secretly wish they were true…even those who do. But as Anne of Green Gables has said, the world needs fairies, it cannot do without them.

All that means is not that we need fairies as a fantastical creature to tell stories about, but that we need fantasy. Which fairies famously represent.

We need superheroes in the same way. Whether you are a dreamer or not, you need dreamers. The ones who keep this world afloat.

They are the legends and the myths today, and they keep us linked to older myths and stories. We need that, we need to keep our imaginations alive. And if that looks like a comic spread with some speech bubbles, so be it. I’ll take that over pure realism, that stuff can be soul killing.

Until next time–Natasha.

 

 

Deadpool and Man of Steel.

Who’s excited about Infinity Wars?

I am not as enthused as I was, Marvel is burning me out. I am a DC person at heart.

With that in mind this week I checked yet another Marvel movie, and another DC movie off my “yet to see” list.

Deadpool and Man of Steel.

They could not be more different stories. One refusing to take anything seriously, the other taking itself perhaps a bit too seriously. No one in Man of Steel developed a sense of humor till the last few minutes of the film. Which proves how desperately the franchise needed the Flash. You go Barry, save the DCU.

Comic relief doesn’t have to be as plentiful as in Marvel, but it is a staple of superhero movies and for a good reason The franchise cannot be taken too seriously, or it falls apart, people nitpick. With the advent of the Dark Knight, and Iron Man, fans have gone to a whole new level of criticizing or worshiping their heroes, but the disappearance of real humor is a telltale sign that we may be forgetting these are just stories.

I know I know, this coming from the person who wrote about relationship goals based on superheros.

Well that’s the point, only a fictional relationship could possible be evaluated without the humanity of he two people getting in the way. They might have flaws, but it will never bug you as much if the person isn’t real, and you can look past it. Learning to do that with your real spouse/significant other is a lot harder, but it’s important.

With that said, did I then love Deadpool?

Heck no. I kept an open mind, I’d heard it was awesome. And though the R-rated material was not enjoyable to me, it wasn’t what killed it.

Fans, you may not want to read the following:

Deadpool was lazy. The writing was lazy. Cussing can be used creatively to emphasize someone’s personality, or the kind of stress they are under, but Deadpool substituted cussing fr a  personality.

I know nothing about what this guy likes or dislikes beyond a few superficial facts But all Marvel characters (except Spiderman and Antman and Thor) suffer from that syndrome, so it wouldn’t ruin him, I suppose.

I also love Ryan Reynolds, for the record, and there were a few moments when his natural comedic gifting came out, but only a few.

Deadpool is vulgar, gross, sick, but not without some good qualities as a person. He really loves his girl, for whatever reason, I guess they are two of a kind. He really tries to do what’s best for her.

The movie was turning into Beastly for a while. Then we go back to R-rated violence and humor.

But Deadpool is still a weak character. Though he makes fun of Marvel tropes, he relies on them for us to even like him. Otherwise, why would we? Remove the Fourth wall breaking, and naughty mouth that makes us all feel like big boys for watching, and you are left with the most average or even sub-par superhuman I’ve ever seen. (Maybe Titan from Megamind has him beat.) I mean, what does he even do that makes him likable? He saves his girlfriend, but if I want to watch gun-slinging violent damsel in distress movie, there’s a few dozen westerns that would beat this out, especially for dialogue.

No, I’m sorry, saving the girl can’t justify everything.

Most of our superheroes are getting high kill rates, and Deadpool embracing that is not helping anything. It’s not a good thing.

Let me tackle Man of Steel now.

I admit I liked this movie okay. It was better than Deadpool. It is chronically serious. All DC movies have been except for Suicide Squad. It’s their style, love it or hate it. I don’t love it exactly, I need to laugh every now and then Superman, but I do appreciate DC trying to put some real morality in it. And that they do not treat moral decisions as something to joke about.

Because right and wrong is not a joke, and cannot be settled on a joke.

I won’t be saying anything new if I say that Superman seeking religious advice is unique, and humble. Superman has always been a humble and they kept that in the movie. They also kept Lois Lane’s conscience, which was nice. I miss her sarcasm but Amy Addams has never been the type of actress to sell that character, so I guess it can’t be helped. She still did a good job of nailing Lois’es reckless, meddling side.

Pa Kent was the worst part though. Ugh. Talk about the anti Uncle Ben. And Pa Kent used to be more likable.

Krypton was never something I cared to see more of, in the comics I got tired of gong back to it. It was too idealized. Too perfect.

The movie touched on the arrogance of such a world, but the thing about planned parenthood, was unnecessary and felt too much like the Matrix. (Yet another lesson about messing with DNA, geneticists, I hope you’re listening.)

But in the end Superman is a sympathetic character. We feel bad for him. True the guy tends to make the same face most of the time, but I think it’s the script’s fault. Most of his scenes are serious, he kind of has to make that face. And he does lighten up a few times.

The comparison of superman to god is a running theme. but Superman himself knows he’d not a god. To have god-like powers without god-like wisdom is to be only a monster. Like Zod. Unless you humbly submit to the higher call of Good, and then you are a hero.

So as imperfect as Superman is, at least he gets that. he’s learning. DC characters all seem to be learning and rowing. And I am looking forward tow hat they come up with in the future. But Deadpool and the rest of the snappy but empty characters, they might get people laughing, but will they ever get them thinking?

I can’t say, but I don’t see it so far, so here’s to the Flawed but Learning people!

–Natasha.

The appalling comment section.

I’ve been re-watching Justice League episodes in this past week. But unfortunately I have to use public internet to get these episodes. The comment section under this stuff is unbelievable.

Comment sections don’t represent the best of people anyway, but they do represent a lot of what passes for humor and reasonable assumptions nowadays.

Whenever you watch something you think about the reactions of the people around you.

I enjoy certain shoes only when I watch them with my siblings, I don’t enjoy a lot of things if I watch them with my mom, but I do with my dad. When I’m with my peers…usually I’m the one spoiling it for them to be honest. Sorry.

So what happens when the people I’m watching it with are a bunch of you-tubers?

The sex jokes.

Both heterosexual and homosexual jokes are all over superhero material.

Someone actually said, I kid you not, that one male super missed this other one when he supposedly died, so that made both of them slightly gay.

I’m not sure how someone can be slightly gay. I think they meant that any and all positive feelings or expressions of emotion between two male characters has to be gay. Because clearly, no man would ever like another man or care about him, unless he was gay.

Right?

This is the line of thinking that says all those men who had deep relationships in history, they were secretly gay.

I think this logic would then say that our modern soldiers who develop deep friendships over the hardships of being in the military, they are all gay. All of them.

Really?

Last I checked gay didn’t mean a man shows any emotion at all. It means he shows a bizarre amount of sexually associated emotion…oh, that’s right, sexual association can now be anything.

Think about it. If someone on TV just stares at someone for a little longer than usual, it’s sexual. Any compliment becomes flirting. Honest admiration becomes infatuation.

I can’t even admire someone now? I have to have a crush on them to have a legit reason to like them?

Same thing with girls. If a girl has a heart to heart chat with another girl, and (gasp) hugs her or touches her at all, it’s now a lesbian moment.

Some girls are more touchy then others, women tend to touch each other more then men do. Women tend to touch men more them men touch them, in non romantic ways. Heck, women touch ourselves more if you go by nervous habits. Women play with their hair, bite nails, do all sorts of things like that, I see them doing it more then men do.

I hate that when I feel admiration or affection for another girl, I now have to question it. Or no, I don’t have to. I suppose no one is pointing a finger at me and saying “Is that sexual?” but when thew hole culture is constantly pointing its finger, doesn’t that affect all of us?

We all feel this pressure to conform to the ideas of the culture.

I have said before I consider homosexuality to be a sin. I have received surprisingly no back lash for that. But what I haven’t said is that I think just about every young person now has asked themselves if they are homosexual.

And the sad thing is, the culture keeps saying that all feelings that might be interpreted as homosexual are the truest feelings. That even if you have had many feelings of attraction toward the opposite sex, the truest you would be the homosexual version.

Leaving aside moral implications for a second, can I ask why we should assume that feelings that lead to humans not reproducing more humans would be considered the most natural? How does nature, what tells us to reproduce, now no longer want us to?

Why, I would ask, do people have reproductive parts only for one gender (most of us) if we are meant to be able to be happy without the other. We can’t continue our race with just women or just men.

Or, if we can, then we should ask ourselves why we were designed for heterosexual life in the first place?

But what about relationships between the same gender. Do they always have to be sexual to be emotional?

I am not even sure physical touch is the dividing line here. I’ve talked about before how physical touch is simply a need humans have, whenever we care about someone. whether they are old, young, man, or woman.

The idea that you cannot even miss someone’s company without is being a sign of romantic love…I…I can’t even…so if my grandpa dies and I miss him…

I won’t even finish that thought. you get the point.

And by the by, being uninterested in romantic relationships with the opposite sex does not make you homosexual. You could simply not desire sex period. Which isn’t unnatural by the way. Most people do, but if someone has not inclination to live a married life, then they have no reason to have sexual desires. (Most people still do, but for some the emotional desire for marriage preludes physical desire.)

Sex is about function as well as pleasure, most pleasures have a purpose. Food tastes good because you need to eat it. You can’t separate those two.  You can enjoy tastes even when you aren’t hungry, but if you were never hungry, you would never learn to like food. Simple.

I question sex that has no useful function beyond pleasure, and I mean overall. In any other context, such as rape, child molestation, or porn, that kind of sexual pleasure is admitted to be wrong…by some cultures.

We have chosen to justify homosexuality. Not because it makes sense, but because we wanted to. There’s no logic behind it. Studies won’t back it up.

The irrationality of homosexuality is what makes it so easy to agree with for everyone under a certain age. Even Christians, who’s beliefs should directly contradict it. But if something has no logic beyond “They love each other” then how can it be refuted?

Easily, but it would require too much thinking. The media isn’t going to ask the tough questions, the rest of us are too scared…

Why are we scared anyway? So what if people say we’re bigoted? I guess it’s true.

I am predisposed to think homosexuality is unnatural and wrong… but the question I put to you is, why shouldn’t I be?

What exactly has it done for our society? It is pushing our science forward? (finding ways to change people’s gender is not moving forward, it’s not discovering new things.) Is it making us kinder?

It is making it easier to be gay, getting praised for your sexual orientation, heck, who wouldn’t want free praise.

And it is free. It doesn’t matter how bullied they are still, no one should get kudos for sexual orientation. Anymore than they should for their skin color. It has nothing to do with excellence. Or nobility. Or even creativity often enough.

People have been bullied for needing glasses, that doesn’t make wearing glasses brave.

 

Why homosexuality is now smiled upon and read into everything, I really don’t know. Honestly I think there’s a lot of broken people out there who turn to it because it’s easier than pushing through the pain of heterosexual relationships. Goodness knows it’s harder to be with the opposite sex. We don’t understand each other.

But if it’s harder, it’s also more rewarding to figure it  out. Marriage is an accomplishment. I don’t believe gay marriage is anything more than sexualized friendship. The reason being, it often doesn’t last and it’s still easier to get along with the same sex.

Do I think my writing this will change anything?

Yes. It changes me. Maybe I need to be reminded of what I believe.

And I don’t care if someone hates me for it. At least I know what I believe is real when it’s against what everyone says.

Justice League!

I finally saw it. Back when I wrote my Expectations (For the New Justice League) post, this is what I said about it:

So what I think the new film needs is not to progress further into the dark, gritty and melodramatic world that the genre has become, but to regress into more human terms.

I have nothing against climatic events and galaxy sized stakes, but it should never be about that. Making the problem with the world the main focus of any movie risks making it too vague. What the film needs to be about is what problems humans deal with on a human level. With something like the Justice League, there’s a wide range of subjects that could be covered, that’s why it worked so well as a show. Narrowing down each member’s own personal struggles in the span of one film is a difficult and almost impossible task

But my concern is that none of them will be followed through in a satisfying way.

I am happy to say that the film makers obviously read my post, because this movie was not the disaster I was afraid it was going to be.

Best of all, they took my suggestion about Diana laying it on Batman.

But this movie had some problems that I want to briefly address.

I do not think the villain should ever be the most important part of a movie, but I do think making them on the level of a video game is a little too far in the other direction. Steppenwolf has to be the most ridiculous villain I’ve seen since…Well he reminded me most of Ego from the Guardians of the Galaxy vol#2.  Complete with the weird egg-shaped plasma globes. And the bizarre god-complex.

However the reason this whack job does not ruin the movie is because he’s not really the point, and he was obviously just a precursor to Darkseid, who’s name is dropped pretty early on; and who will make a more potent of a villain. He serves as a Ronin to DCU’s Thanos, in other words.

So, he’s goofy, but whatever. The real thing we’re here for is the League.

I like Diana naturally, but I never have liked this new Batman, mostly I just can’t buy him as anything but a weird old guy who’s mentally unstable but trying to save the world.

Ben Afleck, probably through no fault of his own, is the weakest link in this new League. Arguably Batman always was the weak link in the League because he wouldn’t commit to it fully since he loved his independence too much. So the issue in this movie is predictably that Batman does not know how to play with the other kids, and though he’s not particularly pushy, he feels unnatural with them. And once the crisis is over I have to wonder if that’s gonna blow up big time.

But again, that doesn’t ruin the film. Batman is antisocial anyway, and to it’s credit the movie is upfront about it. In fact a big theme of this movie is that no one is all put together, but that you work with the good in people and that’s how they get better.

I think the writers are starting to see how they ruined the franchise in the first place by making it depressing and hopeless, and now they are slowly climbing out of it. This movie was not as positive as Wonder Woman, but it was better than Dawn of Justice.

And that’s where I get to the good things about it.

The biggest surprise for me was that I bought the League as a team in their very first fight scene. I expected to feel like they were out of it until the climax, and then hopefully believe it, but I almost immediately felt like they had team chemistry. What tied it together for me was them saving each other. Flash helping Diana when she lost her sword, and Batman helping Flash get away after he was hurt. Flash’es more human weaknesses were a great balance to everyone else, who are often just too powerful to evoke sympathy.

Even though they spend a good deal oft his movie arguing or giving forced exposition, it wasn’t without real moments. Diana’s conversation with Cyborg was cliche, but I believed it anyway. Diana and Bruce’s fight and subsequent make up felt pretty real. And her calling him out was just my personal victory.

And I liked Aquaman more than I thought I would. He wasn’t the selfish jerk he’d been set up to be by this new and darker version. He ended up being kind of a softie, and that rope of truth gag was pretty funny.

Flash as always was one of my favorite parts, he’s a little more ADD then the show Flash, but that makes perfect sense with his powers, and it works fine with the others to balance him out. He still had the humanity and heart factor going for him. And Batman’s advice to save one person was actually solid advice. When you fight crime or rescue people as a career, it has to be about saving one person at a time sometimes. I welcomed the reminder that even one person is important. Which is something superheroes movies have not been emphasizing enough in my opinion.

Cyborg…I could take or leave his backstory. It’s sad, but hard to relate to. As a character, I was glad that he did not waste half the movie refusing to help out of self doubt, but was willing to try anyway after what Diana said to him. Proving he was better than the dark and brooding fellow he’d become.

In conclusion, DC movies are inferior to Marvel in production, they just are. The CGI is worse and the dialogue suffers from pretentiousness a lot of the time. But, dialogue and special effects are not all that make a movie work.

The dialogues is improving by the way, only some of the lines made me want to roll my eyes, as opposed to Dawn of Justice. And special effects are what they are.

What DC has that I’ve yet to see in Marvel, expect for Guardians, Ant Man, and Ragnarok, is heart. The stories are not written as seamlessly as Marvel, but there’s real feeling behind them. There’s more raw and real emotion behind these imperfect characters then I’ve ever felt watching Captain America, or Iron Man, or anyone but the ones I mentioned.

I wince at some of the production errors in judgment, but I forgive them for it because their movies have made me think. The problems they bring up are not always well executed, but they are real. And the characters are getting more self aware of it too.’

A Justice League movie that finally deals with Batman’s issues, while shipping him with Wonder Woman is not all bad, folks.

I understand why many people were disappointed in this movie. It was not the epic showdown we thought, but in retrospect, I always said that was just too much to expect. My wish was that they would make the characters more human, and not dark. And that’s what they did. Even Superman has gone back to being more like his old self. It’s true that was the worst part of this movie, but whatever, it was a mess no matter what way you slice it and at least he didn’t join forces with the bad guy. What a cliche that would have been…Bucky Barnes!

Anyway, DC fans get it. MCU people probably never will understand what makes these movies deeper to us despite their flaws.

But let’s be real, Justice League’s whole point is that we all have hang ups. It knew it wasn’t gong to be a prefect movie, but if we work with what was good about it, I’m confident the franchise will continue to improve.

That’s all for now, until next time–Natasha.

Spiderman Homecoming.

Did the title make you groan or was it intrigueing?

Or maybe both?

Yes, in keeping with my record off seeing movies months after they come out, I’ve finally given this one a watch. Now I wasn’t feeling too well at the time (and I’m still not actually) so perhaps that affected my impression of it, but I doubt it.

Because I don’t think it sucked, per sec.

If you thought it did, I completely understand, but also if you thought it didn’t.

Normally I would pick a side, but this movie really defied you to do that.

I’ll be upfront, this was not Tobey Maguire’s Spiderman in any way, shape, or form.

That is a negative for me, though it won’t be for everyone. I love the profoundness and even the occasional campy-ness of the old trilogy, and the strong moral themes. I think the casting was perfect. And for a nineties trilogy (or whenever it was) the special effects aren’t half bad.

If there’s a downside to that series I don’t know it, but it doesn’t follow that any break from style would be a negative.

One thing I miss from the trilogy, though I wouldn’t chalk it up to a negative, is the wisecracking Spiderman I loved in the old comics. And this new movie…does not have that.

Sorry, this Spiderman is a lot of things, but he’s not good at the quips. His repartoire had the wittiness of a VLOG…because it usually was a VLOG. As a VLOG (that’s making video logs of your life for you none YouTubers) it was okay. Not the worst thing I’d ever see on the internet. But as superhero quips, Hulk has had it better.

But there is more to Spiderman than wise cracks, there’s also emotional depth.

And the movie….doesn’t have that until about halfway through, and then in small amounts that don’t really seem to last.

I mean, sure Peter gets chewed out by Tony Stark and almost cries; and gets his suit taken away; and can’t be Spiderman anymore; but except for when it gives you painful flashbacks to getting chewed out by your parent or teacher when you were in high-school, the most emotion you feel is “What a wuss.”

And this Peter is, sadly, a wuss. He’s not the biggest wuss ever, I mean, compared to a lot of guys, he’s pretty cool…in a nerdy, annoying way. He spends the first chunk of the movie annoying both Tony and the audience with his hormonal energy and bouncing around and not following instructions and basically just sucking at being Spiderman.

If you’ve seen Maguire’s version, you just shake your head or roll your eyes watching this dork.

And I have nothing against the actor, Tom Holland is not bad, and he’s kind of cute some of the time, I blame the script.

And my other complaint is that for a movie with so much young talent, like Zendaya, who is not my favorite actress or anything but I know she has comedic talent, it wasted it. Zendaya was perfect for this more ironic form of MJ (who I don’t mind because this Peter is not the sensitive type and the old MJ wouldn’t suit him at all) and she had like six lines. Six! What a waste.

So you may wonder why I am so ambiguous about whether this movie is good or not if I disliked so much.

Well, it is inferior to the old trilogy in almost every way. But it’s an okay film, maybe even a good one if you’re into teen action films.

Because that’s what this is, it’s Avengers for young teenagers. I mean 13-15 year olds who may not be as up on the darker side of the adult Avengers, (and that’s a maybe.) The language unfortunately rules it out for anyone younger than 13 otherwise I’d say this was a good movie for your preteens who are into the Marvel hype.

I want to say that I don’t think teen action flicks are bad movies. I’ve seen plenty and I’ve like most of them. I even saw a Ninja Turtles movies once, that I thought was pretty cool, and I’ve watched weirder ones than that. (Aliens in the attic was my favorite for awhile. I was young.)

And this movie felt like Ninja Turtles with Spiderman. Replace the warthog or whatever he is with Tony Stark and Happy as the serious-yet-still-humorous mentor character, combine four slightly different teenage turtle personalities into one character who varies from sort of serious; to completely goofy; to whiny; to incautious and reckless.

Add in the comedic quality of one of those movies, which have funny moments but are mostly slapstick/awkward situational comedy.

And you have Homecoming.

It’s like a Junior Marvel film.

If Marvel is going to start making junior spin offs to their own movies, I’m cool with that, they aren’t hurting anybody. But I would prefer they use less famous superheroes as the teens, because the ones who already have better, more profound movies are too good to throw away on B-quality films.

I should touch on the message:

The message is that you should not try to grow up too fast. That it’s okay to stay at the level you can handle until you’re more mature.

And while I agree with that message in some ways, it goes against the grain for me to tell teens to underachieve.

While I think no teen should have to go through what Peter Parker went through, the sad truth is many of them do. Teens who have no lost people close to them, or been betrayed terribly by friends or family are the exception, not the rule.

Peter is clearly a better person deep down then the movie would make him out to be at first, I saw sparks of a noble character in their. In a very annoying package.

But mos teens are an un-tempered, annoying, package of good potential. I can’t fault a film for being honest; but that version of teens is not the whole truth, because it’s a recent development. Teens used to be young adults, and that it was Maguire’s Spiderman was. It helps that in his first movie he goes from high-school to college, and frankly if he hadn’t, the maturity he achieved would have been harder to believe.

But it’s attainable.

I don’t think I would tell my kid to be like this Spiderman, and that’s the biggest test of any young hero. Even though they often are reckless and immature, some are better at learning from their mistakes.

Peter does learn, and I won’t say he made the wrong decision at the end of the film. I would question what we were supposed to take away from a two hour film showing all the reasons why being a superhero is just too hard for some people.

Okay, yeah, we get it. But how does that help us? Did it make a more enjoyable movie?

Still, for what it is, it’s fine. I won’t begrudge you your liking of it if you liked it. But if you like the old trilogy and don’t like seeing superheros changed, and if you like profound meaning in your films, then don’t watch this.

That’s all I have to say about it, until next time–Natasha.

P. S. ( DCU fans keep an eye out for Justice League, that should be next on my list.)

 

X-Men: Apocalypse

I never intended to watch this one, but my curiosity was aroused by the reviews.

And it was not so terrible. It seems to have gotten a lot of hate from the fans, but it had its good points.

I’ll list the negative things first: This movie had inconsistencies, it was unrealistic in many ways, notably when some idiot shot Magneto’s wife and daughter with the same arrow when he wasn’t even trying to. I’ve taken archery folks, unless it’s a loaded crossbow, if you aren’t trying to fire, there’s no way you’ll be pulling back on a regular bow hard enough to shoot clear through a child. It would be hard for most people to do that on purpose. Let alone enough to kill someone else at the same time. Give me a break.

Yeah, so I had a problem with that, and I’m so over Magneto changing sides (sort of) and then changing back. I love redemption, but the man has blown every chance he’s had in all previous films, he is consistently bad, and worse, he’s a mass murderer, I think they need to cut their losses, sorry.

Aside from that, the biggest flaw to me was Apocalypse’s whole back story. There’s no way he was the first thing to evolve, that makes no sense in terms of mutant context. (He had to be lying, I figure,) and being reborn all the time…really? Even if I allowed for that, he seemed kind of dull. He was more of a mind controller then an active villain.

And are you seriously telling me that Storm, Angel, and whoever the other girl was, would not bat an eyelash at destroying the whole world? Really? Their lives were so terrible?

However, I do get how it played into the movies central theme, which was also its best theme. After decades of movies convincing us that mutations are only dangerous when they are not controlled, and that powers need to be accepted, we finally get a reality check about the other side of having power. Power corrupts.

We always saw the difference between the older Professor X and Magneto, The Professor is humble and kind with is powers, while Magneto is cruel and sadistic. Then we went back and saw what made them that way.

yet we know that Charles will suffer a lot of the same things Erik suffered later in life, and he will remain the same. Why is Magneto so different?

There’s a myriad of reasons Erik became the way he did. But one of the best moments he had in this movie was when he yelled at God asking “Is this what you want from me?”

We know Magneto later called himself a god among ants (though I suppose that was erased in the previous film) but no one ever gets tot heat point without firs coming to hate and reject God Himself, either as an idea or as a reality. (Both usually.)

This time Erik has given normal life a try, and still found it taken away, this time by accident on the human’s part, though he still hates them, we see now that he really hates God for letting them do this to him.

Since Erik is Jewish, it makes sense that he would find it baffling that God would let any of what happened happen. It’s a question that’s hard for us to answer.

And later Magneto asks Apocalypse “Where were you when my family died?” This question is one of the many points in the movie where Apocalypse seems to be equated with God. Yet the movie gives several instances where it’s clear that Apocalypse is not God as we would define Him. He is not omnipresent. He is not all powerful. he is at best a cheap imitation. Most of us would think him more like the devil then like God. What with him being evil and power mad and all.

Especially since Apocalypses goal is to acquire ultimate power, notice he doe snot already have it. God would already have all power.

It’s almost as old as time that people want to acquire ultimate power to become gods. And that’s why this theme is important in the movie. Magneto and the other evil mutants don’t just hat humans, they desire to shed their humanity, which is still part of them, and become god-like.

Though any real examination of their powers reveals that they are all limited, and I thought Apocalypse magnification of Magneto’s power bordered on the ridiculous.

God is not limited, (except by choice,) is what I’m saying, or He is not God. It’s as simple as that.

A limited god is not worth much to any of us.

Charles gets it, his message that power corrupts and that great power is given to the strong so that they can protect the weaker is profound though it is glossed over. Mystique sort of echoes it when she tells Erik he has the power to save his remaining family for once.

I am a firm believer that we are given gifts sot hat we can use them for others. They benefit us, it is true, and it’s not wrong that they do, but that should never be the only reason we use them. Magneto’s consistent flaw was his selfishness. He refused to deal with it, to try to be different.

Charles greatest strength was his selflessness.

Though this movie still continues the theme about embracing your power, it makes a point of saying you should embrace it for the sake of other people. Disregarding humanity is not that answer.

The reason I like X-men is because it actually faces the prevalent issue of superhero movies head on: that supers could come to despise humanity for its stubbornness and weakness.

And sure, they could, some have. some brilliant people in real life do. But X-Men is always trying to remind us that even the gifted people are human too, and they need to keep their compassion if they would keep themselves intact.

So, despite its faults, this latest X-men movie is worth checking out.

Until next time–Natasha.

Zombies and Redemption.

So, I have a confession, I actually dared to watch a movie featuring zombies. I doubt any of you are really shocked, what do you know about my tastes, that’s pretty normal now.

Well it’s not for me, but I gave this one a pass because the zombies in it aren’t brain-eating monsters…except for ten seconds.

This movie was a Disney Channel Original, this movie was their average, not terrible, but not good.

Zombies, which is the full title, is about a post-post apocalyptic world, where in a very Divergent fashion, humans are split into two groups, those who are normal, and those who are infected with some virus that made them into zombies…because someone spilled lime soda on some electric device.

Yeah, WordGirl Levels of sense.

But this movie is for kids and younger teens, so I’ll let the silliness slide. The last thing I need is for horror movies to be a DCOM thing.

The story is about a boy zombie, named Zed, and a normal girl, who of course fall in love and unite to overturn cultural expectations. Since zombies are stigmatized and ostracized.

The whole thing is an obvious metaphor for privileged whites keeping down blacks and Hispanics. The zombies get all the worse jobs, they go to separate schools until the integration act that kicks off this movie.

The movie has one interesting turn. Zed uses his zombie powers to become good at football, but he is endangering himself and everyone else in the process because the only thing keeping him stable is a special watch that sends calming signals to their brain. So there’s that.

When Zed convinces his friend Eliza to help him override his watch slightly so he can win the games, people start to accept the zombies, but unfortunately the anti-zombie kids hijack the signal and send Zed, Eliza, and their other friend into full on zombie death mode. Though Zed seems to resist it briefly.

For awhile things start to go terribly wrong, but then the girl Zed likes fixes everything by having he zombies and cheerleaders unite to win the cheer champions ship…which they don’t, but they do end up bring humans into zombie territory and end with a happy song and dance number.

It was stupid; but the elements of the movie do call for some closer examination, not because the movie is brilliant but because the way it was made reflects a lot about what the writers think teens are into and what they think we should be concerned about.

The biggest problem with this movie is that is mishandled the zombie thing entirely. It made it a metaphor for race, but the zombie virus is a way closer metaphor for mental or social disabilities.

Comparing it to Autism would have been smarter. Like the zombies, autistic people can have triggers that make them go ballistic, they could hurt people. So can other special needs kids. And they can’t help it, necessarily.

It’s a pertinent question to ask how much special needs kids should be allowed to mingle with “normal” ones. There are real dangers to both us and them if they lose it, or get bullied, but is there a greater danger if we don’t learn to understand each other? I think there is.

That’s a worthwhile conversation to have, but this movie doesn’t have it. The cheerleaders who mess up the special watches just to get the zombies to go nuts are never caught, the zombies never even bring it up to them, at the end of the movie they are all cool. Even though the brats could easily have gotten someone killed. They almost did, in fact. There’s no lasting impact from that very serious problem.

All we get is Eliza whining about how they took all the blame.

In all fairness if Eliza hadn’t been screwing with the watches to begin with, the cheerleaders couldn’t have done it. Eliza shows no remorse or horror for what she did, Zed admits it was wrong, but he lingers no longer on it. The girl he likes doesn’t chew him out. Nothing.

It’s no use, in a story like this, to pretend that Zombies aren’t different. The age old problem “Should we blame them for what happened before they were born?” presents itself. Should we punish people for something that is not their fault?

And yet whether we like it or not, in real life kids do get punished for what isn’t their fault. They bear the brunt of other people’s mistakes.

We all have to choose what we will do about the problems we face, but it doesn’t follow that we’ll all make good choices.

This movie slightly touches on that when Eliza wants to sabotage the cheer championship, but it deflates almost instantly. She’s talked out of it in twenty seconds. Zed brings up the point that if they behave that way then they are the monsters everyone thinks they are.

Which  is a good point, but it wasn’t fleshed out to really mean much.

And is it problematic to use zombies at all? They are monsters, they do bad things, and we’d be justified in killing them if they were real. They aren’t human, strictly speaking. Though the movie uses it differently, still it leaves the brain-eating nastiness in there (I thought that was a mistake) then we do have to wonder, why should the humans want them around?

I have a problem with making monsters “relatable” the only reason I might have gone with it for this movie is because monster can be a metaphor, and a powerful one. Just not this time.

That’s an okay way to illustrate, I’ve used the example of zombies myself to teach kids in Sunday school what being spiritually dead might look like. It can work.

Comparing zombies to a certain race isn’t going to work because having a different skin color doesn’t make you a monster prone to eating people.

Making that cool isn’t good. It misses the point. When you admit that there’s something wrong with you, you can be helped. There can be redemption. Forgiveness.

But the more we try to justify our issues, the more ridiculous the situation becomes. The most grotesque things become acceptable.

The idea is to be removed from all that, set apart, cleansed. That’s the idea of holiness the bible talks about.

We’re all, you might say, infected with the virus of sin. We all try to control it, much like with the watches, some of us try to harness it, ultimately we end up hurting people because sin hurts. The wage of sin is death.

It’s not our fault we’re born into it, but we constantly make choices that make us weaker to it, and that is our fault. (See the parallels?)

I think the movie reflects our attitude toward perfection. We think that if we as a species can work together we might overcome our differences and dangers.

Wonder Woman is wiser, she knows that each of us has our own darkness we have to face, and love is what will make us able to do it.

So, that was a lot of thought for such a dumb movie, but sometimes figuring out what went wrong can be more work.

Until next time–Natasha.

Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice.

Finally! I can give a more informed opinion on this franchise upsetting piece of work.

Disclaimer, I have only seen the theatrical version and I hear the Ultimate Edition is much better, if you’ve seen that and I don’t address something that was in it, my apologies.

The big question is: Did it suck?

Well, no.

Unlike most folks who cared enough to see this movie when it came out or at least in the same year it did, I didn’t. So my knowledge of it was based on mostly negative reviews, plus one positive one. Maybe two.

I was predisposed to fine the idea of two of my favorite DC guys fighting to the death a terrible experience.

With that somewhat unique perspective, watching this movie was not the fresh take on the characters that it seemed to be to others. And I’ve seen so much dark and gritty from superheroes now that it wasn’t so big a shock.

This movie tuns one of the most beloved superheros, if not the most, into a bad guy. Who murders and makes irrational decisions. It also turns Superman, who is normally confident and cheerful, into a troubled and uncertain hero.

But this Superman is a lot newer to crime fighting then his previous versions, so maybe I can excuse that. And honestly his perpetual frown didn’t bother me, since every scene he was in there was something depressing happening, I wouldn’t be smiling either. He’s never been the wise-cracking kid of super who never gets down.

I could forgive Batman a lot less readily. But upon seeing it for myself, I actually don’t think Batman was acting entirely on his own initiative.

It may be grasping at straws but I felt like all Batman’s nightmares and oddly rage-filled actions seemed a lot more like they were pointing to mind control then to just him. It sound convenient, but being a DC animated series watcher, I can tell you it’s just the sort of thing that they would do. So why not in a movie. (Actually the whole dream-mind control thing has been done before. It was pretty terrifying.)

Even if you don’t buy that an alien force (hint: Darkseid) could be twisting people’s minds (and I’m not the only one who thinks Luthor was acting like he was being influenced by Darkseid) I think it’s not too big a stretch to say that everyone had a darkness they have to face. Wonder Woman said that in her movie.

So with that in mind, I’ll analyze the movie.

I won’t talk about cinematography or acting, or the Martha line as it relates to good story telling; you can get that a dozen other places. I’m going to talk about what I think the story actually means if you just look at it as a story. An analogy. Which is what all superhero movies really are and always have been.

The first thing this movie introduces us to is Batman/ Bruce’s fear of bats and of superman. Which appear to be connected. The bats aren’t literal, they represent the batman side of Bruce, and how he fears it taking control of him. The reason he fears it is because deep down he knows he’s going down a dark path. With the branding and all. I think his disturbing dreams indicated that several times.

For Bruce that fear is still subconscious, and he blames Superman for the sense of danger he keeps having, of helplessness, Alfred tries to warn him about this, but he doesn’t get the hint.

So over a two year period Bruce’s resentment of Superman grows, for no real reason that we can see since Superman doesn’t destroy any ore cities and often prioritizes saving people over catching up to other people he’s suspicious of. But Bruce isn’t going to be bother with facts, since it’s the possibilities that concern him and he doesn’t realize that we can’t base our decisions on all the possible outcomes of something.

Superman is compared to God a lot. But it’s also pointed out that he should answer to God. Superman doesn’t seem to believe this himself, but the comparison bugs him. As it should. Still, he rightly thinks that Batman’s actual Brutality is a top priority over Superman’s possible damage. I mean, one is a fact and the other is a hypothesis right?

But Bruce is having none of that logic crud when Clark Kent tries to point this out to him. Instead he keeps brooding over Superman and finally decides to get rid of him by making a bunch of Kryptonite weapons. After first meeting Wonder Woman a. k. a. Diana Prince. Whom he eventually figures out the identity of.

What we are seeing with Bruce, in my opinion, is the darkness o f fear and hate clouding the judgment. Fear breeds hate anyway. And Luthor is an example of the same thing. Although his is definitely more unstable and out of control (I say more because Batman is the same way) Luthor hates God and blames Superman the way he blames God, because Superman has enough power for one to say “He could save more, but he choose not to. He could destroy us all.” Of course Superman has no wish to do that, but what he intends doesn’t matter anymore These people hate him irrationally.

So Batman tries to kill him, and seems completely shut off to any logic or decency as Superman tries to talk to him and then fights him when Batman refuses to listen. Then that infamous  Martha moment.

I don’ think the idea behind it was terrible, I just found the build up unsatisfactory, but ignoring that, I think it’s true that something as small as a name could trigger the humanity in a person. There are true stories of it happening. And I think all of us can remember moments in our life when our perspective shifted because of one sentence someone said to us.

The idea is that love is the key. Bruce still had love for his mother, even when he’d shut himself off to almost everyone else. And the moment strangely parallels one of the Justice League show episodes in which an alternate Superman had taken over the world, along with the rest of the League, and our Batman convince the other Batman to help him by asking “Mom and Dad, they would be proud of what you did?” and that’s all. But the other Batman realizes the truth.

The truth being that if we love people, then we need to love what they valued also. Provided it was good. Bruce’s parents were clearly good people who would want peace and mercy to be apart of his life.

And since Superman’s mom represents the same a sort of compassion for him as Bruce’s does, the moment does make sense.

I get why people think it’s stupid, but I don’t find it so. In fact I don’t really see how it was much different from Darth Vader changing sides because his son ended up being alive and was almost killed by the emperor.

Anyway, the point is, love conquers fear and hate. Diana tells us in her movie that only love can save the world. And Bruce is showing us how true that is. Because he was actually becoming the greatest threat to the world by trying to kill superman.

I have to say with all it’s faults I like the point DC has been making. That love is the only answer to the fear and hatred and evil we inflict upon each other and the world. Only love will change someone like Batman from a maniac to a man again. And only love can keep someone on the right path.

Love is what convinces Superman to make Earth his new home. Because of the people in it he loves and who love him. Love is what sets Diana on her path of preserving humanity. Love is what opens Batman’s eyes to what he’d become.

And love is all that will make us able to forgive each other for the terrible mistakes we make. Which to his credit Superman does pretty quickly forgive Batman for almost killing him.

So, was this movie perfect? No. Did I like all of it? No, I actually didn’t like most of it. I don’t think I was supposed to enjoy it honestly.

But it is not without its lesson, and the lesson isn’t a total flop. It makes sense. And for setting up the Justice League this movie serves the purpose well enough.

It always could be better, and I think it should have been, but it also didn’t fail completely at what it was trying to do. At least in terms of Batman’s arc. So I’d say it’s worth seeing at least once.

Until next time–Natasha.