SJW's have ruined Movies/TVseries

[Montrovant]

By the way, that exchange did not take place in the Black Panther movie, so why are you using it to bash the black panther movie?

Because it shows the insane level of superhuman competence that we are supposed to accept from this 16 year old child character, without any explanation.


That is a flaw in the plot, and it is one of many.

Just admit you did not know what movie it came from and move on, you are making yourself look like an even bigger fool.

I did know. I was waiting for you to make a point of it, and I answered your question.


Don't get weirder on me, than you already are.

Oh please stop, you used an event from one movie to bash the plot line in a different movie, so either you did not know or you were being very dishonest...which is it?

The girl is a superhero and you are whining about her superhuman competence!

Just face it, you were bothered by a black girl showing up a white dude.

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Because it shows the insane level of superhuman competence that we are supposed to accept from this 16 year old child character, without any explanation.


That is a flaw in the plot, and it is one of many.

Just admit you did not know what movie it came from and move on, you are making yourself look like an even bigger fool.

I did know. I was waiting for you to make a point of it, and I answered your question.


Don't get weirder on me, than you already are.

Oh please stop, you used an event from one movie to bash the plot line in a different movie, so either you did not know or you were being very dishonest...which is it?

The girl is a superhero and you are whining about her superhuman competence!

Just face it, you were bothered by a black girl showing up a white dude.

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

The nature of super hero movies is the need for a suspension of disbelief.

Also, there is only so much time in a movie, you cannot give the full backstory for every one in the film.

I still find it funny he bashes one movie for something that happens in a different movie that is released after the one he is bashing

 

[Montrovant]

1. Most of the world disagrees with you on that point. But I know, you are right and everyone else is wrong...

2. Because most of us have no need to have it appealed to, only a few far right wingers like you have that desire.

1. In this, yes. It was a shit movie. As we already discussed at length.

2. Yeah, you said that. But saying "need" doesn't explain why feel good message, for a larger group, should not be appreciated by large percentages of that group.

1. And you have been wrong at length.

2. A “feel good” message in a shit movie is still a shit movie.

1. Seriously, it's shit. Popular shit. But shit. Just admit that it is a guilty pleasure.


2. But it worked fine in Black Panther. So, why not Red Dawn, and why less successfully in Wonderwoman?

1. It was a good movie, that you did not personally like is irrelevant.

2. Because the pandering you claim is only in your imagination.

1. You keep saying that, but it's not true. Doesn't it bother you to do that?


2. But it is not. I've cited examples from the movie. So, why are you wasting out time, saying something not true?

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

 

[Correll]

Black Panther was a shit movie, that pandered to blacks with a feel good message. It worked there.


Red Dawn did the same to whites.


Why did it work for Black Panther, but not Red Dawn?

Because Black Panther was not a shit movie.

The Characters were not sympathetic, the plot was full of holes, the setting was full of holes, the action was hard to see, not engaging, and not believable, even in the context of a comic book movie. War Rhinos?

I disagree with all of this as does most of the movie going world.

The question stands.



Black Panther was a shit movie, that pandered to blacks with a feel good message. It worked there.


Red Dawn did the same to whites.


Why did it work for Black Panther, but not Red Dawn?

The question is invalid because the movie was not shit.

You find it believable that even in the marvel-verse, that a 16 year old girl, is the Minister of Technology? Is smarter than Bruce freaking BANNER?

A shit movie.

Um, that's not all that abnormal for Marvel at all. Genius characters that can create and understand all sorts of crazy stuff are all over the place. Besides Shuri, you have characters like Amadeous Cho, Moon Girl, Valeria Richards...Marvel has long used the idea that some people are ridiculously intelligent as an easy way to pass off any kind of technology they want. They do it with children, too.

The movies have a lot of canon to try to deal with. Superscience has long been a superpower. Generally there is an explanation for it. None was given for Shuri. And even allowing for that, they were over the top with it.


Your example of Spiderman, was a good one. THe difference in the way they dealt with the interactions between an older and massively accomplished superhero, and a young but bright and relevant character, really showed the difference between doing it right and not.

 

[Correll]

Because it shows the insane level of superhuman competence that we are supposed to accept from this 16 year old child character, without any explanation.


That is a flaw in the plot, and it is one of many.

Just admit you did not know what movie it came from and move on, you are making yourself look like an even bigger fool.

I did know. I was waiting for you to make a point of it, and I answered your question.


Don't get weirder on me, than you already are.

Oh please stop, you used an event from one movie to bash the plot line in a different movie, so either you did not know or you were being very dishonest...which is it?

The girl is a superhero and you are whining about her superhuman competence!

Just face it, you were bothered by a black girl showing up a white dude.

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

Did Shuri build the cloaking field that hides the advanced city from space satellites?

 

[Correll]

Just admit you did not know what movie it came from and move on, you are making yourself look like an even bigger fool.

I did know. I was waiting for you to make a point of it, and I answered your question.


Don't get weirder on me, than you already are.

Oh please stop, you used an event from one movie to bash the plot line in a different movie, so either you did not know or you were being very dishonest...which is it?

The girl is a superhero and you are whining about her superhuman competence!

Just face it, you were bothered by a black girl showing up a white dude.

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

The nature of super hero movies is the need for a suspension of disbelief.

Also, there is only so much time in a movie, you cannot give the full backstory for every one in the film.

I still find it funny he bashes one movie for something that happens in a different movie that is released after the one he is bashing

I'm very good at suspension of disbelief. So when you start exhausting my ability to suspend disbelief, it is a sign that you are asking too much of the viewer.

 

[Correll]

1. In this, yes. It was a shit movie. As we already discussed at length.

2. Yeah, you said that. But saying "need" doesn't explain why feel good message, for a larger group, should not be appreciated by large percentages of that group.

1. And you have been wrong at length.

2. A “feel good” message in a shit movie is still a shit movie.

1. Seriously, it's shit. Popular shit. But shit. Just admit that it is a guilty pleasure.


2. But it worked fine in Black Panther. So, why not Red Dawn, and why less successfully in Wonderwoman?

1. It was a good movie, that you did not personally like is irrelevant.

2. Because the pandering you claim is only in your imagination.

1. You keep saying that, but it's not true. Doesn't it bother you to do that?


2. But it is not. I've cited examples from the movie. So, why are you wasting out time, saying something not true?

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

I disagree that the question of whether a movie is good or bad, is purely subjective.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Because Black Panther was not a shit movie.

The Characters were not sympathetic, the plot was full of holes, the setting was full of holes, the action was hard to see, not engaging, and not believable, even in the context of a comic book movie. War Rhinos?

I disagree with all of this as does most of the movie going world.

The question stands.



Black Panther was a shit movie, that pandered to blacks with a feel good message. It worked there.


Red Dawn did the same to whites.


Why did it work for Black Panther, but not Red Dawn?

The question is invalid because the movie was not shit.

You find it believable that even in the marvel-verse, that a 16 year old girl, is the Minister of Technology? Is smarter than Bruce freaking BANNER?

A shit movie.

Um, that's not all that abnormal for Marvel at all. Genius characters that can create and understand all sorts of crazy stuff are all over the place. Besides Shuri, you have characters like Amadeous Cho, Moon Girl, Valeria Richards...Marvel has long used the idea that some people are ridiculously intelligent as an easy way to pass off any kind of technology they want. They do it with children, too.

The movies have a lot of canon to try to deal with. Superscience has long been a superpower. Generally there is an explanation for it. None was given for Shuri. And even allowing for that, they were over the top with it.


Your example of Spiderman, was a good one. THe difference in the way they dealt with the interactions between an older and massively accomplished superhero, and a young but bright and relevant character, really showed the difference between doing it right and not.

One is a high school kid that has grown up poor and with his aunt, the other is an actual princess that has grown up as the elite of the elite, that their attitudes would be different is fully expected. That you cannot grasp that is also fully expected

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I did know. I was waiting for you to make a point of it, and I answered your question.


Don't get weirder on me, than you already are.

Oh please stop, you used an event from one movie to bash the plot line in a different movie, so either you did not know or you were being very dishonest...which is it?

The girl is a superhero and you are whining about her superhuman competence!

Just face it, you were bothered by a black girl showing up a white dude.

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

The nature of super hero movies is the need for a suspension of disbelief.

Also, there is only so much time in a movie, you cannot give the full backstory for every one in the film.

I still find it funny he bashes one movie for something that happens in a different movie that is released after the one he is bashing

I'm very good at suspension of disbelief. .

clearly not

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. And you have been wrong at length.

2. A “feel good” message in a shit movie is still a shit movie.

1. Seriously, it's shit. Popular shit. But shit. Just admit that it is a guilty pleasure.


2. But it worked fine in Black Panther. So, why not Red Dawn, and why less successfully in Wonderwoman?

1. It was a good movie, that you did not personally like is irrelevant.

2. Because the pandering you claim is only in your imagination.

1. You keep saying that, but it's not true. Doesn't it bother you to do that?


2. But it is not. I've cited examples from the movie. So, why are you wasting out time, saying something not true?

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

I disagree that the question of whether a movie is good or bad, is purely subjective.

Of course it is, there is no objective measure outside of maybe ticket sales and money made, but you dismiss those.

But hey, I could be wrong. Give us one item of a movie's quality that is not based upon personal opinion and feelings.

 

[Correll]

The Characters were not sympathetic, the plot was full of holes, the setting was full of holes, the action was hard to see, not engaging, and not believable, even in the context of a comic book movie. War Rhinos?

I disagree with all of this as does most of the movie going world.

The question stands.



Black Panther was a shit movie, that pandered to blacks with a feel good message. It worked there.


Red Dawn did the same to whites.


Why did it work for Black Panther, but not Red Dawn?

The question is invalid because the movie was not shit.

You find it believable that even in the marvel-verse, that a 16 year old girl, is the Minister of Technology? Is smarter than Bruce freaking BANNER?

A shit movie.

Um, that's not all that abnormal for Marvel at all. Genius characters that can create and understand all sorts of crazy stuff are all over the place. Besides Shuri, you have characters like Amadeous Cho, Moon Girl, Valeria Richards...Marvel has long used the idea that some people are ridiculously intelligent as an easy way to pass off any kind of technology they want. They do it with children, too.

The movies have a lot of canon to try to deal with. Superscience has long been a superpower. Generally there is an explanation for it. None was given for Shuri. And even allowing for that, they were over the top with it.


Your example of Spiderman, was a good one. THe difference in the way they dealt with the interactions between an older and massively accomplished superhero, and a young but bright and relevant character, really showed the difference between doing it right and not.

One is a high school kid that has grown up poor and with his aunt, the other is an actual princess that has grown up as the elite of the elite, that their attitudes would be different is fully expected. That you cannot grasp that is also fully expected

If it were just her being a stuck up princess, that would be enough of an explanation, but the writing supported her arrogance


It is a flaw in the plot.


Why does Wakanda have the Black Panther serum, and no one else does?

 

[Correll]

Oh please stop, you used an event from one movie to bash the plot line in a different movie, so either you did not know or you were being very dishonest...which is it?

The girl is a superhero and you are whining about her superhuman competence!

Just face it, you were bothered by a black girl showing up a white dude.

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

The nature of super hero movies is the need for a suspension of disbelief.

Also, there is only so much time in a movie, you cannot give the full backstory for every one in the film.

I still find it funny he bashes one movie for something that happens in a different movie that is released after the one he is bashing

I'm very good at suspension of disbelief. .

clearly not

Yes. I am. THat it is not infinite is not a weakness on my part, but a very low bar, for movies to reach.

 

[Correll]

1. Seriously, it's shit. Popular shit. But shit. Just admit that it is a guilty pleasure.


2. But it worked fine in Black Panther. So, why not Red Dawn, and why less successfully in Wonderwoman?

1. It was a good movie, that you did not personally like is irrelevant.

2. Because the pandering you claim is only in your imagination.

1. You keep saying that, but it's not true. Doesn't it bother you to do that?


2. But it is not. I've cited examples from the movie. So, why are you wasting out time, saying something not true?

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

I disagree that the question of whether a movie is good or bad, is purely subjective.

Of course it is, there is no objective measure outside of maybe ticket sales and money made, but you dismiss those.

But hey, I could be wrong. Give us one item of a movie's quality that is not based upon personal opinion and feelings.

Plot holes.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1. It was a good movie, that you did not personally like is irrelevant.

2. Because the pandering you claim is only in your imagination.

1. You keep saying that, but it's not true. Doesn't it bother you to do that?


2. But it is not. I've cited examples from the movie. So, why are you wasting out time, saying something not true?

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

I disagree that the question of whether a movie is good or bad, is purely subjective.

Of course it is, there is no objective measure outside of maybe ticket sales and money made, but you dismiss those.

But hey, I could be wrong. Give us one item of a movie's quality that is not based upon personal opinion and feelings.

Plot holes.

Plot holes are purely subjective, they are nothing but an opinion of the individual.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It was a good, clear example of the absurdity of the character. That is why I referenced it. THe character is consistent though all the films she appears in, so I did not consider it dishonest to refer to it.


The girl is not a superhero. She is the sister of a superhero, who's power comes from his tech and some drug enhancement. Neither of which would explain her being superhuman.


That you dismiss valid criticism by simply playing the Race Card, is you being an asshole.

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

The nature of super hero movies is the need for a suspension of disbelief.

Also, there is only so much time in a movie, you cannot give the full backstory for every one in the film.

I still find it funny he bashes one movie for something that happens in a different movie that is released after the one he is bashing

I'm very good at suspension of disbelief. .

clearly not

Yes. I am. THat it is not infinite is not a weakness on my part, but a very low bar, for movies to reach.

your post on here suggest otherwise.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If it were just her being a stuck up princess, that would be enough of an explanation, but the writing supported her arrogance


It is a flaw in the plot.


Why does Wakanda have the Black Panther serum, and no one else does?

And her arrogance was proven valid time and time again. There is no other way she should act.

Because the Heart-Shaped Herb is a plant that only grows in the nation of Wakanda and how it makes the serum is a secret known only to them. That was explained a long time a go in the comics.

 

[Correll]

1. You keep saying that, but it's not true. Doesn't it bother you to do that?


2. But it is not. I've cited examples from the movie. So, why are you wasting out time, saying something not true?

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

I disagree that the question of whether a movie is good or bad, is purely subjective.

Of course it is, there is no objective measure outside of maybe ticket sales and money made, but you dismiss those.

But hey, I could be wrong. Give us one item of a movie's quality that is not based upon personal opinion and feelings.

Plot holes.

Plot holes are purely subjective, they are nothing but an opinion of the individual.

I disagree.


Why did Wakada not grow a large crop of the Black Panther drug and create an army of super soldiers while the evil "colonizers" were "colonizing" Africa, and save them all?

 

[Correll]

The girl is a super-genius. Marvel puts plenty of those in their comics, and their movies. Being 16 doesn't mean she can't have that same sort of fantasy intelligence.

Black Panther is far from the only Marvel film with plot holes, unexplained powers or technology, etc.

The nature of super hero movies is the need for a suspension of disbelief.

Also, there is only so much time in a movie, you cannot give the full backstory for every one in the film.

I still find it funny he bashes one movie for something that happens in a different movie that is released after the one he is bashing

I'm very good at suspension of disbelief. .

clearly not

Yes. I am. THat it is not infinite is not a weakness on my part, but a very low bar, for movies to reach.

your post on here suggest otherwise.

No, it really does not.

THat it is not infinite is not a weakness on my part, but a very low bar, for movies to reach.

 

[Correll]

If it were just her being a stuck up princess, that would be enough of an explanation, but the writing supported her arrogance


It is a flaw in the plot.


Why does Wakanda have the Black Panther serum, and no one else does?

And her arrogance was proven valid time and time again. There is no other way she should act.

Because the Heart-Shaped Herb is a plant that only grows in the nation of Wakanda and how it makes the serum is a secret known only to them. That was explained a long time a go in the comics.

In thousands of years, no one transported it out? And why does it only grow there? Is there a reason, or is it just plot device?


None of their neighbors ever tried to conquer them, and learned about how powerful they really were?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It's not true that it was a good movie? That's subjective.

I mean, the Fast & Furious movies keep making a bunch of money, and I think they are garbage. The Transformers movies made money, and again, garbage. There is so much subjectivity involved. Black Panther was much better than Aquaman IMO, and both made over a billion dollars.

I disagree that the question of whether a movie is good or bad, is purely subjective.

Of course it is, there is no objective measure outside of maybe ticket sales and money made, but you dismiss those.

But hey, I could be wrong. Give us one item of a movie's quality that is not based upon personal opinion and feelings.

Plot holes.

Plot holes are purely subjective, they are nothing but an opinion of the individual.

I disagree.


Why did Wakada not grow a large crop of the Black Panther drug and create an army of super soldiers while the evil "colonizers" were "colonizing" Africa, and save them all?

Read the comic, it answers all your questions.