Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The sentinel program was rejected by the committee. Hence they weren't in the OT. The prototypes were likely put into storage. They then went to work on mutation and adapted mystique mutation and collected DNA from several others over the course of time thenthe sentinel program was for the first time started near the end of The Wolverine.

Because of the timey wimmy stuff the prototype sentinels were activated in the seventies

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

He absolutely is.

They are both "Bolivar" Trask. They both are military scientists in charge of capturing/controlling mutants.

Again, I get the idea is to do away with X3, but you have to write it away. It would have been simple. They chose to put forth no effort instead.

 

[pturtle]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

That should also affect the future then. The same exact final battle shouldn't be playing out at the same exact time if things got fast tracked but didn't happen until that moment of change occurred as a result of the future travel. They are too random in deciding what and how events are changing the timeline. And it still doesn't explain things like how Trask changed. No one ever mentions mutants before that or thinks to mention "hey Magneto killed JFK." That's a pretty big deal.

The future isn’t affected until Wolverine's consciousness returns to his future body, I don't know whats random about that. The time travel rules aren’t anything like Terminator’s or BTTF.

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Exactly. They try to make some semblance of sense. This is just pure nonsense.

Why is what's in Wolverine's mind the only thing that matters but it can affect everyone on Earth? He can alter the past but if he dies there after altering it, it doesn't affect the future after all? Dumb.

 

[pturtle]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

He absolutely is.

They are both "Bolivar" Trask. They both are military scientists in charge of capturing/controlling mutants.

X3 only refers to Bill Duke as Trask, and I don't believe he was a scientist at all in X3. I'm sure when X3 was being made he was supposed to be Bolivar Trask, but with absolutely no connection to each other it's easy enough to retcon that.

 

[pturtle]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Exactly. They try to make some semblance of sense. This is just pure nonsense.

Why is what's in Wolverine's mind the only thing that matters but it can affect everyone on Earth? He can alter the past but if he dies there, it doesn't affect the future after all? Dumb.

Yea I don't know man, everything makes sense to me, the critics and pretty much everyone else who saw the movie.

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Obviously not. Take off the sunglasses.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Why is what's in Wolverine's mind the only thing that matters but it can affect everyone on Earth? He can alter the past but if he dies there after altering it, it doesn't affect the future after all? Dumb.

I have no idea. The movie doesn't explain "why" Wolverine is in a little compartmentalized history that doesn't take "effect" until he returns to the present. I'm writing it off as a mystery of the universe that Kitty most likely doesn't even understand. Because it's a hella cool twist that has never been done in any time travel story before it.

And I couldn't care less how tall and what color a character was in a dreadful sequel (X3) that I'll never watch again.

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

If you're willing to dismiss logic in writing, I assume it's easy to love any movie.

 

[pturtle]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

If Deckard is asking for the science behind it then that's ridiculous, but obviously the movie had specific rules dealing with time travel and not once did they cheat to make something work in the movie.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

If you're willing to dismiss logic in writing, I assume it's easy to love any movie.

Time travel is already illogical. Wolverine is supposed to go back and simultaneously change events in the past and the future? It's time travel man, pretty much the whole concept falls apart when you consider the paradoxes and butterfly effects of even the most simple of stories. Or are you claiming that BTTF and The Terminator are plausible and logical?

Going back in time and changing events so that instead of someone taking a picture of a family leaning against a wall the "future" is changed so that everything else stays the same except the photographer still chose to take a picture and create a photo of just a bare wall? What? Why would the picture still exist in any form in Marty's hand? Come on now.

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Science behind it? This is your shtick I was talking about... Going in circles, asking to explain it again and again.

I just said it'd be easy to fix most of it with a quick explanation about Bishop ****ing up time Marty McFly style or a 5 second line from Charles that he can combine his powers with Kitty's so they can time travel.

Or are you claiming that BTTF and The Terminator are plausible and logical?

They try to make some semblance of sense.

Writing dude. It's all in the writing. It's the Batman realism argument. It's about putting forth an effort, not about making it 100 percent realistic.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Writing dude. It's all in the writing.

I don't know that the writing of BTTF was any better. "Erased...from existence." How does that explain why people are disappearing from a picture that still exists? It's crazy man but you go with it.

And you keep referring to Doc explaining the timelines but even that is where BTTF got themselves into trouble. Doc said that old Biff went back and created a new timeline with the Sports Almanac. But then when Biff went back to the future he went to the *original* timeline which allowed Marty and Doc to get the DeLorean again. But when Marty says "okay how about we also go back to the future and stop old Biff" Doc says "no, that old future doesn't exist anymore." Huh? Then how did Biff go back to it?

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

That does actually make sense though. Because he already did go back and alter it. So you can't do it again. You'd have to go back even further but the events there can't affect it anymore because once you cycle through to what you want to change again, it's still already altered.

Again, like Batman being able to fly in Nolan's movie, it's about a little writing goes a long way.

How does Doc invent Time Travel? It's just as silly as Kitty's ability but they take a second to explain it with a story so funny it's become iconic. He simply fell off his toilet and hit his head. It makes you laugh and it's something there to at least kind of explain it. How the hell does he get plutonium? Equally funny and iconic.

How does Kitty do her thing? Eh, don't even worry about it.

 

[Rorywan]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

If you're willing to dismiss logic in writing, I assume it's easy to love any movie.

Yes, if it's entertaining, well made and has it's own internal logic.
If you are not willing to dismiss logic may I suggest that comic book movies may not be for you?

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

So you see no difference in the quality of The Dark Knight and The Fantastic Four? Good to know.

The point I'm making is this movie doesn't have it's own internal logic. They simply don't even bother.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

That does actually make sense though. Because he already did go back and alter it

No. Old Biff went back and gave young Biff the Sports Almanac, creating an entirely different future and ultimately world. Remember, when you change the past then you go back to a NEW future. That was the whole point of BTTF 1. Marty helped his dad get confidence and become a great writer and all that so when he returned his whole future was different.

But when Biff did the SAME thing he still returned to an unchanged future. Bzzzzz. Wrong. That's not how things work in those movies.

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Timeline 4-6, but you may have to read the previous ones to understand how you get there.

Back to the Future timeline - Futurepedia - The Back to the Future Wiki

 

[pturtle]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Science behind it? This is your shtick I was talking about... Going in circles, asking to explain it again and again.

I just said it'd be easy to fix most of it with a quick explanation about Bishop ****ing up time Marty McFly style or a 5 second line from Charles that he can combine his powers with Kitty's so they can time travel.





Writing dude. It's all in the writing. It's the Batman realism argument. It's about putting forth an effort, not about making it 100 percent realistic.

I don't know what you want, we gave you answers to the three problems that make the movie "ridiculous" and you don't want to accept them for God knows what ever reason. Just say you didn't like the movie, maybe you found it boring, but everything you're complaining about there's an answer for, and I'm not the only one here telling you this.

 

[Deckard]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

No there isn't. There are differences in assumptions and things actually happening. You're saying you assume Kitty evolved. That's not an actual explanation.

I already said I didn't like it. And because of the writing. Why you can't accept that and want to keep going in circles? That's on you. If you don't care for my reasons, it's pretty simple, you can stop asking me about them, and go talk about something else.