1/6 Hot Toys - BvS: Dawn of Justice - Batman

[SilverStar17]

I also read the article in its entirety based on the search engine provided. The only thing I'm a bit fuzzy on is the author's explanation about Luthor's henchman that had the flamethrower pointed at Martha, when Batman said, "I believe you." It states that Batman shot his tank to merely disable his flamethrower and when the guy then tried to use it on Martha, it then discharged gas, thus causing the explosion and Batman subsequently shielded Martha from it.

I could be incorrect on this, but I was under the impression that when you shoot the tank of a flamethrower, the spark usually causes the tank to ignite and therefore, incinerates its wearer.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

I also read the article in its entirety based on the search engine provided. The only thing I'm a bit fuzzy on is the author's explanation about Luthor's henchman that had the flamethrower pointed at Martha, when Batman said, "I believe you." It states that Batman shot his tank to merely disable his flamethrower and when the guy then tried to use it on Martha, it then discharged gas, thus causing the explosion and Batman subsequently shielded Martha from it.

I could be incorrect on this, but I was under the impression that when you shoot the tank of a flamethrower, the spark usually causes the tank to ignite and therefore, incinerates its wearer.

In reality you could be right but the way it was shown in the movie batman shot the tank the guy then pulled the trigger and incinerated himself

 

[Starscream Soundwave]

Yeah. They're bringing out a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT cut because the editing and pacing were absolutely fine.

 

[SilverStar17]

Yeah. They're bringing out a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT cut because the editing and pacing were absolutely fine.

Dude, seriously, enough already.

Everyone understands that you apparently detested the film, but you're really just coming off at this point as simply intending to troll the DC figure threads by simply repeating the same thing over, and over and over again by posting one sentence opinions that you are passing off as fact, while dodging any question that genuinely asks you to explain your opinion. It's fine if your opinion is that the movie was bad, but I for one have politely asked you on four different occasions to state what you feel the defining line is that makes the final official say on what makes a movie good or bad and you have yet to answer that, favoring vague, one line responses instead. The current conversation has nothing to do with what you just said, which sort of even more gives the impression that you're just simply attempting to troll anyone who speaks positively about the film by stating the same thing over and over again.

 

[Starscream Soundwave]

In case you didn't realise, that post was in response to replies to me from hours ago. I don't sit on this forum all day, so my replies are going to be a few hours late sometimes.

The 'final say' on a good or bad movie is based on many factors. I'm sure you could take a guess as to what some of these factors are yourself.

As for the short replies, that's neither here nor there. People write paragraphs on paragraphs on things that could be covered in a few lines. If it doesn't need to be long, why make it long?

I have never slagged anyone off or given out any abuse to people who like the film. I haven't been rude. I'm just making points.

 

[SilverStar17]

In case you didn't realise, that post was in response to replies to me from hours ago. I don't sit on this forum all day, so my replies are going to be a few hours late sometimes.

The 'final say' on a good or bad movie is based on many factors. I'm sure you could take a guess as to what some of these factors are yourself.

As for the short replies, that's neither here nor there. People write paragraphs on paragraphs on things that could be covered in a few lines. If it doesn't need to be long, why make it long?

I have never slagged anyone off or given out any abuse to people who like the film. I haven't been rude. I'm just making points.

 

[Starscream Soundwave]

 

[SilverStar17]

Sure. It's perfectly fine to dislike a good film. You're allowed to dislike things that are good.

 

[Starscream Soundwave]

Sure. It's perfectly fine to dislike a good film. You're allowed to dislike things that are good.

...And vice versa

 

[SilverStar17]

...And vice versa

And vice versa indeed. Just not in this case.

 

[IrishJedi]

That Forbes article is a pretty darn good mic drop.

 

[Sevreed]

Hey i found a video of the newer Batman display as well as the trinity! Cant wait for this in my display!

Thanks for posting this video. It really makes me happy I preorded Batman and Wonder Woman.

 

[MedievaL]

I for one hope to see it more buff. Something like the prime 1's statue will be nice. Ben was really massive in the suit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SilverStar17]

That Forbes article is a pretty darn good mic drop.

Agreed. It perfectly articulates just what is happening in the film, in my opinion.

I think the figure looks pretty good as is with the new body. Bigger won't hurt, but I'll be pretty darn happy with that new, more muscular body.

 

[Yorick]

In case you didn't realise, that post was in response to replies to me from hours ago. I don't sit on this forum all day, so my replies are going to be a few hours late sometimes.

The 'final say' on a good or bad movie is based on many factors. I'm sure you could take a guess as to what some of these factors are yourself.

As for the short replies, that's neither here nor there. People write paragraphs on paragraphs on things that could be covered in a few lines. If it doesn't need to be long, why make it long?

I have never slagged anyone off or given out any abuse to people who like the film. I haven't been rude. I'm just making points.

Please, you don't make points, you make one point over and over.

Your point is:
"this film is bad, as defined by what makes a movie good or bad".

And when people ask: "what makes a movie bad ?" You just answer. "You know".

So, as a way to try to stop this. OK. We get it.

It's a bad movie according to Starscream Soundwave's code of movie quality.

We all get it. But please, just give up on us, poor stupid people that just don't understand what is needed to define a good movie and liked this "bad" movie.
We, that are just to stupid to understand the simple and obvious facts that only you understand.

And to the rest. Let's give him his W.O. Victory, please.

 

[Yorick]

And Skywalker, thanks for the amazing article, it certainly mirror a lot of my perception of the movie, that's how I saw it. A maturity reaching story for superman and a redemption story for Batman.

It baffles me how sometimes children understand things that adults have a hard time to grasp. I read someone saying that his nephew said:
"Superman saved Batman".
To which he replied.
"He saved everyone when he fought Doomsday".
And the kid said:
"No. He made Batman good again".

 

[SilverStar17]

And Skywalker, thanks for the amazing article, it certainly mirror a lot of my perception of the movie, that's how I saw it. A maturity reaching story for superman and a redemption story for Batman.

It baffles me how sometimes children understand things that adults have a hard time to grasp. I read someone saying that his nephew said:
"Superman saved Batman".
To which he replied.
"He saved everyone when he fought Doomsday".
And the kid said:
"No. He made Batman good again".

Quite a perceptive kid.

Please, you don't make points, you make one point over and over.

Your point is:
"this film is bad, as defined by what makes a movie good or bad".

And when people ask: "what makes a movie bad ?" You just answer. "You know".

So, as a way to try to stop this. OK. We get it.

It's a bad movie according to Starscream Soundwave's code of movie quality.

We all get it. But please, just give up on us, poor stupid people that just don't understand what is needed to define a good movie and liked this "bad" movie.
We, that are just to stupid to understand the simple and obvious facts that only you understand.

And to the rest. Let's give him his W.O. Victory, please.

 

[Charlie2099]

In reality you could be right but the way it was shown in the movie batman shot the tank the guy then pulled the trigger and incinerated himself

Sorry to ruin lots of movies for you, but shooting a tank does not make it explode. We use to shoot Coleman propane tanks. Propane gas shoots out, but no flame. We learned to build a small fire first, put the propane tank in the fire, and shoot it. Then a flame would shoot out from the escaping propane. No explosion, just a jet of flame.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

Sorry to ruin lots of movies for you, but shooting a tank does not make it explode. We use to shoot Coleman propane tanks. Propane gas shoots out, but no flame. We learned to build a small fire first, put the propane tank in the fire, and shoot it. Then a flame would shoot out from the escaping propane. No explosion, just a jet of flame.

You lost me.. I am talking about how it went down in the movie not what would actually happen if you shot tanks in real life.

 

[SilverStar17]

Sorry to ruin lots of movies for you, but shooting a tank does not make it explode. We use to shoot Coleman propane tanks. Propane gas shoots out, but no flame. We learned to build a small fire first, put the propane tank in the fire, and shoot it. Then a flame would shoot out from the escaping propane. No explosion, just a jet of flame.

It was actually me that inquired about flamethrower tanks igniting when shot with a bullet. Not necessarily exploding, but igniting. I wasn't using films as my reference either as being why I was under that impression, but I know in WW2 they used to shoot the tanks on troops wielding flamethrowers.

I only ask because in the film, apparently what happened is Bats shot the flamethrower tank of Luthor's henchman to apparently merely disable it, then when the guy pulled the trigger and tried to use it on Martha Kent, is when everything blew up.