Lurker > Wutobliteration

DJquackquack posted...

Of course Im not denying the existence of talent. But talent is like the start of a Fallout game, where you choose which stats are raised. Even if you start the game with a high art stat, you still have to grind for experience and add to it. Imagine facing a level 30 art commission with only your starter stats. Nobody would ever hire you again.

There is no skill in this world that comes free. Everything has to be earned through hard work.

@Wutobliteration

Yes, then you should realize how demeaning it is to call someone else a 'fraud'. Talent exists.
And even with hard work put in, it still takes a tremendous amount to catch up to someone who is otherwise more innate in that skill. Usually, given this uneven playing field and even a disproportion of hard work put in, the starting advantage is what changes the game by a lot.

lolife67 posted...

Um, no? I never presented my thoughts as though they were his, so not sure where that idea came from?

then dont fan the flames.

Let's wait for prof. artist dude to return to clarify. Unless he never does, in which case you can form your own interpretation on why he's suddenly MIA *shrugs*

@lolife67

If you have nothing else to say, I only have one problem to present to you: are you supposed to be @DJquackquack ? All your interpretations and pointers are yours, not his. Unless you're his alt?

I don't see him appearing anymore after I replied to his vague statement that explained absolutely nothing at all except commit ad hominem on me.

*sigh*

@lolife67
What are you trying to argue for again? No, seriously? What??

Go read post #96 again. You and I agreed on that part. Whether or not I said it prior is not even anything to do with the current situation. Even I say "Oh ok what I say is not I didn't say it prior", then what...?

I mean good if you're gonna be happy for fulfiling your own cocked up strawman argument... but as you would soon realize, you and I never disagreed in the first place.

So now what?? Wanna stir more s*** up?

lolife67 posted...

Well first, this still isn't the same thing as you posted above.

sorry you misintepreted or if I wrote not clear enough? more importantly, you're attacking a strawman.

Second, what you did post above isn't what you initially stated and what we're disputing.

Isnt this your first point again?

Third, you drawing something doesn't prove it applies to other artists.

Tell me, WHAT the issue your dear prof. artist had again? He says talent doesn't exist. Me drawing technically should prove it exist. Of course as I said, it still wouldnt matter because you will still deny it anyway

Fourth, you're moving goalposts from the initial statement about art being "largely genetic." .

LOL you are the one moving goalposts by focusing this whole issue as me not saying what I said previously because you misinterpreted it, you realized that?

You've completely avoided the topic at hand.

lolife67 posted...

None of that is what you said, actually.

I said this in regards to drawing because I've observed it among artists.

Those that are not inherent with this skill may practice their hardest but still have to rely on basic methods to draw.

If you don't believe me, I can easily demonstrate drawing without gridlines whatsoever.
BTW it's been a while but I did a drawing post here once where I asked people to draw me anything and I produced the art within minutes. Not sure if you recall. I usually post my art on my social media but like I said I dont want to dox myself

lolife67 posted...

The idea that artistic talent is "largely" based on genetics and the idea that one cannot train to become a great artist.

Obviously someone talent for drawing but that doesn't mean they still don't need to train/practice to become better/professional. Nor does it mean someone who lacks the aptitude initially cannot develop the skill through hard work.

yes, of course training is still needed. But what I said is that genetics gives an initial starting advantage. This is the same for sports. Some genetic advantages are more explicitly known (eg. being tall). Some genetic advantages are implicit (eg. intelligence, artistic). You can't tell from first sight.

But these advantages only exist to a degree. Say, if a person is shown to have a skill for running fast at a young age but no longer runs and gets fat as he grows up, it's pointless right?

But your dear @DJquackquack denies this COMPLETELY.
Let's see what he says

Art is a craft. Like all crafts, it requires hard work and practice. Some artists couldnt draw a straight line when they began. For me it took hours of daily drills over years to get good. This dude is a total fraud.

First of all, he calls out what I say as completely false by calling me a 'fraud' (also why call me out? I'm talking as a matter-of-fact speaking).
Second of all, he commits the Anecdotal Fallacy by only directing his reasoning to HIS OWN personal experience only, completely disregarding all social observations, studies and scientific empirical evidences shown by institutions on developmental psychology and biology.

Thirdly and most importantly, I already called him out on an open challenge to draw Goku. I can tell you 100% I'll win. Because I've already seen his drawing style. Like almost all artists, it'll be a challenge to draw without gridlines

lolife67 posted...

I mean, the actual professional already said you were wrong.

then ask him to explain why? seems like he ran away already

lolife67 posted...

Attention? Trolling? Thinking you're right, even though you're wrong? I don't know why you do what you do.

Then prove me wrong. No, prove the facts wrong.

What you're committing is appeal to authority fallacy. Just because some guy who is a professional artist says one thing means everything he says is correct. This same guy cant even explain or refute any of points to begin with.

lolife67 posted...

You're stopping me by not posting any actual proof of your supposed skills. And considering other posts from you on this site, I don't see why you should be given the benefit of the doubt?

I dont blame you for doing so, but even without my background shown, which part of my points I laid across sounds wrong to you? Are you denying talent exists? Art prodigies? Musical prodigies?

Are you denying the very fact that every artist leans more toward a specialisation than not?

lolife67 posted...

I'm pretty sure you don't know much about those things either, tbf.

But still, I'm sure he knows far more about what goes into making an artist than you do.

If I didnt, why the hell would I explain in such detail about the hobbying art scene and drawing process? Meanwhile your dear prof. artist never refuted my points, only the part on 'natural talent' because it's obviously so emotionally-triggering.

Are you one of those people who think the world is fair or something and everyone is born with the same brain ??

I actually can draw an entire picture of Goku right now within mere minutes, of even more exact proportion to the original's than Jim Lee's lol

WITHOUT eraser. WITHOUT gridlines. I can challenge dear @DJquackquack to do the same, under these criteria. Again, I've never went to art school or had any prof. training whatsoever. In fact I didnt even draw for a few years... went back to pick up a pencil and can still draw lol

I hope that'll do away with doubt but who's stopping you from still denying I did all that myself?

lolife67 posted...

Think we should trust DJquackquack, the actual professional artist on this one.

A professional artist is actually an unfortunate thing here because most of them miss out on university and critical thinking 101. At least reading up on genetics and evolutionary biology would help.

DJquackquack posted...

Holy crap. Nobody listen to this dude. He is so full of crap its not even funny. Or better yet, whatever he says, just do the opposite.

Art is a craft. Like all crafts, it requires hard work and practice. Some artists couldnt draw a straight line when they began. For me it took hours of daily drills over years to get good. This dude is a total fraud.

Also to you, @DJquackquack

Are you seriously denying talent doesn't exist? The very implications of your belief, pls turn back and ask yourself that question.

Art is a trait, just like intelligence. Yes, you can study and be smart. But some people are simply born with an upper advantage.

I understand you put in lots of hard work to what you do, but I warn you're falling into some kind of delusional egoism by denying genetics altogether if you actually think people are born in this world with completely equal skillsets wtff??

Oh, so this is a myth to you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptitude

Are you serious? lmao. Maybe you can start a new religion denying science and calling words like 'innate', 'aptitude' and 'talent' be removed or redefined from the dictionary because they're totally false and discredit your hard work on a certain skill

DJquackquack posted...

Holy crap. Nobody listen to this dude. He is so full of crap its not even funny. Or better yet, whatever he says, just do the opposite.

Art is a craft. Like all crafts, it requires hard work and practice. Some artists couldnt draw a straight line when they began. For me it took hours of daily drills over years to get good. This dude is a total fraud.

And how about artists that can draw without practice? You deny they exist?

ApherosyLove posted...

Ah shit homie, you had me up until there. Good run tho

It is. Do you need the tons of studies out there showing this and the relation of brain structures? Never bumped into that kid in preschool who can draw 100x better than you even though he keeps denying he already could do it since he came out his mommy's womb?

Fony posted...

i don't have a dog in this fight, but can you demonstrate your expertise or work? your qualifications to be arguing with an actual professional artist and also to be critiquing his work and proclaiming his own limitations?

I drew an entire comic book last time but I dont want to doxx myself here. But hey if you want me to flaunt sure whynot. I can do realistic faces to almost 1:1 perfect proportion or manga style or western cartoon style (which is honestly the easiest cos facial proportions can be ridiculously whack)

And FYI i never went to art school, never even took any drawing lessons and never read up a single book on drawing.

I could always just draw since a child. Sorry if this sounds cynical but drawing is really largely a genetic trait. You either have it or dont. Those that are not inherent with this skill may practice their hardest but still have to rely on basic methods to draw. For example when I draw faces, I dont even need to use any gridlines at all. I used to love anime and could draw entire characters straight from the beginning to end with no eraser. All within 15 minutes or less.

But my weakness? My backgrounds arent the best. My shading still needs improvement. I still struggle to draw clothing creases.
This relates back to what I said. It is VERY rare to none to find an artist who can specialise in all aspects of art at the same time.
The biggest discrepancy are artists who either specialise in drawing people and artists who specialise in drawing backgrounds. Perhaps it's some sensory part of our brain that struggles on this. My brother also has a talent for drawing and can draw inanimate objects with almost perfect accuracy and shading, but he cant for the life of him, draw any faces or human anatomy at all

TheSavageDragon posted...

More often than not these people do work on commission. They're hired BECAUSE of how they draw. You started of this whole bias thing claiming that artists draw what they want, not what needs to be drawn. My guess is you're not a paid artist. Because what they draw, needs to be drawn in order for them to pay the bills. Again...these people get out of their "narrow-minded preferred style" when practicing in their spare time. And when they feel it's up to par they incorporate it moving forward.

I mean...come on, man. Dude proves himself to be a published artist, actually making a living of his craft. Meanwhile you deliver critique on his work as if you're Comic Book Guy without putting up.

An artist is free to concept out his idea and draw his art as he likes. The publisher can only assess whether the art is good enough to the artist's own style, not to a certain style. That's the thing.

No artist is being forced to draw in a certain way (realistic, cartoonish, anime eg.) if he doesn't want to or cannot do so efficiently. This is also why for writers, agencies, companies, anyone... that need to hire artists, they'll look at the artist's portfolio to assess whether the drawing style is appropriate. Your portfolio shows who you are as an artist. Your style is your identity.

But what if you can showcase your portfolio such that you can prove to be able to draw in any art form regardless? That makes you versatile and thus higher in demand. So just ask yourself, why do you think you so rarely see any artist do this?

Anyway I dont want to turn this to an argument but I'm just leaving this here for you to ponder on. Good day to ya

DJquackquack posted...

This guy gets it! Thats exactly what it is.

@Wutobliteration
And yes, I can draw realistic. How do you think I learned anatomy? In art school your forced to draw realistic, because you cant exaggerate features if you cant draw them the normal way first. But realism takes forever and I dont like it. I like fun things. I can draw a city street in perspective as easily as the next comic artist, because its part of the training. But if I can freehand the same street with faster and almost as good of results, why would I waste time doing realism?

It may be fun to you but is it fun to a general reader?

Not trying to diss or anything because I also find your art really good in what you do for sure. But I think a big problem is that many artists dont know how to market their brand that well.

Sometimes yes it means having to disregard your art style and alter it to suit a general populace's preference on some level.

Also yes of course most trained artists can draw in any style but it's a matter of how well and how fast. The most respectable and skilled artist to me is the one who can

1. draw efficiently in any art style with full comfort and without compromising
2. draw his own characters out of the box. not some boring 1:1 replication

There are very few artists I see who fit this bill. But some good examples is Oda (apart from his stereotyping of females, his creativity in characters truly shines) and Yoshihiro Togashi (author of Hunter x Hunter. People bash his lazy art but ironically he is very talented in drawing when he wants to be. HxH also has by far... the most diverse range of character styles I've ever seen in a comic)

TheSavageDragon posted...

@Wutobliteration

That so-called bias you keep talking about might be artists trying to make a living. Practically every artist seeks to improve their craft and does so in their spare time. When your publisher demands that you hand in 2 pages of your comic every day, you'll stick to what you do best and fast.

Yeah, so you agree it exists then. Of course it does.

I purposely used 'bias' because it's a negative connotation but it's true and I also think it's detrimental to the artist's own career to only stick his own preferred style narrow-mindedly.

Say for example your art style is not well-liked by the general reader...then your comic wont be liked by as many. Story is what makes a comic for sure, but the art style is what draws in audiences in the first place. And typically readers, or humans in general, are drawn to relatable and attractive faces of consistent proportions. Also big plus if you can add in an attractive girl as the main character or love interest.

DJquackquack posted...

Ive also got drawings of Popeye and blondie. And Jim lee draws a fantastic Goku. In fact its on his YouTube page. Your theory is flawed bro.
@Wutobliteration

which part of this looks like the original goku to you?

DJquackquack posted...

@Wutobliteration
sorry bro but thats just not true. For instance, heres some of my anime work:

cartoon work is hardly a divergence from anime.
also your anime style has an obvious western tint to it.

try drawing realism, both face and body. Across multiple angles and poses.
try drawing realistic backgrounds like a whole city street.

now try doing that over many multiple iterations of work. Tell me how that goes. Tell me if you can even do that .And if you did manage to, how much you'll still enjoy drawing

@DJquackquack

hey I saw your profile and admire your artworks but there aren't much works to see there apart from the same pics you show here so I'll just draw from my limited observations.

From what is seen, it's exactly as what I said. You have your own style of drawing. This is the artistic bias I'm referring to. Artists call it their 'art style', but to me it's just bias honestly. Unless you can prove me otherwise you drawing vastly differently from what's shown above.

It is like how one artist will always draw in a cartoonish style.
Another will always draw in a realistic way.
Meanwhile another artist only draws backgrounds but struggles to draw faces.
There's also a subset of artists who only know replica art. This art involves duplicating other people's works or drawing someone in exact replication (eg. drawing Emma Watson in perfect ratio and form). But the moment you ask these artists to draw their own character without reference, they cant even draw a proper face. This is why they're frowned upon in the art community. Art is about originality.

Take for example the well renowned and acclaimed artist, Jim Lee. His art is good as heck BUT he ALWAYS draws the faces of women near the exact way and the bodies of men almost always alike. Or the author of One Piece, Oda. Practically every young female he draws has an hourglass shaped figure. Then you have artists who go the full extent like the artist of Jojo Bizarre Adventure. Every face is like a freaking copy+paste

They can draw differently but they don't want to. It's not comfortable for them to do so. Most artists in fact, will struggle to even draw because they're not used to it. To me, the most respectable artist is the one who can disregard all bias and draw characters of any and all styles.

DJquackquack posted...

A three times published comic book artist, a panel gag cartoonist with regular submissions at the New Yorker, and a strip artist with a series under consideration at King Features Syndicate.

Not that I needed any of that to know you dont have any idea what youre talking about.

Sure, show me your art then.

DJquackquack posted...

https://youtu.be/PZeDFwTcnCc

funny becos im an artist myself.

what are you?

This is what I call 'artistic bias'.

Dont just look at the superficial detials like scars and whatnot.

The whole bias stems from the artist's STYLE of drawing itself. Notice how most artists only draw faces in a very certain way? It's almost like they struggle to draw the faces differently even if they could. This is the bias.

Artists draw what they like to draw, not what needs to be drawn. And that's the issue

theAteam posted...

Looks like a typical older rich dude's wife

Which is saying something because he could definitely reel in someone younger if he wanted with his status

When you can attend high-class parties and probably bang younger chicks at every club or something, why'd you need to marry one?

Looks are the least of concern when you're looking for a wife.

Deuceswild posted...

Jeff can easily attract a 19 year old gold digger if he wanted to

but that's bad PR.

TheSavageDragon posted...

You'd have a point if pinky or I had said we refused to watch it. Not only did I watch it, I blazed through the manga the day after because I loved it. I'm just not blind, deaf or completely desensitized to Japan being weird. Even after hundreds of hours of anime and Japanese horror.

As for the 2nd sentence, I believe that's entirely due to what I've previously stated. South Korea seems to have embraced western media/mannerisms and put their own spin on it. Of course that's going to resonate with way more people in the West.

Take Japan's most famous death game story, Battle Royale. It's absolutely filled with exaggerated movements, like when the kids are getting their bags and leaving as if you're watching Sentai stuff. Or you get the most Japanese thing like an idol gleefully explaining the game.
As teens my friends and I found it hysterical. Any adult that happened to pass by would simply go "WTF is that shit".

Also, try watching Kingdom if you want to see good Korean stuff.

Yeah I agree with you completely with that. Koreans seem to have taken over by being able to westernize themselves more, compared to the Japanese who are still stuck in their shell. Sadly, this also means a lot of the better quality Japanese stuff are often overlooked now

Rharyx211 posted...

Bro, that dude is literally a standard haughty rival anime character, right down to his silver haircut.

AiB is a good show, but it's so anime you can taste it from the moment it starts.

funny you should say that because there isnt actually an anime adaptation of it (apart from a very short OVA attempt). Implore you to read the manga because there's seriously and absolutely nothing anime-trop-ish about it (there are some foreigners in the manga the live-action cant depict due to cast limitations. Chisaya is one of them I suspect). In fact it goes beyond that because there's hardly anything like it. There's no exaggerated expressions, no outlandish fantasy attempts and what is most impressive is the lack of black-and-white villains I dare say, even Niragi himself. Everyone is depicted very realistically, both rational and irrational agents in games acting. Like I said earlier, it's probably one of the best realistic story depictions in a manga ever. Even the premise included once you know the explanation behind it.

also and more importantly, if you're dismissing it something just because of a mere cultural thing like 'oh no it looks animeeee-likeee...'... I have nothing else to say honestly.

TheSavageDragon posted...

As someone that shares TC's opinion of AiB being the shit, I have to agree with this as well.
The reason why I've been enjoying Korean tv more on average is because generally they pretty much look and act like any popular show from the west.
Japanese tv seems to find a way to be either weird, cheesy or exaggerated more often than not.

I agree with this but this reasoning is really close-minded unfortunately -- to refuse consuming a show entirely by cultural values. Also whatever happened to that time when Japanese culture was more popular than Korean culture?

Turbam posted...

weebs mad

Apparently anything to do with Japanese makes you a 'weeab' but watching k-pop, k-drama and going biased over anything korean-related is perfectly ok

pinky0926 posted...

lol really

So this guy's entire character isn't anime like:

Dude, how the f*** name is that anime-like? So you're saying anyone wearing hoodie is some 'weeab' now?

or this guy

If you bothered to read his background, you'd understand why. Also he's the only character like that FYI

And that scene where she jumps into the bus as it's flying the opposite way wasn't anime at all to you?

Bus game didnt involve a tsunami in the manga. Like I said, read the manga.

Realistic...for a manga adaption, but still full of corny tropes. Fully expecting someone to say "this isn't even my final form" in season 2, lol

Realistic if you actually read the manga, which you DONT

pinky0926 posted...

I'm sure it makes for a good manga but that's also precisely what hurts it in live action. It's full of corny anime shit like swoopy anime hair and absurd action sequences and cheesy dialogue that just doesn't translate well to live action. The games are cool though.

I hate how people like you somehow equate it to being anime-like?

AiB is actually...or probably the most realistic manga I've ever read to be very frank. There's practically no manga/anime tropes involved at all and the art style is super realistic.

More importantly the author dares to delve into areas no one else has ventured as much into. The whole theme of AiB is about the meaning of life and the MC trying to seek an answer to his being in the Borderland.

If you're referring to the live-action show and how the actors act... well, that's just how ALL Japanese act in general, dude. I think western audiences simply arent used to this sort of acting.

pinky0926 posted...

Not even close, it's the most popular thing since parasyte that came out of korea, is all

Also I don't think Alice in Borderland is better than squid game at all

You need to read the manga (where the face card games are at).

The King of Clubs, King of Diamonds and Jack of Hearts games are all absolute genius concepts.

M_Live posted...

I like Squid Game, I will not ever read manga no thanks

Then watch the Alice in Borderland live action on Netflix. It's not as good as the manga but it's certainly still well better than Squid Game

Out of all 3 though, I certainly think Alice in Borderland is the best and most underrated one of all.

I mean, do you have any idea how extremely rare it is for someone like the author to be both able to WRITE, DRAW, and THINK up of such crazy ingenious games. Probably one in a billion people are like this I kid you not. That's why there's so few manga even succeeding on this smart ass genre I felt AiB had the games touched down to the very base of balance, between physical, intelligence and psychological. The MC is also the most balanced, likeable and relatable person I've ever seen created.

Most of the time I legit had no idea how the MCs would win the games. Even Arisu himself, the MC, is usually clueless and gets trapped halfway through despite his ingenuity.

And let me just stress again, the author, Haro Aso, is a genius, man.... Even without the writing...the fact that he has the incredibly talent to draw this well makes him a genius alone. Manga like Kaiji and Liar's Game have good writing but s***ty drawing. Manga like Death Note had a separate writer and artist. But AiB is produced all by this one talented dude himself. Huge props to him

legendarylemur posted...

Wtf lmfao I mean I don't think Squid Game is even in the middle of all the Korean shows on Netflix, but it is absolutely better than Liar's Game and Alice in Borderland, and yes, I read through the manga. If you wanted to actually compare quality things, you should be talking about Kaiji, which is ultimately a better version of Squid Game, which the writer has claimed to have been a heavy influence. In Kaiji, the mind games are wittier, the characters are more interesting, though admittedly Kaiji's focus is primarily on Kaiji, and the situation overall, while still outlandish, is still within the realm of possibility as the games are on less absurd of a scale.

AiB especially was just... dumb. The best word I can describe it with is "death game." That is not a good thing, as all the medias that fit into this category are literally the same thing with variations on the level of violence. The revelation at the very end has very poor payoff as well. It was far too much of a tonal shift, and it leaves a lot of questions that don't have interesting speculative points due to the overall poor development of the world and its possibilities. The biggest thing too is that the ending revelation only makes me question why the whole thing is even a death game in the first place. There are far better metaphors they could've used. I don't think death game is the immediate one that comes to my mind. Far from the only story of its type either. None of the games were really indicative of what was actually going on either. It's just silly gore.

Comparatively Squid Game does actually have a coherent story to the end. There's no absolute asspulls, and there is an actual repercussion to the struggle. It's easy to pity for the characters both dead and alive because the games actually happened and turned awry largely due to greed.

If you want a truly top tier Korean show though, has to be Strangers season 1 or Signal.

I disagree but I agree at least Kaiji is also better than Squid Game. I disagree though about Kaiji being better than AiB. The former has no damn direction. It's just about Kaiji getting screwed left and right and spoilers...still no satisfying conclusion to the character at the end. The games are also dragged out way too long and probably because the writer cant think up of enough new games to carry the series along.

AiB especially was just... dumb. The best word I can describe it with is "death game." That is not a good thing, as all the medias that fit into this category are literally the same thing with variations on the level of violence.

I find it hard to believe you just read the manga, including the amazing face card games segment and can dare say that. Unless you skipped most of the face card games like the mahjong, blackjack and King of Diamonds because the game is too hard for your brain to comprehend lol.

The revelation at the very end has very poor payoff as well. It was far too much of a tonal shift, and it leaves a lot of questions that don't have interesting speculative points due to the overall poor development of the world and its possibilities. The biggest thing too is that the ending revelation only makes me question why the whole thing is even a death game in the first place.

Which part of 'Border'lands, didn't you understand? Also the explanation is pretty darn solid, even if it's not the best like something the author obviously came up with since chapter 1. It's way better than most dumb isekais out there too where the MC never questions the surrealism and the writer just runs away from making a proper ending explanation.

Also the explanation for the Borderlands is actually well established so much so that the author even wrote an entirely separate manga revolving around the premise explaining it further in his sequel Alice in Border Road.

GameFan462 posted...

Did you not understand why they are childrens games?

You need to watch it for yourself.

Did you understand the old guy's intention for creating the whole concept? It was stupid as f***.

"Oh I did it 'cos I was bored." LOL

UnfairRepresent posted...

beautiful sets, great directing, colourful , relatable characters

yeah

but totally fails in the death game genre.

But to be fair, it's very rare to even find such talented writers capable of creating such masterpieces. Those titles I listed are some of the very few I know of with extremely smart games conceived. Liar's Game is the best though IMO. Extremely underrated

like holy hell... anyone who actually thinks Squid Game is good needs to go read Japanese manga like Liar's Game and Alice in Borderland. Those are the real OG s***.

Squid Game is based around children's games but makes sense as to why it's so popular. It appeals to the lowest common denominator, whose intelligence is that of a child's level anyway

VioletMassacre posted...

Where do we draw the line between whats a mental illness or not? These things change all the time.

It IS a mental illness and scientifically proven to be so.

It's society's bias that remains here. How pedophiles are being treated now is like how gays used to be treated in the past, where all of them are stereotyped as 'disgusting perverts'.

If you cant see the logic just ask yourself these questions:

1. Is it their choice for being born like that?
2. Do you think it is fair pedophiles who never committed any crime and refrain from urges are still grouped together and stigmatised by all those that don't?
3. Dont you find it hypocritical we defend LGBT but not this same group of people when in both cases, it's genetic?

From what I understand, most content creators make their videos intentionally long so they can stuff more ads midway through the video. It's f***ing dumb honestly.

Everytime I watch a tutorial video, it'd be like 5 mins of nonsensical pointless talking then just 30 seconds spent on actually going about the solution that matters. Like really. These guys could boil down the entire video to just that 30 seconds instead of wasting 5 minutes of my life

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

They can go watch the movies?

And you can go read villain backstories in the comics or even the internet too?

Murphiroth posted...

Everything to do with EmoParker.
Venom feels entirely tacked on as he was mandated by the studio and Raimi didn't want to use him.

Well, good thing Raimi did. It helped the movie gross almost 900 mil in the box office. Including Venom also helped bring in Parker's development by exploring his darker side. All this time all we ever got was heroic Parker. Showing Parker in a new light was a risk to take but also in challenging audience's familiarity with the character. We never ever see this sort of thing done again, especially not in MCU movies. But I guess people prefer the never-ending predictable black and white BS stories MCU movies are now only known for

Also yes bully Maguire is cheesy but that is kinda... the whole theme of the Raimi trilogy? The movies have always been cheesy to some extent. I dont think people remembered the cheesiness in 2004's movie too.

Topher Grace being miscast as Brock is a direct result of the above.
The already mentioned "IT WAS ACTUALLY SANDMAN!" bit that undermines the message of the first movie

Back then as a kid, I had no idea who Topher Grace was and I also had no idea of Venom's backstory so honestly I dont care. The venom migration scene was cool and completely unexpected to me.

For the sandman bit, yeah it's a retcon but I think it was needed to fit him nicely into the movie and be more relevant. Otherwise what'd he be but yet another villain that sprang outta nowhere?

Harry Goblin also feels tacked on and resolves itself way too quickly and neatly
Everyone seems kind of checked out at that point except for JK Simmons and Thomas Haden Church

Harry felt okay to me. His story has been built up across the past 2 movies anyway. And who wants to watch yet another green goblin fight? His apartment aerial conflict with Parker uncostumed was already one of... if not, the best fight scene I'd ever seen in a superhero movie back then (and still is). SM3 has some of the best most memorable fights ever IMO. (eg. Sandman and Spiderman punching each other onto moving trains was revolutionary at that time).

It's just kind of a mess.

The first time I watched the movie, I actually thought it was the best out of the 3 films. The movie brought fights to a whole other level of crazy and the brutal beating Maguire suffered at the end by Sandman while being choked by Venom was so memorable. I almost got scarred by that scene as a kid. And all the villains' backstories got resolved in the end. What does it matter if Venom isnt as much of a threat as he should be... Raimi did a different version of Venom and he did it well. I couldnt care less how comic accurate it was.

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

The 3 villains in Spider-Man 3 had to be established in the same movie. Here, we've already been introduced to the villains and know the basics, so more time can be spent on them actually doing things.

and how about people who never watched all the Spidey movies? Like I'm pretty sure most gen Z people have never actually watched the Tobey Spiderman movies before. One person I spoke to didnt even know who Tobey was.

In the same way, most people who watched SM3 back then likely never even read a single Spider-man comic before. It didnt matter to them whether Venom was comic accurate or not.

Raikuro posted...

It's just because Venom is a popular character but he got less screentime than a mook villain like Sandman.

I thought they said comic accuracy wasnt a problem here. So it really has nothing to do with writing but more to do with a minority of comic fans who were displeased their favourite villain wasnt given enough justice, even though the whole movie came together cohesively in the end. Also it's not like Raimi's version of Spider-man was ever comic accurate to begin with but I never saw anyone having qualms about that.

Murphiroth posted...

Again, you're prejudging the hell out of a movie you have yet to see and we already know SM3 was godawful and it had nothing to do with the villains not being comic accurate. It's just a mess of a movie.

A lot of people won't care if they change things from the comics if it's well done, and SM3 wasn't and the MCU usually is, what a shocker. You can't even say no one cares either because there are people who complain about it for the MCU too!

so which part of SM3 is godawful if not for comic origins? Because you sure arent explaining it

NoxObscuras posted...

The comics and cartoons have done 6 villains vs Spider-man mutiple times before. The Sinister Six. The problem with Spider-man 3 wasn't the amount of villains, just how it was handled.

but how was it handled that was bad?
If it's about comic accuracy, I just mentioned how MCU constantly butchers up almost every villain backstory anyway but no one complains