TTRPGWhiz

Actually I was expanding on OG’s description of the comic as “True Grit in space with a dog”.

I didn’t say it was. All I said was “this is based on a book that was really well received”. If folks consider that a controversial statement or something worth having an argument about, that’s their issue(s).

An attempt was made.

I don’t see how or why there’s any issue. “This movie is based on an Eisner award nominated comic book” is just a fact, not sure why it triggered so much back and forth. /shrug I don’t really think the general movie going public cares what source material gets adapted. But I do think that adapting a story that has already been very well-received in its original format is noteworthy.

OK.

I have some issues with people confusing "I didn't like this" with "this is bad / not good". And yes, I understand that you said "both" (there are three statements there). That's the point. FWIW: all I did was point out that the comic the upcoming movie is based on was well received and nominated for awards, since the only other info about it in this thread was "True Grit in space with a dog".

Looks like we're saying the same thing except one of us isn't inserting their personal (and likely uninformed; did you read the mini or nah?) opinions. "Well, not every comic depiction is a winner" and "I wish Supergirl was getting something better" aren't really the same thing as "this isn't for me but I'm glad other people might like it". Again: the initial comment wasn't about you. Sorry it was so upsetting.

I recently watched another Whedon show that got canceled early and Tudyk is at his absolute most menacing. Dude's got range.

Did you read this mini-series? Anyway, this wasn't in direct response to you specifically or whether or not you specifically like that particular story (or just your idea of it, if you haven't read it). This is meant to provide some additional context that was missing from the conversation. If I were to respond directly to your comment, I might agree that yes, not every comics depiction is a winner; some just get nominated for the biggest awards. You specifically may not care that a Supergirl movie is based on the only comic that character headlined that garnered that level of critical praise. Others might.

FWIW: the book the movie is based on (Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow) earned Eisner Award* nominations for Best Limited Series, Best Writer and Best Painter/Multimedia Artist. If there’s a more prominent and prestigious Supergirl comic arc out there, I don’t know it. Maybe some other comics readers have suggestions? *the Eisners are comics’ Academy Awards

I'm not talking about YouTubers.

Haven’t seen it yet so can’t comment on it. Imagine that.

Looking forward to the success of and praise for this movie mitigating future doomsaying threads about movies that don’t come out for a year or more. ☺️

I have seen Pearl three times and did not realize that's where I knew Corenswet from. He was great in that part, can easily see him pulling off dialogue like, "what the hey, dude".

First batch of reviews is out. Metacritic: 71 with 35 reviews RT: 87 with 93 reviews

I've weighed in here and there vis a vis Riri's criminality compared to that of other MCU characters. That was the part I found most interesting to discuss. At this point in this thread's devolution, I'm not particularly interested in adding anything else.

I don't owe you any answers, but I'm sorry my post isn't as incisive as "what else can I say but no thank you". Going forward, I'll endeavor to approach that rigorous type of critical analysis. Cheers.

I suppose it's easier to be snarky than point to a single word supporting your suppositions. Have fun in the Superman thread! Make sure you post 'glowing reviews' of who's playing Supergirl, that's very important.

Show me where I defended the show. You keep writing things as if they're facts, but you haven't been able to back up a single one. Hell, I even offered to send you money if you could.

Zac...what? Your example of someone "posting a glowing review of anything that's put in front of them" is your own excitement for a casting choice? Which I already addressed. That's great that you're excited for Milly as Supergirl. Huzzah. As to your last point: that's not what happens. What happens is someone posts a trailer and says "no thanks" months before the movie/show is released. It's how this thread started, which you ought to know. In no world is that the same thing as "discuss things that they didn't like, thought could've been done better and express their ideas on what would've worked better."

I know exactly what I wrote. A forumite posting that someone who disagrees with them must be a paid shill isn't the same thing as disagreeing with someone's opinion. And yes, I am being just as insulting. Why wouldn't I?

You are just making things up. Can you point to where the 'glowing reviews' are? What positive thing am I, specifically, supposed to be responding to in that link? That you're excited for Milly Alcock as Supergirl? Congrats, I guess? I don't feel the need to post my opinion about every piece of casting, plotting, marketing, etc. And I certainly don't feel the need to come running to the forums to crap on things that other people might be excited about. What I tend to respond to is when people post negative takes before even seeing the thing they're posting a negative take about. Then doubling (and tripling, and quadrupling, and and and) down when someone says, "hey maybe you should watch it first". Obviously everyone is entitled to having an opinion. And there is literally no evidence of anyone saying that your (or the other folks you tend to agree with) opinions are wrong, but there is abundant evidence of folks saying "your opinion is uninformed". Because they very often are.

If you can find a single instance in this thread of anyone saying that an opinion is wrong, I will send you money.

I especially like when one of the Grognards of the Apocalypse accused (I'm sure "sarcastically") a couple of other posters of being "paid shills". No brainrot there whatsoever. I guess we can just say whatever we want as long as it comports with the worldviews and opinions of the mods. It was one of them who first mentioned Critical Drinker, after all. I would never have known who that person was without a mod bringing them into the convo (in the exact same way as other CD boosters; "he said it's bad so now I don't have to watch it"). Also why things like "woke mind virus" aren't considered political.