Comics Creators

What are you watching? 2018 edition


It doesn’t sound like that, it is that. I thought I was being very clear there.

I understand what you’re getting at; if I don’t like everything then I don’t like the story, but that assumes its all or nothing.

I like a lot of the story but not all of it. Simple really.

Five minutes on the internet should show you that everything gets picked apart.


I think it’s a case of holding work deemed to have greater artistic merit to a higher standard.


But here on the Internet I thought that we hold DC movies to the highest standard?


Ugh, do we have to keep on rehashing the same old arguments for Superman IV: The Quest for Peace?


I know, right? I think it’s time for us to move on to Steel.


Sure, why not? I mean, it’s no Catwoman but still…


The Return of Swamp Thing reigns supreme and I will hear nothing else


Truly your title betrays you.


Breaking Bad/Better Caul Saul

After much urging from me my wife eventually agreed to give Breaking Bad a go only for me to tell her that Better Call Saul was a prequel and she might, for chronological consistency reasons, be better off watching that first then watching BB.

However, we are now into 10 years since the first showing of BB. Tempus fugit and all that, so I am now struggling to see how Bill Odenkirk can metamorphose his character into the younger, more bushy tailed character she will encounter in BB.

Life sucks.


Is it though? they spend more than half of the movie somewhere else or in a bat-cave… =/


I think we’re talked out about Arrival, but I wanted to make one last remark:

This is because linguistic relavitiy is the most extreme form of the idea. Linguistic realativism, on the other hand, is alive and well, and the examples I quoted - and many, many similar ones - still stand. (Well, most of them do. The thing about the eskimos and their words for snow actually turned out to be not so much the case.)

So if you were left with the impression that mainstream linguistics today rejects the idea that language informs thinking, I just wanted to make sure that this isn’t the case :slight_smile:

(It’s just a question of, to what extent?)


Getting a bit off-topic now, but most people I know who speak a second language would agree that switching between the languages is bigger than just saying different words, and involves certain changes to the way you think about things and process ideas.

It’s anecdotal, but it’s one of the reasons why the central premise of the movie chimed with me, as on a personal level I already buy into the foundation of the idea (which is obviously then stretched into sci-fi territory in the movie).


As one of them bilinguals I would agree.


Learning a new language, even an alien language will not give you the same perception of time as Dr.Manhattan.

If you can’t tell “when” you are that doesn’t make you psychic, but it may mean you have dementia.


If we’re going to start eliminating SF movies based on physically impossible occurrences therein, we’re going to have a very short list of SF movies.


That would be taking it to an extreme, but we can take issue with technobabble that’s all babble and no tech at all.

Alien science, a technical implant, exposure to an extraterrestrial virus, chemicals or radiation etc. Something physical that effects a physical change.

Not just doing a Rosetta Stone course though.


Arrival is already set in an alternate universe where faster-than light travel is possible, it’s equally plausible that it’s a universe where the passage of time is capable of being interpreted differently than our own.


No, but that’s what I mean about it taking a common idea and pushing it into a sci-fi area to explore it.

Dr Manhattan is a great example - Watchmen works because it’s a relatively realistic and grounded world, with this weird supergod thrown into the middle of it that creates interesting ripples and effects for him and the other characters. You have to accept that if you’re going to go with the story.

I guess you could reject Watchmen because the Manhattan stuff is so implausible, but my feeling is that if the whole story revolves around that element, you have to go with it if you want the story to have a chance of working.


Is it?

The way the alien ships travel is never clarified. The don’t move super fast in the movie, they evaporate (for want of a better description). How they do that or don’t do that isn’t explained.


Teleportation on the macro scale is also physically impossible, so one way or another you’re accepting of one set of impossibilities while complaining about another.