David Cronenberg Is Not Fan Of Superhero Movies

Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
LOLOL,

By the looks of things you apparently think that tights and underwear are different. Fair enough.
I want you to attempt walking into a gas station with tights on and watch what happens.
Maybe i have this all wrong, perhaps where you are from, walking around (or flying) in tights is a normal thing. But hey !! leg warmers are in (thumbs up!!)

lulz no they are not the same as one you would be removed from the store and possibly taken to jail/fined while the other may get look weird looks but nothing more.

my point is that most of those characters are not in tights. They are either padded/armored suits like batman/flash(kind hard to tell what his is) or has some other effect/reason.

anyways I think you get what I am saying.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
In the justice league who is in underwear and/or Spandex? Green Lantern maybe....Flash might be in the JL but in his own book it seems to be made of something else. It's not the same as it use to be. They did wear spandex and underwear but they have been modernizing most of the heroes. Now if it isn't armored its ninja, or maybe street clothing. Suits are retaining more of a reason the to simply "look cool". That dosn't change the fact it's still kid-ish looking I agree but not all books are that way anymore.

lol, fail with that one.

the only one in that picture not wearing tights is cyborg, maybe superman. still can't figure out what its suppose to be. here let me showcase your earlier references

deadpool: tights

Punisher: tights

Blade:tights

Gentlemen, lets be honest.

ALL OF YOU including myself started reading comics when we were children.
You didn't decide to wrap a bath towel around your neck and pretend to fly and beat up bad guys when you turned 20.
Bottom line, comics were targeting kids I/E young adults as a source of entertainment.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
lulz no they are not the same as one you would be removed from the store and possibly taken to jail/fined while the other may get look weird looks but nothing more.

my point is that most of those characters are not in tights. They are either padded/armored suits like batman/flash(kind hard to tell what his is) or has some other effect/reason.

anyways I think you get what I am saying.

interesting point my friend. Look at Batman forever or any batman movie during the 90's...a batsuit with titties. and Batgirls suit (skin tight with a bulging ass. I hate to use that language but it is what it is.
No, tighty whities are not wet leather but the representation is there.
I couldnt fathom walking into Wal-Mart with wet leather claiming im Captain planet and getting free organic veggies with my cereal...just sayin...

Originally posted by jedi90
he never said comics in general. you're twisting his words. he was talking only about superhero movies and the property they are based on. deadpool, punisher, and blade have had dark books and lighter stories just like batman......all of them in tights too.

what part of 12-25 yrs old aren't you people reading? you do realize that risk taking is apart of adolescence? which is what cronenberg is referring to. don't confuse your personal taste with what the comic marketing team is aiming for.

"A superhero movie, by definition, you know, it's comic book. It's for KIDS. It's ADOLESCENT in its core. That has always been its appeal, and I think people who are saying, you know, 'Dark Knight Rises' is, you know, supreme cinema art, I don't think they know what the f**k they're talking about."

especially when I specifically said.....

"Those are also not for kids. Specifically speaking his direct quote is flawed as he speaks of comics in general. Comics with Heroes to be exact"

anyways like I said previously said 21+ would be a full adult. I think the grittier stories are better suited 15 and up.

though I do have a couple questions.....

1. Since when does blade and punisher wear tights?

2. In the entire dark knight trilogy when did batman go out in tights?

Yes deadpool does wear tights but his stories are are graphic which is why I added him.

Heck Spider-Man Back in Black was pretty dark toned. May gets shot and peter goes out for revenge.

I see where you are coming from though......and no your right comics are not ranged for people in their 40s and up but they don't need to aim for them as if they read them at that age then they were quite obviously reading them since they were younger.

Originally posted by jedi90
lol, fail with that one.

the only one in that picture not wearing tights is cyborg, maybe superman. still can't figure out what its suppose to be. here let me showcase your earlier references

deadpool: tights

Punisher: tights

Blade:tights

lulz at that.

There is a difference in looking like tights and wearing them. Now who is twisting whos words? anyways blade is not wearing tights in that picture...deadpool I agreed was and punisher sure I guess. As he typically wears some form of actual clothes now.

Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
interesting point my friend. Look at Batman forever or any batman movie during the 90's...a batsuit with titties. and Batgirls suit (skin tight with a bulging ass. I hate to use that language but it is what it is.
No, tighty whities are not wet leather but the representation is there.
I couldnt fathom walking into Wal-Mart with wet leather claiming im Captain planet and getting free organic veggies with my cereal...just sayin...

yeah and that nipple skin tight suit also weighed about 100 LBs.....Bales suit was kevlar and armored. That is most certainly not tights. Sure you can use a campy heroe to make a point but you also could have used....lets say red hood. Wearing an armored upper body, leather jacket, combat boots, combat pants, and of course his helmet. Which is entirely different then wearing a campy costume.

though if you did do that it would be awesome!

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
How am I twisting this around?.....

"A superhero movie, by definition, you know, it's comic book. It's for KIDS. It's ADOLESCENT in its core. That has always been its appeal, and I think people who are saying, you know, 'Dark Knight Rises' is, you know, supreme cinema art, I don't think they know what the f**k they're talking about."

especially when I specifically said.....

"Those are also not for kids. Specifically speaking his direct quote is flawed as he speaks of comics in general. Comics with Heroes to be exact"

anyways like I said previously said 21+ would be a full adult. I think the grittier stories are better suited 15 and up.

though I do have a couple questions.....

1. Since when does blade and punisher wear tights?

2. In the entire dark knight trilogy when did batman go out in tights?

Yes deadpool does wear tights but his stories are are graphic which is why I added him.

Heck Spider-Man Back in Black was pretty dark toned. May gets shot and peter goes out for revenge.

I see where you are coming from though......and no your right comics are not ranged for people in their 40s and up but they don't need to aim for them as if they read them at that age then they were quite obviously reading them since they were younger.

you claimed that cronenberg generalized all comics, which he didn't.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
Specifically speaking his direct quote is flawed as he speaks of comics in general

you're correct, people in their 40s do read comics. a habit that started when they were ...............................kids.

take into consideration:

http://www.retrocrush.com/archive2004/underoos/14superman.jpg

Originally posted by jedi90
Really? what issues are you citing? cause the grant morrison issues i've seen are all rated PG.

Rated P/G =/= aimed at children.

also consider Superman doesnt need Kevlar

Originally posted by jedi90
you claimed that cronenberg generalized all comics, which he didn't.

you're correct, people in their 40s do read comics. a habit that started when they were ...............................kids.

so you are admittedly twisting my words then? As you are taking quotes out of context especially when the very next line says "comics with super heroes to be exact"......

yes because if they are 40 now then they had the comic code back when they started reading which means all comics were pg.....

Originally posted by -Pr-
Rated P/G =/= aimed at children.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Rated P/G =/= aimed at children.

child= 18 and under. glad we agree.

Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
Aquaman fan, stay outta this boy.
Grown folks are talking.

lol.

No.

Originally posted by jedi90
child= 18 and under. glad we agree.

Don't see how that's relevant, even if I disagree.

Originally posted by jedi90
child= 18 and under. glad we agree.

But under 18 you can still be tried as an adult...just sayin...

Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
take into consideration:

http://www.retrocrush.com/archive2004/underoos/14superman.jpg

no but now his suit is some weird new technology kind of suit. It has some ability or something. Never read the issue "the power of the suit" but either way it's not spandex. neither is the flashes or batmans. wonder womans is underwear but shes a women so it doesn't matter lulz. Anyways They are trying to break from just having a suit to have one and upping it to having it have some sort of function or reason. I think they realized spandex is getting to campy and are trying to replace/modernize it.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
so you are admittedly twisting my words then? As you are taking quotes out of context especially when the very next line says "comics with super heroes to be exact"......

yes because if they are 40 now then they had the comic code back when they started reading which means all comics were pg.....

wrong again. i quoted you, not what cronenberg said. go re read what you wrote

you are also wrong about the comics code. they appeared on comics as late as 2010. and they didn't stop the likes of watchmen, the dark knight returns, the long halloween, ect. you know, all the famously dark stories from the 80s/90s everyone raves about.

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
no but now his suit is some weird new technology kind of suit. It has some ability or something. Never read the issue "the power of the suit" but either way it's not spandex. neither is the flashes or batmans. wonder womans is underwear but shes a women so it doesn't matter lulz. Anyways They are trying to break from just having a suit to have one and upping it to having it have some sort of function or reason. I think they realized spandex is getting to campy and are trying to replace/modernize it.

(inhale...exhale...)

I never said they wore spandex...i said tights.

Spandex is more or less material that EXPANDS just like under armour expands and breaths but anyways... Superman for example
can wear underwear and have no need for padded armor but he still wears underwear with tights because that what superheroes wear. its the uniform of heroes man. of course in real life that isnt an issue but this is comics. real heroes wear fire fighting gear, hart hats and body armor ect. point is that out od fun and entertainment, superheroes wear underwear because it's ENTERTAINMENT.

Originally posted by jedi90
wrong again. i quoted you, not what cronenberg said. go re read what you wrote

you are also wrong about the comics code. they appeared on comics as late as 2010. and they didn't stop the likes of watchmen, the dark knight returns, the long halloween, ect. you know, all the famously dark stories from the 80s/90s everyone raves about.

🙄

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
Ooh yes I forgot about the porno comics. Those are also not for kids. Specifically speaking his direct quote is flawed as he speaks of comics in general. Comics with Heroes to be exact

Anyways publishers would not publish a comic if it didn't fallow a strict guideline. After marvel Published a few books with out the comic code it eventually started to become a thing. The first time they did this was iirc when they introduced a story of "problem with guns" in spider-man. Since it showed someone getting shot the publisher refused to publish it so Marvel published it without the ok of the comic code. They did it again in the story where Harry Osbourn became addicted to drugs.