whatever batman

Spelling contest
  • <p> <b>Guide:</b> Okay! Are you ready for your word, Jason?<p/><b>Jason:</b> JASON!<p/><b>Jason:</b> J-e-e-z-o-n. Jason.<p/><b>Guide:</b> <p/><b>Guide:</b> That... isn't your word. That's your name. And you misspelled it.<p/><b>Bruce:</b> [in the audience] o my god<p/></p>

tori-ayne  asked:

Did you see Wonder Woman? The fighting that the Amazons did was extremely choreographic and really beautiful to watch for a plebeian like me, but did it seem grounded in reality?

There’s nothing about Wonder Woman that’s grounded in reality. This is an intentional design decision and, to be fair, the likes of Atomic Blonde and Haywire aren’t either. In Haywire’s case, it’s because what makes for a good MMA fight is about as far from SpecOps as you can get.

The combat seen in Wonder Woman is stylistically designed to be superhuman because Diana and the Amazons are superhuman. They’re immortal, godlike beings who live on a paradise island hidden from the rest of the world. Their combat style and choreography emphasizes that aspect of their characters. It’s part of the visual storytelling ongoing to show us who and what they are.

Wonder Woman is the sort of archetypal character meant to inspire, who we look up at in wonder, who inspires us to be better, and to believe in ourselves.

The combat isn’t grounding in reality and it doesn’t need to be. In reality, we can’t reflect bullets with gauntlets and walking across No Man’s Land with just a shield would just lead to Diana’s legs being shot out from under her by a gatling gun. Realism isn’t the point of the movie though. Besides that, Wonder Woman is no more realistic than Captain America fighting Nazis with a shield or Batman doing whatever Batman does in the Dark Knight. Or Athena kicking Ares keister in the Illiad.

Wonder Woman walking into the No Man’s Land is thematic not realistic, and that’s the same for the movie’s fight choreography. Hear it: Wonder Woman walks into No Man’s Land. You don’t even need the visual to feel a sense of awe. This woman walking where soldiers are scared to go.

This is archetypal, mythic storytelling with mythic heroes.

The problem is that “grounded in reality” has become the new version of “believable” or “suspension of disbelief” or “relateable” except with much more restrictive rules. Usually because this justification is really “I don’t like it, therefore”. Used more often to shut down conversation than start it, because “realism” sounds more legitimate than personal preference or inherent bias. If you’re ever in a discussion with someone and they can’t elaborate on why it isn’t “realistic” with a genre that was never about realism anyway, then you can usually say this is why.

Realism as an argument gets brought up a lot with superheroes, and the idea that anything in the superhero genre (and this includes superspies) is real is laughable. It’s called “superhero fiction” for a reason, and DC’s heroes from the Gold and Silver Age are all archetypal, mythic heroes who are better than humanity and through which we find the best of ourselves.

What’s real are the emotions and beliefs Wonder Woman inspires in you, the sense of awe, the wonder, and the hope. To hope for and fight for a better future than the one we see before us. To inspire our dreams so we find the courage to chase them. To look up at the stars instead of down at our feet. To believe we’ll find victory so long as we keep getting up again. To remind us we can change the world.

Sometimes, we just need freedom reality’s constraints to find the best in ourselves. Inspire us to see who we could be, beyond what we’ve previously believed to be possible.

You know how many glorious scientific inventions we have because of science fiction? Like hoverboards from Back to the Future. Or flip phones from Star Trek. They weren’t grounded in reality either when they were imagined. There was only the possibility they might, maybe exist… someday.

When discussing anything creative try and remember this: no is not a shut down nor does it remove the idea’s value. Rather, any explanation on the subject is meant to help us gain a better understanding of the subject. The more we know then the more choices become available, and we’re able to pick the one best for us. 

The choreographers, directors, and producers who put together the Amazon’s combat style are people who have a firm grasp of how combat is supposed to work both onscreen and off it. They chose this route because what we see on screen is representative of the themes they had in mind and the story they were trying to tell. It was intentional, not accidental. They knew what they wanted.

The point is don’t be discouraged from chasing after a feeling or a dream just because fiction is what inspired you. The difference between fantasy and reality is the will we have to take ourselves there.

-Michi

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.

10

Top 10 Best Female Villains in Cinema

  • 1) Catherine Tramell (Basic Instinct)
  • 2) Alex Forrest (Fatal Attraction)
  • 3) Annie Wilkes (Misery)
  • 4) Eve Harrington (All About Eve)
  • 5) Phyllis Dietrichson (Double Indemnity)
  • 6) Evil Queen (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs)
  • 7) Catwoman (Batman Returns)
  • 8) Baby Jane Hudson (Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?)
  • 9) Joan Crawford (Mommie Dearest)
  • 10) Mrs. Danvers (Rebecca)

One of my fave things to think about is Jonathan just being himself and straight up being savage without provocation because that’s his default and Jervis just looking scandalized at how rude he’s being and gasping his name in reprimand.

Ed: hey guys what’s kickin–
Jonathan: not the roadkill you obviously skinned for that idiotic scarf.
Jervis: *gasp* JONATHAN!

I feel like people take issue with BTAS joker being a mob boss because its one of the liberties bruce timm took when creating his version of the character, but TBH? unless you make joker on his own intimidating enough, i feel like mob boss j is the only way to go… ‘cause unless you’re going for more of a jack the ripper vibe (more violence than flair), then he’s just gonna end up being some random off his bonkers guy that would probably get shot by police pretty quick.

Aside from that tho, joker always has giant plans worked out, and tons of people working for him to execute the plans, being a mob boss for him isn’t necessarily about money, its about getting enough connections and having enough dirt on everyone that eventually he has half of gothams underground wrapped around his little finger. so the next time he has some brilliant plan to cut power to the city or hijack a parade or whatever, he always has enough people on hand to cause chaos and make it happen.

Like i get the irony of someone considered an agent of chaos running organized crime but also? depending on how much of a threat his character is to the city, the joker is technically a mob boss by default.

Also i just wanna point out that, joker’s whole aesthetic is centered around ridiculous suits and though i know j’s appearance is supposed to resemble that of a performer, a choice i actually prefer, the golden years of gang activity from 1920 to 1940 had some LOOKS, my favorite being the colorful and stylish zoot suit:

Which without a doubt was inspiration for bruce timms design (especially when accompanied with the hat he wears occasionally):