Amph Superhero Overload?

Generally speaking the only high quality and intelligent genre cinema these days are the movies with the biggest opening weekends.

Like the Hunger Games:

 

Generally speaking, the only high quality and intelligent genre cinema these days were all filmed before these days and starred James Belushi.

Like K-9 or Red Heat.

 

Generally speaking, it turns out that taste is arbitrarily decided by Filmblor, the tyrannical god of cinema, and it has decreed that the only good movies in history are 45 minute documentaries consisting of a single shot, focused on a can of Spaghetti'os. Filmblor is a cruel deity indeed.

 

Will Filmblor ever let us see the lost footage from The Magnificent Ambersons?

 

No, he also reads the audience surveys.

 

Because the reptilian part of his brain took over his human side and wanted to turn humans into reptiles just like him. It's as simple as it can get.

Warner Brothers did try to strike. They started work on "Batman" in 1979, but couldn't find a director and a screenwriter that gave them want they wanted until 1987. Swamp Thing went to Universal and had two films, a television series and a cartoon series. "Wonder Woman" was on television at the time. There was the two "Legends Of Super-Heroes" television specials. Warner Brothers wasn't confident that the films could reach "Star Wars" numbers, nor were they as desperate as Marvel has been since 1996, thanks to Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

 

Superman II was awful. No I haven't seen the Donner cut.

 

There was the two "Legends Of Super-Heroes" television specials.

As an aside, have you been able to experience the 2 specials? On one hand, it's the best thing ever, because you had so many heroes and villains packed in one show, a lot of which have never been seen since.... Batman/Robin, Captain Marvel, Flash, and Green Lantern together. Hawkman...Huntress...Doctor Sivana, Solomon Grundy... plus others.... Almost 20 live action DC heroes and villains..

On the other hand, the plots and 70's "variety show/roast" atmosphere made the SW Holiday Special seem like Lawrence of Arabia in comparison. I picked up mine on WB DVD on demand, but I think the specials are also on some streaming....

 

The Salkinds were both the best and worst part of the Superman films. They were willing to make the films at all, whereas Warner Brothers had not intention of doing so. And they did ultimately choose Donner to direct, as well as made an effort to appeal to a large audience by getting Brando and Hackman on board early on. The rest, well, we know the rest. Batman it was a problem in that directors like Ivan Riteman didn't want to focus on Batman, but rather the Joker. Which is why he didn't do it as he felt that was a wrong focus. Superman's revival was starting in 1994, but the closest they got to was in 97, before "Batman & Robin" came out and before the studio found out how poorly it would do. There was also an attempt at a Wonder Woman series in 98. Plus, even though Superman's film franchise was screwed up, he had two successful television series from 88-97. And had the Iraq War not happen in 1990-91, "The Flash" would have lasted longer than one season.

I've not seen them, but I've seen photos.

 

1. What reptilian part of his brain?

2. More importantly, why would it want that?

You're just saying words. They don't constitute anything approaching an actual explanation, because they don't really make sense in the context of the universe that was laid out. Yes, I suppose one could hypothesize that changing one's physical body will create a separate consciousness in the mind (why?) and that if this happened then that consciousness would want to replicate itself (again, why?), and that if it chose to do so, it would do it by accessing the knowledge base of the other consciousness in the same body to create a mutation beam (for a third time, why?). But really, all you've done is stack a bunch of arbitrary assumptions on top of one another, none of which have anything to do with either lizards naturally nor yet the genetic technology that the movie established.

 

Viewers might have had a chance to actually watch the '91 'The Flash, instead of the wall to wall 24 hour coverage of the first Iraq War like the networks chose to do then (especially in the first couple of weeks of it)

 

When Connors developed the formula that turned him into the Lizard, a side effect is that it affected a portion of his brain that made him act and behave in a reptilian like manner. Essentially developing a second personality that saw humans as inferior to reptiles and thus the Lizard wants to turn humans into lizards. Once done, the Lizard can control all others like him through telepathic commands. The movie demonstrates this.

Curt Connors: "I spent my life as a scientist trying to create a world without weakness, without outcasts. I sought to create a stronger human being, but there's no such thing. Human beings are weak, pathetic, feeble-minded creatures. Why be a human at all when we can be so much more? Faster, stronger, smarter. This is my gift to you."

Right. When the show debuted, it went up against both "The Cosby Show" and "The Simpsons", but managed to hold its own. Then it was moved to a different night, but by that point the news coverage of the war began and combined with Christmas specials, began to drop in the ratings. CBS kept moving it around the schedule, but it was too late and the show was cancelled.

 

1. When did anyone specify that this was a side effect, and why would it be?
2. Why would the second personality automatically see humans as inferior?
3. How is any of this "behaving in a reptile-like manner?" Reptiles don't naturally do any of the things you are discussing here. This, I guess, is the biggest point of all. It would be one thing if you said the guy turned into a wolf man and then wanted a pack. Or if he turned into a giant duck and then wanted to travel south when it got cold. But what exactly is the connection between being a reptile and literally anything that the Lizard proceeded to do? There isn't one. At all.
4. How can he control the others telepathically? When did they show this, and why would this be the case?
4b. Even assuming he could, why would he want magical telepathic control over every other lizard-man? What would be the point of that? Even by your new, poorly strung together logic, he has never wanted to rule the world. So why does he care if he can control other people or not?

It seems to me that you've just made up a bunch of personal explanations for what the movie didn't bother to. Good for you. It's still terrible from a story-telling perspective.

And this clunky, awful quote demonstrates what a poor grasp of their own story the writers had. As Connors says, he started out wanting to help people with disabilities. He was never trying to create a "stronger" human being. He just wanted to give people back normal capacity that they had lost. He ends the statement with social darwinism, implying that species that are "weak" don't deserve to exist. He says this even though it's completely the opposite sentiment of someone who dedicates their life's work to helping disabled people. Then he gives no explanation for the 180 in his personal views.

Again, I'm not saying that it's impossible to change your mind so drastically. I'm saying that the movie didn't even bother to attempt one. That quite rightfully comes off as stupid and lazy.

 

It was specified after Connors changed his motivations and reasonings when he first turns into the Lizard and later when he explains himself. Before he tested himself, Connors goal was only to restore lost and damaged limbs. After doing so, he wants to turn humans into lizards and control them.

Because they're warm blooded individuals who have all kinds of distinct emotions and personalities that it sees as flaws. As a lizard, being cold blood and more simple in thought and deed is preferable.

Lizards don't have higher brain functions that humans have. The ability to think things out rationally, or emotionally doesn't exist in an animal. So when Connors injected himself, he became a lizard in many ways save one. He has the higher brain functions that humans have. But unlike humans, the Lizard focuses on the simplest definitions of what it means to be a reptile versus a human.

Curt Connors doesn't want to rule the world. The Lizard does. They're two different personalities that share the same mind. The Lizard represents the dark thoughts and feelings of Curt Connors, given voice and shape through a persona that sees things in a very rigid view. The Lizard can control the thoughts of other lizards because he is the alpha one.

You do understand what split personalities are? The Lizard formula changes Connors personality, bringing out his darker side. This is how it's been since Stan Lee and Steve Ditko introduced the character back in 1963. Connors doesn't know that this will happen. He is the first human to test it. That's why he didn't want to rush testing, but Ratha did. There needed to be clinical trials done to determine side effects. Ratha didn't want to wait and Connors decided to test it on himself first and then afterwards wanted to stop Ratha, but the Lizrad began to take over and wanted to kill him, so that he could control the formula and how it would be used.

 

Reptiles have emotions. Your entire premise is wrong.

Why does the Lizard want to rule the world? How does that connect to any of the other things you've described here, even the incorrect ones? Speaking of incorrect ideas, there aren't really "alpha" lizards, because in the most part they aren't communal animals. So once again, your whole premise is wrong, never mind how that has nothing to do with telepathy.

More than that, though, why would they represent Connor's dark thoughts? How come it wouldn't represent his positive ones, too?

Yes, because everything in the movie is exactly the same as the original comic book. Oh, wait.

 

According to Tears for Fears, everybody does.

 

Not complex like humans.

Because Connors is a human-reptile hybrid. And as such, he has the traits of both. The telepathy is a by-product of the genetic alteration.

Because the serum affected the part of his brain that suppressed the positive feelings and left the negative feelings. Again, a by-product of a serum that hadn't been tested in humans yet.

Pretty similar

1. Connors wanted to regrow his lost arm and help others with the same disability.

2. Connors focuses on how reptiles can regenerate limbs that have been severed.

3. Connors invents a formula that will regenerate his arm, which it does. But it then turns him into a lizard that wants to turn other humans into a lizard and rule the world.

 

Also it's not like the plot holes in Amazing Spiderman are any worse than EVERY other movie. If your obtuse enough you can make Citizen Kane unwatchable because of 'plot holes'

 

No, that's exactly what it's like. Even direct comparison to the previous Spiderman series shows it's inferior. Osborne became more violent and grandiose when he was exposed to the formula that made him the Green Goblin. Earlier in the film, they'd mentioned their major problem with the prototype formula was that it made subjects hyper-aggressive and domineering. They gave an in-universe explanation to what happened. Likewise, before Otto Octavius's tentacles started influencing his thoughts, we were told that he had to build an inhibitor chip to stop that exact thing from happening. An inhibitor chip which the movie showed being destroyed during his accident.

In both cases, it made sense for the villains to act as they did. The movie gave us details that justified their subsequent behavior. By contrast, you just made up a bunch of crap about lizards that isn't even true, and which the movie never endorsed, and tried to string it together to support all the nonsense that happened in the reboot.

 

Sinister, when are you gonna learn NOT to feed this particular troll?

 

do you know what trolling is? because i don't think it's thinking the plot of a movie is stupid and backing that up with articulate reasons. we're in the "superhero overload" thread after all. i mean i'm happy for anyone who somehow isn't burned out on superhero movies, but you could just let the rest of us have this thread. you don't have to be insecure about your love of superhero movies and rush to their defense any time someone dares to besmirch one of their inane storylines. these movies are wildly successful. congratulations, you're in the majority!