FYP

Jesus. Is that what you think that post was? :shake: You talked about how many times you rewatched certain tangentially related movies and never rewatched Watchmen; I found it funny that I, compared to you, had rewatched Watchmen many times. All that post does is point out a humorous difference between our likes and dislikes.

Actually, that is even closer to how I feel about the last two films.

He tried to be different, but ended up with a downbeat depressing Supes. Nobody wants to see that. Plus, he didnt have enough action IMO.

Cassel > Watchmen

Personally, the only misstep Singer had in his rendition was the Superman-has-a-kid story arc. Lameola.

I don't need to see the planning. I didn't expect the movie to be the A-Team :)

I don't think it was wonderful or visionary. It was just a great take on the Batman universe. Made for a damn good superhero flick.

Well, I'll phrase it differently than frazod.

My problem has been that the whole movie tells you that the Joker is, in fact, anarchy. He is the king of it. He just "does". Just goes with the flow.

Yet, if you look at the anarchy he creates, it's all expertly planned and executed. If it's planned, it isn't anarchy.

Right.

Tell me what the tone of this post is.

Honestly, that's how I saw it. :shrug:

I left it intentionally vague because I'm bored to death at work. LMAO

Curses. Foiled again.

I look at it as planned in order to create anarchy. But even still, there is anarchy within the plan.

Plus . . . it's a movie. I'm not sitting there breaking down Dr. Manhattan because it's not a feasible scenario.

Sure, but Nolan isn't. Which is why it's the perfect pairing for Superman.