def

You don't need to worry about the two revealing secrets. The comic and the show are going different trajectories. People who died in the comic lived in the show, and the show goes different places (ie. the CDC in the season one finale never appeared in the comic). I read the first omnibus a while back, and it was a fun read. I'm up to about issue 90 now

Join the list here: http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=63575 See if you're actually getting ripped off

Post updated

It's unfortunate. I'm waiting for Gotham's scum's revenge I guess Pie and Flitwick and Brickdoctor will have to dish it out (assuming we make the cut, that is) And @Zepher, yeah, try hosting again It's a lot smoother the second time.

It's important to keep in mind that the 'fuss' and 'controversy' is pretty much just a small number of people on the Internet (ie. the Facebook campaign) who haven't used LEGO in years and weren't going to start any time soon. On this site, I haven't seen people spouting hate about them, except some at the mini-figs. I still don't get why so many people here feel the need to defend the sets from these people who will never read EB anyway.

Thanks for the great review This set looks great; I'll be off to check the price here after this post Of the sets I'd seen, this one looked really dull at a glance. The outside building lacks some detail. I was a bit disappointed with the City Corner set when I got it, and it's kept me away from Town sets overall. They're just too 'naked' for me. But with this set, you intrigued me with the unfurnished room, and then I was sold by the kitchen. The designers put a lot of effort into this set.

I really take it as more of a compliment than being left alive till the last day because scum consider you no threat at all

I really was planning to take a break for the new year, just because of how time consuming the last game became, but I'm tempted by how many of my Witchbreed students are signing up and at the chance to face off against Hinck again, since we've only played one short game together in Werewolf, where I was foolishly taken out day two. Of course, the lovely Egyptian setting is enticing too 1. I got killed by the hosts here on day one of prison riot. 2. I'm online daily. 3. Worst moment: coming home after work to see my two year old daughter had 'played with' my Witchbreed MOC and strewn the minifigs around the apartment, mixing and matching some of their parts. And I had a few hours to get a game day up. It's getting harder to host in def manor as the creature grows more powerful.

Ah, so success is only a matter of money (and not referring to the quality of a film), even though I have explicitly said that when I used the term, I was referring to the quality of it. Got it. Not only can I not understand words in your posts, apparently I can't use them in my own, even when I use the dictionary to get the definition of the word And the profitability is a factor in me enjoying a movie. I'll be sure to refer to a movie's "success" on Rotten Tomatoes before I decide if it's good from now on. Congratulations 5150 Lego, you are a winner!

To me, I have a more relevant opinion than the movie-going public, to the extent that when I see a top-grossing movie and think it's terrible, I don't blame myself for not getting it. I trust my own opinion. Whether you want to place any value in that opinion is your own choice, and I would suggest paying attention to what has been written, and weighing those words, seeing whether they are sensible or not. I don't think you've paid attention to what I've written, since you think I disliked the movie, and I never said anything of the sort. I thought it was so-so. Keeping in mind that I have already said the movie is alright... Has anybody here said the movie is uniformly terrible? That there is not a single thing good about it? Find that quote, and then you can reply to their quote and explain to them that if millions of people like something, there must be something good about it. Pretty much I don't get why Bat-fans are so sensitive about the movie. In general, people aren't trashing it as bad. But any comment that isn't talking about how orgasmically awesome it was seems to draw them out of the woodwork. I was of mixed emotions about the new flick. Not dying to see it or anything, but I was going to be happy to check it out on DVD at least. But the tone of Nolan/Batman supporters in this thread is making me find it insufferable. If the fans get as rabid over this film, I may just take the Titanic route on it, wait ten years to see it when it's on TV. Thanks Internet.

This topic has been fairly exhausted in this thread: http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=63559

You're really not making any point. Basically, you're saying that Nolan's version is good because people liked it. And the fact that I didn't love it is irrelevant to the matter because others did. So, people who liked it have relevant opinions, people who don't have irrelevant opinions. After all, I can't dismiss the fact that others approved By that measure, let's hypothesize, some comic hating director gets selected to make a Batman movie, and he decides to camp the hell out of the movie. He has the bat-nipples, he goes further and gives Batman a pink cape, and makes Batman speak like John Wayne. Somehow, this captures the zeitgeist, and makes more money than even your golden Dark Knight did. Under your logic, I must respect it because it was popular. Even if by all logic it sucks. After all, America likes it, and I can't dismiss that No, I really don't care, and everything you write about businesses, money-grossed, and popularity is irrelevant to the success of a movie. And just to close this little discussion, since you seem to be arguing in the way only people on the Internet can, here is the prime dictionary definition of success: Nothing is written about money. Nothing. When I wrote about he "success" of a movie, I was not talking about business success. Accept it and move on. Maybe when you watch a movie, you care about what the people funding the movie were aiming for, but most of the planet doesn't. I certainly don't. When I sit down in a movie theater, and the lights go out, I never ever consider whether the movie is a business success. So, you can drop the semiotic argument on what success business investors want. Honestly, I don't think anybody was disagreeing with your hypothesis that business people want to make money. Quality is not a matter of consensus. If we listened to the crowd, Justin Bieber would be crowned the greatest musician of all time.

What?! Why is this site full of high school kids Go out and buy a copy of Portishead's Dummy. When you start hanging out with girls, and you have one of them actually in your room, you'll be happy to have it to show off how worldly you are (I tease, I tease, I know you're in college )

Your memory of things is certainly off of mine. The Dark Knight Returns and Year One were out before the Burton films, and A Death in the Family had already shook up the comics. The first Burton movie certainly gave him a boost; that's when the Arkham Asylum graphic novel came out, and the Legends of the Dark Knight series started, but he was already the #1 DC character. I think he'd already punched out Guy Gardner at that point I wasn't around at the time, but I always think the Denny O'Neil stories were what saved the character from becoming a joke. About what dr jones was saying about the 60's show... when comic books were utterly defanged in the 1950's by the comics code (see this Google page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredric_Wertham), they were literally made for kids, though lots of adults read them up to that point. That was when Batman really started going camp. The show was a step up, it was as much a comedy as it was a superhero show. About the accepted interpretations of Batman, I don't find that much discrepancy. Particularly from the 70's onwards, there seems to be a pretty clear vision, that includes his 70's detective work (O'Neil and Adams), his gritty 80's stuff (Miller), and into the next century (Hush, The Long Halloween). Bringing up All-Star Batman is a real weak argument, since it was near universally hated, and the story was never even finished. Frank Miller was quite amazing in the late '80's, but he's, quite honestly, lost his mind. And most of his fans have given up on him. Between the horrifically crap Dark Knight sequel, the horrible All-Star Batman, and the written-for-Batman racist rant that is Holy Terror, well, it's simply best to leave him out of the conversation. I don't know who it was that hurt Miller so badly, but he certainly was hurt bad. In all this discussion about representing Batman well in films, I think we do need to bring up Paul Dini again and again. He has correctly interpreted Batman in animation (and short films), and I think he was a writer in the Arkham games. He really seems to realize what people of all ages find cool about Batman. I'll hold off in passing any judgment about the next Nolan film. I really liked Batman Begins, far more than I expected to, but was let down by the Dark Knight. I find his 'realism' policy silly, in that villains like Poison Ivy and Killer Croc are off-limits. Ironically, I think Nolan might have done those characters quite well.

I really couldn't care less what investors think. I can't fathom why you'd make that such a key point. As Siegried mentioned, Brazil was certainly a successful film, regardless of the money. Th Big Lebowski, Scott Pilgrim... All made less than Schumaker's Batman & Robin. But, as you point out, good movies are about popular consensus, not quality I think they're all successful movies, just not financially. I think you have a very business oriented concept of success, one that I don't share It's awesome that you love the film, and I'm not trying to take that away from you. But, the notion that a lot of 14-year old boys went to see a super hero movie four times over the summer does not make it great. The American public bought Vanilla Ice, Avatar and Two And a Half Men. There's absolutely no way that I'm going to take popularity as a measure of quality. I'm a free thinker Again, like it as much as you like, but please don't ask me to care what investors think, it's not going to happen.

You justify the quality of The Dark Knight based on its income. Being profitable doesn't make it good. It is no sign of quality. It's a sign of profitability. Movies are a business for sure, but good movies are generally made in spite of the business, not in conjunction with it. Case in point: Here is Disney's chief technical officer speaking about his company's films this year. http://www.avclub.com/articles/disney-executive-says-that-story-doesnt-matter-whe,60512/ You had a really long explanation why Transformers 2 was good (it involved money), and I'm not buying it. I'll reiterate, I think TDK is a so so film. Didn't hate it, didn't love it. But the argument that a lot of people watched it has no meaning. The public often has atrocious taste. My notion of a successful film, Batman or otherwise, is one that is good, not one that turns a profit. Now it seems that he is wearing armor in the comic More realistic it seems. I can understand DC making changes for the sake of new readers wanting to see something related to the movies. It looks kind of dopey though. Actually, the whole Justice League looks like clown shoes now. But it'll relate better to the next Batman and Superman movies. I think he did in the Ultimate universe, but it was again, an attempt to bring the comics more in line with the movies. X-Men were decked out in black leather for a few years too. Movie watchers count for more than the base of comic readers. Somewhat understandably, since they are businesses first and foremost.

Money and profit is never a sign of success. It is a sign of money and profit. I can point you in the direction of Pirates of the Caribbean 4, Transformers 2, or Alvin and the Chipmunks as all wildly profitable movies in recent years. If you want to explain how they "worked well", go ahead

I really think a person's age informs their idea of good Batman stories. The Bane/Kinghtfall thing was really unpleasant, in my opinion, and that got me to stop reading any Batman stories for over a decade. I picked up The Long Halloween a few years back, on account of its reputation, but I thought it was so-so, and I doubt I'll ever really get into them again. As I mentioned before, I love the Killing Joke, and I love the Miller Batman too. For me, the best Batman stories though were the 1970's ones, with Neal Adams doing the art. Short stories, no crossovers, and heavy on the detective work. I like that Batman is at heart a detective. I think that is a key aspect of the character which gets lost from time to time.

I bought some comics this month, and they are making me happy I got the first volume of the new Carl Barks Donald Duck comics. It was beautiful. I'm not crazy about the stories, but the pacing and the art is so remarkable. I'm really jealous. And I read right through that. I'm reading Craig Thomson's Blankets, a book I'd heard about before, and finally picked up. His first book was a cutesy animal book, and it kept me from picking this up when it was new. I really wish I had got it years ago. It's fantastic. An auto-biographical story of a guys first romance. Phenomenally drawn, using a full vocabulary of story telling techniques. I can't recommend it enough. I'll be picking up his new book, Habibi, soon after. And I bought some manga, some Naoki Urasawa work, Monster and Master Keaton. Plowing through it in Japanese will be my Christmas holiday homework. And of course, drawing some myself

You can count me as not a fan of The Dark Knight. The plot doesn't make a lot of sense, and it's so relentlessly gritty that it got tiresome. And I thought they handled Two-Face really poorly, and shouldn't have had him in the movie. I don't hate it at all. I watched it once in the theater, and once at home after. I just didn't love it, and the massive over-hype doesn't help much. Ledger and Bale do fine with the roles. But the Joker wasn't "the Joker" in my opinion. There was no whimsy, which is a key part of the character to me. I'll catch the new one on DVD. Still waiting for that animated Killing Joke movie... It's just a matter of time

What? Who wrote that?

Huh?

I'll be happy to watch this. I've realized mysteries aren't my bag. Looking forward to the high production values and compelling story on display

Double checking things, I had read the After Ellen 'article' which was actually just a little blog blurb. Let's check the Al Qaeda/McCarthy level of rhetoric they employed: Well, having reread that, you definitely had no point rhetorical Nazis, indeed.

Wow, why bother with the Internet? I think it's pretty much a last resort of discussion to say that it doesn't matter because LEGO will do what they're doing anyway. But thanks for your illuminating post. LEGO thinks you are a fart too.