Mortal Kombat (2021)

[AquaParade]

It's whatever man. I just can't with the whole "your opinion is simply an emotional response" thing.
When you try to invalidate or inform where other's opinions are coming from, it really is no different than plugging your ears and repeating "I'm right, you're wrong!".
You said I was wrong in my presumption, I showed you the evidence, you then said that all of those opinions are invalid because reasons. Classic.

Agree to disagree.

[Leo656]

Some people like black licorice.

Those people are Wrong.

And frankly, should be shot in the face because their bad opinions befoul the very air we breathe.

[AquaParade]

Yeah.

I totally proved you wrong though. And everyone saw.

nanner, nanner, nanner.

[Coola Yagami]

It wasn't so difficult to get it right.

Remove Cole. Make Liu Kang the focus character. You don't need Scorpion to have some reincarnated guy, Scorpion is Scorpion, we don't need Cole. AND PUT ****IN JOHNNY CAGE IN THERE

Make the tournament. Just do it. No tournament, no movie. You want what happens next, that's that what the sequel is for.

Save the plot of MK3 for the sequel since MK2's was pretty much a rehash. Just don't do what Anhillation did, don't try to cram MK2, 3 and 4's plot all in one movie.

Also don't make Mileena black unless you go want to go all the way with a black Kitana. THEY'RE TWINS, YOU MORONS.

[AquaParade]

Either way they treat the next Mortal Kombat, there is one tricky thing they will have to balance: death & consequence.

They have to find a way to make death meaningful in a world where some of the fan's favorite characters are reincarnated. Noob-Saibot being the obvious example.

Other films have to strike this balance too, but for Mortal Kombat, I think it is especially crucial.
Mortal Kombat is so focused on action, tension, death... Half of the potential fun of the movies should be in clinging to your chair, not knowing if your favorite character is going to make it out of the tournament alive.

I find that to be sort of crucial to a movie centering around a tournament. You need that feeling of escalation - seeing characters drop off the board and wondering who will rise to the top. There is a formula there, but it's a fun, dynamic formula.

I mean, guys, this is a reason you can't just take everything from the games, or strictly follow the storyline of the games. Think about it: In the games, nearly every character comes back in each sequel!
There is absolutely no tension in watching Goro and Johnny Cage fight, if you automatically know they will both survive and be in the next four movies.

I just enforce this because many people don't seem to understand the basic principle that it's sometimes best to veer away slightly from the source material, in order to best serve it in a new medium.

Originally Posted by Leo656

Oh, Jesus. You've never once "proved me wrong" about anything in the history of this place, you've only ever proved that you're an obstinate assclown who likes to get my goat. Dumbass.

I mean, look who I'm arguing with: A guy who loves a "Joker" movie that has nothing to so with the Joker, and a "Watchmen" TV show that has nothing to do with Watchmen. I shouldn't even be wasting my time with someone so consistently ignorant. But I confess, your constant and incessant need to get the last word on any topic provokes a response and I keep getting suckered into your nonsense even though I know better.

But no, you're not "right" and never were. You just do this super-annoying thing where you argue insistently in circles to try and reinforce provably bad opinions.
----------------

Sounds like an invalid, emotional response.

I'm actually gonna watch this movie today, finally, so I look forward to having some more thoughts to share on That and less to do with these ridiculous and insipid circle-jerk "debates".

*Pretends to be on topic*

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Yeah.

I totally proved you wrong though. And everyone saw.

nanner, nanner, nanner.

Oh, Jesus. You've never once "proved me wrong" about anything in the history of this place, you've only ever proved that you're an obstinate assclown who likes to get my goat. Dumbass.

I mean, look who I'm arguing with: A guy who loves a "Joker" movie that has nothing to so with the Joker, and a "Watchmen" TV show that has nothing to do with Watchmen. I shouldn't even be wasting my time with someone so consistently ignorant. But I confess, your constant and incessant need to get the last word on any topic provokes a response and I keep getting suckered into your nonsense even though I know better.

But no, you're not "right" and never were. You just do this super-annoying thing where you argue insistently in circles to try and reinforce provably bad opinions.
----------------

I'm actually gonna watch this movie today, finally, so I look forward to having some more thoughts to share on That and less to do with these ridiculous and insipid circle-jerk "debates".

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Yeah, I know better than most people about a lot of things. So? When you're Right all the f*cking time you don't have to be polite about it.

I think you are actually quietly acknowledging me on these forums in particular with this because you wish this was you.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Well, **** man. I didn't know it was this easy.

*Ahem*...

No, you're wrong.

Furthermore, your opinion is simply an "emotional response".

-- Okay, I could get used to this.

Again, I'm fine with the opinion of wanting a Nolan reinvention. But arguing that there is any reason for it outside of curiosity is.... you know... phony justification. It would be like Star Wars needing to take a first movie on a single planet with relatively normal stuff before they go out into space in the second movie. It's just not necessary. And if you want a lot to unpack, lmao unpack friggin' Star Wars - even if it was only Episode IV back in 1977.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Again, I'm fine with the opinion of wanting a Nolan reinvention. But arguing that there is any reason for it outside of curiosity is.... you know... phony justification.

How do you mean it is "phony justification"?

I don't understand the notion of "the only reason to make a movie like that is because you are curious." I mean, it depends on what perspective you are coming from.

There's really no reason to make any adaption other than curiosity then, right? I mean, Chrisopher Nolan should have just stuck to the Bob Kane version of Batman, but good thing he was curious I guess because we got The Dark Knight.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by IMJ

I think you are actually quietly acknowledging me on these forums in particular with this because you wish this was you.

You're actually a nice guy in general, though. Whereas some people insist on being obtuse because it amuses them. That isn't you.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Leo656

You're actually a nice guy in general, though. Whereas some people insist on being obtuse because it amuses them. That isn't you.

I mean, we were having an actual conversation until you looked at the link I provided and cited that every fan opinion on Youtube was an invalid, emotional response to seeing something fresh. That when they say they like what they see, they don't really know what they are talking about.

And yeah, when you bs like that, I'll play the game right back with you.

You're starting to flare up by bringing Watchmen and Joker into this like it actually matters. Poking to see what will get you a response.
I mean, it's just weird to try and single someone out who liked Joker and Watchmen. No one has to like them, but they are both award-winning projects, so to call someone out for liking them is just....tone-deaf. I get that you don't like those movies and maybe you think I am a weird, ignorant fool for liking them? I don't know. That's fine I guess.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Leo656

You're actually a nice guy in general, though. Whereas some people insist on being obtuse because it amuses them. That isn't you.

That was nice, man. And true.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

How do you mean it is "phony justification"?

I don't understand the notion of "the only reason to make a movie like that is because you are curious." I mean, it depends on what perspective you are coming from.

There's really no reason to make any adaption other than curiosity then, right? I mean, Chrisopher Nolan should have just stuck to the Bob Kane version of Batman, but good thing he was curious I guess because we got The Dark Knight.

Well... a better reason to make a film isn't curiosity as much as because a solid story fits the framework of an intellectual property.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Well... a better reason to make a film isn't curiosity as much as because a solid story fits the framework of an intellectual property.

What? You could say that the Rebirth framework fits Mortal Kombat just as well as the Dark Knight framework fits Batman.

Both are just adaptions with a few creative choices and pivots applied, conceptually speaking. It's just that one maybe appeals to you personally and the other doesn't.

It feels like you've sort of come out of nowhere with a special rule for MK, in which no creative liberty is prudent, but would only serve to "satisfy curiosity". I mean...what?

It's just not true. Sometimes you take creative liberties in order to better serve a story in a new medium. And sometimes you do it simply in the act of creating something.

Again, I ask, was Christopher Nolan just satisfying curiosity? What is the difference in theory?

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

It feels like you've sort of come out of nowhere with a special rule for MK, in which no creative liberty is prudent, but would only serve to "satisfy curiosity". I mean...what?

And I've got to be honest - it sounds like you're digging in deep to argue semantics as a method to not let go of your position - a position which appears to be "making a movie out of curiosity for it's framing is more sound than making a movie whereby the story tenets fit the intellectual property".

I'm just saying... it feels a lot like that, man.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Again, I ask, was Christopher Nolan just satisfying curiosity? What is the difference in theory?

Because he didn't do the movie curiously saying "I'll try this and I wonder if it will work out?"
He made the movie saying that his vision for Batman was that it was a property that could work being set in a real-time world.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by IMJ

And I've got to be honest - it sounds like you're digging in deep to argue semantics as a method to not let go of your position - a position which appears to be "making a movie out of curiosity for it's framing is more sound than making a movie whereby the story tenets fit the intellectual property".

I'm just saying... it feels a lot like that, man.



Because he didn't do the movie curiously saying "I'll try this and I wonder if it will work out?"
He made the movie saying that his vision for Batman was that it was a property that could work being set in a real-time world.

No, see you are implying that the only purpose to make a film like Rebirth (roughly speaking) would be to satisfy curiosity. That is your argument, not mine, remember?

My argument is that the framework would make for a really cool film that fans are eager to see. It is literally no different than Nolan - Batman line of thinking, speaking conceptually. Same exact notion of “I think this is a cool way to present the material.”

You’re implying the only reason to make an adaption in that way would be to “satisfy curiosity.” That’s the part that doesn’t hold water to me. You’re applying that to Mortal Kombat but not to any other creative adaption.

It’s not about digging heels in or semantics. You’ve just created special circumstances for Mk.

[Leo656]

Finally saw the movie. Pretty good! I assume everyone has seen it by now so I'm not gonna bother Spoiler tagging anything.

- Yeah, Cole sucks. Just, everything. I laughed so hard when Raiden kicked him out. I'm like "DAMN, son, look who got sent home early from Mortal Kombat school... for SUCKING!"

He also has the exact same f*cking super-powers as Guy Gardner when he was "Warrior" in the 90s. Terrible!

Seriously, swap Cole out for Cage and it's the EXACT Same Movie. Except that the ONE annoying part is no longer there to annoy anyone, and now your movie has one less degree of separation from the source material. You could even make Cage half-Asian, that wouldn't have been a problem. As it is, too much of the movie focuses on him considering he's a Made-Up Rando. Even during the Sub-Zero/Scorpion fight, they keep interrupting THAT - the thing we've waited to see for the whole movie and actually care about - to show F*cking Cole instead, and it's like I... Don't... CARE!

- Needed more Goro. Especially since he only got one scene and got killed by F*cking COLE. Before the Tournament even happens. The Tournament Champion gets killed by Some Rando before the Tournament even happens. That pissed me off more than anything in the movie (and frankly very few things did bother me, but that was the biggest thing by a mile). As is, Goro looked great, came off like a bad-ass, but in the end the most memorable thing he got to do was pop his arm back in, and then die. For such an integral character there should have been a lot more. A LOT more. I'm sure Shang Tsung will resurrect him for the sequel, but this could've been handled better.

- Could've used more Scorpion, too, even allowing for the storyline reasons why he was sidelined until the end. It made sense, it just feels a bit "off" to see so little of him considering he's pretty much the series mascot. He was really well-done, except for the fact that he would've probably gotten re-killed by Sub-Zero if it wasn't for - you guessed it - F*cking Cole. Otherwise, what we did get to see was very good.

- Movie needed about 15-20 more minutes so that more characters - especially the villains - had more room to breathe. Most of the villains really only showed up, scowled a lot, and then got killed. Kabal got to run his mouth a lot, at least, but even he got very little to do otherwise. I mean, I get it, ensemble casts are always tough, but the bad guys felt like fodder, especially with how easily they were dispatched overall. No wonder Shang Tsung tried to sabotage the Tournament!

- On the heroes side, would've liked to see more Liu Kang and Kung Lao. What we did get was good, but again, could've used more of Them and less... well, You Know.

- Kano was a riot. Pretty much stole the movie. Or at least he had the most personality out of everyone, and didn't play the part as if he were doing community theater like a few of the other actors did.

- Liked Sonya. Pretty hot, pretty bad-ass. No complaints here.

- Liu Kang can... only speak in... bursts... of dialog... that are three... or so... syllables. With a lot... of dramatic... pauses.

- Lots of good Fatalities. The general violence level was on-point.

- The "Arcana" thing was kind of "eh", but not really altogether bad as a way to explain why the "regular" people would end up getting super-powers. Just kind of silly how it was executed, it more or less came off like "I get really pissed off and now I get super-powers". Especially since Sonya just automatically gets hers as soon as she gets the mark, and everyone else had to struggle and "unlock" theirs. But again, as a general way to give an explanation to something like that, like "How can these normal people throw fireballs and junk", it was fine.

- Lots of great Sub-Zero action. That's my guy so I was very pleased to see how much attention he got, especially compared to everyone else considering most everyone else was just a sketch. He definitely should have checked to make sure Jax was dead, though. I'm like "C'mon, Bi-Han... don't be such a Noob!" HAH! "Noob!" Don't be such a... ha ha haaaaa... that's good sh*t.

- The overall tone, feel, and execution was good. Definitely "felt" like MK, while still being a bit more "grounded" than the games. I honestly feel like you go any more "real" than this, though, and you've tilted it too far the other way. But this was good.

- As far as being a prequel instead of focusing on the Tournament as is proper, this was a good way to do it. Hopefully the second movie will actually get more into the meat.

- Hopefully Cage will be involved early on in the sequel, and they won't spend 40 minutes of the plot on the others trying to find and recruit him. That would be terrible. Bring him in during the first five minutes, say all the "recruitment" happened offscreen between movies, and spend the bulk of MK2 on the actual MK Tournament. We got the prequel stuff out of the way, and it was done well, but let's not c*cktease any more than is necessary.

- Shang Tsung 100% needed a Sinister Asian Goatee.

Overall, I liked it more than I thought I might even though the things I knew would annoy me, did. But the things that were good were better than I thought they'd be. Hopefully they'll get to do the second one, and it won't take another 20 years to get to it.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I mean, we were having an actual conversation until you looked at the link I provided and cited that every fan opinion on Youtube was an invalid, emotional response to seeing something fresh. That when they say they like what they see, they don't really know what they are talking about.

And yeah, when you bs like that, I'll play the game right back with you.

You're starting to flare up by bringing Watchmen and Joker into this like it actually matters. Poking to see what will get you a response.
I mean, it's just weird to try and single someone out who liked Joker and Watchmen. No one has to like them, but they are both award-winning projects, so to call someone out for liking them is just....tone-deaf. I get that you don't like those movies and maybe you think I am a weird, ignorant fool for liking them? I don't know. That's fine I guess.

- Again, Black Licorice. People can say "I like this!", mean it sincerely, and still be completely wrong on the subject. Where they over-step is in asking for anyone else to share in or be force-fed their Black Licorice. And I don't have to indulge them in their Wrong-ness. That's not my job, my job is simply to explain to them why they're Wrong.

- You misread me as usual. Here's the nicest way I can explain this, and I really am trying to just explain and not be a dick: I don't ever say things hoping that you'll reply to them. More often than not, when I see that you're the most recent poster in any thread, I roll my eyes because I know I'm about to read something that's going to give me heartburn. I don't invite that willingly, make no mistake about that. If you sincerely think I say things to provoke a response from you, you're simply wrong. Again, not being a dick, Just Explaining.

- Anyway, to clarify: It's not that I "don't like" those things. Point of fact, I actually bought "Joker" today when I was out shopping, since the Blu-ray was on sale for $12. SO HUH. Shows what you know!

No, I bring them up NOT to speak anything of their quality, or my opinion thereof. I bring them up because you have this consistent gimmick of being all, "I Really Like A Thing Best When It Has NOTHING To Do With The Thing It's Based On" and I'm entering those things into evidence of that in order to establish a pattern of behavior. They go right along with your "I'd like Mortal Kombat better if it was a lot more like 'The Raid' and a lot LESS like Actual Mortal Kombat" opinion.

Point being, your track record shows that the less resemblance to the source material A Thing has, the more you're in love with it. That's your prerogative, but maybe don't go around trying to tell people who want things played proper that THEY'RE the ones who are wrong, or they might just push back. You can say all day long "I'd like Mortal Kombat better if it had nothing to do with Mortal Kombat except the character names", and other people can agree with you, but it definitely doesn't make You or Them "right".

Originally Posted by AquaParade

My argument is that the framework would make for a really cool film that fans are eager to see.

FAKE fans. Fake fans don't need or deserve their tastes catered to. REAL Mortal Kombat fans want to see things that are... y'know... actually like Mortal Kombat. Not just a bunch of character names in a scenario that otherwise has NOTHING to do with Mortal Kombat.

Fake Fans don't get to insist their taste should take precedent over that of Real Fans. Not about Anything. That can be "Elitist" or whatever else anyone wants to say. Doesn't matter. If a person says, "I'd like this thing better if it were more 'In Name Only' and even less like the source material", they're a Fake Fan. Period.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

No, see you are implying that the only purpose to make a film like Rebirth (roughly speaking) would be to satisfy curiosity. That is your argument, not mine, remember?

Originally Posted by AquaParade

There's really no reason to make any adaption other than curiosity then, right? I mean, Chrisopher Nolan should have just stuck to the Bob Kane version of Batman, but good thing he was curious I guess because we got The Dark Knight.

I made the argument that the only reason to make a film like Rebirth would be to satisfy curiosity because there is no other reason - a real world MK does not fit the story narrative. I did not make the argument that making a film out of curiosity is a sound way to make films. And that was my point.

1) Making a movie out of curiosity as to whether it would work or not is not a good reason to make a Hollywood flick.
2) The only reason to make Mortal Kombat Rebirth would be out of some curiosity as to how the characters could adapt to a real-world only narrative, which is against the grain of the MK thesis.

Given 1 & 2, err go, Mortal Kombat Rebirth would only be made as a curiosity and not a solid premise based on the Property and therefore is not a good reason to make the movie.

I delivered my point almost like Socratic logic there. At this point, any more verbal judo or head math is on you, dude.

[Leo656]

I like you, let's go bowling.

....Do bowling alleys still exist?

[AquaParade]

[QUOTE=Leo656;1890459]

Finally saw the movie. Pretty good! I assume everyone has seen it by now so I'm not gonna bother Spoiler tagging anything.

- Yeah, Cole sucks. Just, everything. I laughed so hard when Raiden kicked him out. I'm like "DAMN, son, look who got sent home early from Mortal Kombat school... for SUCKING!"

True. I appreciated them sending him home. Keep it real.

[B]Seriously, swap Cole out for Cage and it's the EXACT Same Movie.

Exactly my point all along. Cole doesn't make or break the movie. He's just an avatar thrown into the mix. He could have been Johnny Cage and it would not have improved the film one iota. I guess people could have gotten like two little endorphins from being able to call him Johnny Cage and been satisfied with that if their standards are incredibly low. The issue was with the script and execution.

- Needed more Goro. Especially since he only got one scene and got killed by F*cking COLE. Before the Tournament even happens. The Tournament Champion gets killed by Some Rando before the Tournament even happens. That pissed me off more than anything in the movie (and frankly very few things did bother me, but that was the biggest thing by a mile). As is, Goro looked great, came off like a bad-ass, but in the end the most memorable thing he got to do was pop his arm back in, and then die. For such an integral character there should have been a lot more. A LOT more. I'm sure Shang Tsung will resurrect him for the sequel, but this could've been handled better.

Agreed. And the bolded is probably right. Which annoys me more. As I was posting above, I really think they'll need to work hard to make death feel earned in this universe. I don't want them following the game storyline because then we have every character being resurrected every time, which is a total joke.
They may as well move onto Goro's cousin or whatever. Goro now looks like a tool and bringing him back is going to add another notch to the "can't really die" score. I say we cut our losses.

- Could've used more Scorpion, too, even allowing for the storyline reasons why he was sidelined until the end. It made sense, it just feels a bit "off" to see so little of him considering he's pretty much the series mascot. He was really well-done, except for the fact that he would've probably gotten re-killed by Sub-Zero if it wasn't for - you guessed it - F*cking Cole. Otherwise, what we did get to see was very good.

Yeah, I expected more Scorpion, but between him and Sub-Zero, I was pretty satisfied with the runtime they got. A lot of characters to balance.

- Movie needed about 15-20 more minutes so that more characters - especially the villains - had more room to breathe. Most of the villains really only showed up, scowled a lot, and then got killed. Kabal got to run his mouth a lot, at least, but even he got very little to do otherwise. I mean, I get it, ensemble casts are always tough, but the bad guys felt like fodder, especially with how easily they were dispatched overall. No wonder Shang Tsung tried to sabotage the Tournament!

Agreed. There are fairly strong rumors going around that WB chopped this one up. It's possible there was more development in there. But again, as you say, ensemble cast does make it tricky. So many characters to serve in this franchise.

- Kano was a riot. Pretty much stole the movie. Or at least he had the most personality out of everyone, and didn't play the part as if he were doing community theater like a few of the other actors did.

Kano was great fun to watch and essentially filled the role of Johnny Cage here. Agreed.

- Lots of good Fatalities. The general violence level was on-point.

Violence on point. Unfortunately some of the action had way more cuts than I was expecting. Still, some good choreography.

- The "Arcana" thing was kind of "eh", but not really altogether bad as a way to explain why the "regular" people would end up getting super-powers. Just kind of silly how it was executed, it more or less came off like "I get really pissed off and now I get super-powers". Especially since Sonya just automatically gets hers as soon as she gets the mark, and everyone else had to struggle and "unlock" theirs. But again, as a general way to give an explanation to something like that, like "How can these normal people throw fireballs and junk", it was fine.

I really did not gel with the "Arcana" thing. And honestly, I was forgetting they'd even have to tackle that aspect until we got to it. Really felt like we were watching Power Rangers when this **** came up. Great example of something that works absolutely fine in the games but becomes a pain to translate into live action.
It's one of the reasons I like the "grounded" idea. No, I do not want to get rid of all the powers. I rather they just keep the mystical elements more mysterious. I'm at a bit of a loss here, because it's corny as hell the way they did it, but you have to allow some of the humanoid characters to have their powers. What is Sub-Zero without ice manipulation?

- Lots of great Sub-Zero action. That's my guy so I was very pleased to see how much attention he got, especially compared to everyone else considering most everyone else was just a sketch. He definitely should have checked to make sure Jax was dead, though. I'm like "C'mon, Bi-Han... don't be such a Noob!" HAH! "Noob!" Don't be such a... ha ha haaaaa... that's good sh*t.

Bi-Han was easily the highlight for me as well. In fact, the beginning and ending of the movie are probably the two parts I'd go back and watch.

- The overall tone, feel, and execution was good. Definitely "felt" like MK, while still being a bit more "grounded" than the games. I honestly feel like you go any more "real" than this, though, and you've tilted it too far the other way. But this was good.

Obviously I disagree here. When Sub-Zero showed up in Outworld, the corniness began to go off the charts and never really stopped from there. It was awful looking and didn't feel real.
Again, it felt like they went over to Lord Zed's evil Power Ranger universe or some crap. I could easily do without seeing Outworld so explicitly. Find a way to honor the iconic levels either on earth, or in a way that doesn't take us out of the movie. I don't want the Outworld element gone, I just want it to be way more subtle.
That and the Arcana **** did nothing but hurt the movie for me.
I'm still a "real" fan though, I promise

[AquaParade]

- Again, Black Licorice. People can say "I like this!", mean it sincerely, and still be completely wrong on the subject. Where they over-step is in asking for anyone else to share in or be force-fed their Black Licorice. And I don't have to indulge them in their Wrong-ness. That's not my job, my job is simply to explain to them why they're Wrong.

- You misread me as usual. Here's the nicest way I can explain this, and I really am trying to just explain and not be a dick: I don't ever say things hoping that you'll reply to them. More often than not, when I see that you're the most recent poster in any thread, I roll my eyes because I know I'm about to read something that's going to give me heartburn. I don't invite that willingly, make no mistake about that. If you sincerely think I say things to provoke a response from you, you're simply wrong. Again, not being a dick, Just Explaining.

Oh, sure. But again, calling Joker and Watchmen Black Licorice is just a poor analogy. It is the kind of analogy that makes it seem like you live under a rock.
It's more Joker and Watchmen are pizza, which most people celebrate, except you. And liking pizza is subjective, so I forgive you. But it was just bewildering for you to post "this guy likes Joker and Watchmen! Ha, what a joke!"
And you bringing up those two movies was completely random to the topic at hand. It was a weak attempt at "you like these things, so obviously you have terrible taste", which doesn't even hold water, given those two projects are widely acclaimed.

Look, you aren't as subtle as you might think you are, is the bottom line.

And I know you sometimes hate when I post in the same thread as you, because I will call you on statements I disagree with, and I will back those statements up with facts.
And that's typically when you take your ball and go home.

If there is one thing I've learned about you on this forum, it's that you don't like when people disagree with you. Especially when they back up their reasoning and put you in a corner where you actually have to back up what you are saying.

Sorry, I'm really not trying to be a dick, but I am going to call it like it is.

- Anyway, to clarify: It's not that I "don't like" those things. Point of fact, I actually bought "Joker" today when I was out shopping, since the Blu-ray was on sale for $12. SO HUH. Shows what you know!

Oh...then...your prior post is even more bewildering than it was before. I hope you enjoy the blu ray.

No, I bring them up NOT to speak anything of their quality, or my opinion thereof. I bring them up because you have this consistent gimmick of being all, "I Really Like A Thing Best When It Has NOTHING To Do With The Thing It's Based On" and I'm entering those things into evidence of that in order to establish a pattern of behavior. They go right along with your "I'd like Mortal Kombat better if it was a lot more like 'The Raid' and a lot LESS like Actual Mortal Kombat" opinion.

Oh, but that's hyperbole when you say Joker and Watchmen have "nothing to do with the thing it's based on."
Pure hyperbole. Along with Mortal Kombat and the Joker, I'd also like to see a "grounded" version of your posts.

Um, yeah this recent Mortal Kombat movie would have been better off being more like The Raid for sure. It should definitely take influence from the Raid and combine it with the Mortal Kombat DNA to make something awesome. See, when you wipe away the hyperbole, it isn't so crazy.

Point being, your track record shows that the less resemblance to the source material A Thing has, the more you're in love with it. That's your prerogative, but maybe don't go around trying to tell people who want things played proper that THEY'RE the ones who are wrong, or they might just push back. You can say all day long "I'd like Mortal Kombat better if it had nothing to do with Mortal Kombat except the character names", and other people can agree with you, but it definitely doesn't make You or Them "right".

Hyperbole alert. Hyperbole alert.

btw, I didn't tell anyone they were "wrong".

FAKE fans. Fake fans don't need or deserve their tastes catered to. REAL Mortal Kombat fans want to see things that are... y'know... actually like Mortal Kombat. Not just a bunch of character names in a scenario that otherwise has NOTHING to do with Mortal Kombat.

You're wrong.

Simply put: You don't decide what makes a fan.
The material does. The source material speaks to the fan, and whatever about that source material speaks to the fan, is what creates the fan. It's not for you to decide what elements qualify. It's nothing more than an attempt for you to claim ownership over the franchise and the conversation.

Wanting to take creative liberties from the source material doesn't mean you don't appreciate the source material. The issue is you are only speaking in extremes.
Look how much hyperbole is in your post. Everything is "all or nothing". If I say I want MK to have fight scenes like The Raid, you turn it into "You want MK to just be The Raid with Mortal Kombat names!!!"

And lastly, if you weren't Sub-Zero two Halloweens in a row, and didn't buy the Strategy guide for his awful game, when you didn't even own the game itself, I don't want you telling me I'm not a true fan. I mean, you are sure to keep saying it now, but I'll just remind you that it's bologna.

Regarding my "track record" showing that I like stuff that veers from the source material, that is true. I love reinterpretation. That's how we got The Dark Knight Returns, That's how we got The Dark Knight, that's how we got plenty of awesome works of art.

And I also love stuff that is faithful to the material. I probably love a lot of the same movies and comics that you do!
Fact is, I love a lot of stuff. I just don't get my panties in a twist when creative liberties are taken. I like it all.

Fake Fans don't get to insist their taste should take precedent over that of Real Fans. Not about Anything. That can be "Elitist" or whatever else anyone wants to say. Doesn't matter. If a person says, "I'd like this thing better if it were more 'In Name Only' and even less like the source material", they're a Fake Fan. Period.

Hyperbole alert. Hyperbole alert.

Look at all this ****:

"I Really Like A Thing Best When It Has NOTHING To Do With The Thing It's Based On."

"I'd like Mortal Kombat better if it had nothing to do with Mortal Kombat except the character names"

"I'd like this thing better if it were more 'In Name Only' and even less like the source material"

"I Really Like A Thing Best When It Has NOTHING To Do With The Thing It's Based On"

Hyperbole shouldn't be abused like this, man lol. We all use hyperbole to help emphasize a point sometimes, but when you're pushing back and using this much hyperbole, it's just disingenuous and muddles whatever point you are trying to make. And it appears that your argument is reliant on hyperbole.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by IMJ

I made the argument that the only reason to make a film like Rebirth would be to satisfy curiosity because there is no other reason - a real world MK does not fit the story narrative. I did not make the argument that making a film out of curiosity is a sound way to make films. And that was my point.

I'm so glad you just said the bolded. Because it contradicts what you said in your previous post:

it sounds like you're digging in deep to argue semantics as a method to not let go of your position - a position which appears to be "making a movie out of curiosity for it's framing is more sound than making a movie whereby the story tenets fit the intellectual property".

See? You said I was digging in my heels on the point that this type of film would only "serve to satisfy curiosity", but it's actually the exact opposite of what I am saying.
You are putting the words in my mouth that "the only reason to do this is to satisfy curiosity" and then telling me that isn't a good reason. But...I never said that was the reason. You did!

It sounds like you don't like the idea of a grounded MK. I respect that, but your posts aren't making logical sense.

1) Making a movie out of curiosity as to whether it would work or not is not a good reason to make a Hollywood flick.
2) The only reason to make Mortal Kombat Rebirth would be out of some curiosity as to how the characters could adapt to a real-world only narrative, which is against the grain of the MK thesis.

No one in the history of this forum has ever argued point #1. You just keep saying it to a wall. No one ever said "they should fund a grounded MK to satisfy my curiosity". That's a strawman argument. Let's acknowledge that we are discussing what we think would be a fun and prudent future for the franchise.

Point #2 - No, I disagree. Obviously. (even though you claimed this was my argument in your last post)
It's not against the grain of the "MK thesis" lol. Tell that to Chris Nolan or Frank Miller when they are reinventing something. It's perfectly okay to take something and make a few changes for the big screen. A shift in medium often calls for it. The only discrepancy is how much you change.
Go ahead and follow the MK videogame storylines for 10 movies if you want. Enjoy seeing Johnny Cage resurrected 12 freakin times and see how much tension is in each fight.

You just don't like the idea. Again, that's fine. But as you can see online, most fans actually do like the idea. Don't argue that unless you can provide more than just your own personal opinion, because I've done the work to at least cite the Rebirth video and the hugely positive fan reaction it received. I'm at least citing my sources, so please don't shoot from the hip.

Given 1 & 2, err go, Mortal Kombat Rebirth would only be made as a curiosity and not a solid premise based on the Property and therefore is not a good reason to make the movie.

Nah. You could say that about any Hollywood adaption. "It only serves to satisfy curiosity". Legit one of the weirdest arguments I've heard lately.

Making MK exactly like the games only "serves to satisfy the curiosity". Even more so, really, because we've already seen the games...in the games. Why put it all up on screen for any reason other than to satisfy curiosity?
See how that works?
Ugh, stupid argument no matter what side of the fence you are on. I digress.

I delivered my point almost like Socratic logic there. At this point, any more verbal judo or head math is on you, dude.

Cringe. Dude, your posts barely make sense.