I like dah sunglasses and der nut punch ya

This miniseries sounds good. I'll definitely try to watch it. I just really hope Sub-Zero doesn't look like how he did in the teaser.

So the third MK movie is essentially gonna be Rebirth.... I don't know how I feel about that. I really wanted a canon reboot... Not too happy about this.

Signed.

I somehow missed this comment before, but I totally concur.


Fucking Paul W.S. Anderson.

That's actually some decent writing. It demonstrates what the characters can do combat-wise, shows off the environments, shows some of Cage's moral fiber while Goro gets granted a warriors death... and instead we get a cheap shot and a bad one-liner.

Someone just needs to draw a pentagram on the floor and send Paul W. S. Anderson back into the darkness he came from.

Have they found someone to play Kratos yet?

>Reboot
>Canon

Pick one

What are you talking about? For the third movie, I wanted a canon reboot... a reboot of the series that follows the canon storyline... o_o .... as in, not a crime drama...

Well played, sir.

I am so fucking sick to death of awesome games/comics/franchises being killed by stupid wannabe writers and directors "putting their spin" on them...

Look at the X-Men movies... they have absolutely no bearing on the original comic/series... they are fucking woeful.
Look at that shitty Street Fighter movie... nothing more to say here...
Look at the last 2 Terminator movies... again, nothing to say here...
Look at Dragonball Evolution... didn't follow the manga or the anime at all... it was laughable...

What do they all have in common? The original creators had nothing to do with the making of these movies...

Last thing the Mortal Kombat franchise needs is a shitty movie where all the details are totally incorrect because some stupid wannabe director wants to "put his spin" on it... fuck that. If they're going to make a Mortal Kombat movie I want Ed Boon and company overseeing the entire operation...



I say boycott!

Um, well, a few things...
- The first two X-men movies, in particular X2, are widely regarded as some of the best, most successful, and beloved comic book movies ever made. In fact, the first X-men movie is what created a renaissance of comic book movies, proving to Marvel and others that there was still a market after audiences fled comic book movies following Batman & Robin.
- Street Fighter II: The Animated Movie was a fantastic movie that did everything right and even inspired the game series in many ways.
- Have you seen Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles? That was a really good series full of great characters, acting, and ideas.
- Dragon Ball Z itself didn't follow the manga and included so much filler content that the creator never intended the anime to have. Almost all of Dragon Ball GT was divergent from the manga.

Some of the best ideas ever are from new creators putting their own spin on old properties. Without fresh ideas and new creators, Mister Freeze would still be a goofy, jokey badguy with a gimmicky ice motif instead of the tragic anti-hero the Animated Series won an award for in "Heart of Ice". Without original creators putting new spins on old franchises, Resident Evil would still be a dull, puzzle-based game with poor controls and terrible voice acting. Without new ideas from new creators, Street Fighter 2 would just have been another beat-em-up instead of a fighting game. Without a new creator and new ideas, James Bond in Casino Royale would've been a hilariously cheesy Bond movie with invisible cars, jetpacks, and moon lasers.

New ideas from new creators can be VERY good... provided the new talent has the skills and smarts to back up their ideas.

Nevermind.

Wrong.
Shredder could be human and not human being at the same time. In other words: it is not neccessary for the Shredder to be human to stay the Shredder. More so Turtles Forever actually aknowledges alien slug Shredder as sort of Ultimate depiction of the Shredder comparing to the whimpy Shredder of the eighties and very original Shredder form the comic book. Seems they don't share your idea.
And it goes from creators of the new series and creators of the Shredder himself. I think they now better who Shredder is and they completely accept idea that Shredder could anyone as long as he has all qualities of the "Shredder persona". So creators of the character in question are mistaking?


First movie was pretty good, IMHO. Characters were keep close to their game depiction (well as much as they could close to the characters that were represented by short biographies). Some details were added, but they didn't ruined impression form the movie. At the very least it was decent and not as much failure as MKAn. MKC was good too, for the series that was basically it's own thing.


Don't play fool, please. People already explained to you that MKR didn't changed and violated that many things as you keep pretending.


Disagree.
Baraka's blades ad much essential to his character as him being crazy killer beast. And in case of Reptile him being cannibal is not defining point of the character, but one of the main traits of him. Something that's could be easily associated with him. His main trait, being violent ugly lizard-like monster, is intact too.


Wrong.
Baraka's blades as much iconical to him as spear for the Scorpion and frezzing abilities for Sub-Zero. In other words Baraka = blades. Without them his generic monster.


Pleade, reread what you've written, so you will know what I am answering to. It was response to your post.


Wrong.
Now you are confusing essential qualities with superficial ones. For Jax essential that his a black, strong, badaas man who works for government. Him being major of US army is superficial and could be easily changed, if it suits the story. It goes in the same boat with his metal arms - there are part of his character, but there are not neccessary for him to be recognizable.


What is it?



Wrong.
And it's funny that you mentioned it, because all of the Shredders have the same key qualities, however they are present differently in pretty much every incarnation of him. But all of them are still there.
What defines Shredder is not the fact that he is human being. Thinking that will be close minded approach, just like you demonstrate in this MKR discussion. Shredder character is defined by his qualities. And all of the Shredders have the same key qualities, however they are present differently in pretty much every incarnation of him. But all of them are still there. So...all of them could be easily called "The Shredder", because Shredder persona defined not by origin of the being in suit, but by qualities of that being.


No.
We don't know nothing of him, except for what Jax told Scorpion and that only information that Jax knows himself. He could be easily sorceror in guise of crime mob boss. There is no enough information to make such solid claims.


That's exactly what you're doing. Insanity is trying to prove that character defined by it's origin. Characters defined by:
a) character traits and
b) character signature detalis (e.g. Shredder's spike suit, Baraka's blades, Reptile monsterness, Shao Kahn's helmet e.t.c.) Though this one is not even essential. You can remove this and operate solely by only traits of the character in question, doing whatever you want to do - trun him into human, alien whatever. As long as his "core traits" are still there, this characters is himself. Now I described you how alternate interpreatation work.


That's what I call being pessimistically stupid.
Note 1: Terminator wasn't killed by directors who wanted to put their own spin. There were killed because producer wanted to create movies as cheap as possible so their hired incompitent writers and directors who weren't suit for the job.
Note 2: First Street Fighter movie was debacle, because they seemingly wanted to adapt animeish Street Fighetr plot to the western audience. And they put Van Damm in it. The same probably goes for the second movie.
Basically your rant is debacled.
Have a nice day.

Um, well, a few things...
- The first two X-men movies, in particular X2, are widely regarded as some of the best, most successful, and beloved comic book movies ever made. In fact, the first X-men movie is what created a renaissance of comic book movies, proving to Marvel and others that there was still a market after audiences fled comic book movies following Batman & Robin.

Widely regarded by movie studio executives and critics... ask a die-hard fan of the comics and original cartoon and they think the movies are utter crap. The movies killed the X-Men for me.

- Street Fighter II: The Animated Movie was a fantastic movie that did everything right and even inspired the game series in many ways.

I was referring to the live-action film with Jean Claude Van Damme... the animated movie is a LOT closer to the original game story however it still deviates enough to shit me to tears...

- Have you seen Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles? That was a really good series full of great characters, acting, and ideas.

Yes I have and thank fuck it was cancelled after two seasons. Should never have been done.

- Dragon Ball Z itself didn't follow the manga and included so much filler content that the creator never intended the anime to have. Almost all of Dragon Ball GT was divergent from the manga.


Dragonball GT is anime only and doesn't have a manga counterpart and therefore doesn't apply in this instance.

Did. Still have no clue how you got that interpretation. This is exactly what I wrote (and I even copy/pasted it from the quote in your post):

That's not what defines Baraka. Norman Bates from the movie "Psycho" is also a blade-wielding psycho. Baraka's not even really a psycho. He's just an angry dumb carnivorous bastard.

As for the overall argument, I'm just going to keep saying what I've been saying: iconic qualities are not the same thing as essential qualities. Baraka is not defined by his blades, and Scorpion is not defined by his spear. Those are just gimmicks the characters have. Sub-Zero IS define by his freeze, but that's because cryomancy runs in his bloodline.

Please speak for yourself, you are completely wrong. I'm a huge fan of the X-Men comics and the original cartoon (and funny you should praise the cartoon considering it was different from the comics in many ways), and I LOVE the X-men movies, particularly X-men 2.

The X-Men movies are praised not just by movie execs and critics, like you so ignorantly said, they're praised by the masses which is exactly what we should all want for the benefit of the brand. I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only X-Men comic book fan who's a big fan of the movies as well, so again... Speak for yourself.



You have absolutely no idea who changed the script for the movie, so I don't see how you can blame Anderson for this. Actually, considering the length of the final cut of the movie, this situation screams "the producers did it!". They're the ones who'd be more worried about cutting the movie as short as possible, not the director.



A canon reboot would likely kill the franchise for anyone who would watch it.

Fans often talk about how they'd like the movies to follow the canon of the games, but that's completely insane. First of all, the scope of characters in the MK mythology is massive. It would take a really long movie to do justice to all the characters.

But never mind that, there's hundreds of details in the MK games story that don't make any sense and would make a completely wacky movie. People just choose to remember what they like best and figure that's how the movie should be made, but incorrectly say they want it to follow the games' canon.

Liu Kang died and became a zombie. Jax, Sonya, Johnny Cage and Kung Lao were all killed and then brought back to life, no problem. Mileena just covered her face and pretended to be Kitana and everyone bought it.

Barely anyone actually dies in the events from MK1 to MK Armageddon. The few characters who do die somehow get resurrected. The name of the game is MORTAL Kombat.

Oh, and Mokap exists.
There's your canon for ya.

So the majority of you are all ok with Baraka being a black former doctor who grafted blades into his arms as an experiment instead of what he actually is which is a mercenary soldier from an Outworld race of nomads called Tarkatans...

How any die-hard Mortal Kombat fan can be okay with this is beyond me...

Way to totally fuck the franchise Warner Bros... how can you honestly condone this shit!?

I suggest you try to get your head around the fact that Ed Boon fully supports MK Reborn.

Good for him. That doesn't mean that people who aren't Ed have to.

Except that the role can be defined by function since this is fiction, not the metaphysical identity of one singular object that is aware or not.

Reptile fulfills in Rebirth the same function as a character- AND NOT IN PLOT before anyone asks- as Reptile in MK. Thus he is Reptile.

And since there IS NO DEFINITE ANSWER to identity, let's leave it at that.



Postomodern literary criticism is essentially this. What deduction through observance is the viewers only and own. Any assumption or deduction about a literary / or any artwork is correct to the reader.

You can argue that Magnolia is Double Dragon if that is what you perceive it to be. Society won't probably accept it, but that doesn't make it WRONG. Just unacceptable. Any piece of art can be interpreted in any way you deem fit. This is the core concept of postmodern analysis. What happens through social interactions and what kind of concensus is surrounding the art piece is completely irrelevant.

Case being: wether Reptile here is the same Reptile of MK is entirely up to you. You don't have to enforce any kind of set rigid laws to decide what is canonical or not. It is what he is to you that matters, stop pushing your own perception on others, since some people might not be able to interpret it as their own or as logical thanks to social, cultural differences, or hell, even mental state.

I condone it because in my humble opinion Baraka while being a visually appealing character isn't a narratively appealing character and the very minor he and his race play in the lore just doesn't appeal to me. Its the same with Reptile which is probably why Kevin thought he could get away with changing them as much as he did.

TV Tropes may be a pretty lame website overall, but they have a perfect description for what's going on in this thread:

The Purist: a fan who has an idealised vision of what the show should be and isn't going to let anything or anyone affect or change that vision... not even the show itself. They tend to react to any changes made in the show's format with hostility and suspicion. Although often a fan who's been burned by Adaptation Decay or obvious merchandise pandering gone wrong, some just simply don't like change and respond to it with pram-shaking tantrums. They usually also hate non-canon entries in a work simply for...well, not being canon

Good job referencing a thing you supposedly don't like.



That's a pretty sweeping generalization of the opinions on display in this thread. It's not that those of us who don't like Rebirth don't like change. I, for example, love the first two movies and the Malibu comics. It's that we don't like this specific direction because it's not just different from MK classic, it's approaching unrecognizable.

There are essential parts of the character. Maybe, just maybe, Scorpion could exist without spear in one form or the other. But take away blades from Baraka and what you'll receive? Generic hideous monster.

Here is question: what do you think about Splinter from old cartoon / anime? In every single adaptation of the TMNT he is a mutated pet rat of the Hamato Yoshi. In the old cartoon and anime he is a mutated Hamato Youshi himself. But he has all qualities of every other Splinter. He is skilled fighter, quite old, serve as the father-teacher figure for the Turtles. The question is: so according to your philosophy you will count him as entirely different character from all other Splinters or just as another incarnation of the regular Splinter?


I think it is completely possible to create MK movie / series based on the canon. All that we need is the right human leading the project and enough faith (money and time) from studios bosses.
All plotholes could be fixed (and really there is not many stuff that should be fixed / retconned, at least not in the first five games) and there is no need to put all characters and all MK mythology into single movie. MKAn done that and everyone know how it turned out.
Just put one game to the screen at a time. Add some details here and there, but don't make stuff like Cage killing Goro or Sub-Zero and Scorpion working under Shang Tsung. Keep true to the plot. First two parts will be about tournaments, third would be about war between two worlds and it could be separated in two movies. There is a foundation for movie franchise.
Though personally I'd prefer CGI series.


Maybe because not every hardcore fan is closeminded to the point of hating something different from the usual version of the franchise?

^ Not drunk here, and I agree... except I probably won't enjoy it at all. I'll give it a try, though. Didn't really dig the initial vid.

I've never seen the devil, but I imagine he looks a little bit like a quote button.


I can't rule that out, but that doesn't change the fact that Anderson is an art vampire who takes other people's original source material and whores it for nickels. That guy isn't human. He is but a vessel, and inside that vessel is a Cthulhu that operates him with levers.


Not seeing where you're coming from here. Logic doesn't change for fiction. Just because Reptile isn't a material being with awareness doesn't make him any less an object, so identity applies. Specifically, Reptile is what all characters are: a abstract set of qualities. That has been my definition for "character" since the beginning of this argument.

I'll give you a counter-example to illustrate. Dr. Cain and Dr. Light literally share the same function in the Mega Man Franchise, but that doesn't make them the same character.


Even if there is no definite answer, there's still the best available theory. My problem is that it looks like you're defining characters as functions, and I'm just not sold on that.


This is not true on a concrete level, though. You can't argue that a portrait of a flower is portrait of a dog.


Perceptions are casually related to the world. You can't just perceive random shit. The fact is, one movie instantiates the concept of "ninja," and other movie does not. You could say, "but everything in the film Magnolia was actually a metaphor for ninjas," but if you did say that, you're no longer dealing with the concrete images you saw on screen, but with a rationalization you constructed.

It's one thing to say that someone's literary conclusions are false, but it's another thing to say that Peter Gibbons from "Office Space" is the same character as Patrick Bateman from "American Psycho."


I'm still gonna say different character on this one. The act of being Hamato is itself a quality, and that has to hold in all instances. The other versions still have the name and function of Splinter, so if you're going with Chrome's theory (if I read right) Splinter passes. I don't define characters as functions, though.