JeNeSaisQuoi

Well, I didn't say that it couldn't be done--far from it--only that I have had better results with my Dark/WP, personally. In general, /Shield will do just about anything better than Willpower. Other than just standing there while mobs beat on you without attacking back, Shield is the clear winner. And really, no one designs a toon based on it's ability to stand around and do nothing and not get killed.

However, I really enjoy that Willpower does that really well because I sometimes hit massive lag spikes. Willpower has always come out on top for me in that regard. Before I deleted my Fire/Shield, I would sometimes hit a lag spike and then find myself on the ground, provided the mobs were tough enough. I'd say that it's the only thing Willpower can do better than Shield. Just my personal experience though.

But yeah, if you just want an "I Win" button, Shield is the way to go. There's a reason that half the Scrappers you see in the game have Shields, even after the Shield Charge change. Honestly, the only good reasons to play anything other than Shield are, in my opinion:

1.) Other Secondaries might cost you less to IO out.

2.) Can't pair it with certain Powersets.

3.) Concept.

4.) You just don't like the way it looks or plays.

5.) Shield is too FotM for you.

But again, looking at the Pylon results and seeing that /Shield Scrappers are taking them down in like three minutes, where as it took my Dark/WP ten minutes to do it, it's pretty easy to see which is functionally better.

Touche'.

I admitted that I was probably oversimplifying my reasons for comparing the two directors but...well, you just schooled me. I still don't like Snyder's work, but I'll think twice before comparing him to Bay in the future.

Um, when asked what movies I thought were good in this very thread, I mentioned liking Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World quite a bit, which is very special effects heavy. I also mentioned Sunshine, which is filled with special effects. So...you took the time to find some choice pieces of my dialogue but not quite enough time to actually read what I was saying. Probably a good idea to read everything someone says so that in the future if you want to make a valid point, it won't come across as you being lazy or that you're just trying to be smarmy. Unless that's what you were going for, in which case, good for you.

I never said anything of the sort, as far as other people liking him goes. The closest I even came to implying anything like that was when I jokingly retorted to someone's statement about me not having a soul, and even then, all I said was that my standards kept me from watching any of Snyder's films.

How my personal standards equals me telling other people that they have bad taste...well, I'm not sure where you got that one. I've insulted Zack Snyder often enough, but I haven't insulted anyone for liking his movies. I've simply said that I don't, and why I don't. It's up to you whether or not you want to take personal offense to that.

And yeah, if a director uses the same technique over and over again to the point of becoming cartoonish, then yes, in my opinion, he is a hack. I don't even want to dislike Zack Snyder as I so badly want his Superman movie to be good, but he's not impressed me so far. I said this earlier, and I'll say it again: I want to be proven wrong about Snyder. I want the next Superman movie to be good. I hope like hell that he proves me wrong. I'm not geting my hopes up, but you never know and none of us will know until his Superman movie comes out.

So, seriously...calm down.

Well, remember that I said that I don't even feel like my standards are even that high--it's not as if I'm some film snob that just sits around watching Kurosawa and Fellini films all day or anything.

Let's just talk movies that have come out since Snyder started directing, which was around, what 2000 or so?

Well, the movie that most recently kind of blew me away was Aronofsky's Black Swan. That was quite good, although it almost seemed like it was Aronofsky directing a David Lynch film.

Anything by Clint Eastwood. Post 2000, I'd say my favorite film by him would have been Letters from Iwo Jima.

Edgar Wright is pretty incredible. Shaun of the Dead is my least favorite of his, although I do really dig it. Hot Fuzz and Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World are comedy masterpieces though.

As far as straight action films go, Ryuhei Kitamura's Versus is pretty awesome, and notably done with very little (if any) special effects of any kind. There's a definite lack of the slow motion that the Wachowskis and Snyder are so slavingly into. I recently watched Grand Master Ip Man, (no idea who directed it) and that was a great old school style martial arts film.

I'd say though that my all time favorite director would be Danny Boyle. Just...anything he does is amazing. Slumdog Millionare and Sunshine are my two favorite movies by him, post 2000. (Still haven't seen 127 Hours yet--none of the theatres near me played it.)

I could go on and on. But I think any of those films are miles above anything Snyder has done. Because Snyder uses alot of slow motion and CG to make pretty films, well, I don't see how that makes him a good director or any of his movies any good because honestly, the same thing could be said about Michael Bay or the Wachowskis (whose films I also find painful to watch.) Essentially, I'll take a good story with some decent acting over a CG filled slow motion fest that is really nothing more than eye candy.

And yes, I've seen Watchmen (which Snyder actioned up for no good reason, and which never should have been put on film in the first place) and I've seen 300, which I'd almost be willing to say was good if the action wasn't so bogged down with slow motion, just making it boring to watch.

More than anything, I think that's my biggest problem with Snyder: He's a one trick pony, and it's a trick that the Wackowskis made dull before he even started directing. You watch something by Danny Boyle, and you never know what you'll get: Could be a sci-fi film, could be horror, could be a film about Scottish junkies, could be anything. Snyder--not so much. No matter the subject matter of his films, you know you'll end up getting the same stilted slow mo fest that he always produces. I hope--I really do, that I'm wrong and that his Superman film will be good, but...well, we'll see, I guess.

Looks like we're going to (possibly) be getting something alot better than that as Aronofsky is supposedly directing the next Wolverine film.

Because I don't think either one of them are any good?

I wouldn't even really say, honestly, that my standards for a movie are that high but they're high enough that I have no desire to watch anything by Zack Snyder.

I'll take my high standards for seeing a movie over a soul any day.

Honestly, and I'm not a student of film or anything--but I don't see the difference between what Bay does and this movie.

Bay likes to have alot of mindless explosions that the audience has seen abour four million times before.

This trailer has tons of things exploding pointlessly.

Michael Bay casts pretty girls irregardless of whether or not they can act.

This trailer has that in spades.

Michael Bay loves slow motion shots.

Only Zack Snyder out slow motions Michael Bay. So much so that it has become his trademark, which is sad considering that it was done to death and had become incredibly boring before Snyder even started making films.

Seriously, I don't see the difference, other than that Snyder has generally had better source material to work with.

Now, to be fair, this is only a trailer, so this film could turn out to be decent. I'm just saying, that from what I've seen so far, it looks painfully stupid and dull.

I don't think it's so much the director as the content. If this film can be as over the top as either of the Twilight films then it will be comedy gold.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand where you're coming from here. Every Batman film prior to Nolan's showcased some pretty outlandish aspects of the comics. Batman and Robin even has superpowered villains in it. Sure, it's a terrible film, but they're there.

The original series of Superman films featured superhuman threats in parts 2 and 4. Just about all the Marvel films feature superhumans.

I mean, we've already seen a hundred superhero films where super powered beings run rampant. I don't understand why you have such a problem with Nolan not using that aspect of the comics when we've already seen it so many times before.

I'm unclear on what "old view of comic book movies" you're talking about. Other than the Punisher films, I can't even think of a superhero movie that doesn't have superhumans in it.

Well, maybe as far as Scrappers go, but you're still a Scrapper, so I wouldn't call it squishy exactly. However, you put enough Defense in there and it'll toughen up considerably. Personally, I find it easier to shoot for S/L defense if the Scrapper doesn't already have some defense built into the set. There are some pretty massive bonuses for S/L around that are relatively cheap. Well, relatively. Within your budget, I'd say. Kinetic Combats for instance.

You're also going to be doing so much damage that mobs wwill be defeated before they have too much time to really go to work on you, so that helps as well.

Well, early Rick is a bit of an idealist. At the point he's at currently in the comics (SPOILER ALERT, by the way) he has very little problem with killing people that he feels are hazardous to his, Carl's or the group in general's survival. In fact, if you're up on the series currently, he's proven over the last few issues that he's extremely quick and remorseless about taking the lives of troublemakers. It almost seems to be his first option at this point.

In fact, and it's been quite a while since I read the beginning of the series, I don't recall it even taking Rick very long to get to the point where he'd kill human beings pretty callously if he thought they were a threat. I recall him killing someone during a skirmish at the prison because he thought they'd be a problem.

So, yeah, if the TV series is going to follow his moral arc pretty closely, it won't be long before Rick is routinely handling problems by means of execution. If Rick was ever really trying to take a moral high road where murder is concerned, he didn't last on that road very long.

No, I actually did mean "stupid."

Let me clarify this though: Because it appears to be almost offensively stupid from a two minute trailer doesn't mean that it will be. And even if it is, that doesn't mean that it won't be an enjoyable entertainment experience. I mean, The Expendables was one of the dumbest films I've ever seen, and yet I was able to enjoy it for what it was. However, that doesn't mean it wasn't a bad film.

More than anything, I just find Snyder's directorial style to be tired at this point. He keeps using the same boring tricks over and over again. I don't want that for Superman. I like Superman. I'd like to be able to enjoy a Superman film. Hopefully, he'll try some new things out or Nolan will force him to limit the amount of silly slow motion in the film to the parts where they actually make sense.

Because it looks like a trailer for a videogame?

Because Snyder's use of slo-mo borders on self parody at this point?

Because this movie looks painfully stupid and I don't want the same director that made it to turn Superman into concept art with Michael Bay explosions?

And yes, I did mean "wary."