• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

Captain Marvel Controversies

Bookwrack

Gazer
Validated User
"Need" how? The manga seemed to get by fine with depicting her as a human-form robot. Why couldn't the live-action version do the same?
Sol is Major Kusanagi, and not using CGI wasn;t the reason GitS live-action was bad.
Not the same at all. Except for when she's breaking parts off, the Major visually passes as fully human. Gunm's cybernetics aesthetic is much more openly robotic, and strapping all of that on as prop costume wouldn't be feasible for someone trying to have more range of motion than Robocop.

Like I said before, I'm not arguing that her facial depiction isn't weird, especially considering the trailers show other full cyborgs except for the head with fairly normal faces, but the CGI useage isn't surprising.
 

Sankarah

Not Quite a Grognard
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Not the same at all. Except for when she's breaking parts off, the Major visually passes as fully human. Gunm's cybernetics aesthetic is much more openly robotic, and strapping all of that on as prop costume wouldn't be feasible for someone trying to have more range of motion than Robocop.

Like I said before, I'm not arguing that her facial depiction isn't weird, especially considering the trailers show other full cyborgs except for the head with fairly normal faces, but the CGI useage isn't surprising.
I wouldn't expect practical effects there. I was thinking more Furiosa from Fury Road. That route would ditch the uncanny valley issue, and would also give Salazar more exposure while still allowing for the same range of effects.
 

salinea

grievous lack of
Validated User
My apologies, but this doesn't help me to understand anything about the character. Does she accelerate to rapid speed in a fraction of a second? Do tentacle arms larger than she is sprout from her body? Does she convert energy into some other form? Does she cast magic?

Thanks.
the first one. At least in the manga, haven't seen the movie.
 

Kevin Mowery

WAUGH!
Validated User
Can the discussion of how much CGI should have been used for the main character in Battle Angel Alita and how it compares to Ghost In The Shell please go to a different thread?
 

Bookwrack

Gazer
Validated User
the first one. At least in the manga, haven't seen the movie.
It's the standard 'even with super strength and flying powers, you can't pick up and carry a building by a corner. Physics just doesn't operation like that' thing.

I can understand how, for a character whose wetware is a brain in a case, going for an uncanny valley, something is off look makes sense. But in the source material, there are plenty of other characters who have the big eye look, so limiting that to just Alita would make it jarring in other ways as well.
 

bhu

Professional Cat
RPGnet Member
Validated User
My apologies, but this doesn't help me to understand anything about the character. Does she accelerate to rapid speed in a fraction of a second? Do tentacle arms larger than she is sprout from her body? Does she convert energy into some other form? Does she cast magic?

Thanks.
It kind of varies depending on which body she has, she's used various ones through the comics.
 

Pyrephox

Sheepish
Validated User
I wouldn't expect practical effects there. I was thinking more Furiosa from Fury Road. That route would ditch the uncanny valley issue, and would also give Salazar more exposure while still allowing for the same range of effects.
I'm pretty sure they were going for the uncanny valley issue. It's a part of the underlying theme of the film, that Alita, who is visibly and unescapably 'robotic' and 'unhuman' in appearance, is nonetheless one of the most human and humane characters in the story - even when she is inflicting massive damage on the surroundings.
 

Fabius Maximus

Registered User
Validated User
Fun fact: Rome was remarkably honest about the belief that slaves would do this and that the only reason slaves were slaves was because they'd had a round of bad luck.
That actually endured well past Rome--as late as the 1780s, you had british slave traders flat out stating: we use blacks because we need the labor, not because they're inferior. So...points for honest? It's not until the 1830s plus that the whole scientific racism bandwagon gets rolling with ZIS IS ZE GENETIC DESTINY! Bullshit.

Depends on what definition you use, and how wide your umbrella is.

It's not feminist because it's not... labeling itself "feminist" so to speak, it's a movie and character created by guys without much thought of it's feminist aspects. It's not pro-women's rights, it's not misogynistic either, it's just a movie with a female main character.
I'd say that's very feminist. Which is to say, in the 1960s-50s, there were movies with black actors but it was treated as something unusual, with a side order of "come see the dancing bears." "Part of it was the studios deciding that they were trying to get the black demographic (see the various African-American sitcoms of the 1970s), and honestly, part of it had a somewhat uglier subtext of "come see the dancing minstrels!"

But a big shift came as you started getting African-American actors in movies and TV shows, not as the main selling point or as audiences to ogle at, but simply because they were good actors and could carry a movie. I'd argue that a movie that isn't explicitly labeling itself feminist but that is being carried by a female character actually is very feminist, in that it represents an internalization of the idea that movies and TV shows can be carried by female actors, because they're just good movies and actors--if that makes any sense.
 

FickleGM

Registered User
Validated User
I loved Alita!
I loved Captain Marvel!

I am also loving some of the irony I've seen:

1. I've seen some folk who were cold on Alita turn into Alita supporters once they saw their MRA brethren doing that.

2. I've seen folk who have criticized romantic subplots involving other female leads criticise Captain Marvel for not having a romantic subplot.

3. I've seen folk who were critical of how Rey became so skilled, since TFA didn't explicitly state it, level the same complaint against Carol Danvers when her training with Kree Spec Ops and her former piloting abilities were explicitly stated/shown/justified (hey, I like Rey, but at least some of the criticisms leveled against her didn't ignore the actual film that was watched).

Irony Flakes, they aren't just for breakfast, anymore.
 

salinea

grievous lack of
Validated User
I can understand how, for a character whose wetware is a brain in a case, going for an uncanny valley, something is off look makes sense. But in the source material, there are plenty of other characters who have the big eye look, so limiting that to just Alita would make it jarring in other ways as well.
I just said I didn't watch the movie, why are you making that point to me?
 
Top Bottom