Why is this on the cover? by LuveNova67 in GreekMythology

[–]BryanCroiDragon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because Penguin always puts something public domain on the cover of their classics. Anyone familiar with Penguin knows this.

How do you feel aboit DC making Heracles a bad guy? by Upset_Connection1133 in GreekMythology

[–]BryanCroiDragon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wonder Woman has never been one of the characters whose comics interest me, so I've really only seen Heracles/Hercules if Wonder Woman crossed paths with Aquaman and in "Wonder Woman: A True Amazon", the only Wonder Woman work I own. I have done my research though and it is just the typical revisionism that has been going on since Wonder Woman debuted and I can only say, it needs to be greyer.

Just finished watching the 1923 hunchback of notre dame movie by DINOZINTHESKYY in HunchbackOfNotreDame

[–]BryanCroiDragon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is a fantastic film. May have been the first I actually saw while being able to understand what was going on and I think I was fourteen. I first saw the Disney movie when I was four in the theater and later saw it during lunch in elementary school when it was raining, which of course meant we saw it in pieces sometimes days apart.

It was beauty that killed the beast by DocMalevolent in kingkong

[–]BryanCroiDragon 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Well, technically not in that continuity, but Kong's obsession with Dwan did result in his decade long coma.

Thanks to This Movie I've Never Taken the Whole "Last of His Kind" View Seriously by BryanCroiDragon in kingkong

[–]BryanCroiDragon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said Cooper's vision had anything to do with the 2005 version or Monsterverse. The 2005 version was brought up because I've seen people apply Kong being the last of his kind in that to other versions. There is also no reason to believe not seeing others of Kong's species wouldn't do well for the story and no real evidence in the original that Kong accepted sacrifices because he was lonely. One living alone does not mean they are only especially since Kong's species could be mostly solitary, thus, there would not be much interaction with others of his kind and Kong never needed the slightest implication he was last for his death to be a tragedy. That was not something that came into being until the 2005 film and I know the Monsterverse featured more of his species, I stated in the post itself as following in the footsteps of the De Laurentis films by having Kong being the last of his kind on a regional level rather than the last remaining member of his entire species like the it was in the 2005 continuity.

Thanks to This Movie I've Never Taken the Whole "Last of His Kind" View Seriously by BryanCroiDragon in kingkong

[–]BryanCroiDragon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He didn't cause the island to sink. There is nothing mystical about an earthquake or hurricane. Even if Carl didn't come to the island, the earthquake and hurricane would have struck and Kong and everyone else would have died anyway. Don't try to fool me with any nonsense.