What's the appeal of seeing buildings destroyed in movies

Buildings represent civilization. Villains destroying them at a whim is a classic show over power against one. That simple.
 
A superhero film without explosions and collapsing buildings is just like watching The Real Housewives............. Is this really what you want? I sure hope not!
 
I don't see how its any more repetitive than watching cars crash, or people get shot, or punched or...you get the idea.

It's cinematic shorthand, and shows how powerful the forces destroying said buildings are. That's usually how its utilized.
 
People who don't like seeing buildings destroyed can...always go see other ****ing movies. Just a thought. I know I am responding to a phantom poster who cannot respond back but I thought I'd say my peace anyway.
 
I'd like to put the OP in a room with Bay, Snyder and Emmerich and baseball bats would be included.
 
I'd like to put the OP in a room with Bay, Snyder and Emmerich and baseball bats would be included.
:funny:

It's funny because I can be excited about Superhero movies and dramas, it's almost like you can like two things at once.:eek:
 
tumblr_ludepcdIGV1ql3buq.gif
 
Man people got super defensive in here for what I thought was an interesting question.
 
Good for you. Some people don't appreciate being talked down to by some rando on the interwebs with a superiority complex.
 
Last edited:
And as Spidey said who the frick is this moron to judge any one of us? I love the popcorn flicks as much as I love the Oscar bait/Indie movies. I just put a different hat on so to speak.
 
I always wonder about reading comprehension on Hype. There is a right way to ask a question and there is a wrong way. The thread starter asked the question in the most arrogant way possible. Ask nicely and you will get nice responses. Act like a ****ing grown up is basically what I'm getting at.

Also, who cares why this guy was banned? Based on the rude way he asked this question it's not shocking that he didn't last. It sure would have been cool if someone else had asked this question.
 
Last edited:
In case anyone's still wondering about the answer...

The-Simpsons-Season-5-Episode-6-30-6d30.jpg
 
Have to say no director destroyed cities (NYC in particular) and national landmarks than Roland Emmerich
 
A Hulk movie without property damage and buildings at risk is like a Mortal Kombat game without violence.

Idea: They could just cut to screens that dynamically say "POW!", and "BAFF!" and "JERMAINE!" when any window or mailbox is at risk of being damaged. I know that would have made me like Age of Ultron more.
 
I don't think buildings being destroyed is cool or anything, but depending on what kind of superhero movie you see, it could work. Like, take a Hulk movie. There's bound to be buildings getting destroyed and it makes sense, but with a hero like Superman it just felt like a big orgy of mass destruction.

In general I prefer clever action sequences that relies more on interesting choreography rather than destroying as much of the city as possible.
 
It's symbolic basically. Showing that this force is destroying things we assume can stand the test of time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

  • C. Lee
    Superherohype Administrator

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,324
Messages
22,085,744
Members
45,886
Latest member
Shyatzu
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"