Topic: Batman Vs Superman
started by: Leisher
Posted by Leisher on Jun. 11 2013,07:29
< Already approved. >
Posted by GORDON on Jun. 11 2013,07:36
Will the villain be Khan? no wait
Posted by Leisher on Jul. 22 2013,09:14
Maybe WB and DC are getting the hint that rushing a Justice League movie isn't the best idea?< Batman will appear. >
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 05 2013,06:53
< The new Batman will be... >
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 05 2013,07:47
QUOTE
Joe Manganiello
Maybe that dude. Batman, and even Bruce Wayne, is supposed to be a physically imposing dude.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 12 2013,06:45
New rumor:< Batman might be Christian Bale. >
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 12 2013,10:03
No. No Welsh Batman lisp.
Posted by Stranger on Aug. 23 2013,07:46
< http://www.cnn.com/2013....t=en_c1 >I for one have never been as big of a hater of Ben Affleck as most people are. (I personally think Nick Cage is a bigger douche if you ask me).
But isn't Ben Affleck to much of a pussy to play Batman?!?!
Posted by TheCatt on Aug. 23 2013,07:46
Guess we'll see if he can act.At least it's not that Bradley Cooper faggot.
Posted by Stranger on Aug. 23 2013,07:50
Didn't he already fail as a superhero in Daredevil?
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 23 2013,07:58
I am an Affleck fan, and never understood the hatred for him. I am ok with him as Batman. I just hope he doesn't do the gravel voice like Bale.
Daredevil was a mess, but not because of him.
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 23 2013,08:36
QUOTE
But isn't Ben Affleck to much of a pussy to play Batman?!?!
Yes.
QUOTE
Didn't he already fail as a superhero in Daredevil?
Double yes.
QUOTE
At least it's not that Bradley Cooper faggot.
Screw him after he fucked up Faceman.
QUOTE
I am an Affleck fan, and never understood the hatred for him.
I've seen him in two roles where he didn't suck. He played a loudmouth asshole douchebag in both. I could totally believe him in those scenes. Anything else ... not so much.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 23 2013,09:17
< A public service announcement. >
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 23 2013,09:26
I was not overly impressed with Heath's performance there.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 23 2013,09:29
I don't believe you've been even mildly impressed by anything ever. Malcolm upon witnessing the big bang: "meh".
Posted by TheCatt on Aug. 23 2013,10:12
I thought Heath was great as Joker.< The DTMan thread on that casting. >
Posted by thibodeaux on Aug. 23 2013,10:46
(Leisher @ Aug. 23 2013,12:29)
QUOTE
Malcolm upon witnessing the big bang: "meh".
Win
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 23 2013,13:18
(Leisher @ Aug. 23 2013,12:17)
QUOTE
< A public service announcement. >
I don't even need that.... I remember the pre-internet WTF? of Michael Keaton as Batman, and he held the title of "only REAL Batman" for a long time.
So I'll wait and see how Aflek does.
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 23 2013,14:45
(Leisher @ Aug. 23 2013,11:29)
QUOTE
I don't believe you've been even mildly impressed by anything ever.
Malcolm upon witnessing the big bang: "meh".
Malcolm upon witnessing the big bang: "meh".
Big bangs and the like probably happen all the time, just not in this universe.
Posted by TPRJones on Aug. 23 2013,14:51
Oh, sorry, that was me. Taco Bell for lunch was a mistake.As to Ben for Batman, I think he could do it. It's really not that hard of a role to play, honestly. It's the bad guys that get to do the real acting in that franchise.
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 30 2013,10:28
< JT as the Riddler >?
Posted by Paul on Aug. 30 2013,11:03
Needs more big names, like George CLooney, Arnold Schwartzenegger, Uma Thurman, Alicia Silverstone!
Posted by Leisher on Sep. 16 2013,12:29
< Justin Beiber trolling the net. >
Posted by Leisher on Sep. 19 2013,05:58
< Petition to get Adam West a cameo. >Sign it.
WB said no to him years ago with the first series of Batman films saying a cameo by him would hurt the films' serious tones... (yeah, they said that while making Bat-nipples)
Anyway, folks just want him to get some bit role, ala Stan Lee in all the Marvel films, as a tip of the cap to Adam.
Posted by Paul on Sep. 26 2013,11:35
“I am the least qualified person to comment on anyone playing the role of Batman since I so terribly destroyed the part. I tend to look at it like this – let’s just see what the movie is before everyone starts beating him up. He is a smart man, he knows what he is doing.” < -George Clooney >
Posted by Leisher on Nov. 07 2013,10:04
< Here comes Robin or Nightwing? >
Posted by thibodeaux on Nov. 07 2013,12:09
(Leisher @ Sep. 19 2013,08:58)
QUOTE
Anyway, folks just want him to get some bit role, ala Stan Lee in all the Marvel films, as a tip of the cap to Adam.
I love the Stan Lee cameos. Best one by far: "Hef" in Iron Man.
Posted by Leisher on Dec. 04 2013,10:47
< Wonder Woman will be in it. >I do not like the casting choice there unless she bulks up.
This is who should be Wonder Woman:
Jaimie Alexander
Posted by Malcolm on Dec. 04 2013,11:10
< Bah, go MMA. >
Posted by Leisher on Dec. 04 2013,11:35
I still like Jaimie, but that girl is better than who they cast. I think DC might hit big stumbling blocks with their attempts to catch The Avengers just based on their casting decisions.
Ryan Reynolds should have been the Flash.
Posted by GORDON on Dec. 04 2013,11:48
I think you meant to post these pics of Jaimie Alexander.
Posted by Leisher on Dec. 11 2013,13:00
< Doomsday? >
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 09 2014,06:25
< Rumors from an "insider". >It should be noted that the Amazons are Kryptonians thing has been dismissed by the powers that be on the film.
Posted by Malcolm on Jan. 19 2014,10:05
< Delayed >. Hopefully because someone found the casting director that was bribed to bring in Affleck, and they executed the motherfucker as an example to all the rest of the corrupt douchebags in the industry.
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 20 2014,07:06
This is a pretty smart move by WB/DC. They were trying to go head to head with The Avengers (mistake!). Now they avoid that bullet, and instead, force Marvel to move one of its phase 3 movies. No way does Marvel leave something like Dr. Strange on the same day as Superman Vs Batman. Dr. Strange should be a late July, early August release anyway. Maybe even a winter release. The source material just isn't popular enough for a May release.
Posted by Malcolm on Jan. 20 2014,09:03
< Merge > threads.
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 20 2014,09:47
Merged and changed the title to the actual working title.
Posted by TheCatt on Jan. 20 2014,11:48
Thanks for the merge since I got to look at those dress pics again. Damn.
Posted by GORDON on Jan. 31 2014,11:38
Jessie Eisenberg and Simon Gruber for Lex Luthor and Alfred, respectively.Interesting choices.
< http://www.nerdist.com/2014....-alfred >
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 31 2014,11:55
Jessie Eisenberg as Lex Luthor?Really?
It's going to take a Heath Ledger as the Joker type of performance to pull this off.
Posted by GORDON on Jan. 31 2014,11:56
My first thought was, "What, are they remaking smallville?"
Posted by Malcolm on Jan. 31 2014,12:18
(Leisher @ Jan. 31 2014,13:55)
QUOTE
Jessie Eisenberg as Lex Luthor?
Really?
It's going to take a Heath Ledger as the Joker type of performance to pull this off.
Really?
It's going to take a Heath Ledger as the Joker type of performance to pull this off.
He'd probably need to die to seal that deal. This is another nail in the coffin this movie looks to be.
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 31 2014,12:21
WB/DC doesn't exactly have an awesome track record casting their characters.Exclude the Dark Night films as they had nothing to do with them.
Posted by GORDON on Jan. 31 2014,12:41
They should get America's Sweetheart Jonah Hill for Lex.
Posted by Leisher on May 02 2014,09:57
Posted by Leisher on May 21 2014,11:07
< Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice >A little too obvious with that title...
Posted by Leisher on Jun. 13 2014,07:08
< DC's rumored slate of movies through 2018. >
Posted by Malcolm on Jun. 13 2014,07:19
QUOTE
Xmas 2017 – Flash and Green Lantern team-up
Fuck. No, wait. NOT Ryan Reynolds. WOOHOO!!
Posted by Leisher on Jun. 13 2014,07:47
Just sayin'...
Posted by Malcolm on Jun. 13 2014,07:56
I'll say it again, Ryan might've been a passable Guy Gardner. He isn't Hal Jordan. He isn't even Kyle Rayner.
Posted by Leisher on Jun. 13 2014,09:57
Actually, I disagree on Kyle Rayner and Guy Gardner. Guy Gardner is a tough guy, a punk, and stocky. Ryan Reynolds would be completely unbelievable as him.
Rayner, on the other hand, was kind of a wise cracking guy. Reynolds would have fit him better.
But at the end of the day, Reynolds should be the Flash.
I consider the Reynolds/Green Lantern casting to be a massive red flag. Marvel does Marvel movies and Disney stays the fuck out of the way. WB does DC movies...
Posted by Malcolm on Jun. 13 2014,10:17
QUOTE
But at the end of the day, Reynolds should be the Flash.
I could kind of see that. I consider Barry Allan (since they're probably going Hal Jordan) to be more likeable than I've seen Ryan pull off in any role. There's something about him that just makes me want to punch him every time I see him on screen.
Posted by Leisher on Jun. 13 2014,11:10
QUOTE
There's something about him that just makes me want to punch him every time I see him on screen.
I'm guessing you're a massive Dane Cook fan too.
I submit that Ryan Reynolds is the newest Scott Baio. Like Baio, he's a good looking guy with a limited range. People don't really hate him, but they don't really love him. Each also has drilled a surprisingly long and impressive list of A list actresses.
I don't mind Reynolds. I think he's very good when cast well, and that's usually for comedic effect. Although, I will say that his dramatic turns were far better than other comedic actors.
Posted by Malcolm on Jun. 13 2014,11:31
QUOTE
I'm guessing you're a massive Dane Cook fan too.
I swear to god, if Dane didn't dress like a hobo that just crawled out of a cardboard box, I wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
Posted by Leisher on Jul. 29 2014,08:30
< Full photo of new Wonder Woman. >My wife saw it and said, "That sucks. Her outfit looks nothing like the Underoos I wore as a kid."
Posted by GORDON on Jul. 29 2014,10:36
That chick got in trouble for supporting Israel recently
Posted by Vince on Jul. 29 2014,10:57
She also has had a couple of sandwiches since the earlier pictures I've seen of her.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 11 2014,08:29
< WB blinked first and moved away from Captain America 3. >What's that say when Warner Brothers has so much faith in its product that they think Captain America, all by himself, is going to put a massive dent in their team up of Superman and Batman?
There's also a ridiculous list of all the superhero comic movies on the way with their release dates.
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 11 2014,09:03
latino-review.com, the "Latin Perspective of Movies and Pop Culture."I think I would write a very good caucasion-review.com site.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 11 2014,09:47
I don't know how they became such a huge source of movie news. I also don't get the whole "Latin" connection because I've never seen them discuss anything Latin or from a Latin perspective.
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 11 2014,09:48
"There was a nude scene with *the actress* but her butt was waaaay too big in proportion to her body. It was gross."~ movie review on caucasion-review.com.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 11 2014,10:41
Racist.
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 11 2014,11:49
You obviously just hate white people and their ways.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 26 2014,11:24
Why DC/WB moved BvS away from Cap 3, and why that whole 2 big movies on one day thing happened in the first place:QUOTE
When WB/DC announced that they would be releasing their Batman v Superman on May 6, 2016, many fans were taken aback. That date, after all, had been "claimed" by Marvel Studios. While they hadn't announced which film would open on that date, the Disney-owned giant had made it clear that day would be the kickoff of Phase 3. By declaring that BvS would open that day, WB/DC basically threw down the gauntlet. They were willing to bet that Marvel would either change dates, or have something completely inferior to their title planned for the day- like a lesser known character along the lines of Ant-Man or Doctor Strange.
Then a few key things happened.
Captain America: The Winter Soldier came out and was a major hit for Marvel
Marvel announced that Captain America 3 would be their May 6, 2016 film
Guardians of The Galaxy did insane business- despite no A-list stars, a director unknown to the mainstream, and a cast of characters that were widely unknown to the masses. The success of GoTG showed that Marvel, as just a brand name, had established a strong enough bond with pop culture that it could open a movie with a talking raccoon and still use it to print money
Suddenly, this game of chicken didn't seem so wise. It was clear Marvel had their game plan and would not be budging, so WB/DC shifted Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice to March 25, 2016. A smart move by the studio, and a win for everybody- especially the fans.
Then a few key things happened.
Captain America: The Winter Soldier came out and was a major hit for Marvel
Marvel announced that Captain America 3 would be their May 6, 2016 film
Guardians of The Galaxy did insane business- despite no A-list stars, a director unknown to the mainstream, and a cast of characters that were widely unknown to the masses. The success of GoTG showed that Marvel, as just a brand name, had established a strong enough bond with pop culture that it could open a movie with a talking raccoon and still use it to print money
Suddenly, this game of chicken didn't seem so wise. It was clear Marvel had their game plan and would not be budging, so WB/DC shifted Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice to March 25, 2016. A smart move by the studio, and a win for everybody- especially the fans.
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 26 2014,12:01
1. It is possible I would have seen them both on the same day anyway. I do crazy shit like that sometimes.2. DC's a bunch of bitches, aren't they. And now I know that the movie they are releasing is seen as an inferior product... maybe now I'll wait to hear some reviews, first.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 27 2014,10:56
< WB doesn't think superheroes are funny. >Really? A "no jokes" policy?
I get it if you were trying to reverse your previous track record of mocking your own properties (Ex: Batman and Robin), but no humor?
Humor kind of worked well so far for Marvel...
QUOTE
"DC treats their superhero characters more like gods," whereas Marvel, the opposition, has characters that are more human-like and flawed.
And that's always been DC's problem. Their characters are beyond reproach. Meanwhile, Cap's a fossil with out of date thinking, Thor's an overgrown frat boy, Stark's a paranoid drunk control freak, Spider-Man has abandonment issues, Wolverine's a cold blooded killer, etc. Hell, even Marvel's villain are more gray area than actual "we're the bad guys with bad thoughts" villain types.
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 27 2014,11:06
Christ. I guess no Flash, Booster Gold, or Blue Beetle.
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 27 2014,11:19
All the Marvel movies have had humor. From subtle (Cap slipping Fury the $10 when he gets on the bridge of the Helicarrier) to gut busting (Hulk tossing around Loki).
That Hulk/Loki scene drew laughter that was so loud in the theater that I couldn't hear any lines for the next 40 seconds.
Warner Brothers: "Superheroes should be seen as serious, so you won't find humor in our movies. However, if you'd like to see two people making out over the smoldering ruins of a city where at least a hundred thousand people just died, that's totally in our wheelhouse."
Posted by Malcolm on Aug. 27 2014,11:31
Also ... no Riddler, no Joker.
Posted by Leisher on Oct. 08 2014,15:10
A still from 2007's I Am Legend:
< How did that happen? >
Posted by Vince on Oct. 09 2014,03:36
I don't know if I buy that rumor. Not that they had as much humor, but I can think of a couple of lines from Batman Begins that were funny. Alfred was pretty light hearted and the "Does it come in black" line with the tumbler. They're more serious, but I think the Batman reboot set the tone and it was to be more based in what the real world looks like. I suspect that was more in response (by Nolan) to what the late 80's and 90s franchise became more than what Marvel was doing.
Posted by Leisher on Oct. 09 2014,06:55
You lost me. I'm not sure what rumor you're responding to...?Also, Nolan's Batman reboot, while successful, wasn't as successful as people remember.
Heath Ledger's death and performance as Joker made that series far, far more successful than it would have been otherwise.
Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 09 2014,07:11
QUOTE
Heath Ledger's death and performance as Joker made that series far, far more successful than it would have been otherwise.
Fixed.
Posted by Vince on Oct. 09 2014,07:14
(Leisher @ Oct. 09 2014,08:55)
QUOTE
You lost me. I'm not sure what rumor you're responding to...?
Sorry. Realized after I'd posted that it was to an older post in the thread. The rumor about no humor.
< It was pretty successful >
Posted by Leisher on Oct. 09 2014,07:32
< Not as successful as you remember. >Again:
QUOTE
Heath Ledger's death and performance as Joker made that series far, far more successful than it would have been otherwise.
Does The Dark Knight make $500 million if Ledger doesn't die? Probably not.
Posted by TheCatt on Oct. 09 2014,07:39
I don't know, and it's impossible to know. But the Dark Knight was pretty freaking awesome, and really set the tone for future super hero movies, imho.
Posted by Vince on Oct. 09 2014,08:02
I agree with Catt. Batman Begins was good. Dark Knight was about twice as good (which neatly lines up with the box office take). Heath Ledger did an awesome job and they were praising his work in that movie even before he died.And I think a lot of why Begins didn't do better was because people were turned off by the previous Batman movies. I have no proof of this, but I suspect a lot of people when to theaters to see The Dark Knight after renting or seeing Begins on TV and realizing it wasn't the crap they'd been given in the last few Batman movies.
Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 09 2014,08:08
QUOTE
Batman Begins was good.
It was ok. It looked Oscar-worthy compared to the Joel Schu-loser movies that came immediately prior.
QUOTE
Dark Knight was about twice as good
Eh. It was a bit better.
QUOTE
Heath Ledger did an awesome job
No. He did a better than average job.
QUOTE
And I think a lot of why Begins didn't do better was because people were turned off by the previous Batman movies.
Nolan's Batman trilogy didn't have a Batman feel to it. Didn't have a comics feel to it. Just three films that happened to have a character which shared a lot with the one I know from print and ink. Same for Bane, same for Catwoman. I'd also like to point out the Dark Knight Rises wasn't that good.
Posted by TheCatt on Oct. 09 2014,08:15
Let's just agree that Malcolm is wrong.
Posted by Vince on Oct. 09 2014,08:43
Again, I agree w/ Catt. Though I will give him that Rises wasn't as good as it should have been.Other than that, yeah... Malcolm is wrong.
Posted by Leisher on Oct. 09 2014,08:58
I disagree with you two and agree mostly with Malcolm. While I do think Ledger was better than Malcolm gives him credit for, I also think the Nolan Batman films are really overrated. And I say that as someone who enjoyed all three films.
But nobody can deny that they had plot holes galore, and this is a fact:
QUOTE
Just three films that happened to have a character which shared a lot with the one I know from print and ink.
I said this in the Dark Knight thread:
QUOTE
They were absolutely brilliant movies that featured Batman, but they weren't necessarily Batman movies.
I've heard that sentiment echoed elsewhere too. It's like Nolan had the stories laid out and then got hired to make a Batman film.
Iron Man did more for the genre than Nolan's Batman trilogy.
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 12 2015,06:54
< Split into two movies with the first coming out this October? >As the article states, it could easily be a fake, but it would also be a logical move.
We shall see...
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 12 2015,11:57
< Superman says it isn't true. >
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 28 2015,12:03
< Jason Momoa says Aquaman won't be blonde or white. >Not being racist, but Aquaman rules from the bottom of the ocean. The bottom of the ocean isn't exactly known for its sunlight. So should be fun to explain his dark skin.
The fact that this is a Zack Snyder thing bugs me. It's a red flag. Snyder doesn't work for DC. He doesn't write the books. Hollywood doesn't have a great track record with respecting source material. However, Snyder does as 300 was basically a frame for frame remake of Frank Miller's book. So we'll see...
Posted by Malcolm on Jan. 28 2015,14:12
Doesn't matter the ethnicity, it's hard to shake the "pussy" label.
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 20 2015,09:20
He's going to crush this role, but I'm still going to laugh thinking about how the guy who rules a kingdom without sunlight, yet somehow he's got tanned skin and dark hair.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 20 2015,11:41
Polynesian ancestry?
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 20 2015,11:46
Atlantis came first.And Aquaman is the product of an Atlantean queen and a honky from the States.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 20 2015,11:47
A woman from Atlanta is probably black, you know.
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 20 2015,11:49
Not that kind of Atlantean...A queen from Atlantis.
Marvel calls them Atlanteans. Should they be Atlantisians?
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 20 2015,11:51
I knew what you meant, but the "sunken city of Atlanta" episode of Futurama was on a couple days ago and I was of a mind.
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 20 2015,11:55
I did not get that reference. I had completely forgotten about it.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 18 2015,14:13
First trailer.My first impressions.... it looks like kind of a bummer.
Posted by TheCatt on Apr. 18 2015,16:21
So... Why are batman and super man fighting?
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 18 2015,19:01
(TheCatt @ Apr. 18 2015,19:21)
QUOTE
So... Why are batman and super man fighting?
Looks like "because bullshit." Looks like there's going to be an religious/ignorance-backlash against Supes, an Batman is going to be involved.
Without knowing anything about it, though, I bet a dollar that Lex Luthor is manipulating public opinion and Bats gets involved. The bits and pieces I've gleaned about Lex, beyond the old and new movies, is that he is a brilliant, manipulative bastard.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 18 2015,19:36
(TheCatt @ Apr. 18 2015,18:21)
QUOTE
So... Why are batman and super man fighting?
Unless lex gives bats some kryptonite, that'll be the shortest fight in history. Oh wait, in the last movie I saw, supes was a gigantic vag 99.9% of the time.
Posted by Vince on Apr. 18 2015,19:52
(TheCatt @ Apr. 18 2015,18:21)
QUOTE
So... Why are batman and super man fighting?
I think the theory is that a bunch of folks think Superman is great and saved us all from Gen. Zodd. But a bunch of other folks are looking at the death toll and massive destruction from the first movie and thinking he was kind of a dick about collateral damage. And Batman is falling on the side of "kind of a dick".
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 18 2015,20:30
(Vince @ Apr. 18 2015,21:52)
QUOTE
(TheCatt @ Apr. 18 2015,18:21)
QUOTE
So... Why are batman and super man fighting?
I think the theory is that a bunch of folks think Superman is great and saved us all from Gen. Zodd. But a bunch of other folks are looking at the death toll and massive destruction from the first movie and thinking he was kind of a dick about collateral damage. And Batman is falling on the side of "kind of a dick".
Funny, because when I think of "kind of a dick," I think Affleck.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 18 2015,21:11
QUOTE
My first impressions.... it looks like kind of a bummer.
I wasn't blown away by the trailer. And yes, it'll be a bummer. "No jokes" policy for all DC films, remember?
QUOTE
So... Why are batman and super man fighting?
< Here's the original story. > It is excellent. There are a handful of superhero stories that transcend the genre. This is one of them. Basically, it's the future and Superman has lost his way and is being controlled. Bats comes back from retirement to set him straight and without spoiling the end of the fight, he does kick Supes' ass using his tricks and toys.
For this film, Gordo is on the right track. There's going to be folks who aren't exactly thrilled that millions died in Metropolis and that the most powerful being on the planet is an alien. That theme is one that gets explored a LOT in DC comics. It's why Luthor hates Supes, why Batman has backup plans on how to take out every other hero, why the humans eventually turn on super powered beings in the phenomenal < Kingdom Come > (another one on the list of must reads for anyone), etc. Even Marvel has touched on that theme with their own Billionaire playboy (Iron Man) and member of their primary super team having plans on how to defeat his teammates should they go bad.
Anyway, my guess is that they're going to play up that the government is nervous about Superman (another story line from the comics), cults will form to worship him, folks will be scared of him, etc. So, Batman's going to come after him, whether or not that's via Luthor or the government, who knows?
By the way, heroes fighting before they team up is classic comics by the numbers.
Anyway, I expect once their fight is going on, a baddie will appear and Supes will prove to Batman that he's a genuine good guy (Really well done in the last few pages of < The Nail >. A pretty cool story about the Kents getting a flat tire and never finding baby Supes.). By the end of the film, we'll have the Justice League or most of it.
If you want to see another Superman/Batman fight where Superman actually the bad guy, read < Red Son >. That's where Supes landed in Russia, not the U.S.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 18 2015,23:10
QUOTE
Kingdom Come...
QUOTE
That's a character that Mark Waid invented that was really just put to me like come up with the most God awful, Rob Liefeld sort of design that you can.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 19 2015,11:57
Where'd you get that from Malcolm? That made me laugh. Speaking of Affleck as that thread is back and this movie is becoming relevant... When I watch that trailer and they show him, he does not look like Bruce Wayne. Not even a little bit.
I do like the voice they've come up with though. A guy with all those toys should use a voice modulator rather than just talking with a rasp.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 19 2015,15:24
Ripped off the wikipedia page for Magog. Originally < here >.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 20 2015,09:49
The trailer Gordon posted isn't real. Apparently, < this is the real trailer >.
This one looks legit awesome. I'll be there opening night.
(Sorry, I'm crazy busy and was too lazy to embed it.)
Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 21 2015,10:12
This trailer (the real one) is the first I've had any interest in this movie. Looks like it might be good. And Daredevil showing up didn't bother me at all.But then I've never really cared for DC much at all. I barely care about Marvel. So I'm sort of their target audience, I guess.
Oh, and I, too, would rather see the retro version.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 23 2015,20:13
(TPRJones @ Apr. 21 2015,13:12)
QUOTE
Oh, and I, too, would rather see the retro version.
This one is even better though.
Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 23 2015,21:02
Why was Batman shining his own logo into the sky? Isn't that how other people contact him? Doesn't that mean he was essentially talking to himself?
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 24 2015,07:35
It's a pretty dramatic here I am/let's fight, even though I guess technically all he'd have to do is whisper "I am Batman" and Clark would hear it from anywhere in the world.
Posted by Leisher on Jul. 11 2015,22:06
< ComicCon trailer >< Trailer and a rundown... >
Posted by GORDON on Jul. 12 2015,12:53
Do they call it "Supes-Buster Armor?"
Posted by Leisher on Jul. 12 2015,13:54
Yeah, there's a thing about that armor that, if true, makes it far less cool.I linked a rumor earlier in the thread about it.
Posted by GORDON on Jul. 12 2015,13:59
Is it illegal to talk about the Miller comic, where they fought, in this thread?
Posted by Paul on Jul. 13 2015,05:44
< Man of Steel/Batman Vs Superman comparison > < . >< vs... >
Posted by GORDON on Aug. 07 2015,16:32
Some group gave the movie a standing-o and immediately signed on Afflek for 3 more movies.< http://nerdbastards.com/2015....ovation >
Posted by Leisher on Aug. 07 2015,20:29
It's important to note that the "some group" was studio executives. I hope they're right though.
Posted by Leisher on Oct. 21 2015,07:20
< Budget is $410 million and climbing. >
Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 21 2015,07:42
(Leisher @ Aug. 07 2015,22:29)
QUOTE
It's important to note that the "some group" was studio executives. I hope they're right though.
Come on, Leish. Like DC execs have ever been wrong about casting superheros < before >.
Posted by Leisher on Oct. 21 2015,11:04
Affleck doesn't concern me. The "no humor" policy and the way DC doesn't seem to know its own heroes worries me.How do you reboot Superman, in the Marvel age of movies, and in his first film have him kill someone? Will Affleck's Batman wield dual machine guns?
Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 21 2015,11:08
QUOTE
Will Affleck's Batman wield dual machine guns?
He may as well. I won't even be able to watch the flick because I know I'll be thinking, "When is someone going to beat down the douchebag from Mall Rats?"
Posted by Paul on Dec. 03 2015,22:11
< https://youtu.be/CMVugzohlwA >
Posted by TPRJones on Dec. 04 2015,07:16
The trailers have been looking pretty good.Affleck looks like he can play a solid Bruce Wayne. Still not sure how he'll be as Batman, though.
Posted by Malcolm on Dec. 04 2015,07:34
QUOTE
Affleck looks like he can play a solid Bruce Wayne
A foppish playboy that gets by on looks and inherited wealth and prestige? Yeah, I bet he could pull that off.
Posted by Leisher on Dec. 04 2015,08:25
Jesse whatever playing Lex Luthor is not doing it for me. It's jarringly bad in the trailer. Lex Luthor is a cold calculating businessman who actually becomes president at one point. He's not even technically evil, he's just protecting the Earth from what he sees as an alien menace who could wipe out humanity. He's a LOT like Batman. Unlike Batman, he has no rules about what means can be used to get to the result he desires.
Jesse Eisenburg's portrayal is nothing like that. He's playing him like a strung out sex offender.
Posted by Malcolm on Dec. 04 2015,09:15
I assume whoever cast him didn't see the piece of shit called American Ultra.
Posted by Leisher on Dec. 04 2015,12:20
Fixed:
Posted by Leisher on Jan. 04 2016,06:07
< Early review hits the web. >It's glowingly positive, and as the article points out, doesn't say one negative thing. That's a red flag. The other red flag is that they specifically mention Jesse Eisenberg's performance and Ben Affleck's. Red flags because those are the two most controversial castings in the film.
The movie may be awesome, and I hope it is, but this review reminds me of the glowingly positive review that was leaked about Fantastic Four...
Posted by Malcolm on Jan. 04 2016,07:25
I hope Superman rips Affleck's head off in the first five minutes and pisses in his eyes.
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 12 2016,07:04
< Trailer remade shot for shot with Reeves and West. >
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 12 2016,07:27
QUOTE
What if the Batman v Superman Dawn of Justice film was made in 1966 starring Adam West and George Reeves
Batman and Superman would spend 90 minutes at the bar, then get in a drunken fistfight for the next 10. Credits roll.
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 12 2016,07:49
It's becoming increasingly concerning to me that the studio keeps having insiders and people who worked on the film come out and praise it. Meanwhile, the general public keeps watching the trailers and saying "Ok, Affleck isn't as bad as we thought he'd be, but what the fuck is Eisenberg doing to Luthor?"
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 12 2016,09:40
QUOTE
EDIT: Trailer for Superman v. Batman makes that movie look more and more like ass. The Lex Luthor performance could make Affleck's acting merely the second worst aspect of the film. Currently in terms of quality, it looks somewhere between the second and third Keaton entries.
< Yeah >.
QUOTE
Meanwhile, the general public keeps watching the trailers and saying "Ok, Affleck isn't as bad as we thought he'd be, but what the fuck is Eisenberg doing to Luthor?"
I'll give you 50%. I'm still not buying Ben. Just go Karl Urban.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 12 2016,12:28
Actually each trailer make it look more promising than the one before. I think the Lex has potential and Affleck seems like he might not be a disaster after all. Not sure about whoever that is playing Supes, though, he seems kind of lame.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 12 2016,13:05
QUOTE
I think the Lex has potential...
Are you shitting me? Maybe the potential to be a whiny bitch.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 12 2016,13:46
I may be the only person on the planet who actually liked the last Superman movie... a lot.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 12 2016,14:02
(GORDON @ Feb. 12 2016,15:46)
QUOTE
I may be the only person on the planet who actually liked the last Superman movie... a lot.
Would that be Superman: Where Did My Balls Go?
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 12 2016,14:04
I thought it was perfect, and I liked the actor playing the role.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 12 2016,14:17
(GORDON @ Feb. 12 2016,16:04)
QUOTE
I thought it was perfect, and I liked the actor playing the role.
Feel free to < revisit the thread > where I point out how retarded it got. Yeah, every superhero needs a father that's a big enough dumbshit to stand in the path of a tornado for no sound reason, and said superhero also must be a big enough pussy not to do anything about it.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 12 2016,14:27
Yes, I remember your opinions.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 13 2016,04:31
(GORDON @ Feb. 12 2016,15:46)
QUOTE
I may be the only person on the planet who actually liked the last Superman movie... a lot.
I liked it. Not up to the level of Nolan's Dark Knight series, but I wasn't disappointed.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 13 2016,05:18
(Vince @ Feb. 13 2016,07:31)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Feb. 12 2016,15:46)
QUOTE
I may be the only person on the planet who actually liked the last Superman movie... a lot.
I liked it. Not up to the level of Nolan's Dark Knight series, but I wasn't disappointed.
The Supes movie of... a decade ago? had a few really cool moments, but overall I didn't like the movie. The most recent movie, I thought it did a very good job even if there weren't as many cool moments as the Brandon Routh (?) movie.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 13 2016,18:25
Part of the problem with the Brandon Routh movie (in my opinion) was that he did such a spot on job of Christopher Reeve as Superman that it was on the verge of creepy. I told my movie date afterwards that he played a better "Christopher Reeve as Superman" than Christopher Reeve did.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 13 2016,19:08
I didn't mind that, I minded the stupidity of the movie... in one moment he can't even stand on the kryptonite island and Luthor can punch him 10 feet backwards, and 10 minutes later he is able to lift the entire thing out of Earth orbit.And the fact that the entire movie was Supes lifting things, or catching things.... that is literally all he did the entire movie.... was dumb.
But then the bullet flattening against his eyeball was cool.
Cool moments, dumb movie.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 14 2016,06:06
To be fair, the hailed original '78 had Superman flying against the spin of the Earth until it spun backwards. So there was a precedent of stupid.
Posted by TheCatt on Feb. 14 2016,10:28
(Vince @ Feb. 14 2016,09:06)
QUOTE
To be fair, the hailed original '78 had Superman flying against the spin of the Earth until it spun backwards. So there was a precedent of stupid.
BACKWARDS IN TIME
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 14 2016,19:34
Yeah I never thought he literally spun the earth backwards, but rather it appeared to spin backwards because he was going backwards in time. Which is still dumb but less dumb than "earth spin backwards causes time to reverse".
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 15 2016,07:16
Superman Returns sucked because it was the exact same movie as the original only somehow worse. Yeah, it had cool moments as Gordo pointed out, but overall it wasn't a good film. Man of Steel I also enjoyed. I thought the effects and acting were much better than previous efforts. However, I did have issues with it.
If you're still reading and haven't seen Man of Steel, skip the rest of my post.
Why turn Earth into a new Krypton? That made no sense. Why introduce an atmosphere that makes you normal instead of using the existing one that makes you gods?
The kiss over the devastation that easily killed hundreds of thousands was, at the very least, in poor taste. Realistically it shows that you have no regard or remorse for the humans you claim to protect and Batman is right to want to stop you.
Superman doesn't kill. End of story. (He could have covered his eyes. He could have told the morons standing there to move. Etc. Plus, if you watch Zod's head, the way Superman moved it would have pointed the beam right at those people and killed them.)
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 15 2016,07:36
Yeah, I always did wonder why Zod chose Earth instead of, say, Mars, which Supes would not have fought him about. But then you realize that Zod is crazy and it was now about hurting Supes, not bringing back Krypton.And one presumes that just because they change the atmosphere of the planet to breath easier, it still won't change the yellow sun that makes Supes super. But that's another can o' worms, isn't it, because they showed the atmo making supes weak.
I dunno.
Still liked it, even the Costner sacrifice.
Posted by Leisher on Feb. 18 2016,06:02
< People are starting to see the film and the suits are nervous. >They want to make clear that people are enjoying the film, but they're comparing it to Man of Steel. Considering how that was received, and look no further than the previous comments in this thread for that, the WB peeps are worried.
I'll bet if Justice League is the next film, they're going to relax that "no humor" rule and skew more towards what Marvel does, particularly in light of Deadpool's success.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 18 2016,07:31
QUOTE
particularly in light of Deadpool's success.
The next DC movie, Blue Beetle and Booster Gold Go Hawaiian.
Posted by Paul on Feb. 26 2016,04:23
< Ben Affleck 'Wasn’t Thrilled' With the 'Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice' Script — and Rewrote It Dressed As the Superhero! >
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 14 2016,07:11
< Jenna Malone's cut character is Barbara Gordon. >
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 14 2016,07:56
(Leisher @ Mar. 14 2016,09:11)
QUOTE
< Jenna Malone's cut character is Barbara Gordon. >
QUOTE
It was recently revealed that Malone has been cut from the theatrical release of "BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE" and will only be seen in the 'R' rated 'Ultimate Cut' which will be released on blu-ray and dvd this summer.
Choke on ten thousand dicks, WB.
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 14 2016,08:02
Running time for BvS is 2 1/2 hours and they couldn't fit her in?
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 17 2016,11:34
< Has to make $800 million to $1 billion. >
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 17 2016,11:52
(Leisher @ Mar. 17 2016,13:34)
QUOTE
< Has to make $800 million to $1 billion. >
QUOTE
Warner Bros is coming off of its worst year in recent memory, since JUPITER ASCENDING, PAN, and Henry Cavill-starrer THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. all either bombed or underperformed in 2015.
Ouch.
QUOTE
Echoing concerns that came out of early test screenings for BATMAN V SUPERMAN Eddy Von Mueller, a senior lecturer in the Film and Media Studies department at Emory University, says that WB/DC's desire to make a more arresting superhero film "could be a tougher sell to audiences." Von Mueller's comments are based on a comparison between DC and Marvel, since the latter's films have tended to be more lighthearted and escapist not to be made by people with several large sticks crammed cozily up their asshole.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 17 2016,12:12
I wonder if the people who directed those recent flops at WB are now sitting back and silently laughing at the idiot producers who has all the mandatory input in their films.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 17 2016,12:26
(GORDON @ Mar. 17 2016,14:12)
QUOTE
I wonder if the people who directed those recent flops at WB are now sitting back and silently laughing at the idiot producers who has all the mandatory input in their films.
Jupiter Ascending: the Wachowski ... uh, "people"
Pan: Joe Wright is currently working on new Black Mirror eps.
Man from U.N.C.L.E.: Guy Ritchie DGAF.
Something tells me not one of them gives a shit about WB.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 17 2016,12:31
And thus the schadenfreude laughing at their misfortune.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 22 2016,10:42
Presales are big. Expecting a $300M opening weekend. I hope it bombs.
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 24 2016,08:17
On Monday I saw an article about people's responses after seeing BvS, but I didn't post it after seeing that these were not critics or regular people. They were insiders and critics were still under a hush order. As you would imagine, the reviews were overwhelmingly positive as all of the leaked reviews have been from studio friendly sources.So I held off.
Today critics reviews are coming in and currently the movie sits at < 33% on Rotten Tomatoes. >
Ouch.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 24 2016,10:04
Mega ouch.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 24 2016,10:17
Posted by Paul on Mar. 25 2016,04:36
(Leisher @ Mar. 24 2016,11:17)
QUOTE
Today critics reviews are coming in and currently the movie sits at < 33% on Rotten Tomatoes. >
Ouch.
Ouch.
< https://youtu.be/cwXfv25xJUw >
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 25 2016,07:01
Wow. Who would've thought that a movie whose real villain is Axel Foley interpreted by Jeese Eisenberg would be a bad money maker? Guess we'll have to check those second weekend numbers.
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 25 2016,11:31
< Fake accounts are skewing the BvS IMDB score higher. >
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 25 2016,11:35
(Leisher @ Mar. 25 2016,13:31)
QUOTE
< Fake accounts are skewing the BvS IMDB score higher. >
Wow. That's a sharp, sharp curve as the ratings descend.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 25 2016,12:17
Peeps seem to be turning on this movie. It can't be THAT bad.....I'll prolly see it this weekend. I'll let you know.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 25 2016,12:26
QUOTE
It can't be THAT bad.....
WB wanted to start the shared universe with Green Lantern. I'm supposed to believe they've learned better after everything I've seen about Suicide Squad, casting Ben "I Was in Daredevil, Goddamnit" Affleck and Jesse "Somebody please Atomic Wedgie the Shit Out of Me" Eisenberg, and the "no funny stuff" screenplay rules?
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 25 2016,15:19
< Conflicting reviews >. I don't really mean about the final opinion, I mean about exactly how "eh" it was. It edged out Deadpool's Thursday sneak preview numbers but the reviews top out at "kind of not bad" and frequently tank as far as "horrible." I generally like DC comics more than Marvel, but goddamn me if I don't want to see the fucktards helming the DC movies to be punished for their constant meddling.
Posted by TheCatt on Mar. 25 2016,17:22
(GORDON @ Mar. 25 2016,15:17)
QUOTE
Peeps seem to be turning on this movie. It can't be THAT bad.....
I'll prolly see it this weekend. I'll let you know.
I'll prolly see it this weekend. I'll let you know.
My geekiest comic book friends are not happy.
And yes, I mean geekier than you people.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 26 2016,09:36
1 o'clock movie bitches.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 26 2016,10:08
(GORDON @ Mar. 26 2016,11:36)
QUOTE
1 o'clock movie bitches.
Get into that goddamn coal mine, canary.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 26 2016,13:57
Ok, non-spoilery review:It's a long movie, something like 2 hours 40.
The first 1.7 hours is like, "Who thought this slow, plodding, poorly paced shit was a good superhero movie?"
And then there's like 45 minutes of AWESOME.
Then it gets kind of slow again at the end.
So I dunno.
Posted by Paul on Mar. 26 2016,22:36
Posted by Vince on Mar. 27 2016,06:53
Seems like they wanted to put the awesome battle from Dark Knight Returns in this but didn't have the established history of the comics to do it in. That history was what made it work in the graphic novel. Had a bad feeling this was going to feel very clunky and poorly written.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 27 2016,06:59
There were aspects of a few different comics I've actually read.
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 28 2016,06:39
< Record box office. >No surprise there. Even bad reviews weren't going to stop this movie from doing well. Hell, most tickets were sold before the reviews even came out.
The interesting part starts next weekend and goes on to future DC movies. It'll be number one again, but for how long with Civil War looming? Will bad reviews here hurt Suicide Squad which already had a massive negative in skatepunk Joker?
Marvel makes good movies that appeal to hard core fans and casual fans. DC can't seem to hit that same mark.
I've heard their core audience likes this movie about as much as they liked Man of Steel...so not at all.
I think DC's big problem is they put their properties in Hollywood hands rather than using in house folks. What results are known characters that don't act like the audience expects and it pisses them off.
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 30 2016,18:47
< Another record! >Largest drop off for a superhero film. Not a good sign.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 01 2016,22:27
Liked it better the second time, after I had time to ponder why some things were the way they were.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 01 2016,22:30
I'm seeing it Monday.I'm hopeful my low expectations will translate to a good experience.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 01 2016,22:34
I explained in the spoiler thread why I liked it better, I actually have a reason.... I wish I could tell you why going in so you don't have the same "what the fucks?" that I had.
Posted by Paul on Apr. 02 2016,08:24
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 02 2016,11:21
I am anticipating the second weekend drop off. If the flick isn't as bankable as is needed and Suicide Squad sucks, one wonders what WB will do.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 02 2016,12:16
Other movie sites are rating it better than 7/10, though.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 02 2016,16:22
(GORDON @ Apr. 02 2016,14:16)
QUOTE
Other movie sites are rating it better than 7/10, though.
We've been over how the ballot box is stuffed.
Here's the IMDB average rating:
7.3/10 from 200,577 users
Metacritic: 44/100
A grand total of two of them rated it 70 or higher.
I got $100 that says more than a few of those 200K users are fake WB accounts. Every website that allows unrestricted, easily duped voting has it going 70-80%. The ones that don't are putting it beneath 50%. Hell, here's a favourable review from RT:
QUOTE
Unfortunately, director Zach Snyder's scattershot, overly complicated and hugely drawn-out exposition depletes the story of all its fun and power, reducing his leads to impotent cranks.
I repeat: that's one of the more positive reviews.
RT audience score: 71%
RT critic score: 29%
And don't give me the bullshit that critics don't like superhero movies. Deadpool, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Ant-Man didn't get this much hate. Then again, those were movies made by people without pointy sticks permanently lodged in their asses.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 02 2016,16:51
OK sir I won't give you that bullshit sir.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 02 2016,17:45
He's not wrong though. I posted a link earlier in thread showing that IMDB's ratings were being skewed intentionally.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 02 2016,19:54
But what none of you are considering is that go fuck yourselves.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 03 2016,10:35
(GORDON @ Apr. 02 2016,21:54)
QUOTE
But what none of you are considering is that go fuck yourselves.
Fine. Let's put this in perspective:
1) < ID4 > is pulling approximately the same audience rating as Affleck v. Cavill: Dawn of We're Shoving Our Cinematic Universe Down Your Throat Like It Or Not.
2) ID4 was a movie where Randy Quaid played an alcoholic conspiracy nut/abductee. The action reaches a zenith when he fulfills his quest to avenge his asshole's virginity at the hands of an alien probe (that might be what the real Randy's doing now, I haven't checked). In BvS, the action is at a high point when O'Battion is avenging his parents' deaths.
3) In the critics category, ID4 is more than doubling a flick that analysts say "must make a billion." That means they're sympathizing more with Randy and his asshole than Ben and his dead mom and dad or anything else in BvS.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 03 2016,13:14
Have you seen this movie yet?
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 03 2016,16:29
(GORDON @ Apr. 03 2016,15:14)
QUOTE
Have you seen this movie yet?
Someone PayPal me $10 and I might. I think I can piece enough together from previews and this board to know that I'm not wasting cash on it.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 03 2016,16:41
Cool. Let me know when you can discuss a movie you've actually seen, then.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 03 2016,17:40
(GORDON @ Apr. 03 2016,18:41)
QUOTE
Cool. Let me know when you can discuss a movie you've actually seen, then.
Let me know when there's enough substance and story to pay to see.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 03 2016,17:40
(Malcolm @ Apr. 03 2016,20:40)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Apr. 03 2016,18:41)
QUOTE
Cool. Let me know when you can discuss a movie you've actually seen, then.
Let me know when there's enough substance and story to pay to see.
Not my job.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 04 2016,08:01
QUOTE
Heading into the weekend, it appeared Batman v Superman was looking at a drop anywhere from 58-68% and it ended up settling in on the wrong side of those expectations. The film's estimated $52.3 million signifies a 68.4% drop (62.1% if you take into consideration its $27.7 million in Thursday previews last week). This is the fifth largest drop of all-time for a film opening over $100 million, topped only by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2's 72% drop and a trio of Twilight films dropping 69-70%.
In fact, the film's second weekend plummet is on par with last year's Fantastic Four, which dropped 68.2% in its second weekend...
In fact, the film's second weekend plummet is on par with last year's Fantastic Four, which dropped 68.2% in its second weekend...
Damn, waiting for this thing to come out for free seems a better deal every day.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 04 2016,08:29
< PA review >:GORDON edit - I'm deleting this photo because I don't want to get carpel tunnel moving the mouse left to right a million times trying to read Leisher's big post.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 05 2016,07:32
If you went to McDonald's and ordered a Big Mac, what would you expect to receive?"Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions, on a sesame seed bun."
But what if you ordered that Big Mac and didn't receive the cheese or special sauce? Would you be satisfied? Wouldn't you feel cheated? Is the sandwich still a Big Mac if it's missing ingredients?
That's the problem with BvS and the problem with DC movies in general. They simply don't stay true to the source material.
Over at Marvel the filmmakers are making movies based on existing characters and they're changing almost nothing. The characters seem to go from page to film without a lot lost in translation. Look at Iron Man. Show me the differences between the comic and film versions. You can't. From the look to the attitude to the mannerisms to the way he talks, it's all the same. That's due to the team making the movies. From the producers to the actor to the special effects guys, they're all on the same page.
BvS is an entertaining film. I don't regret seeing it in the theaters. However, it's not the BvS film that should have been made in 2016. It's not a comic book movie that should have been made in a world where Marvel makes movies. It certainly did NOT work as a film featuring Batman or Superman.
Don't blame the actors either. I think Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck do a perfectly good job as Superman and Batman. Say what you want about Affleck, but his Bruce Wayne is the best we've ever seen. Snyder and the screenwriters deserve some of the credit for that as well. Also, the entire supporting cast was great with a few exceptions.
I'm not yet sold on Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. She was awesome in the movie until she put on her costume. All the other heroes' appearances were very, very underwhelming.
Oh, and Jesse Eisenberg as Alexander Luthor (an important distinction from Lex...I believe) was not good. I don't blame Jesse as I think he did his best, but the character was terrible. Luthor was just inconsistent throughout and his character made zero sense. Was he insane? Was he brilliant? Horribly written.
The issues also isn't the spectacle as this film delivers that and then some. The movie feels really, really big.
The issue starts at the director and goes all the way up to the folks running WB and DC.
I just don't understand how the folks at WB, who are successful filmmakers, can look at Marvel films and then so badly flub the execution of their own comic properties. People aren't going to show up just because it's a superhero movie. Ask Fox about the Fantastic Four.
I don't understand how a director who made his name, with what was basically a shot for shot remake of a comic book, can forget the formula that got him to the dance.
NOTE: Just found an interesting tidbit. At 5:55 of < this podcast > Snyder reveals he doesn't believe superheroes have any credibility if they perform dialogue while wearing their suits.
We've heard murmurs that WB executives think Snyder is the wrong guy to helm their Justice League film, and I couldn't agree more. You can't put superhero movies in the hands of someone that doesn't respect superheroes. I mean, that's a no brainer.
It's probably not a smart idea to put a guy in charge of your movie who doesn't respect your source material. Batman DOESN'T kill. Superman always tries to minimize damage and protect civilians. These are concepts Snyder either didn't know about or didn't give a fuck about. Many will ask what the big deal is, but go change a core moral value about your favorite character in any existing property and see how it affects everything. Robin gets beat to death with a crowbar in the books because Batman doesn't kill.
Snyder either doesn't know, doesn't understand, or doesn't care.
And aside from that criticism, the pacing of the film is complete shit. Just a horribly slow movie. No reason this had to be a 2 hour and 40 minute affair either. Oh, and those cutaways. Was it me or were some of them out of order?
Anyway, is this worth your time? The spectacle is good to see in a theater, but honestly, the action isn't that great. I would tell you to wait to rent it or see it on your favorite streaming service.
Even if this reaches $1 billion, which we've been told "it has to reach to be considered successful", I can't see how WB/DC can be happy with this movie. Your core audience is shitting all over it and the casual audience isn't reacting positively either.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2016,08:14
QUOTE
Batman DOESN'T kill.
< Bullshit >. Granted it was retconned until 20 issues later.
QUOTE
Robin gets beat to death with a crowbar in the books because Batman doesn't kill.
Also blown up. But only because enough fans called a 900 number.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 05 2016,08:21
(Malcolm @ Apr. 05 2016,11:14)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Batman DOESN'T kill.
< Bullshit >. Granted it was retconned until 20 issues later.
QUOTE
Robin gets beat to death with a crowbar in the books because Batman doesn't kill.
Also blown up. But only because enough fans called a 900 number.
That article doesn't mention Batman killing anyone.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2016,08:22
QUOTE
The Beast invited Batman to fight him to the death, but instead Batman locked the room, effectively burying the assassin alive.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 05 2016,08:31
But it being retconned eliminates it. Plus, locking someone away isn't a death sentence. The person just becomes Schrodinger's cat.Batman's mythos is he doesn't kill. Go through any of his books and that mantra is repeated again and again.
Something Nolan understood and addressed. Too bad Snyder didn't.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2016,08:34
Fine. He fucking shot and killed Darkseid with a gun which lead to an entire schtick that required time travel and other such bullshit to undo that. Snyder's also been on my "hack radar" since he made this < piece of shit >.
Posted by TheCatt on Apr. 05 2016,08:42
< Sucker Punch > was such a potentially great idea.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 05 2016,08:52
QUOTE
Fine. He fucking shot and killed Darkseid with a gun which lead to an entire schtick that required time travel and other such bullshit to undo that.
When? And I'm not sure if Darkseid would count. He's not exactly a human who can be reformed and work part time at the 7/11.
And why are you trying to dig up obscure references to try and counteract an established mythos? Are you really Zach Snyder? Show me the examples where he uses a machine gun to mow down enemies (and I'm not talking about the dream sequences).
QUOTE
Sucker Punch was such a potentially great idea.
The visuals in that movie were amazing, but the execution...
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2016,09:00
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 05 2016,10:43
Can Superman fly? You immediately say "yes" because we all know he does, but originally he couldn't. He just jumped high and far. Does that mean Superman can't fly? No because his legend was changed once the character was fleshed out.
Rick Grimes broke the fuck out of his hand and it would "never heal right" beating up a child molesting serial killer. Then he had his other hand cut off, so Robert Kirkman simply dropped the issues with his dominant hand.
Shit changes to fit a character as he or she is fleshed out. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not so much.
People complained about Wolverine in recent years because he became too invincible.
Anyway, back to the point, Batman doesn't kill. He certainly doesn't address all problems head on not using stealth or intimidation.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2016,10:47
Bah. You're telling me the Frank Miller Batman wouldn't ice a motherfucker with the right motivation?
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 05 2016,11:02
< WB claims they're not concerned about the 58% drop off from last weekend. >Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.
QUOTE
You're telling me the Frank Miller Batman wouldn't ice a motherfucker with the right motivation?
I do not think he would. Also, if we're now including alternate Batmen, then you'd find your killers.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 05 2016,18:18
(Leisher @ Apr. 05 2016,10:32)
QUOTE
That's the problem with BvS and the problem with DC movies in general. They simply don't stay true to the source material.
Maybe that's why I didn't hate it, I don't know the source material very well.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2016,21:31
(Leisher @ Apr. 05 2016,13:02)
QUOTE
< WB claims they're not concerned about the 58% drop off from last weekend. >
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.
I do not think he would. Also, if we're now including alternate Batmen, then you'd find your killers.
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.
QUOTE
You're telling me the Frank Miller Batman wouldn't ice a motherfucker with the right motivation?
I do not think he would. Also, if we're now including alternate Batmen, then you'd find your killers.
Azrael4life, bitches.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,06:07
QUOTE
Maybe that's why I didn't hate it, I don't know the source material very well.
I don't think you need an intimate understanding of Batman to know what he represents.
He's supposedly the world's greatest detective. He's always two steps ahead of his enemies. He wears the suit to spook his enemies and intimidate them. He uses stealth. He doesn't kill.
Does that sound like Batman in the movie?
During his fight with Doomsday in the original comic, all Superman does is worry about the people getting caught in the crossfire. He's flying to grab people out of cars Doomsday flings, he's going into burning houses to pull people out, he's constantly thinking to himself to guide Doomsday away from populated areas, etc.
Does that sound like the Superman in the movie?
QUOTE
Azrael4life, bitches.
Now that was a Batman that killed people.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2016,07:49
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,09:07)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Maybe that's why I didn't hate it, I don't know the source material very well.
I don't think you need an intimate understanding of Batman to know what he represents.
He's supposedly the world's greatest detective. He's always two steps ahead of his enemies. He wears the suit to spook his enemies and intimidate them. He uses stealth. He doesn't kill.
Does that sound like Batman in the movie?
But this movie made clear that he is old and tired and he now believes that playing by his own rules doesn't work. Alfred tells him he's too old to die young, and he's basically wasting his life. He says himself that in Gotham that there are no good guys left. He's tired and jaded and his head is up his ass... and there is a one-liner from Alexander Luthor that says he's been actively fucking with Bruce Wayne's head to push him over the edge.
So no, my first watch I was thinking the same thing. After I had time to digest it, I saw that the movie skipped a bunch of *time passes and Bruce Wayne gets sick of it all and decides fuckit, get off my lawn*
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,07:50
11 day total for Iron Man 3 - $289,562,44111 day total for BvS - $263,600,462
< BvS box office compared to 3 other superhero films. >
WB can try to spin this however they want, but those numbers are not good. Not for a movie that's supposed to be the stepping stone into your expanded universe, and certainly not when you factor in the backlash its received.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2016,07:53
I decided this morning that while they are stupid, STUPID for not emulating the Marvel universe strategy as closely as possible, I don't need all my art to be strictly Van Gogh.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,07:54
(GORDON @ Apr. 06 2016,10:49)
QUOTE
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,09:07)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Maybe that's why I didn't hate it, I don't know the source material very well.
I don't think you need an intimate understanding of Batman to know what he represents.
He's supposedly the world's greatest detective. He's always two steps ahead of his enemies. He wears the suit to spook his enemies and intimidate them. He uses stealth. He doesn't kill.
Does that sound like Batman in the movie?
But this movie made clear that he is old and tired and he now believes that playing by his own rules doesn't work. Alfred tells him he's too old to die young, and he's basically wasting his life. He says himself that in Gotham that there are no good guys left. He's tired and jaded and his head is up his ass... and there is a one-liner from Alexander Luthor that says he's been actively fucking with Bruce Wayne's head to push him over the edge.
So no, my first watch I was thinking the same thing. After I had time to digest it, I saw that the movie skipped a bunch of *time passes and Bruce Wayne gets sick of it all and decides fuckit, get off my lawn*
Because that's who Batman becomes in The Dark Knight? (Book, not the movie.)
Never did he say playing by his rules don't work. He says he's beaten nothing but criminals who are replaced non-stop, but stopping this alien would make a real difference.
And Lex fucks with him how? (I had something here, but it's spoiler material. Probably a lot of what you wrote too.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,07:56
QUOTE
I don't need all my art to be strictly Van Gogh.
But don't you see? This movie tries hard as fuck to be Van Gogh.
Marvel doesn't work that hard. They want their movies to be approachable by casual and hardcore fans.
It's occurring to me that the more people feel the need to defend this movie, the more I'm realizing what a disaster it is...
It's also occurring to me that, at the very least, people are talking about it...
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2016,10:12
QUOTE
But this movie made clear that he is old and tired and he now believes that playing by his own rules doesn't work.
That's un-Batman in and of itself. Batman does not quit, ever, and he will fuck you up from his ER bed in his 90s if you think otherwise. In the comics, Bane literally breaks his back and it's not enough to make him stop. He's the dude that stashed secret files on the other JLA members on how to neutralize them if they ever turn on him. He sits around most days doing nothing but dreaming up every plan he might ever need to ruin your life.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2016,10:33
< DC's revamped plan >:QUOTE
Suicide Squad - August 5, 2016
Wonder Woman - June 2, 2017
Justice League: Part One - November 17, 2017
The Flash - March 16, 2018
Aquaman - July 27, 2018
Untitled DC Movie - Oct. 5, 2018
Shazam - April 5, 2019
Justice League: Part Two - June 14, 2019
Untitled DC Movie - Nov. 1, 2019
Cyborg - April 3, 2020
Green Lantern Corps - June 19, 2020
Wonder Woman - June 2, 2017
Justice League: Part One - November 17, 2017
The Flash - March 16, 2018
Aquaman - July 27, 2018
Untitled DC Movie - Oct. 5, 2018
Shazam - April 5, 2019
Justice League: Part Two - June 14, 2019
Untitled DC Movie - Nov. 1, 2019
Cyborg - April 3, 2020
Green Lantern Corps - June 19, 2020
Why?
QUOTE
According to The Hollywood Reporter, two currently-untitled DC movies have been scheduled for Oct. 5, 2018 and Nov. 1, 2019. Wonder Woman has subsequently been moved from its June 23, 2017 spot to an earlier release on June 2 that same year, pitting it against Bad Boys 3 and Captain Underpants. This means that fans will get three DC movies in 2018 and 2019, matching the same number of Marvel Cinematic Universe’s releases both those years.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2016,11:15
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,10:56)
QUOTE
It's also occurring to me that, at the very least, people are talking about it...
The thread about it on something awful is getting about 500 replies a day, still. That's a shitload, for 2 weeks later.
And I think it only gets defended so much because it gts attacked so much. When I say I like it, and someone else says it is shit... welp, I may feel compelled to explain myself.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,11:20
(GORDON @ Apr. 06 2016,14:15)
QUOTE
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2016,10:56)
QUOTE
It's also occurring to me that, at the very least, people are talking about it...
The thread about it on something awful is getting about 500 replies a day, still. That's a shitload, for 2 weeks later.
And I think it only gets defended so much because it gts attacked so much. When I say I like it, and someone else says it is shit... welp, I may feel compelled to explain myself.
Have you read my example in the spoiler thread yet? You might understand my position more if you do. (Not to mention TPR's far more succinct explanation...)
Talking about something can be great, but it can also show how bad something is too.
For example: I hear Donald Trump's name multiple times a day. Not for good reasons.
Point being, I think people are talking so much because this movie is so divisive. And honestly, end of the day, Zach Snyder shit all over the source material, which is something you've condemned previously with other films. So stop arguing and accept the fact that this movie, while enjoyable to watch, was shit.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2016,11:27
Yes, I read your post, and I understand your point, but I think your example was pretty extreme. They veered away from the comics, a bit. Not every aspect of his character, but a big one... the gratuitous killing. But they gave an explanation for it in the movie, and I am not... what's the word... married? to the source material, and I can live with it. Old, grizzled batman no longer gives a fuck and is branding people and killing them trying to steal kryptonite.... in order to destroy a bigger threat. Ok. I get what they are saying, and fine.So I understand why people hate that aspect, but I just don't have the strong feelings about that particular thing so it doesn't affect my opinion of the poorly edited film.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,11:43
< Despite what they're saying WB has been shocked by the reception of BvS. >QUOTE
Yes, I read your post, and I understand your point, but I think your example was pretty extreme. They veered away from the comics, a bit. Not every aspect of his character, but a big one... the gratuitous killing. But they gave an explanation for it in the movie, and I am not... what's the word... married? to the source material, and I can live with it. Old, grizzled batman no longer gives a fuck and is branding people and killing them trying to steal kryptonite.... in order to destroy a bigger threat. Ok. I get what they are saying, and fine.
I think you're 100% wrong. I don't even think there's a gray area where you might be kinda, sorta right. (I don't think you're wrong to enjoy the movie, but I think you're wrong in thinking they only altered the characters "a bit" and that it's ok to do so. I would explain more, but I don't want to put spoilers here.)
They veered away from the comics MASSIVELY, and destroyed three of the biggest, if not THE biggest, DC stories that could have been told on the big screen. (I can't list them without spoilers, which you're spouting off here in the non-spoiler thread pretty blatantly for a guy who doesn't like spoilers.)
You're filling in blanks for Snyder that he doesn't fill in the movie, and quite honestly, destroy the character of Batman. So if you're ok with that, if you really don't give a shit about respecting source material, that's fine, but you can NEVER criticize any form of entertainment going forward if they bastardize the source material.
Point being, YOU might not care about Batman, but you care about other things. I don't know if that's Game of Snores or Hobbit stuff or Starship Troopers or Star Trek or what, but this will come up again (and I'd bet a dollar has previously) where you'll be standing in my shoes on this very argument.
And understand, you're arguing that the Matthew Broderick Godzilla movie was awesome, and who cares if Godzilla was nothing more than a T-Rex lost in New York that had babies, because shitting all over source material is a-ok...
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2016,11:59
QUOTE
THR also speculates that Warner Bros. may be counting on August 5's Suicide Squad as a release that will turn around perception of its DC film universe.
Please tell me there's somewhere in Vegas taking odds on the returns from Suicide Squad. I'd bet five large on that thing flopping like a cheap hooker coming down off a two day meth high.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2016,13:16
Between this and the other thread, I've literally got nothing else to say about it. Consider me shut down.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2016,13:33
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 08 2016,18:25
I was just reminded that Batman in the Burton movies had a pretty decent body count.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 08 2016,19:36
Same for Nolan's movies.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 08 2016,21:12
(GORDON @ Apr. 08 2016,21:25)
QUOTE
I was just reminded that Batman in the Burton movies had a pretty decent body count.
Batman killed someone in the Tim Burton directed Batman?
The guy who made the Planet of the Apes with Wahlburg and said of the ending "I don't know what it means. Let whoever makes the sequel figure that out." Amazing he'd get a character wrong
As for Nolan, he credits Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" as giving him the idea and concept of a Batman that can cross that line. The problem is he apparently can't read...
< Batman doesn't kill anyone in that book. >
I'll forgive Snyder for the sins of Batman killing and AGAIN making Superman ignorant of all the people dying around him or apathetic to it, IF you admit the movie's pacing SUCKED and Doomsday's translation is the equivalent of the Matthew Broderick movie version of Godzilla. (Or Deadpool from Wolverine: Origins.)
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 09 2016,10:00
QUOTE
Batman killed someone in the Tim Burton directed Batman?
The large black dude he knocked into the bell and dropped down a tower? I think he died. The thugs he blew back to the stone age when he wiped Axis Chemicals off the map? The only Batman I know of that 100% hasn't killed anyone is Adam West.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 09 2016,10:29
(Malcolm @ Apr. 09 2016,13:00)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Batman killed someone in the Tim Burton directed Batman?
The large black dude he knocked into the bell and dropped down a tower? I think he died. The thugs he blew back to the stone age when he wiped Axis Chemicals off the map? The only Batman I know of that 100% hasn't killed anyone is Adam West.
Those things, as well as:
He tried to missile and machine gun Joker from the Batplane in the first movie, but missed.
He also strapped a bomb to a dude in Returns, and smiled as he walked away and the guy blew up.
So now that I think about it, the movies have been always about Bats being a serial killer.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 09 2016,13:09
Read the sentence after the one you quoted.DC has far more input in their animated films, and I'm pretty sure Batman hasn't killed anyone there.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 09 2016,16:34
Well, I only bring it up because suddenly it was a huge deal for this movie, but never brought up in discussing previous ones talking about how the creators didn't have any respect for the franchise. But whatev.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 09 2016,16:59
(Leisher @ Apr. 09 2016,15:09)
QUOTE
Read the sentence after the one you quoted.
DC has far more input in their animated films, and I'm pretty sure Batman hasn't killed anyone there.
DC has far more input in their animated films, and I'm pretty sure Batman hasn't killed anyone there.
Those cartoons have been ten times as faithful to the comics relative to any batman live action movie.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 09 2016,17:01
(GORDON @ Apr. 09 2016,18:34)
QUOTE
Well, I only bring it up because suddenly it was a huge deal for this movie, but never brought up in discussing previous ones talking about how the creators didn't have any respect for the franchise. But whatev.
Hell, in Batman Returns, he kills the Penguin via surface to surface mini-rockets.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 09 2016,20:04
(GORDON @ Apr. 09 2016,19:34)
QUOTE
Well, I only bring it up because suddenly it was a huge deal for this movie, but never brought up in discussing previous ones talking about how the creators didn't have any respect for the franchise. But whatev.
Of the laundry list of things that were wrong with BvS, including multiple other characters not being remotely accurate, this is the one you've chosen to plant your flag in to somehow validate your argument.
We've established Hollywood can't do Batman right. What does that prove exactly? The comics, TV shows, video games, and animated movies seem to get it right.
Also, I'm pretty sure I did criticize the Nolan films. Let's not pretend anyone should have take the previous Batman films remotely seriously.
I mean, you act like I'm the one with the problem because a film maker took massive liberties with a property showing it no respect and creating a bad product because of it. < I'm pretty sure other people here have had similar issues with movies... >
But whatev.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 09 2016,20:13
Yes, I shouldn't go around planting my flag. This is super serious shit and I am just a mouse in a land of giants. Observation withdrawn.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 09 2016,20:52
(GORDON @ Apr. 09 2016,23:13)
QUOTE
Yes, I shouldn't go around planting my flag. This is super serious shit and I am just a mouse in a land of giants. Observation withdrawn.
Super serious enough that you've argued it in two separate threads for two weeks or so.
But you're right, it's perfectly ok for YOU to do this about movies, but I can't. I apologize.
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 09 2016,20:59
(Leisher @ Apr. 09 2016,23:52)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Apr. 09 2016,23:13)
QUOTE
Yes, I shouldn't go around planting my flag. This is super serious shit and I am just a mouse in a land of giants. Observation withdrawn.
Super serious enough that you've argued it in two separate threads for two weeks or so.
But you're right, it's perfectly ok for YOU to do this about movies, but I can't. I apologize.
Hold on let me write 2 pages about why you are wrong.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 09 2016,21:37
(GORDON @ Apr. 09 2016,23:59)
QUOTE
(Leisher @ Apr. 09 2016,23:52)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Apr. 09 2016,23:13)
QUOTE
Yes, I shouldn't go around planting my flag. This is super serious shit and I am just a mouse in a land of giants. Observation withdrawn.
Super serious enough that you've argued it in two separate threads for two weeks or so.
But you're right, it's perfectly ok for YOU to do this about movies, but I can't. I apologize.
Hold on let me write 2 pages about why you are wrong.
How are you even up? It's after 10 p.m.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 10 2016,10:39
Zing.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 10 2016,10:44
To be fair, he zinged me first and made me laugh.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 10 2016,11:17
< After two weeks >, we finally get the answer to, "What's more powerful than Batman and Superman put together?"
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 11 2016,07:00
The Jungle Book is going to kill everything next week. < 100% rating currently at Rotten Tomato with 21 reviews. >
< BvS isn't doing as well financially as Man of Steel. >
< And here comes the studio to "fix" the DC movies. >
Seriously, how fucking difficult is it to look at what Marvel is doing and copy that? One guy, who is familiar with the source material, is the final word on the entire movie universe. Instead WB seems to be taking the various properties and giving them to directors with no clear plan or direction.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 11 2016,07:20
QUOTE
Now rumors seem to be flying about all kinds of goings on behind the scenes. Recently there was word that they'd be going back into SUICIDE SQUAD reshoots with the intent of making it lighter and funnier.
We're not saying we're panicking like chihuahuas during a thunderstorm and are going to copy Deadpool but...
Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 11 2016,07:57
(Leisher @ Apr. 11 2016,09:00)
QUOTE
Seriously, how fucking difficult is it to look at what Marvel is doing and copy that?
The problem is that's exactly what they are doing. But instead of copying the underlying approach and methodology that Marvel has established for making good superhero films, they are copying the shallow surface layers of what they see. People liked seeing the super fights in Winter Soldier, so we'll have to be sure our heroes fight each other! And we'll make it dark and moody because people like that! And I think Malcolm is right; now they will start aping Deadpool without understanding why it was so successful, and just make things that are painfully bad to watch because it's clearly trying too hard.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 11 2016,08:32
QUOTE
One guy, who is familiar with the source material, is the final word on the entire movie universe.
My pick would be < Bruce Timm > but I don't think he could stand the execs. They have to hand over complete control. There's just no fucking way they'll let it happen. WB is famous for fucking with things.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 11 2016,09:57
Bruce would be a decent selection, but I think they'd keep him in the animation department.Geoff Johns might be a better pick, but that would come at the expense of their comic line. Although, who cares because I'm pretty sure they're rebooting again really soon.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 11 2016,10:05
If they wanted to be ballsy, they'd give it to Grant Morrison.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 11 2016,10:22
< WB: > reshoots totally not about comedy. By the way, the author looks paid off.QUOTE
Although reshoots can sometimes indicate that something is wrong behind the scenes, everyone involved in the production of Suicide Squad has continuously shown nothing but support for the quality of the project. Between the sheer lunacy of Jared Leto’s Joker, to Jai Courtney’s recent labeling of David Ayer as "psychotic," Suicide Squad seems primed to absolutely kill it this summer.
If by "it" you mean any chance of a DC film universe ever getting off the ground, then yes. BvS didn't have much competition. SS will.