It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Along with her mallet
But I wouldn't assume it was necessarily her "go-to getup".
Just.....watch it. And then judge yourself. You're sometimes a very stubborn little boy, aren't you ;-).
To me, "Suicide Squad" looks far more like the Christopher Nolan approach on DC Comics than the blatant action porn approach from Zack Snyder. Dark, rich of content and theme, with the necessary superhero action, but never superficial or dull.
These DCEU films aren't dark in the true sense of the word, though Snyder will like to tell you that they are. A dark film isn't one that simply shoves some needless blood and violence down your through to try and appear edgy or "cool" to get that hard R rating. A dark film will take a portrait of a man like Bruce, show his traumatic origins, and follow him as he takes on missions far greater than himself that test every fiber of his being, missions that he faces without eroding his principles. Dark is a movie where bad things happen to good people in a faceless, nameless world of cruelty; dark is when Bruce is tearing at the seams as he continually misses out on the things he wants and is driven to the brink without going off the edge; dark is Batman committing true sacrifice when no options are left; dark is when Batman is forced to do things no others can do to do what he knows is right in the name of public good.
Dark is not blood splatter on walls; dark is not Batman running over people in his car; dark is not building explosions; dark is not Batman stabbing hearts and snapping necks. These are the kinds of things you do when you have no strong storytelling sense, and instead want to mask your shortcomings with character and narrative with upscaled violence and action. And even then, the only good action in the entire movie is the warehouse fight, ruined by Batman playing God. The Batman and Superman fight is a blink and you missed it joke, and the final fight with Doomsday is one of the absolute worst finales in superhero movie history.
I know what I like and I don't like, and what I added in spoiler tags is something that immediately turns me off from these movies (and seems to be a staple in a lot of them, unfortunately). I'll see it eventually, but I won't be spending a dime on it.
Nolan didn't have the luxury of doing direct interpretations of the characters, as his vision sought to ground his Batman world in our reality as opposed to Snyder's over the top one, and still he does it all so much better even with those limitations. Nolan and his team had to find clever ways to keep the characters true to what they are in the comics while also keeping it grounded, while Snyder can't even make them good when he's given free reign to do anything with them he wants.
Should we name all the characters Snyder gets wrong? Batman/Bruce, Superman/Clark, Perry White, Jimmy Olsen, Lois Lane, Pa and Ma Kent, Lex Luthor whoever that guy is supposed to be, Doomsday, and the list goes on and on. I can forgive a few screw ups in characterization along the way in regards to more minor characters, but to destroy all the main characters and make them shadows of the shadows of their former selves is just laughable. They don't resemble the comics or even the worst written fan fiction out there; it's just its own isolated form of bad. Parts of Schumacher's films feel more like Batman than the one this film slaps on our plate, and that's just sad.
I'll stand up for Nolan's groundbreaking work till the end, even in a world where it's now the cool thing to do for people shit on his work, especially that of TDKR, while in the same breath they lift up BvS. And people wonder why they're laughed at while in mixed company.
Nolan's work built Warner brothers a massive vault of never ending billions. Snyder's work on the other hand couldn't have been pushed under the rug faster by Warner, and now they are taking away every bit of control he has to avoid future disasters like BvS. The former is a visionary storyteller with eloquence in his approaches, the latter a grown man who acts and speaks like a teenager and knows nothing of proper filmmaking, and only has an interest in stuffing gratuitous sex and violence into everything he makes, for no salient reason on top of it. Anyone who thinks otherwise lacks proper critical thinking and analytical skills, not to mention sense.
But I don't have to argue why Snyder's such a dolt and cinematic amateur. The man gives us the proof all on his own, in an interview during the release of Watchmen, where he gave us his perspective on Batman and Nolan's films:
Snyder spoke to Entertainment Weekly about his then upcoming movie "Watchmen." During the interview, he revealed that he had very different ideas about the Caped Crusader than fellow director Christopher Nolan, who directed "Batman Begins."
He said:
Everyone says that about "Batman Begins." "Batman's dark." I'm like, "Okay, no, Batman's cool." He gets to go to a Tibetan monastery and be trained by ninjas. Okay? I want to do that. But he doesn't, like, get raped in prison. That could happen in my movie. If you want to talk about dark, that's how that would go.
:-&
Like I said Snyder isn't a god send either and I don't know about the superman characters as I genuninly don't care. Affleck as batman though to me is perfect he is the perfect blend Keaton and bale. He has personality he is interesting... And Irons is he best Alfred period. Rewatching Nolan's batman begins I noticed the Nolanisms early on sadly. A lot of his characters don't talk like real people the monologue like well movie characters..
And before you say what you hate the Nolan verse no actually I don't I own all three films and Batman begins is/possibly was my favorite batman film I need to rewatch batman v superman to determine which truely wins out.
Depending on villian choice and plot Affleck's batman film right now has me more excited then any other DC universe movie
If there's a reasonable argument about Zsasz, it's that he is such a small, background character. He's one of the only characters that I like in Gotham.
@Risico007, you don't have to keep listing your credentials for being a fan, I get it. I'm not here to call you a sell-out or anything; what you like, you like. As you said, "different strokes." It just so happens that our love of Batman makes us both very passionate, that's all.
I am missing your observations of Ben's Bruce, however. I think he lacks any kind of personality, and he is the one that doesn't seem to talk like a real person, not only due to weird deliveries on Affleck's part, but also down to the writing/dialogue which feels unnatural. Bruce wouldn't say, "I'm a friend of your son's," or "Martha won't die tonight," as they seem ham-fisted and fall flat on every level. An eloquence in speech can be done with Bruce successfully, however, and should be strived for. He's an immense intellect and should speak a bit more eloquently than most, but there is speaking with sophistication and then speaking like you're reading a Hallmark card or a bad joke book, and there's far too much of those last two in BvS. I don't want to see Bruce being a funny man, either; his inner monologues are where we get nice glimpses of what could be in a depiction of a dark and ponderous Batman. Batman should largely be internal, and let his actions speak for him. He doesn't work as a man of wit and should be kept to being the straight man in the Justice League, and I worry that that's not what we'll be getting, judging just from the recent trailer.
Jury is still out on Irons for me. Three minutes of screen time doesn't make him the best Alfred in my eyes by a long shot, just as a quick glimpse of Tom Holland in Civil War doesn't make him the best Spider-Man, as some have proclaimed. I did like however how much Alfred was busting Bruce's balls in the movie, calling him out for how much of a prick he was being, as if he was the voice of the audience/me. I wish they'd gone further with that, however, and made Alfred be the one that shows Bruce that how he's doing his job isn't working and that killing Superman isn't the answer or a righteous act. Irons is certainly worthy of the part up there with Michael Caine, and I even love Michael Gough, who saved the Schumacher films from being total hogwash; he's a largely forgotten Alfred and that's sad. I agree though, Irons will shine if he's in a solo film and given more time to do his thing.
@Creasy47, it's truly hard to say. As I've said before, the Batman killing angle, if done properly, would've been interesting to me. We're all used to seeing Batman follow a code, so to suddenly see a Batman throw that all out the window would've been interesting if the approach was truly effective.
The problem I face with BvS is that Batman's new style of crime-fighting isn't earned or felt by the audience. We don't really get to see what drove him to be like this. Instead of seeing Batman's origin all over again with the murder of his parents, I wanted to see a flashback of him trying and failing to save Jason (the Robin that died on his watch), and see him carrying the boy's corpse out of the wreckage as Joker escapes, laughing his ass of at Batman's misery. Being given that dark and tragic background on his character would've provided a great context for why Bruce felt so nihilistic in BvS, and why killing was so natural for him.
Without all this, his attitude towards killing just feels out of place, wrong and taken way too far. His character, even with more background, still wouldn't work, however. It doesn't make sense why he would so quickly try to kill Superman, as Bruce would be able to see beyond the destruction of Metropolis and try to talk to Superman on his level, nor does it make sense why Superman having a mom would suddenly make him snap out of his malicious behavior. When you get as committed to a mission as Batman did, and your target feels so inhuman to you, I don't think anything could pull you away. The problem there lies in Snyder and his team making Batman more of a punisher, and not the rehabilitative person he is in the comics. Then the film explores Batman somehow gaining back his humanity all at once (though I don't see this), and acting like Clark was his buddy all along to both Lois and Ma Kent at the funeral later on, when in reality he was ready and willing to absolutely murder the guy with a kryptonite spear if Lois didn't pop up (thanks, Amy). Sorry Batman, but your sudden change of heart isn't earned at all.
This all being said, who knows how much Batman as a character will change down the line in future DCEU films. Will he stop killing? Will he take the guns off his batmobile? I don't know, and at this point, I'm not invested enough to care. Until DC/Warner show me that they heard the appeals of the fans and fix what they've screwed up (though that'll never erase my frustration), maybe then I'll come back on board (not likely though). The issue they face if they keep Batman on this road is that he'll have no rogue's gallery left. If Batman remains murderous, I expect him to never let a villain live, and in the same token, Gordon and the GCPD had better come after him for all the terror he's causing as well, because in the comics the Commissioner would do exactly that if Batman acted the way he acts in BvS and was killing everything that posed a 1% threat to him.
Seeing the Justice League trailer, it seems Bruce has gone from mopey murderer to slapstick/comedy guy, and that I most certainly don't like either. I think DC and Warner are taking the "too dark" criticisms of BvS too much to heart, and are now trying to make all the Justice League members jokesters, which alters their original vision drastically. It's fine if they want to make a good portion of the JL jokesters, but that should never be done with Bruce.
Batman is the quintessential straight man, and all the funny moments he is involved in should never be directly because of him. In the JL film you could have a moment where all the JL members are having a laugh about something (a joke, funny incident), then they all look at Batman who is just stone faced and not "in on it" because that's just his personality. The comedy derived from Batman should be that he's the one that never shows laughter, while everyone else is having a fun time. Any moments where he quips or shows wit should be dark humor or at the very least dry as can be. Think back to Batman Begins, where Alfred says, "What do you call that," to Bruce as they both watch him driving the batmobile recklessly on TV while trying to save Rachel, to which Bruce replies, "Damn good television." More of that dry humor and less of the humor we see in the JL trailer, I say. I never want to hear Bruce say, "I hear you talk to fish" to Aquaman ever, ever again, or whatever that train wreck of a scene between him and Flash was supposed to be.
@Risico007, even in the Arkham games Zsasz is largely throwaway, though. In Asylum he's blink and you miss him, and in City you answer his phone calls. Not exactly ground breaking characterization or boss design. In Knight, you see him for a second on camera footage. That's the extent of his use in the series, though.
I love the Batman Begins game, actually. One of my favorites, right up there with what Rocksteady did. That game gets largely forgotten but it had fantastic combat, great level design, and plenty of moments where you could use gadgets and environmental weaknesses to create fear and make enemies more nervous/scared/vulnerable, with a stealth system that actually worked. In many ways it feels like a more linear prototype of what Rocksteady would do later on.
Definitely not. If they were going for more of that then they would have just got Snyder to direct it. Rereading those comments fro Snyder that @Brady posted only reinforces why I cant allow myself to get too hyped about the JL movie. Snyder's perspective of things is just off.
Affleck is a better film maker imo and doesn't have the misplaced ego that Snyder has. I think Ben's going to make a more faithful adaptation of the character.
Epic post.
Brilliantly put.
Only Here;(and wherever I might Need It) The Licence Is Renewed; Because it is one of the names of the game-The Bourne Game...!
@mynameismyb00nd/ @MyNameIsMyBondRn, you're going to have to hide better than that following such a recent ban. Your writing style makes you so transparent it isn't even funny. Better luck next time, old chap.
P.S. Next time you make a duplicate account, don't pick the same exact words. That kind of gives you away, big time.
Mod Edit - Or better still, realise you were banned for a reason, and don't try and make a new account. You will be caught at some point.
YES THANK YOU
Except that the airport battle in Civil War was 110% more badass than all of Batman V Superman. It also lasts longer than Batman and Superman share screentime together.
Those are the same looks of horror I had when I saw the suit designs too, especially of Flash. I've seen better cosplays.