Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

12930323435125

Comments

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I'm shocked Murdock! How in the hell did you not see the 1978 Superman till now?
    I feel like I saw that movie in my CRIB, lol

    Well I never really had a big interest in superman. Any bit of Superman I got was either Cameos in Batman cartoons. And I really wasn't into superhero/comic book movies until I saw the first Captain America movie with my dad. CA the first avengers and The Avengers. My late father is the reason I got into those movies. We saw Man of Steel together and we were both disappointed by it. He thought it was ripping off the Avengers and I thought the movie as a whole was just bad. From plot convinces to the disaster movie porn climax and really bad editing. Too much style over substance. I then recently saw the 1978 superman film on TV and was instantly swept in. It was a far superior movie. Whatever emotions MOS tried to evoke were null. I felt all kinds of emotions watching Superman the movie. I was really saddened by Pa Kent's death in SM78 as It was very similar to my own father's passing. I get what Snyder was trying to do, but in my opinion he failed and took it far to seriously. You can't make Superman dark, gritty and realistic. He's a character of fantasy, light, hope and goodwill.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    edited May 2014 Posts: 7,854
    Murdock wrote:
    I'm shocked Murdock! How in the hell did you not see the 1978 Superman till now?
    I feel like I saw that movie in my CRIB, lol

    Well I never really had a big interest in superman. Any bit of Superman I got was either Cameos in Batman cartoons. And I really wasn't into superhero/comic book movies until I saw the first Captain America movie with my dad. CA the first avengers and The Avengers. My late father is the reason I got into those movies. We saw Man of Steel together and we were both disappointed by it. He thought it was ripping off the Avengers and I thought the movie as a whole was just bad. From plot convinces to the disaster movie porn climax and really bad editing. Too much style over substance. I then recently saw the 1978 superman film on TV and was instantly swept in. It was a far superior movie. Whatever emotions MOS tried to evoke were null. I felt all kinds of emotions watching Superman the movie. I was really saddened by Pa Kent's death in SM78 as It was very similar to my own father's passing. I get what Snyder was trying to do, but in my opinion he failed and took it far to seriously. You can't make Superman dark, gritty and realistic. He's a character of fantasy, light, hope and goodwill.

    The first two Chris Reeve Superman films (and with Superman II, I mean both versions, the Lester and Donner cuts) are the best Superman live-action films you'll ever see. The best Superman animated film is Last Son of Krypton, the first three episode of the 90s Superman: The Animated Series.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 1,778
    People tend to undersell to impact of Richard Donner's Superman. Financially, after being adjusted for inflation, it's far and away the highest grossing of the Superman films, grossing just a little shy of 1.1 billion dollars. Critically it was practically universally loved and is still held in a very high regard. And most importantly it pretty much created the modern day superhero movie. It was the first mega-budget box office smash based on a comic book character. Had it not been the hit that it was we might've never gotten Batman, X-Men, Spiderman, etc. on screen. Atleast not on such a large scale.

    Not to mention Christopher Nolan, Joss Whedon, and Stan "The Man" Lee have all praised Donner's Superman as a milestone in the comic book/film field.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 12,837
    Man Of Steel was everything I dislike about films today rolled up into one, 2 hour snoozefest

    *Gritty, self concious (they wouldn't even call him Superman!) reboot? Check.
    *Really washed out, grey cinematography that makes the film look ugly? Check.
    *A bland, forgettable score? Check.
    *A miserable, charismaless main character? Check.
    *A shitload of CGI? Definetely check. This was even worse than Transformers when it comes to CGI. There was no real stunts. I know you need CGI for a film like this (people can't fly after all) but some of it just seemed like it really wasn't needed, there was too much).
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Man Of Steel was everything I dislike about films today rolled up into one, 2 hour snoozefest

    *Gritty, self concious reboot? Check.
    *Really washed out, grey cinematography that makes the film look ugly? Check.
    *A bland, forgettable score? Check.
    *A miserable, charismaless main character? Check.
    *A shitload of CGI? Definetely check. This was even worse than Transformers when it comes to CGI. There was no real stunts. I know you need CGI for a film like this (people can't fly after all) but some of it just seemed like it really wasn't needed, there was too much).
    Post of the day. =D>
  • Posts: 6,396
    Murdock wrote:
    Man Of Steel was everything I dislike about films today rolled up into one, 2 hour snoozefest

    *Gritty, self concious reboot? Check.
    *Really washed out, grey cinematography that makes the film look ugly? Check.
    *A bland, forgettable score? Check.
    *A miserable, charismaless main character? Check.
    *A shitload of CGI? Definetely check. This was even worse than Transformers when it comes to CGI. There was no real stunts. I know you need CGI for a film like this (people can't fly after all) but some of it just seemed like it really wasn't needed, there was too much).
    Post of the day. =D>

    Couldn't agree more.

    Donner rules! :-bd
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 1,778
    Man Of Steel was everything I dislike about films today rolled up into one, 2 hour snoozefest

    *Gritty, self concious (they wouldn't even call him Superman!) reboot? Check.
    *Really washed out, grey cinematography that makes the film look ugly? Check.
    *A bland, forgettable score? Check.
    *A miserable, charismaless main character? Check.
    *A shitload of CGI? Definetely check. This was even worse than Transformers when it comes to CGI. There was no real stunts. I know you need CGI for a film like this (people can't fly after all) but some of it just seemed like it really wasn't needed, there was too much).

    Well said. It's practically a monument to everything Hollywood is getting wrong with modern-day blockbusters.

    I don't understand why every CBM that isn't produced by Marvel has to be so serious and gritty that they're devoid of any sense of fun. To me the Indiana Jones trilogy found the perfect tone for a popcorn flick/blockbuster. There's a sense of danger and edge to them but at the same time they're not afraid to have a sense of humor and be fun.
  • Posts: 4,813
    I found this cosplayer online- I'd LOVE if they used a suit like this in Batman vs Superman.

    BmonS87CcAAjjdu.jpg:large

    The only thing I'd change is that logo on the chest
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    That's awesome. If I had a suit like that I'd wear it out in public with pride.
  • Posts: 1,778
    Wow that's one cool suit. They only thing's I'd change is the underwear over the pants and just go with solid grey (ala Man of Steel) and like @Master_Dahark said the emblem could be a bit different.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    That's awesome. If I had a suit like that I'd wear it out in public with pride.

    You'd probably be paying a personal visit to Arkham Asylum if you did. Even with how super heroes are becoming mainstream, people would still call you crazy.
  • Posts: 4,813
    That's awesome. If I had a suit like that I'd wear it out in public with pride.

    You'd probably be paying a personal visit to Arkham Asylum if you did. Even with how super heroes are becoming mainstream, people would still call you crazy.
    HAVE YOU MET ME??

    tumblr_l106xrCGkG1qbwdexo1_400.gif

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    I'm worse.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I don't understand why every CBM that isn't produced by Marvel less to be so serious and gritty that they're devoid of any sense of fun. To me the Indiana Jones trilogy found the perfect tone for a popcorn flick/blockbuster. There's a sense of danger and edge to them but at the same time they're not afraid to have a sense of humor and be fun.

    Exactly. Completely agree with the Indiana Jones trilogy but I'd say the fourth film got the balance right as well. I know a lot of people hate Crystal Skull but I enjoyed it and one of the reasons I enjoyed it was because it was a fun, escapist adventure (although it still had a sense of danger and a heart), which made a nice change from the usual grey, miserable blockbusters.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The first two Chri
  • Posts: 12,526
    I found this cosplayer online- I'd LOVE if they used a suit like this in Batman vs Superman.

    BmonS87CcAAjjdu.jpg:large

    The only thing I'd change is that logo on the chest

    That costume is pretty cool!
  • Posts: 1,778
    I don't understand why every CBM that isn't produced by Marvel less to be so serious and gritty that they're devoid of any sense of fun. To me the Indiana Jones trilogy found the perfect tone for a popcorn flick/blockbuster. There's a sense of danger and edge to them but at the same time they're not afraid to have a sense of humor and be fun.

    Exactly. Completely agree with the Indiana Jones trilogy but I'd say the fourth film got the balance right as well. I know a lot of people hate Crystal Skull but I enjoyed it and one of the reasons I enjoyed it was because it was a fun, escapist adventure (although it still had a sense of danger and a heart), which made a nice change from the usual grey, miserable blockbusters.

    I'm actually a defender of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull aswell (despite Shia LeBeouf trying his hardest to ruin the movie). But nothing Spielberg and Co did in 2008 was going to eclipse the original Indiana Jones trilogy in my mind. In alot of ways those 3 films along with Jaws were the start of my love of movies. They were some of the first films I ever saw and they're all very close to my heart. I guess I can't say I'm totally unbiased when comparing the Indy trilogy to modern day blockbusters but I'll take them over the likes of Man of Steel or Transformers any day. Every film in the Indy Trilogy has it's share of violent, serious, and emotional moments but never in the course of any entry does a film try to be anything other than a fun popcorn movie. There's something very unpretentious about them and unlike films like The Dark Knight, Man of Steel, or The Dark Knight Rises they all wear their heart on their sleeve.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited May 2014 Posts: 24,173
    I'm surprised to read so often that people dislike MOS. For what it's worth, according to BOM it made $668,045,518, which is a lot, and it currently holds 7.3 on imbd, which is not bad.

    Quantum Of Solace, by comparison, made about a hundred million less and its imdb score is as of right now 6.7. Yet that didn't stop people from flocking in to see SF and lift it to its record breaking position in no time.

    Sometimes a minor detail decides whether a film will bring home gold, or only lead. Which money making celeb did they cast? Which other films are playing at the time of release? How clever have the promotional campaigns, leading up to the film, been?

    I really think any project with Batman AND Supes will sell, at the very least when they do it the first time (live action of course). Curiosity, being a fan of one or the other or possibly but not necessarily both, having had a good time watching MOS, ... all of these can lure one in.

    I'm a Supes fan. Read a number of comics, watched all the films including the Mole Men one, watched the old animated shorts. I simply adore Donner's first film. But, I also appreciate what they did with MOS. People who went in expecting another Superman: The Movie in 2013 are pretty naive. Of course they were going to go a different route. With Superman Returns, people complained that Supes had been pussyfied. With MOS, I hear people complain it's too violent a film! Make up your minds, folks. Some say they shouldn't have dropped the Williams themes, others complained that Ottman leached too hard on Williams' music. Some people complain MOS had too many fights and goes too big for its third act... Look, we're talking about the man of steel, not the man of straw.

    My hypothesis is that many complainers come from a simple disliking of Zack Snyder. But IMO, Snyder is a comic book fan who understands comics. I consider his Watchmen pretty impressive considering that film is a different medium than comic books and yet he managed to make the one look fairly similar to the other. He also turned in a pretty faithful adaptation of 300 and his Dawn Of The Dead remake is one scary and thrilling ride down the horror rollercoaster. So what is the problem with this man? Does it really narrow down to Suckerpunch? Please let's allow the good man his own 1941. I think he has balls for taking on a big project like Superman. And IMO, I emphasise - only IMO, I think he kick-started things rather well.

    This is not your daddy's Superman. But then daddy's Superman went down under with Superman Returns, a film that tried to go back to Donner's first but was spat on by critics. So no wonder WB decided to go 180 on Superman.

    Oh, one more bit of news: this next film will have nothing to do with Nolan's Batman universe either, so we might as well get used to the idea right now. That brilliant series is over. TDKR put a full stop to it. Rather than see them try to mimic it, and fail, I prefer them to go 180 on Batman too. Maybe this new series will be aimed more towards people a lot younger than we are, who won't bother with Superman's legacy when MOS 2 comes out. Maybe this is not our playground anymore and we should just go with the flow or sit this one out. That's how it happens in the comics too. You can curse the new 52 all you want and hide behind the original Bob Kane Batman comics, but they're here now and they seem to be selling rather well. Nobody tells you that you must like them, but at least it would be ridiculous to bring up the argument that it's different and thus bad. The comic book medium is a very versatile one and by expansion, so is the superhero movie medium. It doesn't follow the established patterns of film series anymore; it's become its own thing. So there is room for a Superman/Batman world with a different style than the one we're used to. But that's the nature of the beast. Maybe in two or three films after this one, we get yet another DC micro-universe with yet another type of Bats or Supes. They're like clay; you can give them a different shape every time.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Good thinking, @DarthDimi. Superman and Batman have been "re-invented" numerous times in the comics, so why not on film? I saw MOS as a massive improvement in so many ways. Sure there is the nostalgia factor, and I will always love STM (and Superman III), but had those films come out today, they would have been ridiculed. They get away with their flaws due to their age, that is all.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I've never seen a Superman film before (or read a Superman comic) so my issue with Man Of Steel wasn't that it wasn't like the old ones or that they reinvented him or anything like that. I wasn't biased because of Zack Snyder either (I thought Sucker Punch was crap but a lot of fun and I liked Dawn Of The Dead).

    The reason I didn't like MOS was because I didn't think it was a very good film.
    There's something very unpretentious about them and unlike films like The Dark Knight, Man of Steel, or The Dark Knight Rises they all wear their heart on their sleeve.

    I agree but I think The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises were very good too. Really well made, brilliantly acted movies with fantastic stories, amazing cinematography, brilliant stuntwork and two of the best villains I've ever seen in anything. They were films that took themselves very seriously but I think they had a right to because unlike Man Of Steel, they were actually as deep as they thought they were. I think that's one of the few cases where the whole gritty reboot idea has actually worked.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I've never seen a Superman film before (or read a Superman comic) so my issue with Man Of Steel wasn't that it wasn't like the old ones or that they reinvented him or anything like that. I wasn't biased because of Zack Snyder either (I thought Sucker Punch was crap but enjoyable and I liked Dawn Of The Dead).

    The reason I didn't like MOS was because I didn't think it was a very good film.

    If you see any of the older ones, I would be curious to hear what you think. @Murdock hated MOS, too. But he loved STM.

    My Superman ranking:
    1 MOS
    2 Superman III
    3 STM
    4 SR
    5 Superman II
    6 Superman IV
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Yes. I've only seen two Superman films currently. Man of Steel then almost a year later Superman the movie. Man of Steel's problems are not it's visuals. I don't care that Sups killed Zod because he did it in the Richard Lester version of Superman 2. My complaints of the movie are it's style over substance. Sure it's not my dad's superman, but it's not even superman. It suffers from QOS editing, a terrible script. Way and I mean Wayyyyyyyy to much action. And too many plot conveniences. Lois Lane is somehow so important she can be allowed to go anywhere and can climb mountains. Yeah...right. This was a rushed film by far. All the dialogue is classic Nolan monologue. Superman has a god complex, Oh I'm supposed to protect people so I'll destroy important technology. He's breaking Jor El's number one rule. Do not interfere with Human history.

    MOS is another Generic "Gritty Reboot." To ride of Nolan's coattails. If given to someone like Joss Whedon. Then it probably would have been the best Superman film since the original.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    batman-vs-superman-batmobile-600x399.jpeg

    Tomorrow, we get to see it in full.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Interesting. Nice to see this being teased before the Bat suit.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 2,782
    the bat car looks like a penis extension for wig wearing ben affeck (father ted pun intended). the film is going downhill all the way. give me back my Bale.




    http://i.imgur.com/I1Izlwl.gif


    http://i.imgur.com/d1yXaSG.jpg
  • Posts: 4,813
    Can't wait to see the rest... And the batsuit!!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    give me back my Bale

    Ain't gonna happen, @forgotmyusername. ;-)

  • edited May 2014 Posts: 12,837
    I don't get why they didn't just carry on with Joseph Gordon Levitt as Batman? That way you continue where the Nolan films left off, but the Nolan films also still stand alone as a trilogy.
  • edited May 2014 Posts: 9,846
    http://www.batman-on-film.com/BvS_news-new-Batmobile-revealed_5-13-14.html


    well this should quiet most rational people this film will be awesome
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Just saw this, surprised they revealed Batman with it, too. Looks good!
Sign In or Register to comment.