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
Whilst MoS was undoubtably a financial success for Warner Bros it still under performed at the box office with takings of $649mil (only $50 million more than Casino Royale took - and that was 7 years ago). I'm sure the studio's expectations were more comparable to the success of the The Dark Knight.
It's my feeling that because MoS didn't deliver the expected box office returns, the decision was made to greenlight a Superman V Batman film.
I´m not trying to be cynic here, I´m aware that there are several stories dealing with it, I´m just not into comic books, so if anyone could shortly explain to me, thanks.
Especially since it's Zack Syder directing, because I think he'll probably (again) throw in loads of CGI action.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Batman-Dark-Knight-Returns-TP/dp/1563893428/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377702210&sr=8-1&keywords=the+dark+knight+returns+comic
I'd suggest buying the above novel by Frank Miller. It's the source material for the movie, or it seems that way, given the fact it was quoted at launch. This will tell you all you need to know about Batman vs. Superman.
It still has an opening in Japan this Friday to come, so although it may get close to $700 million, for a film which cost $225 million, Warner Bros would have wanted better. A film needs three times it's budget to be in the black, meaning $675 million, so the question is why did they spend so much? Lesson leant I would think.
Love that.
Truth is Batman could only beat Superman, if Superman was holding back. Superman often holds back. If he wanted Certainly Silver age Superman could destroy where Batman would happen to be on earth. He would not need to go anywhere near a potentially Kryptonite laiden Bats. Or just throw Batman into the sun.
Large part of Supermans character is his human upbringing and the sense of morality his earth parents gave him.
I thought as rule of thumb that a film had to double, not treble, it's production budget in order to start turning a profit.
Seriously, people need to read The Dark Knight returns. The idea of Batman beatingSuperman isn't as black and white as a lot here are presuming. There's a subtlety to the way the story is dealt with and it doesn't involve Batman firing weapons at Superman, it's about sending a message. At the risk of sounding offensive, people are making assumptions without necessarily having all the information, much like those who think they know Fleming, but haven't actually read more than a book.
In these Batman v Superman comics, does Batman travel to Metropolis or does Superman travel to Gotham City? Or both?
So Detroit Morocco and Toronto
Detroit Gotham City
Toronto Metropolis
Morocco..... Base where Lady Shiva is I hope I hope
Oh, you mean like when he flew up to a sun and blew it out like a candle? DC should have never done that.
I've not seen Man of Steel, but I'm pretty certain he flies in that film. I wish they'd taken his flight ability away, and kept him on leaping. That would have been the best way to start off Superman's evolution.
Doomsday would be a killer bad guy for a Justice League film.
It did get crazy, in the comics Superman became more powerful than any other character Marvel or DC. Superman prime had ability at god like status. Agree would love to see Doomsday, think it will happen a few films down the line.
Wait...What?! The sun is what gives Superman energy and enhances his powers, so why would he do such a thing?!
http://moviewit.com/batfleck/
LOL! That's hilarious. I know that Affleck looks the part but how well will he act in the part? I am one person who doesn't like to underestimate an actor's versatility but I'm having a bit of a hard time seeing Affleck nailing this part acting wise. Of course, I hope that I'm wrong.
This really is turning into (and I don't mean the last few posters at all; I mean the general public) another CraigIsNotBond scenario.
Not our sun. It was a dying star, or something, and he literally just flew up there and blew it out. I've never actually read the issue, Denny O'Neill described it on the documentary "Look, Up In the Sky! The Amazing Story of Superman". Pretty good documentary, too. I caught it on A&E back when Superman Returns was first coming out in theaters.
I was at my library yesterday, and found this book about comics artists responding to 9/11, and the first two-pager in the book has Superman describing all these things that he can do, and then he says that he can't become real and stop a real threat from hurting real people. It was actually pretty good.
Snyder comments on collateral damage in Man of Steel. Interesting read, comments on his take of the Superman myth.
I always envisaged the collateral damage was to be the catalyst for Luthor. After all, what better way to turn Metropolis against Supes than to have his arch-nemesis and psuedo-philanthropist rebuild a city and spin it all back on the Man of Steel.