Lorerunner's Forums

The Lorerunner's Forums

Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Turn 5-1069
Yesterday at 12:30 pm by SilverDragonRed

» Babylon 5: The Fall of Centauri Prime (S5:E19) ~ On the End of Londo Mollari and the Symmetry of Mister Morden
Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:20 am by Arsene Lupin

» Turn 4-1069
Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:30 pm by The_Wanderer_In_Rags

» StarCraft 2: Redux
Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:23 pm by theshadowcouncil

» Potential Future Loreruns
Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:26 am by WKC690

» Your Top 3 Themes of each Final Fantasy?
Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:28 am by Alianger

» Lorewalkers' Top 5: JRPGs
Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:27 am by Alianger

» Turn 3-1069
Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:21 am by FreelanceZero

» Bound by the Past
Thu Sep 28, 2017 2:58 pm by SilverDragonRed

You are not connected. Please login or register

Batman v Superman Spoilers Everywhere, Spoilers, Seriously Spoilers

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

I loved the movie.

Thought I'd start with that since I've been hearing this weird crescendo of negativity about it from the internet yet not from anyone who's opinion I trust. The ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are sort of disgusting to flip through. But let's talk about the negatives first.

First... some of the scenes felt like the drama sort of folded in on itself. Only a couple really, but there were some odd presentations of pauses and whatnot, especially before the obviously foreshadowed false flag operation (kudos for them doing that right though, more on that later).

Second... The fight between Bats and Supes was ridiculously contrived and it showed. It was like they shoved it in for that one snippet of the movie just to show Bats beating Supes then they went back to the actual movie. Though again, more complicated thoughts since this was a weird situation. More on THAT later too.

Third... the ending. God almighty the ending. You do not spend close to 10 minutes showing the impact and effect of Supes dying only to immediately tease that he's coming back. NO. I have talked about this for, at this point, almost 2 decades. You do not kill someone only to undo it. You do not make death cheap. You make death significant. This is basic level writing. Grawrgh.

I should really get some sleep so let's cover those two points again really quick, plus a third one.

False Flag Operation: So Luthor arranges for a bomb to go off, killing a fairly large number of people, including a few regular chars who've been in the movie up to this point, most notably the senator, his secretary, and Mr. Grumpy. What I liked MOST about this is at first it seems like they were going to just flat blame it on Supes, but they had a few background news broadcasts clearly showing how it was proven that Mr Grumpy was 'behind' it. Which I loved because that's the best type of False Flag Operation. You don't need to convince your enemy beyond all doubt that someone else did it, because that's not how that works. You just need to plant those seeds in there, and we saw even leading up to the meeting the crowd outside was equally "We love you Supes" and "We hate you Supes" and I LOVED that. That is exactly how people would react to this in real life. Also, the entire point being pushing Bruce into the fight. Speaking of which.

I mentioned it was a weird situation the BvS part of... the movie named after that fight. Here's why I say it's weird. The movie goes well out of its way to show how Bruce slowly descended to the point where he wanted to bring Supes down, and it all boiled down to cynicism. And I liked that. This is an older Bruce (you saw the desecrated Robin costume, right?) who's already been through hell and back as the Bat. This is a bitter and broken old man. And it still took quite a few deliberately aimed pushes to get him to that mark. And then... sigh... Supes made almost no effort to reach out to Bats. I would have applauded if he just rushed up and knelt and begged Bats for help. Imagine how that would have cut through that fog of cynicism. But no we had to have the fight for what amounted to no reason (I honestly didn't even feel it was that cool to watch, the later fight against Doomsday was way cooler) and to show that Bats beat Supes so comic geeks everywhere could explode with joy. And okay, sure. But you know what I loved about the end of that scene? The Batman beat the Superman. But Clark Kent beat Batman. And that is exactly right.

This brings me to my final thoughts for now. I've always felt Supes was at his most interesting when he was the Man, not the Super, and this movie was that in spades.

Bonus thoughts: Loved this interpretation of Doomsday (I was actually saying to myself "C'mon give me the spikes" when he emerged, heh). The afore-mentioned Robin thing, makes me wonder what happened with Joker. The obvious setup for Flash and Aquaman was cool, but Cyborg's entrance was... especially interesting. The dream sequences were a bit much, not really something I enjoyed. The little touch towards the end about how much Luthor was abused as a child was nice. As an aside, I loved Eisenberg's portrayal of a villain (clearly not Luthor... but still a very interesting villain I thought). Darkseid for the next movie makes me pause a bit... it's clearly advertised all over the place (Flash time traveling to warn him, the dream future about the Parademons, the Mother Box being present, the fact that Luthor warned 'someone' and of course the obvious representation of the devil from the stars) but going to what is effectively the biggest DC villain right off the bat like that? There is a reason Thanos has been built up over multiple movies (perhaps too many really...)


_________________
The Lorerunner
View user profile http://lorerunner.com/
The Lorerunner wrote:I loved the movie.

Thought I'd start with that since I've been hearing this weird crescendo of negativity about it from the internet yet not from anyone who's opinion I trust.  The ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are sort of disgusting to flip through.  But let's talk about the negatives first.

First... some of the scenes felt like the drama sort of folded in on itself.  Only a couple really, but there were some odd presentations of pauses and whatnot, especially before the obviously foreshadowed false flag operation (kudos for them doing that right though, more on that later).

Second... The fight between Bats and Supes was ridiculously contrived and it showed.  It was like they shoved it in for that one snippet of the movie just to show Bats beating Supes then they went back to the actual movie.  Though again, more complicated thoughts since this was a weird situation.  More on THAT later too.

Third... the ending.  God almighty the ending.  You do not spend close to 10 minutes showing the impact and effect of Supes dying only to immediately tease that he's coming back.  NO.  I have talked about this for, at this point, almost 2 decades.  You do not kill someone only to undo it.  You do not make death cheap.  You make death significant.  This is basic level writing.  Grawrgh.

I should really get some sleep so let's cover those two points again really quick, plus a third one.

False Flag Operation: So Luthor arranges for a bomb to go off, killing a fairly large number of people, including a few regular chars who've been in the movie up to this point, most notably the senator, his secretary, and Mr. Grumpy.  What I liked MOST about this is at first it seems like they were going to just flat blame it on Supes, but they had a few background news broadcasts clearly showing how it was proven that Mr Grumpy was 'behind' it.  Which I loved because that's the best type of False Flag Operation.  You don't need to convince your enemy beyond all doubt that someone else did it, because that's not how that works.  You just need to plant those seeds in there, and we saw even leading up to the meeting the crowd outside was equally "We love you Supes" and "We hate you Supes" and I LOVED that.  That is exactly how people would react to this in real life.  Also, the entire point being pushing Bruce into the fight.  Speaking of which.

I mentioned it was a weird situation the BvS part of... the movie named after that fight.  Here's why I say it's weird.  The movie goes well out of its way to show how Bruce slowly descended to the point where he wanted to bring Supes down, and it all boiled down to cynicism.  And I liked that.  This is an older Bruce (you saw the desecrated Robin costume, right?) who's already been through hell and back as the Bat.  This is a bitter and broken old man.  And it still took quite a few deliberately aimed pushes to get him to that mark.  And then... sigh... Supes made almost no effort to reach out to Bats.  I would have applauded if he just rushed up and knelt and begged Bats for help.  Imagine how that would have cut through that fog of cynicism.  But no we had to have the fight for what amounted to no reason (I honestly didn't even feel it was that cool to watch, the later fight against Doomsday was way cooler) and to show that Bats beat Supes so comic geeks everywhere could explode with joy.  And okay, sure.  But you know what I loved about the end of that scene?  The Batman beat the Superman.  But Clark Kent beat Batman.  And that is exactly right.  

This brings me to my final thoughts for now.  I've always felt Supes was at his most interesting when he was the Man, not the Super, and this movie was that in spades.  

Bonus thoughts: Loved this interpretation of Doomsday (I was actually saying to myself "C'mon give me the spikes" when he emerged, heh).  The afore-mentioned Robin thing, makes me wonder what happened with Joker.  The obvious setup for Flash and Aquaman was cool, but Cyborg's entrance was... especially interesting.  The dream sequences were a bit much, not really something I enjoyed.  The little touch towards the end about how much Luthor was abused as a child was nice.  As an aside, I loved Eisenberg's portrayal of a villain (clearly not Luthor... but still a very interesting villain I thought).  Darkseid for the next movie makes me pause a bit... it's clearly advertised all over the place (Flash time traveling to warn him, the dream future about the Parademons, the Mother Box being present, the fact that Luthor warned 'someone' and of course the obvious representation of the devil from the stars) but going to what is effectively the biggest DC villain right off the bat like that?  There is a reason Thanos has been built up over multiple movies (perhaps too many really...)

I think they hinted the first Justice league enemy will be Brainac with Darksied being the end all end villain they want to finish on. There was some hints about Brainac through the film which was much less heavy handed then the Darksied hints.

View user profile
I liked the movie. I actually enjoyed it more than Deadpool, which many would strongly disagree with that statement. Not saying Deadpool was bad at all.

The movie has a crap ton of flaws that I don't want to get into right now. All I will say is that they ruined the Death of Superman story that could have been told in a separate movie. Instead, they tried to rush it. Killing Superman in only his second movie sounds absurd considering they haven't built the character up enough. They spent the entire movie hating Superman, and then everyone is suddenly sad to seem him gone. Yes, Superman had many supporters, but that wasn't the tone of the movie. They can't really kill him anymore so the tension is completely gone. There were some great moments during that whole sequence, but now's not the time.

Much of the negativity about this movie seems way overblown to me. A lot of people are making it seem like the worst superhero movie ever made; it's not even the worst Batman movie. People have to right to dislike, or even hate it, but it bothers me when people act like its the worst thing ever made.

Btw, I call Mr. Grumpy, "I-can't-feel-my-legs" Guy.

View user profile
How would you say it stacks up when compared to Man of Steel? I enjoyed that film, flawed as it was, but these days I find myself gravitating more towards dramas and thrillers than action movies. And while I value your opinion greatly, the feedback on Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes, as well as other casual audience members on the net have made me wary of the film.

View user profile
In my opinion people may be disliking this movie because it's very different from the Marvel formula. The last Superman and Batman films came out in '12 and '13, and since that time there have been at least three Marvel movies every year, so they may have set a tone for what people expect from a superhero movie. Marvel (and particularly the MCU) tends to be more lighthearted and character focused, as in the drama comes from the characters and their interactions, and BvS is very much the opposite of that.

Kinda liked the fight itself. Could've been less punchy.

The Lorenunner wrote:
Third... the ending. God almighty the ending. You do not spend close to 10 minutes showing the impact and effect of Supes dying only to immediately tease that he's coming back. NO. I have talked about this for, at this point, almost 2 decades. You do not kill someone only to undo it. You do not make death cheap. You make death significant. This is basic level writing. Grawrgh.

So, Batman made a spear to kill Superman, who sacrificed himself, for our sins, maybe. Then they basically reenacted SuperJesus being taken down from the cross, handed to the women etc. with two crosses conspicuously placed in the background. I half expected Batman to bury Clark in the batcave behind a huge boulder, just because. Then they released the movie on Good Friday. Yeah there's no way they couldn't have hinted that he was coming back.

View user profile
Well I'm not going to get to into this movie, was it as bad as the reviews say no, but honestly it wasn't all that great either. I enjoyed it but I also disliked it so I don't know what to say really, maybe a lot of it has to do with the fact that there was no proper set up like the avengers had etc...

View user profile
Ok, first things first

In the theatre, one row behind me, about two seats to the left, sat a reasonably drop-dead gorgeous young lady, with a white blouse that fell just a little lower than you're normally used to seeing. If you're reading this, i was the guy wearing black, sitting to the right of a friend who would sometimes speak not quite as low as he should (he means well, though). Point is, PM me.

So, the movie. I liked it. It might me fair to say i loved it, but i don't really know where one ends and the other beings, so let's just say it was somewhere between the two. I was actually hampered beforehand, because of every review thumbnail i saw, and offhand remark that you just can't filter out when using the Internet, pretty much painting the picture that the movie sucked. So my mindset when seeing this movie was about to same as when i saw Star Trek Nemesis, though don't take that to mean i'm trying to damn it with faint praise.

I was basically thinking "Ok, it's probably gonna suck. Aaaany time now it's gonna start sucking. Ok, maybe after this part it'll start sucking. Hmmm.... maybe it won't suck after all; that's what you get for letting critics get to your hea- BRUCE!!!! SHE'S THE KEY!!! - ok, yeah, it's sucking - AM I TOO SOON!? - unbearably so, buddy, yeah. Also ruining the pace in a movie already too convoluted with disjointed dream sequences and trying to hammer in enough plot points for a three hour piece."

It was like the movie knew i wanted to like it, but was going through a self-hatred phase, and so did all in it's power to get me to hate it. Well, the screenplay did, at any rate. Which leads me to the confrontation that the movie is actually named after.

I have to speak honestly and say that in this universe, i don't think this confrontation would have ever happened. The reason it happens in DKR, is Superman is basically a well-behaved shell of the Government. He does what he's told and says Yes Sir, and we barely ever see Clark Kent until maybe the very end of the story.

In this movie, as well as the one before, Superman is far too human to go into that confrontation like he did. Bill's theory can suck it, because this Superman is very much Clark Kent first, as i think should be. And i was surprised too, because i was expecting them to flatten his character in order to shove him down that path, but he was actually very likeable throughout. You can tell he's suffering through most of the movie, with all the tragedy surrounding him - which draws an interesting parallel with how Bruce Wayne deals with his own pain.

While Clark has had two years of being a superhero, Bruce has had tenfold the experience. And to his credit, he will still rush out to save his people in an office building out in the next city, in the middle of a fight between titans, as everything else is crumbling in front of him. Why? Because he's frigging Batman. And as frigging Batman, he cannot ever back down so long as someone somewhere is threatened by something, for as long as he can move a muscle.

So, if the Movie had spent less time with dream crap, setting up Ironflash and Darkseid and the JL, in what is effectively a sequel bait that NEVER pays off for the rest of the running time, and more time setting up why these two characters who would normally find a better way to settle their differences are inexorably drawn into fighting each other, i think it would have fared a bit better.

As for the fight itself, i was betting on a draw. Never did i expect for Batman to outright win and it taking Lois to nearly beg for Superman's life. I won't deny it felt satisfying, but i felt a lot more sympathy for Superman here than i did in DKR. As for how they made up, it felt a little too sudden. A minute after Bruce is ready to impale Clark, he's promising the safety of his mom, and about half an hour later is telling her he's a friend of her son. I guess it's nice they can so readily put down their differences, but it also felt almost as rushed as when they were being twisted into fighting each other in the first place.

Then the three of them - oh yeah, and Wonder Woman was around too - have to combine their forces to fight Doomsday and then Superman dies. I won't lie, i love a good live action Dragonball Z fight, and i feel like Snyder is spoiling me here with the awesome action, but i felt like it was mostly fanservice. The best kind of fanservice, that i will never complain about, but it was definitely the movie's Final Boss Battle, because it had to be, because formula.

All in all, i really liked this movie. Quite despite itself in some parts, but it's a major net win regardless.




That's it for me, except BONUS PARAGRAPH!!


About this whole Batman vs Superman thing fans go on about. I'd like to drop my two cents. I don't think Batman will ever lose to Superman in anything that isn't either a lark or a cynical piece or fanmade. The reason, i think, is not because fans. Superman has a ton of fans that will never accept Batman ever beat Superman (you know who you are), who would be overjoyed to see the Man of Steel win with extreme prejudice.

The reason, as i see it, is rather literary. Any scenario i can think of where Batman loses to Superman would probably come off as a failure. It would kinda literally be Strength losing to Power. When people compare Supes to Bats, it always seems to come off as a Brawn vs Brains scenario, but i don't think this is accurate. Batman's defining trait, perhaps even more than his intellect, is his determination. It's the basic premise of most heroic tales i can think of, that it's not about how much damage the character can dish out, but how much he can take and keep moving, normally while facing a superior foe. Batman vs Superman is probably one of the greatest expressions of the Warrior facing down the Dragon. All the more potent here, because in this case the Dragon is not actually a villain, and there's a always good bit of reasonable doubt that the "hero" will actually pull through - something most confrontations of this type usually lack.

As for Superman being so insurmountably powerful, i think that's more of a disservice to the character than anything. One of the Superman stories i remember enjoying the most was a two parter where he faces the Eradicator, and the cliffhanger is Superman getting thrown into the sun. I was genuinely on the edge for the next issue, and it was one of the most memorable comic experiences i can remember when i found it on sale and read the conclusion. In a universe where Superman is untouchable, that's just lost. Now, i'll freely admit i don't hold a candle to a real comic aficionado, but every time you put a character in front of me who has no limitations and can just do whatever with impunity, i just fail to see the allure. I want to like Superman, but every time a writer flashes his big awesome power in front of me for no other reason than to say how big awesome powerful he is, i just lose interest.

Actually, you might say Superman's character benefits more from losing to Batman than it would the other way around. It gives him a limit - something on his road that isn't the power glory that writers seem to trip over themselves to bloat him with, and makes him more human. Seriously, think of how it would have ended up if that fight in the movie had ended the other way around, without regard for which character is your favorite, and tell me if it would have been as satisfying, for both.

View user profile
Well, I guess I will just have to play the devils advocate here and tell you gues that we have seen entirely different movies. What I saw on my almost empty screening, was a horrendous contrived piece of garbage alike to Fant4stic and Amazing Spider Man 2. I will praise it as a good remake of Batman and Robin though.

Heavy Spoilers ahead.

DISCLAIMER: I am kinda a comic book guy, so quite a bit of my criticism will arise from it being a terrible interpretation which misses the mark from everything that makes those characters good from the comics. (I am also a Marvel guy mostly, but it is irrelevant.Wink

When I saw the movie, I went it hoping to see two comic book legends in their purest forms clash ideologically and physically, while setting up the Justice League. What actually happened was two brooding "idiots" do something for 2,5 hours. But I am getting ahead of myself.

The movie starts once again with the most reinterpreted scene in any comic book history, if not cinematic history period. That however is not a bad thing on its own. What bothered me was that the way it was filmed was overly pretentious and over the top, especially with the gun getting stuck in the necklace just so Zack Snyder can have a slo-mo shot the gun firing, which reminded me of the spider man web hand which was supposed to catch Gwen Stacy in Amazing Spider Man 2. Why is it there? What does it add to the movie, to the story and to the narrative? Its pretentious movie making 101.

One good thing about this movie is that it actually looks good and the shots are all well made on a technical level.

Then we are going into a dream seqeunce of Bruce finding the batcave. We have another pretentious scene of Bruce being lifted into the air by bats. We do not know that it is a dream sequence at first. So, just why would you do that? Again, same as the gun and the necklace. Same complaint.

This is however, quickly forgotten when we see a beautiful opening of Bruce witnessing the destruction of Metropolis. Which beautifully illustrates his point of view, point of view of the world and all the motivation he needs. Beautiful, amazing. Well done.

However even there, why do we have a scene where Bruce tells a "Mr. Grumpy" if he may call him Wally? That’s just pondering to hard core comic book fans who will immediately go: "Ohhh Wally! Its Wally West, the Flash!". Just Why? As an audience member, I just kept asking Zack Snyder
Why. Why do things happen? What is the motivation, why.

Then we have a scene of a stone cold killer Super Man killing a man in Africa. 'Nuff said.
Soon enough we get introduction to stone cold killer Batman. One, the "prime" Batman does not kill. Yes it did happen in the comics, but even in the main continuity it always happened under certain circumstances. It also makes no sense for Joker to be alive anymore, because this Batman would just murder him, probably while using a car as a wrecking ball. There is a throwaway line where Alfred tells Bruce that everything changed, implying that Batman became more cruel. Personally it would have been fine if it ever was brought up again.

To be fair, Ben Affleck was great at portraying the character he was given, I however do not want to call him Batman, because he isn’t. Nonetheless Ben Afflecks acting is spot on.
I also enjoy Henry Cavill in the role as his character, also not Superman, however slowly getting there.

I am not going to go through every scene, and just touch on somethings from this point forward.

How many dream sequences were there? 10?

Lex Luthor. Why? He is portraying a new iteration of the character. It doesn’t work. Why? Straight away, this Lex Luthor ruins any possibility to have an interesting character in this cinematic universe, because a guy in comic books, or any other iterations(other than movie iterations) is a cunning business man, genius who becomes a president at one point. And he is just a man, who Superman should be able to take down in a blink of an eye. But the charm of the character is that Superman cant do it, Lex always finds a way to outsmart Superman and even though losing to him, still never completely turning into a Joker-esque character. BvS Lex Luthor is just a psychopath who the public will never except back, hence he is just Supermans version of Joker, which is not what Lex Luthor is.

Why cants Superman save his mom, Martha? Why doesn’t he hear when Martha gets captured but always hears when Louis Lane is captured or thrown of a building? So his kidnapped mother his motivation to fight batman? Why doesn’t he try to talk to Batman? I mean yes he does, once and then he proceeds to punch him and tell him to stay down. The fight between the two is so stupid. Batman is not prepared at all, other than kryptonite and somehow even though Superman throws Batman all over the place, somehow they end up in a place Batman stashed the kryptonite spear? Which Amy Adams throws away into the flooded part of the building just to go after it the very next scene? I was thinking Aquaman was going to show up by this point with the spear.

Speaking of Aquaman, the Justice League cameos are so hand fisted. Wonder Woman even opens them all up in order of the movies coming out. Also who gave them names? Who designed logos in this incredibly secret document? What was Wonder Womans plan btw? Get a photo? How would she have gotten the photo if Batman wouldn’t have shown up to Luthors party with his thing-a-magic.
This is taking too much of my times and energy and bringing me back nightmares. There are a lot of things I haven’t touched upon. I will just end on a positive note. The moment Superman takes the spear and is prepared to sacrifice himself, I felt as if Superman finally became Superman. He finally had a smile and this integral part of superman which I cant just pinpoint. He was dark or brooding, instead he, the character, was grounded by his love for Louis Lane which made him the symbol and the hero he was supposed to be, which inspired the likes of Batman. That was good, even if the circumstances surrounding it were non-sensical pieces of garbage made up by a person who does not understand the characters they are working with.

After all, this was so much wasted potential and even though a lot of the things I said maybe thought of as nitpicks, I think they are and they stand out when you think about. I do love those characters and I have no idea how anybody can like this movie, if not for it comedic value.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but this movie doesn’t work as a movie. Man of Steel works and I like Man of Steel, this movie is just a 2,5 hour trailer for the universe they are setting up.
I am done. Sorry for rant, and if you read all of that, you are a real hero.

PS: Superman regenerating, since his heart is obviously beating, means that Zod from Man of Steel should have went through the same procedure, except he didn’t.

View user profile
Don't know what all the fuss is about. I enjoyed it. It was messy. It was pretty to look at. Batfleck was probably the best big screen interpretation of Bats in some time (even though he's a god damn mass murderer), Wonder Woman was ok (wish she was actually built like an Amazon, but that's my bias for strong female bodies talking), Jesse Eisenberg played an interesting villain, I can't really complain about his _acting_, but I want to flick Zack Snyder's head for handing him the script written like that.. the flash drive was just- no. No. No no no. Bad Snyder, bad.

BvS was contrived, but then I'm pretty sure we all knew it would be. Abruptly started, abruptly finished, WAY too much Batman fanservice. Not a big fan of Clark's "development" (that word's being generous), dream sequences could have worked, but would have needed to be handled way better.

Still worth the price of admission. Really hope Affleck doesn't get fazed by the negative reviews and is at least able to come to appreciate his own performance. Few actors did "bad", just victims of the writing.

View user profile
Oh.. and Supes' "corpse" shoulda been shot up into space.. fabricate a reason something akin to "his body is contaminated with the creature's".. what-the-hell-ever, but then we can just end on a shot of his space-casket floating toward the sun.. without the bullshit dust waving about.

View user profile
Is it really that bad that Batman kills people? It's not like he didn't do it in other movies they just didn't mention it and make it obvious like in this movie.

View user profile


Considering the movie is half based on the Dark Knight Returns, yes it is.

And even then, in other movies Batman is not mawing people down left and right for his own pleasure.

Nolans Trilogy is a more realistic movie, meaning that a vigilante killing occassionaly will happen, as it probably would in real life. Batman V Superman is basically a bunch of comic book panels brought to screen, however there is no substance behind this aping of the comic books.

View user profile
ADDENDUM - (i think it's an addendum)


I forgot the line that summed up this Superman for me - "All that circus back west, burying an empty casket."

Because it's true. Superman isn't the alien from Krypton who's really strong - that's just as good a description of Zodd. Superman is the guy who grew up in Kansas, raised by Jonathan and Martha. And when the time comes to remember him, that's where he is. Not among the adulating crowd with all the fanfare; back home, with his family and friends and the people who knew him. That's who he is.



Clark beating Bats:

While i can see the logic there, i'm not sure i completely look at it that way. Because if you put it as a battle, then i think the one who really beat him was Lois. Sure, Clark told him something that made him relent (violently, at that), but i'd argue Bruce was within that kind of reach from the very beginning, if it had been done right.

The point is, establishing a connection with someone and beating them are not only two different things, i'd argue they're diametrically opposed. What Clark did was connect with Bats, and to do that, he really had to lay down his arms, so to speak. It's just not something you can do from a place of aggression or superiority. Once he did, though, the only battle left to fight was in Batman's head.

Because the thing is, Bruce knew from the beginning he wasn't killing a monster or a lowlife. He was killing a man, and he was being premeditated about it. And throughout the fight you hear him rant, but i think half of it was to convince himself. And then, when he has Clark at mercy, he still can't bring himself to just do it, and rants some more, just to build up enough anger to finally go through with it. Then Clark connects with him, putting the biggest chink in his armor since the whole fight started, and Bruce's resolve just starts to waver. And then Lois shows up, and the whole picture is completed. All that was then left was for Batman to decide whether or not to kill the man lying at his foot, with his family right there beside him, begging him to stop.

If there was any beating done, i'd argue Batman beat himself.

And this is not so i can go haha, Clark didn't even get that much, but it's just that can't see this as a situation that can be called in terms of victory or defeat. This is what should have been done to begin with - and not entirely for lack of trying, since Clark did try to extend the olive branch, for about ten seconds. In truth, i'm pretty sure that was all Bats would have needed to realize something was not right with the situation - even as hard as he was pushing himself to do it, but i guess that was all the writers could come up with.

View user profile
The point is that Batman was never above killing, nor has any Batman till recently it became the end all rule to not kill, Batman was even hinted to have killed the Joker in one of the comics and he certainly has killed Ras al'Ghul half a billion times. Frankly put Batman is a vigilante and the men he killed were mercenaries that clearly had nothing agaisnt slaughtering innocents. If they didn't want to die, not working in the mercenary force for a evil genius might be helpful.

Not to mention the multiple times previously in the comics Batman brutally murdered people.

View user profile
Unless it's an Elseworlds Batmam, it has been decades that Batman vowed not to kill or use guns.

Furthermore, there is always context for Batman to kill. In the killing joke it is implied that Batman kills Joker, but that's the point of the comic book that Joker is trying to drive Batman over the line.

Even after the death of Jason Todd Batman didn't resolve to killing, which was the central conflict of Under the Hood, not that Batman didn't save his robin but that he didn't avenge him.

I always remember the scene from Justice league unlimited, when the character deadman sees danger to Batman. Deadman takes possession of Batmans body and uses a gun to eliminate the danger. After that Batman is devastated even though it wasn't him that killed the guy.

Or Arkham City where Batman was prepared to save the joker even after everything he did.

Whatever was Batman when he was first conceived, right now the character evolved to where no killing is a fundamental part of him, his moral compas among other things make him interesting. It can be broken, and it has in comics but under certain circumstances. Here were have a bloodlust stupid batman.

In this movie there is no context, maybe it will be provided with time. Meanwhile we just got a movie with punisher.

View user profile
OmegaSpruz wrote:Unless it's an Elseworlds Batmam, it has been decades that Batman vowed not to kill or use guns.

Furthermore, there is always context for Batman to kill. In the killing joke it is implied that Batman kills Joker, but that's the point of the comic book that Joker is trying to drive Batman over the line.

Even after the death of Jason Todd Batman didn't resolve to killing, which was the central conflict of Under the Hood, not that Batman didn't save his robin but that he didn't avenge him.

I always remember the scene from Justice league unlimited, when the character deadman sees danger to Batman. Deadman takes possession of Batmans body and uses a gun to eliminate the danger. After that Batman is devastated even though it wasn't him that killed the guy.

Or Arkham City where Batman was prepared to save the joker even after everything he did.

Whatever was Batman when he was first conceived, right now the character evolved to where no killing is a fundamental part of him, his moral compas among other things make him interesting. It can be broken, and it has in comics but under certain circumstances. Here were have a bloodlust stupid batman.

In this movie there is no context, maybe it will be provided with time. Meanwhile we just got a movie with punisher.

I understand that most Batmans do not kill, nor should they but I am saying that since it was not a total betrayal of the character, I personally did not mind it. If he was....I dunno...responsible for killing Robin in a fit of Drunken rage then I might have been more pissed.

View user profile
Spirit of Memory wrote:
OmegaSpruz wrote:Unless it's an Elseworlds Batmam, it has been decades that Batman vowed not to kill or use guns.

Furthermore, there is always context for Batman to kill. In the killing joke it is implied that Batman kills Joker, but that's the point of the comic book that Joker is trying to drive Batman over the line.

Even after the death of Jason Todd Batman didn't resolve to killing, which was the central conflict of Under the Hood, not that Batman didn't save his robin but that he didn't avenge him.

I always remember the scene from Justice league unlimited, when the character deadman sees danger to Batman. Deadman takes possession of Batmans body and uses a gun to eliminate the danger. After that Batman is devastated even though it wasn't him that killed the guy.

Or Arkham City where Batman was prepared to save the joker even after everything he did.

Whatever was Batman when he was first conceived, right now the character evolved to where no killing is a fundamental part of him, his moral compas among other things make him interesting. It can be broken, and it has in comics but under certain circumstances. Here were have a bloodlust stupid batman.

In this movie there is no context, maybe it will be provided with time. Meanwhile we just got a movie with punisher.

I understand that most Batmans do not kill, nor should they but I am saying that since it was not a total betrayal of the character, I personally did not mind it. If he was....I dunno...responsible for killing Robin in a fit of Drunken rage then I might have been more pissed.

I thought about it a lot. I dont want to come off as too angry at this movie, and Batman killing actually a nitpick among other actual problems with the movie editing and writing.

That said, when I saw Dark Knight yesterday on TV, Batman trying to not to kill throughout the movie stood out like a sore thumb after BvS, even though Nolan Batman does kill a few times. I dont know, to me it isnt a betrayal of the character, but thats not a good executive decision on Zack Snyders part, because it does worsen the characters and the internal logic of the world.

View user profile
It doesn't bother me so much that he kills but that he's kills with guns. It's kinda boring. He has a batbelt for a reason! Sad

View user profile
OmegaSpruz wrote:Batman V Superman is basically a bunch of comic book panels brought to screen, however there is no substance behind this aping of the comic books.
Exactly like every other Zack Synder film. All style, no substance.

View user profile
Why Zack Synder needs to stop directing superhero movies

I came across this article recently. It explains a lot about Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice.

View user profile
Best to abandon hope that the future films will be good if the same people make them. Suicide Squad looks like it will be interesting and every dc film that features the joker has been good so the pattern is there.

Edit: When I say "good" I mean critically acclaimed or positive reaction.

View user profile
Will you guys check out the Ultimate edition of the movie? The rated R version with 30 min more footage?

View user profile
Ironically myself and Arch are on the other side of the fence again with our opinions with a comic film, but we all have different tastes at the end of the day. It’s why I try to avoid critics/feedback before I see a movie just so I’m not conditioned to expect a good or bad movie because there have been many movies people rave highly about (like the first Avengers) I felt disappointed and there have been ones people have crucified that I enjoyed (like The Wolverine), which just solidifies we all have our own tastes.

Now recently I caught up on the trio of movies I’ve missed being, Avengers Civil War, X-Men Apocalypse and of course Batman v Superman. And out of the 3 Batman vs. Superman was probably the one I disliked the most, which was a shame considering I’ve been on such a high DC kick over the past few months. I’ll start with the positives because just because I didn’t like the movie doesn’t mean it’s the worst thing in the world, I feel too many people blow things out of proportion these days on what is good or bad; especially with the Internet.

I really loved the scene where Superman was set up in the court room, even though I predicted that was going to happen. It’s something that DC has been doing better these days that they’ve lacked in the past with their characters that Marvel always brought to the table, which is more realistic (Stan Lee likes to point that out obviously). But with people questioning whether or not to trust a man that can easily exterminate the entire planet like it was nothing really brought forth that element I’ve always loved with the X-Men with the whole Humans accepting mutant’s scenario.

The fight showdown while although predictable and really didn’t add to much, I found enjoyable for what they did. It was a fan geek out moment seeing two iconic heroes on the big screen duke it out and why people wanted to see the movie in the first place so I accepted it for what it was I knew the outcome beforehand since Bats had access to Kryptonite, didn't care who won really just enjoyed it from entertainment aspect.

I liked the Darkseid and Justice League teasers. Wonder Woman was good as Diana, would've been better if they made her a bit more airhead in associating with society, but it was enough. Doomsday also looked cool WITH the spikes; I didn’t know what to make of him without them, lol.

Now as for the couple negative things, I found the movie boring for the most part I don’t know why. Maybe it’s because I knew too much and they were doing a lot of slow pacing for newer people I couldn’t tell you, but until the court room scene I was about to fall asleep.

I wasn’t a fan of Batman’s voice since I feel it keeps devolving. Kevin Conroy proved you don’t need any gimmick voices to do an awesome Batman, but directors really want to emphasis that if this were real life you have to do a complete 180 with the voice complex. Just felt unnecessary.

The BIGGEST gripe I had though was Superman in this movie. Now for the record next to Wolverine, Superman is my second favorite hero of all time in comics. I grew up watching the old 1940 cartoons, All Star Superman is one of my favorites, and Christopher Reeve needless to say is one my many inspirations in life that helps motivate me during cardio/weights and the essence he brought Superman from the pages to life is something that will stick with me forever but I digress.
What bugs me about this new Superman from Man of Steel is a few things. First they constantly portray him as Jesus, this dates back to the last movie. And I get that if this were real life some might make the comparison, but seriously they went overboard with the symbolism and comparisons, it’s just something that had no business being in this or Man of Steel or even attached to the Superman character in general.  Next also dates back to last movie which I won’t spoil what happen at the end of Man of Steel, but Superman/Clark Kent came off as a bully to me. Rather than try to reason with Batman in this movie he threatens him! I get that they want a darker Superman thanks to the Batman Begins movies, but it’s easier to toy around with characters like Batman because the essence of his character is having the path of a criminal set up for him with his parents murdered in front of his eyes yet he resists becoming one himself. Superman on the other hand is an alien with all the power in the world yet prefers using his mind over his muscle. In this movie I felt he could’ve been Bruce Banner trying to contain the Hulk inside. Even as Clark Kent who fascinates me as a character more than Superman, rather than be the stumbling, bumbling nice guy that blends into the background, he came off cocky to me in this, especially when he was asking Bruce Wayne questions. I just didn't like the adaptation.

Finally this wasn’t a complaint about the movie, but the trailer. They shouldn’t have spoiled Doomsday in the trailer, I’m sure I would’ve been more excited about that moment had the trailer not spoiled it. I was on par with Lex, I prefer when Luthor is older than a kid personally but he wasn't bad. Affleck as Batman was alright, I actually liked him as Daredevil despite what people may think of the movie. Thought he came across as a solid Matt Murdock, Bruce Wayne I had trouble adjusting.

Anyway I’ll leave it at that.  Pretty much I found it to be a boring movie for the most part with couple decent scenes and one of the worst portrayals of one of my all-time favorite characters I’ve seen. But we’re in an age where everyone needs a character make over so it is what it is. I hope others enjoyed it though even if I didn’t. I’ve heard speculation Cyborg is going to have a MAJOR role in the next movie.

View user profile http://bowmen.imgur.com

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum