Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice

Oh dear...
They seem to have no real idea which direction to go in, which is why Marvel has been completely dominating the movie front by getting their properties out there.

If it had nothing to do with the putrid MoS (a film somehow more lifeless than Superman Returns) in any way, then I might say that by taking their time the studio was putting together a far superior effort. But of course not. What should happen is a lightening up to be honest, a remembrance that comics are not always about uber-dark-reality-for-the-sake-of-being-realistic-because-that's-what-people-supposedly-like-now-100%-of-the-time-because-the-Nolan-films-made-money.

This and a story worth telling. To me Superman is distilled and personified by the Fleischer cartoons, and this energy combined with some of the more thought provoking stories of the past 20 years or so could be pretty damn good. (Agreed that the new 52 is mental though. However, it did resurrect Babs randomly, so for that I was ecstatic.)


Oh hell, what WB should have done long ago is turned to the guys who have done this for decades and said, here's a feature budget-go do what you usually do.

A Bruce Timm led feature would decimate any competition. Who else knows and cares more about the subject matter? How many times does one have to do a definitive adaptation to be recognized? Imagine a Mask of the Phantasm without the time and schedule constraints, even live action. His recent short for the Batman anniversary was the first time I've been excited about anything superhero related in years, and it's a beyond tiny little piece.

This perfectly captures the Kane/Finger Batman of the first year in 1939, right down to the single line of the ending recalling "The Case of the Chemical Syndicate" and the pointed cowl ears.

Anyone else yearning to see Kevin Conroy win the Oscar for a true Dark Knight Returns adaptation? I've dreamt of that movie since reading the book 15 years ago.

 

Supergirl.
The second Ghost Rider film.
I hear Jonah Hex is bad but haven't seen it.

 

It's completely obvious now that the Man of Steel movie was made simply just so they could get to this movie.

 

Giving this one a miss.

 

I think it was for a couple reasons: one was to wash Superman Returns out of the public's consciousness. Another was to make $661 million (which is not as much as the biggest WB movies or Batman, but not bad). Another was to prove that WB could make superhero movies as successful as the Marvel franchise. But I agree that one of the reasons was to set up future sequels.

 

I guess the studio simply has no faith in exploring Superman's story.

Batman V Superman? That's the branding for the sequel?

Good grief.

 

From a movie point of view, Batman has been infinitely more profitable than Superman, so I understand their reasoning, even though it looks stupid. I dunno about this film. I just hope it's not as ugly and lame as Man of Steel.

I was a big fan of the 1978 Richard Donner Superman film, and thought that had a pretty good balance between humor, action, spectacle, plus it wasn't too stupid (save for the "spin the Earth around and go back in time" ending). And the casting was terrific and it was a fun romp. I think all the movies after that got steadily worse, to the point where they were almost sitcoms. Superman IV was almost jaw-droppingly awful, and I can see why they decided to just end the franchise there instead of trying to keep going.

You gotta wonder what the mid-1990s Superman film proposed by Tim Burton would've been like, starring Nicholas Cage (which would've been weird casting). Burton's a weird guy, but he makes interesting, striking movies that take a lot of risks. But I've run hot and cold with him lately.

 

Despite the response to Man of Steel, they clearly set out to make a somewhat serious movie, with a serious tone, look, feel.

Batman V Superman sounds like a kids cartoon.

 

Cartoons will always be superior to any live action movie they churn out.
Blade was rare exception.
This will be Heavens Gate part 2 you watch.
Like, X-Men days of Futures Past movie
Watch the 90's cartoon first.
Much better in my opinion.

 

At some point, though, "serious tone & feel" can become heavy-handed, leaden, and without even a vestige of humor. And I think all those problems afflict Man of Steel. Even the Nolan Dark Knight films are occasionally fun and have witty dialogue; they're not drudgerous 100% of the time.

 

I have no issues whatsoever with a "serious" Superman movie. In fact, the teaser trailer for Man of Steel is still a great work and I'd LOVE to see the movie that it promised. But what we got failed not in what it tried to be, but how poorly it was executed. I couldn't help but laugh throughout the movie b/c of how ridiculous and dumb it got, the final insult being the last line where a female soldier giggles and comments on his "hotness." Just a mess.

 

I realise that I've brought this point up before, but for me the Superman cinematic benchmark will always be the first two Christopher Reeve movies, though I still like the last two even more than Superman Returns and Man Of Steel. The problem with Returns was that it spent too much time referencing the Richard Donner approach, even recycling whole lines of dialogue and plot elements. Also, while its slightly darker take worked on a visual level, the story suffered from a Superman who just moaned his way through the story - and don't get me started on the lack of humour in both this film and the most recent reboot.

Actually, considering the character, is humour really that integral to the success of Superman? Most of the comedy in his previous on-screen adventures either came from laughing with the deliberately bumbling Clark Kent persona or whatever villain he was fighting against, though there was perhaps too much of a reliance on Lex Luthor plus newly-created variations on the same idea (and Ross Webster wasn't even funny!) rather than further exploring the established comic book rogues gallery. On the other hand, you could argue that Bizarro and Brainiac appeared late into Superman III, albeit in heavily modified forms compared with Ilya Salkind's original plans for this sequel where both were going to be more literal interpretations of these known figures along with Supergirl, who I'll cover soon...

After what was effectively a glorified vehicle for Richard Pryor, The Quest For Peace had a better balance of comedy, dropping the excessive slapstick caused by combining Richard Lester's direction with the writing of David and Leslie Newman, who the Salkinds seemed to resort to in favour of more tasteful alternatives such as Tom Mankiewicz. I still give out a little sigh every time Donner and Mankiewicz discuss in their DVD commentary the intention for this dream pair to continue heading the production of further Superman sequels, alternating in various roles to keep their enthusiasm fresh.

Coming right up to date with Man Of Steel, I appreciate what Zack Snyder achieved on 300, but fans of Superman don't want just another mindless action flick with huge amounts of mostly unnecessary collateral damage. Yes, there's no hiding from the fact that Henry Cavill is stuck playing an alien torn between his powers and fitting in with humanity, yet he was completely unsympathetic - when Christopher Reeve chose to reverse time, give up his powers for Lois Lane or even then abandon their relationship to serve the world again, I genuinely felt for him. Similarly, as I touched on previously, despite being something I can watch on occasion, Returns fails in my opinion because there isn't that connection. Brandon Routh wasn't given much time to be heroic, nor do I appreciate his brooding over Lois moving on in her life when Reeve had already made it clear they couldn't be together, no matter how much he may have wanted that.

Now, that's not to say I'm against darker or more contemplative superhero movies. Incredibly, even though general consensus suggests it wasn't very good, I really liked DareDevil and I've no interest in the recent Spiderman reboot. Sam Raimi's vision may have occasionally lapsed into excessive brooding, but overall I thought his trilogy was quite close to how I'd always perceived Spiderman in his original comic form. On the subject of Marvel's franchises, I've fallen head over heels with X-Men, confirming that it's not Bryan Singer or his writing team I blame for the various failings that plague Superman Returns. If anything, I just wish it had tried more to find its own identity, which isn't something you could ever say about Man Of Steel.

Something tells me that Zack Snyder alone thought Jor-El's reference to 300 (and perhaps one of the biggest Internet memes I can think of) was a good idea, only he then quickly follows this with General Zod sentenced to a certain number of cycles that further rams home the reminder this film's director masterminded a certain Spartan-themed epic. We get it, Zack - enough, already! As if this wasn't bad enough, WB then pushed Man Of Steel as being spearheaded by Christopher Nolan, with the promotional efforts naturally pointing out his Dark Knight trilogy as some kind of guarantee this latest project couldn't fail. In reality, the MOS promised by those early trailers isn't what the end product ended up being.

From my earliest days as a comic enthusiast, Batman always seemed a little too dark, though I guess he's done well for himself. Perhaps it's just that I've always regarded this form of entertainment as something that should be light, escapist fantasy. Then again, as someone who's since got into penning superhero fan fiction, I'm more aware than ever of the very strict rules that exist in a world that should theoretically be free of such constraints. For example, it's difficult - if not impossible - to use Supergirl because she comes across as simply her cousin in a skirt, which is the exact same problem Jeannot Szwarc found himself facing when he directed a film skewed to promote balletic nature and romance over pure brawn. However, unlike Superman, she can't really succeed with power alone because she's not that kind of person, so the logical solution is to introduce magical elements and the concept of mind over matter. Based on this points, is there any other way her sole cinematic adventure could have realistically turned out, and should we be that surprised by its lack of success? If there really had to be a romantic element, I only wish it had been toned back a few notches. Who really wanted to see witches and love potions?

Moving onto Batman for a moment, the dark approach fits like a glove with him because we actually expect that kind of story from someone who owes their existence to seeking revenge and embarking on a personal quest to become their fears rather than just conquering them. Nolan's bag of tricks worked perfectly in this context, yet WB were clearly hoping it could also print money as the foundations for a similar Superman reboot as well. Unlike in previous films where humour (mostly) felt natural, MOS suffered because of any light elements being shoehorned into a package that was obviously designed by committee to be a carbon copy of the Dark Knight trilogy, even if this approach didn't fit the new character.

I read that Nolan made the original pitch for MOS, yet in more recent times it seems as if he's distancing himself from the series Zack Snyder is directing, though whether this is due to other projects being more appealing or his determination not to be seen as some kind of go-to-guy for comic book adaptations remains to be seen. Either way, I don't even believe he was that involved to begin with, as David S. Goyer could easily have adopted the Dark Knight approach and non-linear narrative without Nolan's direct involvement.

My biggest worry is that WB lost faith in Superman as a result of the lengthy production troubles that ultimately led to Returns, which failed to meet expectations and has since been criticised in hindsight by the majority of its target audience. Even though a sequel was once proposed, I doubt that MOS was ever considered more than just a way to initiate development of a Justice League crossover, leading up to the real thing making its screen debut. WB must surely know they're playing a very distant second to Marvel - a company that rarely puts a foot wrong. Even then, Marvel's few mistakes are easily forgiven because of just how right they often get things.

In addition to the new Spiderman, I don't think much of Marvel's hasty rebooting of Hulk, though I do understand that not everyone liked the earlier takes on these characters. However, even though a few small missteps have occurred, there's no doubting just how well the X-Men series has done. As somebody who grew up with DC's flagship superhero, I respected Batman for what he was and looked at Marvel's universe from a distance, really only noticing the old X-Men animated series and videogames (well, those produced by Capcom in the mid-to-late 1990s, at least).

These days, I've given up on DC and the New 52, throwing myself deeply into a wealth of increasingly familiar names that work in collaborative films because they have back stories that I can relate to. By contrast, I really do think Superman and Batman are being jammed together along with Wonder Woman due to WB foolishly believing this is the next logical step. Marvel's crossovers and ensemble teams feel natural, while Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice smacks of a need to keep up with the competition. Is there any reason these two former titans would be reduced to fighting either physically or ideologically? Worse, is there any real reason for them engage in battle outside of DC's need to make money?

Unlike their Marvel counterparts, any meeting of DC characters doesn't come across as really necessary. Looking at the X-Men, Avengers or Fantastic Four as examples, every piece contributes to the overall machine, while in the Justice League there's no hiding from the fact that in terms of sheer power, Superman towers over his supposed equals. As for the Snyder/Goyer/Nolan insistence that Batman taking on Superman is relevant to pursue as a film project, I'm not even worried about the physical imbalance of such a conflict. Worse, my concern is that there isn't a valid reason for this to happen in the first place. At least Professor X and Magneto had a valid reason to become lifelong enemies, while it's amazing how Batman was able to sit back as Superman went against General Zod, the only real losers being so many innocent civilians who surely died in the resulting devastation.

 

here's the new Wonder Woman unveiled at Comic-Con

 

Shalome.
Fit
And
Fabulous.

 

Oy, Gal Gadot...

 

About time DC gave
Marvel some Superhero competition.

 

That's Wonder Woman? If I didn't know better, I'd think that picture was something from a Beastmaster reboot.

 

I'm looking foward to this. How about we wait and see how it turns out before blasting it? Even those of you who hated Man of Steel (I didn't hate it...it had some merits but huge deficits as well) have to admit sometimes the first movie in a saga blows chunks while the sequels improve on the first. Of course the opposite is often the case but let's wait and see what happens before we speculate how bad it will be shall we?

The original plan was to make at least one Man of Steel sequel and then move on the Justice League but that time table was scrapped with the success of The Avengers. Given the other Superman reboots that were potentially out there (J.J. Abrams horrible script, the chance to cast Nicolas Cage as Superman), Man of Steel could have been much, much worse.

 

To give "Team Snyder" some credit, the new design for Wonder Woman doesn't actually look too bad, though I'm more concerned with the rumours concerning her revised origin (at this point, I should give a spoiler warning to those of you who've yet to see Man Of Steel)... Although two pods were seen in the ship that landed prior to Kal El's arrival, only one body remained on board - it's believed that rather than go with the traditional character of Kara Zor El, as suggested in a promotional comic, the only other survivor of the planet Krypton found her way to helping the Amazons accomplish wonders, to quote Jor El. So, in this new continuity does that technically mean Wonder Woman is also Supergirl? I suspect that is what they're aiming for, plus her age would give a hint as to how long Superman can expect to be around!

P.S. My understanding is that the MOS sequel hasn't actually been scrapped, but held back until after the release of a full-blown Justice League movie. However, I would still happily trade all of this for a look at how Christopher Nolan might have rebooted Superman without any outside interference. Additionally, for those interested, a fundraising effort is currently ongoing to finance a documentary on the abandoned Tim Burton project, Superman Lives. According to the most recent video clip, Kevin Smith appears to be fully involved, and I can't wait to hear more of his stories about this ill-fated venture.

 

It is somewhat encouraging that Chris Terrio, academy award winner for Argo, is involved with the script. I had heard that Affleck's involvement included having a say in the script, so it makes sense that he would bring in a decent writer if what he didn't like what he was given. We'll have to wait and see but MOS was such a mess from it's writing to it's direction that the bar is set so low, for me anyways, that improving the series with the sequel may be possible.

 

Why does Wonder Woman have a sword?

 

I find no reason to complain about hot babes with lethal weapons.

 

She's being out the lasso later for private time.

 

Xena Warrior Princess part 2 . It look like the same costume designer.
This movie has so many plots I won't suprised if some characters
announced won't make the cut.

 

Is there a reason she shouldn't? (mostly serious question here; not a comic book reader, much.)

Do you like anything?