- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Batman vs superman. Worth a watch or don't bother?
Posted on 6/29/16 at 11:29 am to Scoob
Posted on 6/29/16 at 11:29 am to Scoob
quote:
Sony makes a reboot of Spider-man, the first of which looked very good, and one where the actor finally seems right for the role.
Public reaction: enough with the reboots, we know who Spider-man is, we don't want origin tales, we want action going forward.
Marvel tosses yet another actor into the role, transposes him into their Avengers MCU, and everyone: "YAY!!!"
Batman, with even more movies to his credit than Spider-man, shows up in DC's new franchise as they build to their Justice League (their "Avengers"):
"wait, where's the standalones to establish this version? If we reboot him, we have to have his movies to flesh him out. People need to understand him and his motives."
No we don't
To be fair, we had 2 versions of Spider-Man within the last 10 years. Both telling origin stories, that was the problem. We've only had 1 Batman. It doesn't seem like a big difference, but I actually think from 1 to 2 is a huge leap in media representations in a similar format.
quote:
Wonder Woman: "so she just shows up, and we're supposed to accept her with no history, other than a single B&W photo and the in-story comment that she's 100 yrs old?"
Can't win with people; if they made the WW movie before this, you'd have a lot of folks hesitant with that. Is this a one-off, the way Green Lantern was?
GL sucked, and MoS gets criticized a lot. DC is very uneven with their movies, so maybe I'll wait to catch it on HBO, and decide from there if I want to explore the character further.
I mean, DC can start by making compelling movies. The second piece is they CAN win with people. Much of the conversation before BvS was DC's plan to build the Universe. People said, "Why not just copy Marvel?" They didn't, they didn't and forged their own path. And by trying to do SO much in one film, Batman, WW, Luthor, Superman, Doomsday, they ended up with a bad film.
So it's possible, at least, that their plan isn't exactly working well. And that's what people predicted.
quote:
Contrast to Marvel films- the Hulk films are also uneven, the first Captain America movie required a certain taste, and lots of people didn't really love the Thor movies.
Fine- and now, you can't skip them, or the other movies going forward; not if you want to keep up with the overall story. Even if you're just an Iron Man fan, if you skip the other films, you lose a whole lot of what motivates him, as well as cameos (or in the case of CW, a co-starring role). Skip Ant-Man, that sounds safe, right? Well, not after CW it isn't.
GotG- that was just a Marvel scifi, right? Ok to skip? Nope- we get more Infinity Stone and Thanos development from that movie, than we do in the entire rest of the series.
There is a risk here too, people can, and have, become bored.
quote:
Some films seem disjointed as standalones, but taken in a run of films, make a lot more sense.
If anything, the films are often TOO similar, too easy to follow. That's a common criticism of the Marvel movies, and possibly a valid one.
quote:
DC is trying to build a multi-movie story, just like Marvel. While BvS seems a little disjointed, it does make more sense if you also saw MoS. Maybe it will make even more after Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, and the new Batman come out. Probably those films will make more sense, if you see BvS.
So instead of the current Marvel plan, where you build small movies that lead to big movie moments in the future, DC is building retroactively in that future films will make past films more cohesive and higher quality? So we wait for 5 years and 4 more films for BvS to be "good?" Does that make any sense?
I see your point only because, I do find the pre-CW and post-CW reactions to the First Avenger kind of telling, but plenty of people loved that film before CW. But I don't think Marvel actively planned to make TFA better in the future by releasing CW, it just took those people who didn't "get it," to finally buy in to everything and "get it." In fact, CW wasn't even written when TFA was released.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 12:33 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Freauxzen
I guess what I'm saying is, maybe Warner wants in on the big superhero payout, but is afraid/aware the bubble will burst soon.
I typed out a huge, wandering reply that I deleted, becaus there were many angles involved. I'll keep this to the simplest, most pressing one.
I want to see Avengers vs Thanos. Backstories and character development are nice, but I'm not in this for the drama. There are many better dramas out there, in far more realistic settings. This is a fantasy genre, about superpowered heroes fighting and defeating superpowered villains.
I'm getting a little tired of the Hydra backplot, and the continual random new characters. If you want to make a perpetual never-ending story, put it on HBO like GoT.
If DC wants to jam in a lot of stuff early, and we get Justice League vs Darkseid by the 4th film or so, and the arc is complete before the actors age too much to keep buying as the leads, that's not a bad thing.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News