- 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 8:00 am to strohmile126
Posted on 6/29/16 at 8:00 am to strohmile126
Is it worth a $3-5 rental? Sure! Give it a try.
Was it worth a $9 ticket? Nope.
It was horrible with only a few moments of awesome action.
Was it worth a $9 ticket? Nope.
It was horrible with only a few moments of awesome action.
1
Posted on 6/29/16 at 11:04 am to lsufan9193969700
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
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.
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.
Marvel has built a multi-movie story, that will include various characters. Sometimes, these characters will seem completely different in different movies; Tony Stark is 100% don't trust the government in the early Iron Man films, yet in Civil War he's the big Hero Registry supporter.
Some films seem disjointed as standalones, but taken in a run of films, make a lot more sense.
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.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 11:06 am to strohmile126
I was impressed. I didn't know batman or superman could be that boring, and he did it with both
At least I can laugh at the stupidity of the Schumacher films
At least I can laugh at the stupidity of the Schumacher films
Posted on 6/29/16 at 11:09 am to Breesus
quote:
Worth the watch: Ben Affleck is possibly going to be remembered as tGOAT Batman. He awesome. Jeremy Irons was solid as well. The movie is fricking horrible, and Batman is the one silver lining. His solo movies should be awesome.
this. he did a pretty good job capturing batman's angst.
movie was complete shite though.
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 11:52 am to Breesus
Aren't you the guy who plans to vote for Hillary? Yea your opinion is invalid
Posted on 6/29/16 at 12:23 pm 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 ?
They still gave us Batman's origin in this movie. In CW we didnt get all of that. They didn't have to show us how he got his powers. They rebooted him without insulting our intelligence. Spider-Man/Batman is a bad comparison because they were handled differently and thus to response was different. DC established who Batman was when we already knew but never fully set up why he is so different from other versions other than a line here or there. How about instead of wasting our time with killing his parents, use that time to show what happened to Jason Todd. You double benefit because that also gets rid of the horrid Martha scene so many people hate.
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 saw a very large amount of praise for Wonder Woman. I, myself, saw her as one of the best parts of the movie. My wife was glad a woman was able to be showcased as both sexy and strong. People are pumped for her movie so this was a great movie by DC. If they handled Batman the same way it would have extremely well received I feel.
quote:
Marvel has built a multi-movie story, that will include various characters. Sometimes, these characters will seem completely different in different movies; Tony Stark is 100% don't trust the government in the early Iron Man films, yet in Civil War he's the big Hero Registry supporter.
Some films seem disjointed as standalones, but taken in a run of films, make a lot more sense.
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.
Marvel has had their characters grow over the course of their movies similar to how tv shows handle characters. Iron Man is different from Iron Man to Civil War because New York has been invaded, he created a robot that wanted to kill everyone, and Potts left him. Cap is different because the organization and country he fought for turned out to be ran by Nazis.
Batman changed by the end of BvS in a clunky and badly handled way. They wanted to do the same stuff Marvel was doing in their 13th film in their 2nd. No one was giving them a free pass for wanting to take a short cut. Not saying they have to make 12 other films, but you need to handle it better.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 12:24 pm to cincyykid
quote:Of all people to make this statement...
Aren't you the guy who plans to vote for Hillary? Yea your opinion is invalid
quote:
cincyykid
Posted on 6/29/16 at 12:25 pm to strohmile126
quote:It's pretty bad.
Batman vs superman
This post was edited on 6/29/16 at 12:25 pm
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.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 12:59 pm to Scoob
quote:
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.
They're world-building - that's a different goal, because.....
quote:
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.
We are going to get Thanos, and we are going to get some deaths, and Black Panther, Captain Marvel and Dr. Strange will take over for a few years. There's an obvious plan at play. And there are more big bads than just Thanos. Like Kang. Or Annihilus. And if we ever get there - The Maker and Dr. Doom. That stuff would be epic.
And it SEEMS DC is going there too. You aren't getting Darkseid in movie #4 though. Darkseid is now 8 years out at least. Probably around movie #10.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:04 pm to Scoob
Marvel will get a pass on just about everything here; DC will get lambasted for every minor misstep. Face it, if Superman had done the "superhero landing in BvS post- Deadpool the Marvel fanboys on here would be screaming, "Snyder is such a clichéd hack!!! Deadpool totally clowned him!!! What a POS!" Yet, in Civil War Spiderman nails the dismount in the epitome of the "superhero landing" and what do we hear? Crickets. And the Marvel fanboys here will deny it, but they know it's true.
BvS' Batman action scenes are some of the best in the superhero genre. Was it the greatest movie I've seen? Nope. Enjoyed it, though.
BvS' Batman action scenes are some of the best in the superhero genre. Was it the greatest movie I've seen? Nope. Enjoyed it, though.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:09 pm to SoFla Tideroller
quote:Thor and Iron Man do it all the time, too.
Face it, if Superman had done the "superhero landing in BvS post- Deadpool the Marvel fanboys on here would be screaming, "Snyder is such a clichéd hack!!! Deadpool totally clowned him!!! What a POS!" Yet, in Civil War Spiderman nails the dismount in the epitome of the "superhero landing" and what do we hear? Crickets
And let's admit it, it's what we want.I can't understand how anyone takes any of these films very seriously.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:24 pm to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
Marvel will get a pass on just about everything here, DC will get lambasted for every minor misstep.
Marvel has never and will never get a pass for what they did to both Mandarin and Tony Stark in Iron Man 3.
Similarly, DC will never get a pass on what they did to Lex in BvS.
In fact, Iron Man 3 is a pretty good comparison to the fricked up portrayals of Superman and Lex.
And plenty of people, myself included, blasted Marvel for what they did in neutering Ultron.
In MoS, Zodd was so great myself and bunch of other actually were rooting for Zodd to kill the immature little shite Superman they created.
Zodd was a better villain than many of the Marvel villains. He was certainly more cruel and badass than Ultron turned out to be.
That said, DC nailed Batman with Affleck and hopefully they give Affleck as much control as possible on his stand alone films.
And I know a bunch of us are excited about Suicide Squad. DC will probably get praise for that too.
The difference is that Marvel set up their universe correctly and they do way more correct than they do incorrect.
DC has way more problems than it does success at this point and the criticism correctly reflects that.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:26 pm to Scoob
I guess the objective question is this: do you want to see a movie with Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman in it? Do you want to see these characters (the actual title characters) in any movies anytime soon? Would you like to see a Justice League movie with a huge budget and top-notch effects?
If your answer is yes, then you should watch this movie. This made over $800 million dollars, it is not going to be rebooted. If the franchise craters, there's a very good chance it will be shelved, and not rebooted for probably at least a decade. You have to figure for an audience cool-off time, development, and then actual filming again... at which point we might all be done with the superhero genre, and it wouldn't be worth the risk to make. They very likely might decide to just keep it on the CW, safe and cheap, and string the soap opera stories along there. We would never get impressive visuals like we do on the big screen (and even the haters admit this movie delivers on that account).
None of these comic book characters are ever going to be exactly the way we imagine them to be.
If your answer is yes, then you should watch this movie. This made over $800 million dollars, it is not going to be rebooted. If the franchise craters, there's a very good chance it will be shelved, and not rebooted for probably at least a decade. You have to figure for an audience cool-off time, development, and then actual filming again... at which point we might all be done with the superhero genre, and it wouldn't be worth the risk to make. They very likely might decide to just keep it on the CW, safe and cheap, and string the soap opera stories along there. We would never get impressive visuals like we do on the big screen (and even the haters admit this movie delivers on that account).
None of these comic book characters are ever going to be exactly the way we imagine them to be.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:40 pm to Breesus
quote:Marvel fumbled around with Hulk twice before getting it right in Avengers. Marvel (extended, not the actual current MCU) wasted and threw away the Fantastic Four. They let Spiderman get stuck in a repeating time-loop. Their popular X-Men franchise is zigzagging back and forth in time, from the 90's to the 60's to the future to the 70's to the 80's. They let a potentially cool figure in Ghost Rider become a joke... just imagine if they were to introduce him with the proper mood and actor, into the MCU (that's for fans of Ghost Rider comic, not the Nicolas Cage movies).
The difference is that Marvel set up their universe correctly and they do way more correct than they do incorrect.
But that's not the MCU, you say:
Ok, Green Lantern isn't DCU. Nolan's Dark Knight with the ridiculous TDKR isn't in it.
quote:
Zodd was a better villain than many of the Marvel villains. He was certainly more cruel and badass than Ultron turned out to be.
quote:
DC nailed Batman with Affleck and hopefully they give Affleck as much control as possible on his stand alone films.
quote:2 films, we get a great villain, the near-perfect Batman, and excitement for the next movie.
a bunch of us are excited about Suicide Squad
That's not awful.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:52 pm to Scoob
quote:
Marvel fumbled around with Hulk twice before getting it right in Avengers.
Marvel was able to take their time and build their universe with relatively low expectations, IMO. Go back and look at those phase 1 films, the majority are just ok, or downright bad. Dc's problem is people expect more now, so their films are under a lot more scrutiny. Had MOS came out back in 08, maybe it doesn't get so much backlash. Just my 0.2
Posted on 6/29/16 at 1:58 pm to Scoob
Marvel has made mistakes and gets bashed. DC has made some good movies and been praised. This board has some very bias posters but as a whole seem to call comic book movies at face value.
Ironically I see more love for DC comics on here than Marvel, which is why I think some DC movies are more harshly judged. Those of us that are big X-Men fans tend to hate the Fox movies.
As much success Marvel has had, Batman and Superman are still the two most beloved characters in comics. So any movie featuring one (and moreso both) with be viewed with a bigger magnifying glass.
Ironically I see more love for DC comics on here than Marvel, which is why I think some DC movies are more harshly judged. Those of us that are big X-Men fans tend to hate the Fox movies.
As much success Marvel has had, Batman and Superman are still the two most beloved characters in comics. So any movie featuring one (and moreso both) with be viewed with a bigger magnifying glass.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 2:02 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
Had MOS came out back in 08, maybe it doesn't get so much backlash.
Would Superman still be a color washed, immature, reactionary arse clown?
It has nothing to do with current expectations and everything to do with the choices DC is making in writers and directors.
Posted on 6/29/16 at 2:14 pm to Breesus
quote:
Would Superman still be a color washed, immature, reactionary arse clown?
It has nothing to do with current expectations and everything to do with the choices DC is making in writers and directors.
Meh, I thought MOS was a solid film and most people I know do as well. I don't know anyone IRL that complains as much as the posters on here
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News