- 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: We're Getting an R rated version of Batman v Superman
Posted on 2/24/16 at 8:52 am to abellsujr
Posted on 2/24/16 at 8:52 am to abellsujr
quote:
And yet, people will continue to speculate, jump to conclusions, and bash the film. It's just been the way it is with this movie. The internet is going to be a firestorm again, like when Doomsday was revealed.
The pity party you are creating is still hilarious. "O woe is me, Superman. Most important and most popular superhero of all time, woe is my little film and the trials it must endure!"
2
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:00 am to Dam Guide
quote:
The not learning from Deadpool properly has begun.
Pretty much this. And leave it to DC to frick that up.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:01 am to Freauxzen
I never said he was the most popular superhero of all time. And come on, bro. Message boards have been a firestorm for this movie. You may not see it, but it's there. The casting, the trailers, Snyder, Doomsday looking like a ninja turtle, now rated R? I'm not saying that it hasn't deserved it to some degree, but some of the criticism has been comical, IMO. Like, there were people who criticized the last shot of one of the trailers for having the three superheroes presented. Like they were copying Marvel. 
It's not a pity party when you speak facts. The rated R thing will be attacked needlessly, IMO. As it has in this thread. This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 9:16 am
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:21 am to RLDSC FAN
quote:
Damn, some of you like to bitch about anything that's released about this flim. Jesus
It's just another version, you don't have to buy it if you don't want to.
Well, let's break it down. The problem is, this:
quote:
WB Exec - What if we just add 4 minutes of alternate takes, scenes w/a couple of curse words, and some more CG blood to Superman vs Batman and sell it to them a second time as the Ultimate Edition?
Describes 99% of "Unrated" or "Director's Cut," movies. This is a fact. The amount of truly "Recut" films that evoke altered themes, timelines, character arcs, and real integrity through REAL cuts and additional content are very very small. Blade Runner and Kingdom of Heaven on Ridley Scott's side. Daredevil, actually. Metropolis, Donnie Darko, Apocalypse Now Redux and a few others.
Most involve things like extra soundtracks (Pat Garrett and Billy the kid, great movie), different endings - countless Horror and Sci-Fi movies, or just added chopped scenes or altered scenes (most action films and yeah horror films again who love them some director's cuts). That's it. Most movies do it to have two versions of a film out on DVD and to have something "title worthy" like UNRATED or DIRECTOR'S CUT which makes it standout for marketing purposes. There is no other purpose.
Even Watchmen was simply some extra shots and longer takes. The only real addition was Hollis death to my knowledge, nothing else was substantial. The extra content did involve the extra gore (the prisoner's hands getting cut off in close-up for one), which allowed it to be R-rated.
Most studios leave them unrated when they are meant for DVD alone, when they expect to get a re-release - Watchmen and Kingdom of Heaven both had short, small runs, then yeah, having it rated is a necessity.
So talking about it now before the movies' release, before any success or plans of a rerelease, in light of Deadpool's success, wreaks of desperation to create more buzz by getting labled "R." If this was meant for home video, there's nearly no reason to go through the rating process except to get the "R" label to talk about. So,
quote:
So you think that Warner Bros. approached Snyder about an R rated director's cut, he edited said cut, had it approved by Warner Bros., and had it submitted to and approved by the MPAA within ten days?
No. When you have editor's who have probably edited hundreds of movies, they know what an R movie is and what a PG-13 movie is. It's quite clear and there are guidelines. Most likely one of the earlier cuts of the film, before the final, was more akin to an "R" film just because violence is something they cut up in the editing room. So all they do is go back to the cut, clean up some of the transitions, make sure the effects and consistency are good, and send it on. They probably just assume this will be an R rated movie, rather than actually having a rating, from what they know about R rated movies.
I wouldn't expect a recut film with more content or meaning, it's just going to be longer and more blunt action scenes. They'll add something simple, like some superfluous cut scene, and call it "NEW SCENES!" That's about it.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:23 am to RLDSC FAN
Where was all the screaming when they announced that Killing Joke might be rated R?
This isn't the movie being rated R.
This isn't the movie DVD/BluRay being rated R.
Those have had their PG-13 ratings for five months now.
This is a special, director's cut, additional DVD/BluRay.
This isn't the movie being rated R.
This isn't the movie DVD/BluRay being rated R.
Those have had their PG-13 ratings for five months now.
This is a special, director's cut, additional DVD/BluRay.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:27 am to Freauxzen
You're really talking out of your arse on this one.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:28 am to Fewer Kilometers
Apparently it's because they're copying off of Fox because of the timing of the announcement. Despite what actually might be a cool thing like a darker and more violent Batman. It will be overshadowed by that. It's impossible to speculate what will make it rated R until it's released. If it's one scene that makes it R, that may be kind of lame. But we don't know anything until it comes out.
This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 9:30 am
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:34 am to abellsujr
quote:
I never said he was the most popular superhero of all time.
But he is. He is the most popular superhero film of all time, that's a fact. So if this movie was Avatar-successful, this should not be a surprise.
Not only that you're pairing him with the second most popular superhero of all time. This movie will be successful, there is no doubt. That's why your reaction is creating a pity party. There is no trial. There is nothing to overcome. He is the #1. Him being the #1 superhero movie is not a surprise or out of the question.
There's a chance this thing goes for $1.8 billion, which is Avengers level. Everyone should realize this.
quote:
And come on, bro. Message boards have been a firestorm for this movie. You may not see it, but it's there.
People want to talk about the most popular superhero of all time? Of course they do. Again, not a surprise. If there was THIS much conversation over Martian Manhunter, then yeah, this might be an anomaly.
Firestorm is a loaded word, btw.
quote:
The casting,
There are legit concerns. Even you know that.
quote:
the trailers,
Even Superman fans admitted the first 3 trailers were crappy. It was only the last trailer that started to get it right.
quote:
Snyder,
Well there is Man of Steel to look at.
quote:
Doomsday looking like a ninja turtle,
I don't know about Ninja Turtle, but he looks dumb. FTR, I don't like the way Apocalypse looks either. And I didn't like Green Goblin in Spider-Man. And many people share those opinions. It's ok to not like something.
quote:
I'm not saying that it hasn't deserved it to some degree, but some of the criticism has been comical,
This is the internet, people like to be dramatic and hyperbolic, on both sides. Because......
quote:
I'm not saying that it hasn't deserved
The blind excitement, while a good thing and quite normal, is exactly the same as the blind hatred. Exactly. Like you said, some of this criticism is deserved, and because of that, fans should worry, but they don't. And now it's become this
quote:
I'm really hoping this movie kicks arse, just to witness the meltdown on this board.
rather than "I hope it's good because I really love Snyder's Superman and want to see it succeed!" Which makes it nearly impossible to talk about, and which makes your perception of "firestorms" happen.
And legit criticisms can't be comical.
quote:
IMO. Like, there were people who criticized the last shot of one of the trailers for having the three superheroes presented. Like they were copying Marvel.
One dude in one thread does not equal "people."
quote:
It's not a pity party when you speak facts.
It's a pity party when you are the most dominant, popular, important, and recognizable superhero on the planet. Again, there is no way this movie doesn't cross $1 billion, which will be successful, and given the Batman buzz. crossing $1.5 is a pretty safe guess as well.
quote:
The rated R thing will be attacked needlessly, IMO. As it has in this thread.
Because it's funny and convenient, see my post above.
This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 9:36 am
Posted on 2/24/16 at 9:37 am to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
You're really talking out of your arse on this one.
Compelling and rich. If you think any of those points are wrong, feel free to respond with facts. 99% of "Director's Cuts" are marketing shams, that's the point. Is that wrong?
Is the reveal of this "R" rated cut convenient or not?
Those two points together make this pretty funny, that's all people mean.
ETA: And if you mean the Ultimate edition as a legit "extra cut," then I've never seen it so I'm only commenting on the "Director's Cut." There are substantial changes to the Ultimate Edition Apparently. And maybe it goes on that list. However, needing 2 "Recut" versions should tell you everything you need to know about why.
This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 9:55 am
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:00 am to Freauxzen
quote:
99% of "Director's Cuts" are marketing shams, that's the point. Is that wrong?
Snyder's director's cut of Watchmen was a vast improvement over the original. I'd rather go by Snyder's previous attempt at a full cut of his superhero movie than by going by every other director's cut by every other director in the world.
But then we don't even know if this is a director's cut or an extended cut or if they had shot scenes specifically for this or what. It's listed as an "Ultimate Edition".
quote:
Is the reveal of this "R" rated cut convenient or not? Simple question.
Convenient? If they were rushing it out for immediate release, possibly. More likely coincidence, given the time frame and that they won't be marketing the special ultimate cut and the regular cut until this Fall. They had plenty of time to edit a new cut, there was no need to do a one week edit and rush it to the MPAA.
And this wasn't an announcement by Warner designed to latch on to the coattails of the Deadpool success. This was someone seeing the listing on the MPAA bulletin and letting someone at a non-Warner Batman fan site know about it. If Warner is hoping that this news will help the box office for BvS, they sure went about it by a ridiculously odd route.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:10 am to Freauxzen
The issue is with Superman. They drastically changed his character and people are split about it. It starts with that. That falls in line with him being the most popular superhero of all time. He's more violent and angry now (which actually falls in line with The New 52). But a lot of people just don't see that as Superman. More of these people are also going to be bothered by collateral damage, etc. They're going to be mad about Clark Kent not being in his usual corky fashion, etc.
Now, there is other criticism as well against Snyder's DC. Some of it is well deserved, like the dialogue (hopefully it's Goyer's fault), some of the casting, I'm not a fan of how Doomsday looks, the marketing. So if you add in the fans who are against the "new" style Superman on top of all of the things that I talked about, you have a recipe for negative attention. Me personally, even though there are things I'm not a fan of, there are things I love about Snyder's Superman.
WB just doesn't know what to do with him. I ask you Freau, how would you handle Superman? How would you approach a character that has such a history with film and an expectation. Do you go full boyscout or do you go New 52 and try to bring action and show Superman in his full potential. Maybe it's a mix of both. Which is probably why they scraped future Superman solo projects. They need to find the right mix. Some people on here were begging for a rated R Batman. It's been said that Batman takes center stage in this movie. Is it a big deal that the directors cut is rated R because Superman is in the movie? As I said before, WB doesn't know what to do with Superman yet, so they're focusing on what works. That again comes back to classic Superman fans being disappointed. But I ask them to be patient with Superman.
Now, there is other criticism as well against Snyder's DC. Some of it is well deserved, like the dialogue (hopefully it's Goyer's fault), some of the casting, I'm not a fan of how Doomsday looks, the marketing. So if you add in the fans who are against the "new" style Superman on top of all of the things that I talked about, you have a recipe for negative attention. Me personally, even though there are things I'm not a fan of, there are things I love about Snyder's Superman.
WB just doesn't know what to do with him. I ask you Freau, how would you handle Superman? How would you approach a character that has such a history with film and an expectation. Do you go full boyscout or do you go New 52 and try to bring action and show Superman in his full potential. Maybe it's a mix of both. Which is probably why they scraped future Superman solo projects. They need to find the right mix.
quote:It's not just one dude. I heard that from multiple people. And that was really just an example. When you're disappointed in something or not a fan of the product, other things seem to come up that are unreasonable. That's just kind of human nature. This rated R thing is an example of that. We have not seen the movie, we know nothing about what will be added to make it rated R, and yet we want to criticize it with assumptions. Why? I believe it's mostly because of the negative attention already established. What if they were making this announcement because of the success of Deadpool? Does that mean they didn't already plan this? Does that mean it's a bad idea? So because of the success of Deadpool, frick THIS IDEA.
One dude in one thread does not equal "people."
Some people on here were begging for a rated R Batman. It's been said that Batman takes center stage in this movie. Is it a big deal that the directors cut is rated R because Superman is in the movie? As I said before, WB doesn't know what to do with Superman yet, so they're focusing on what works. That again comes back to classic Superman fans being disappointed. But I ask them to be patient with Superman. This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 10:20 am
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:19 am to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Snyder's director's cut of Watchmen was a vast improvement over the original. I'd rather go by Snyder's previous attempt at a full cut of his superhero movie than by going by every other director's cut by every other director in the world.
You may have liked it more, and that's cool (I'm a completionist, so that's why I have that version), but it is no a way a "better" or "different," film. In fact, many reactions just refer to it as overlong. It doesn't change anything and doesn't improve the film in any significant way outside of Hollis, which should have been in the theatrical cut, yes.
quote:
But then we don't even know if this is a director's cut or an extended cut or if they had shot scenes specifically for this or what. It's listed as an "Ultimate Edition".
So there could be a "Director's Cut," then "Ultimate Edition." Again, that should raise red flags. Does Snyder not know what he wants his film to be? Watchmen had how many versions, 3 or 4?
quote:
Convenient? If they were rushing it out for immediate release, possibly. More likely coincidence, given the time frame and that they won't be marketing the special ultimate cut and the regular cut until this Fall. They had plenty of time to edit a new cut, there was no need to do a one week edit and rush it to the MPAA.
And this wasn't an announcement by Warner designed to latch on to the coattails of the Deadpool success. This was someone seeing the listing on the MPAA bulletin and letting someone at a non-Warner Batman fan site know about it. If Warner is hoping that this news will help the box office for BvS, they sure went about it by a ridiculously odd route.
Fair points, but leaks are often planned and strategic, this happens frequently. People don't just "happen" upon information and release it. Plus, have you ever seen "This Film Has Not Been Rated?" They protect that MPAA process like Fort Knox.
I would lean more convenient than coincidence, but we really have no proof either way.
But that isn't a bash, and that isn't hating. It's just trying to call it like it is. And that's what people are doing.
ETA: The rating timeline for a film is not as long as you think. Final cuts can hit the MPAA a couple of weeks before a film lands, just saying. 10 days wouldn't be an extraordinary tough task to take on for a studio that can shell out bucks to get some positive press.
This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 10:31 am
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:53 am to Freauxzen
i still can't believe how much they gave away in the second trailer. Grrrr
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:59 am to Freauxzen
quote:
You may have liked it more, and that's cool (I'm a completionist, so that's why I have that version), but it is no a way a "better" or "different," film
The original was cut for time. The director's cut allowed him to extend the scenes and add scenes to give it a better flow. In my opinion it's better, and by definition it's different. You're just putting quotes on words in an attempt to lessen their meaning.
quote:And now you're speculating in the attempt to make your argument. There are classic, Oscar caliber films that have have had multiple versions released. Quit trying to paint this as some insane idea by someone without a clue as to what film he's making.
So there could be a "Director's Cut," then "Ultimate Edition." Again, that should raise red flags. Does Snyder not know what he wants his film to be?
quote:It's a bulletin. A standard release from the MPAA listing the ratings of their recent films. Box Office Mojo gets these and lists them every week. Quit trying to build a conspiracy where one doesn't exist.
Plus, have you ever seen "This Film Has Not Been Rated?" They protect that MPAA process like Fort Knox.
quote:The rating timeline is that you request the next open date for the screening of your film and the MPAA usually replies with a rating within 24 hours of that screening date. The MPAA turnaround isn't the point. You're surmising that within 9 days, Warner contacted Snyder about the new project, edited an R version (or happened to have an R version edited), approved that version internally, found an open date on the MPAA's calendar, submitted the movie for a rating, received that rating... all for additional press that they got by... sending an e-mail attachment to a Batman fan site that no one has heard of. Not Entertainment Weekly, not Empire Online, not even ScreenRant.com... but to an obscure Batman fan site.
The rating timeline for a film is not as long as you think. Final cuts can hit the MPAA a couple of weeks before a film lands, just saying. 10 days wouldn't be an extraordinary tough task to take on for a studio that can shell out bucks to get some positive press.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 11:30 am to Tactical1
quote:
Superman featured in an R rated film is not something we should want.
At least me.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 12:21 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
You're just putting quotes on words in an attempt to lessen their meaning.
Not at all. No one lauded that as the best version of the film, just marketing folks to sell more copies to people who had already bought one. It's not widely accepted, the discussion doesn't even come up when people mention Watchmen around here.
It isn't definitive or better. The mere addition of an Ultimate Edition should tell you that that version isn't even Snyder's most realized version. It isn't better, the Ultimate edition is better right?
quote:
And now you're speculating in the attempt to make your argument. There are classic, Oscar caliber films that have have had multiple versions released. Quit trying to paint this as some insane idea by someone without a clue as to what film he's making.
Ah, so Zack Snyder = Oliver Stone? Zack Snyder = Ridley Scott? Got it.
quote:
It's a bulletin. A standard release from the MPAA listing the ratings of their recent films. Box Office Mojo gets these and lists them every week. Quit trying to build a conspiracy where one doesn't exist.
I'm not trying anything, I'm having a discussion, so well done on this point.
And it wouldn't be a conspiracy it would be opportunistic marketing. There's a difference, sort of So let's look at the bulletin: LINK
quote:
The Ultimate Edition was rated R for sequences of violence.
So they are going to increase the length of action sequences and add in some cut to make it more violent.
=Automatically better film!!!!!!!!
quote:
The rating timeline is that you request the next open date for the screening of your film and the MPAA usually replies with a rating within 24 hours of that screening date. The MPAA turnaround isn't the point. You're surmising that within 9 days, Warner contacted Snyder about the new project, edited an R version (or happened to have an R version edited), approved that version internally, found an open date on the MPAA's calendar, submitted the movie for a rating, received that rating.
I'm actually not surmising, assuming, or saying that THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED. It's just what could have happened. And it's plausible given the timing, that's all. It isn't certain.
You're surmising that all of these things MUST happen anyways, so there's a leap there as well. Your thinking that they weren't planning to fleece fans with 3 editions before this. Or that "getting something approved internally," is really that difficult when a film has already gone through multiple cuts. Or that they can't force their way in review before Joe Blow's movie shot for $1 million. Neither of us know.
quote:
... all for additional press that they got by... sending an e-mail attachment to a Batman fan site that no one has heard of. Not Entertainment Weekly, not Empire Online, not even ScreenRant.com... but to an obscure Batman fan site.
More has been done for less.
To say with certainty that they didn't do this because of Deadpool is the exact same as saying they certainly did. We don't know. It's just convenient as heck or a massive coincidence. Within 10 Days, we've already had Wolverine announced as a possible R film, of course that's Fox taking advantage of itself. Then BvS right after that.
Your first post is pretty dismissive of the concept outright:
quote:quote:So you think that Warner Bros. approached Snyder about an R rated director's cut, he edited said cut, had it approved by Warner Bros., and had it submitted to and approved by the MPAA within ten days?
The not learning from Deadpool properly has begun.
That says something.
And the real interesting piece in all of this is that Suicide Squad is getting lost in the Deadpool hype since WB toned down the marketing to support BvS. Suicide Squad has gone unmentioned, but it was also going to be the fun, R-Rated violent extravaganza. Funny that WB thinks BvS needs the R too, but don't have the balls to go for broke in the theater, when really, if they had that content, THAT would have been the gutsy move.
This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 12:40 pm
Posted on 2/24/16 at 1:27 pm to Dr RC
quote:
I have some oceanfront property in Arizona
You would if this guy had his way.....
This post was edited on 2/24/16 at 1:29 pm
Posted on 2/24/16 at 3:40 pm to Brosef Stalin
well her Philopian Tubes are the only ones strong enough to handle his sperm - just ask Brody
Posted on 2/29/16 at 9:23 am to Freauxzen
Posted on 2/29/16 at 9:33 am to abellsujr
never really cared about him killing Zod, the superman purists can shut up about that.
Now the pointless death of Jon Kent was probably the dumbest part of that movie.
Now the pointless death of Jon Kent was probably the dumbest part of that movie.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News