- 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 V Superman Budget is Reportedly Over 400 Million. Plus New Images
Posted on 2/16/16 at 5:53 pm to Freauxzen
Posted on 2/16/16 at 5:53 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
He ends IM3 by saying he'll always be Iron Man. The only big change is that he takes the reactor out of his chest. He doesn't visibly retire, he leaves a note to the kid that says Iron Man "will be back." He's pausing, not retiring. And he's talking to Banner at the end, not pulling away from the Avengers.
Come on. He went from out of business at the end of IM3 to having new suits and a world protecting army of drone Iron Men in AoU. Don't pretend that wasn't a huge jump from one movie to the other.
quote:
A version is shown in Thor.
By that logic, Captain America was introduced in Iron Man 1.
quote:
Nope. Not even close.
Hulk and Black Widow weren't dating? They were discussing running away together! What were they if not a couple?
1
Posted on 2/16/16 at 5:55 pm to RLDSC FAN
Dead Pool >>>>>> Batman
Posted on 2/16/16 at 5:55 pm to BlacknGold
quote:
whats really ironic about all this is the comics universes are almost exactly opposite. for decades marvel has been the grittier of the two companies across the board with more street level, "hardcore" stories. while DC has largely been more fantastical and not nearly as gritty. funny how the cinematic universes developed.
DC chose to go with Alan Moore and Frank Miller instead of Mort Weisinger and Julius Schwartz.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 6:01 pm to BlacknGold
quote:
This isnt Marvel nor their system so people are bucking it.
Everyone knows it's the marketing, even the guys still pumped. People aren't bucking it because it isn't Marvel, but their making the assumption that the movie looks bad, because of the bad marketing, because DC is taking an untested approach. It's a fair assumption to make, look at the OP:
quote:
In an effort to guarantee a better outcome, DC made some bold decisions for this film. They brought in Ben Affleck, who's career resurgence has been a popular storyline in the industry. They brought in an Academy Award winning writer in Chris Terrio. And they brought in BATMAN! Remember, the idea to include Batman wasn't pre-planned. In fact, the whole Batman Vs Superman angle wasn't cooked up until well after MAN OF STEEL had come out, and it's been said that they didn't decide to include Batman in the film until three days before they announced it at Comic Con. So bringing in The Dark Knight was an impulsive move, and one that was likely aided by the fact that DC knows that audiences love them some Batman. Yet here we stand, with a film that DC has pulled out all the stops for, and the response so far is that it could be another MAN OF STEEL- that'll excite many, anger many, and not exactly set the world on fire with positive buzz.
That's fairly telling. Although it's fair to constantly compare it to Marvel, the hodge-podge approach to BvS+The MoS reaction+the terrible marketing is what makes people wary. Not rejecting the Marvel model. People just assume the Marvel model is safer.
quote:
So many Marvel phase 2 movies were horrible.
That's a bit of a stretch. Phase two:
Iron Man 3
Thor:TDW
Captain America: WS
Guardians of the Galaxy
Avengers AoU
Ant-Man
Nearly every film, sans Thor, was better received than Man of Steel. And again, every film but Thor and Ant-Man made more money. And they were both close (Thor $4 million off, Ant-Man $50 million off).
None of these films, not even Man of Steel is a "Horrible," film. That's incredibly dramatic.
quote:
They lost Whedon and Wright because they are done with being put into a box. Those movies have become so cookie cutter and boring.
Marvel has been experimenting. The funny thing is that Phase is where they've done that the most. IM3 wasn't nearly a normal superhero film. Neither was Thor. Winter Soldier was a heavy dose of espionage and Guardians was more adventure than super. It just happens to come from a comic book.
quote:
GIVE US A TRUE VILLAIN MARVEL! please.
Loki has been awesome. But yeah I agree here. We need Kang with the quickness.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 6:04 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Come on. He went from out of business at the end of IM3 to having new suits and a world protecting army of drone Iron Men in AoU. Don't pretend that wasn't a huge jump from one movie to the other.
I mean it is, but again, Tony Stark's technology is way out of the normal. Right?
quote:
By that logic, Captain America was introduced in Iron Man 1.
And Batman in MoS. But not Aquaman, Flash, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Cyborg, and whoever else they use.
But I'd say a tool is different than a character FWIW. If we saw a Golden Lasso in MoS that might make sense.
quote:
Hulk and Black Widow weren't dating? They were discussing running away together! What were they if not a couple?
30 minutes into the film and Bruce doesn't even realize Natasha is flirting
Posted on 2/16/16 at 6:06 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
DC chose to go with Alan Moore and Frank Miller instead of Mort Weisinger and Julius Schwartz.
And Marvel went with some weird amalgamation of Silver, Bronze and Modern.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 7:15 pm to 3nOut
quote:
if this movie is even remotely good, i'll post the nude images i have of Amy Adams
Bookmarked.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 7:33 pm to Sentrius
quote:
This board is starting to suck with all the pessimism and negativity towards this movie. They want it to be terrible so they can gloat until the end of time.
DC/Marvel is to the MTV board, what Lebron/MJ is to the MSB
Posted on 2/16/16 at 7:57 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:So this includes marketing? Isn't that fairly close to what most of the recent big comic book movies have cost when including marketing? Why is this a story?
The budget for the film, with promotion included, has reportedly ballooned to north of $400 million.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 8:14 pm to DukeSilver
Because it's a clickbait article.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 8:26 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
The one recurring theme coming out of these test screenings, dating back to December, is that Ben Affleck's Batman is the highlight of the film.
so it's a Batman man flick? got it.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:21 pm to finchmeister08
quote:Yep. WB wouldn't want it any other way. They will always fall back on Batman. Everything else has has failed for them in the comic book world. Why they invested 400 mil on a movie directed by Zack Snyder with Superman in it after a lack luster MoS, I will never know. $200 mil? OK. But somebody over at WB will have a lot to answer for if this thing fails. Look for WB to focus more on Harry Potter movies. I wonder how much of an affect this will have on the Suicide Squad turnout. They may scrap comic movies completely for awhile. Probably just being pessimistic on my part, but frick I was hoping for this thing to succeed. The ones that will pay the most are the diehard DC fans who have been waiting for these JL movies their entire lives.
so it's a Batman man flick? got it.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:23 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Loki has been awesome. But yeah I agree here. We need Kang with the quickness.
I agree it was time to move on from Loki and that has happened. Just like Xmen finally has moved on from magneto. Thanos is a great choice for the overarching villain. I liked the idea of Ultron although he could've been done better. Doom would be great if possible.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:24 pm to DukeSilver
quote:Because DC is unproven while Marvel can do no wrong. WB should not be investing what Marvel does at this point.
So this includes marketing? Isn't that fairly close to what most of the recent big comic book movies have cost when including marketing? Why is this a story?
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:31 pm to abellsujr
quote:
Because DC is unproven
BB grossed 373 million.
TDK grossed 1.010+ billion.
TDKR grossed 1 billion.
Man of Steele grossed 668,045,518 million
They're not clueless
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:35 pm to RLDSC FAN
To the suggestions that DC should have made individual movies first, then built to a mega-movie (like Marvel did with Avengers): they should have in a perfect world, but they blew that chance by making terrible decisions.
Remember- Batman Begins was considered great, and Iron Man was surprisingly good; but you would have said DC was still ahead.
As the next movies came along, there was more hype for Green Lantern than for Thor. Thor was obscure Viking dude with surfer hair, Green Lantern was going to be a sci-fi extravaganza. Results were a little different- Thor was solid; and introduced Hawkeye, Loki as an iconic villain, and built the Avengers/Shield storyline;
GL was a bizarre disaster with no tie-ins and led to nothing.
DC has been way behind and scrambling ever since. It's unclear if they have the vision to build a DCU of any sort, as once again Batman is rebooted, and they are probably/definitely going to have to reboot at least the Flash, if not also Green Arrow... while these characters are actually having decent runs on TV. Doing so might kill the TV shows, and still not have much success on the big screen.
Meanwhile Marvel has spun a couple of bit players directly from the big screen to TV (Coulson, Peggy Carter), and has maintained continuity across the different mediums.
If DC could stop rebooting and start to build, they'd be in better shape.
Imagine if Gotham weren't so different in timeline- Oswald Cobblepot would be a brilliant cameo talking to Luthor about "the Bat". You could have just a couple of lines, and leave it at that, and Gotham would become so much more relevant; but you can't, since we're talking at least 30-40 years here.
Remember- Batman Begins was considered great, and Iron Man was surprisingly good; but you would have said DC was still ahead.
As the next movies came along, there was more hype for Green Lantern than for Thor. Thor was obscure Viking dude with surfer hair, Green Lantern was going to be a sci-fi extravaganza. Results were a little different- Thor was solid; and introduced Hawkeye, Loki as an iconic villain, and built the Avengers/Shield storyline;
GL was a bizarre disaster with no tie-ins and led to nothing.
DC has been way behind and scrambling ever since. It's unclear if they have the vision to build a DCU of any sort, as once again Batman is rebooted, and they are probably/definitely going to have to reboot at least the Flash, if not also Green Arrow... while these characters are actually having decent runs on TV. Doing so might kill the TV shows, and still not have much success on the big screen.
Meanwhile Marvel has spun a couple of bit players directly from the big screen to TV (Coulson, Peggy Carter), and has maintained continuity across the different mediums.
If DC could stop rebooting and start to build, they'd be in better shape.
Imagine if Gotham weren't so different in timeline- Oswald Cobblepot would be a brilliant cameo talking to Luthor about "the Bat". You could have just a couple of lines, and leave it at that, and Gotham would become so much more relevant; but you can't, since we're talking at least 30-40 years here.
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:37 pm to Byron Bojangles III
True. I should say Batman is proven, but DC overall is not. And not every Batman movie was a success. The thing is, this is a Batman reboot. You never really know how well a reboot will do. It was just really risky of them to do this.
This post was edited on 2/16/16 at 9:41 pm
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:40 pm to abellsujr
That's EXACTLY why they went straight after Bale to reprise his role and once they couldn't get him they got Ben. Personally I think this movie hits a billion
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:44 pm to Byron Bojangles III
Batman and Ben Affleck are the least cconcerning part of this mmovie. I'm jacked up about his role
Posted on 2/16/16 at 9:46 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:I hope so. If they hit a bil with all of this negative buzz, I will be both shocked and fricking ecstatic.
Personally I think this movie hits a billion
I should probably just relax and enjoy, because I'm pretty sure I'm going to like the movie. It's just going to piss me off to no end if they frick this thing up long term. I mean, I may boycott superhero movies all together for awhile if they scrap JL plans.
This post was edited on 2/16/16 at 10:00 pm
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News