The Flat Earth Society

Other Discussion Boards => Arts & Entertainment => Topic started by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 05:38:03 PM

Title: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 05:38:03 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/mInx8rG.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 05:39:01 PM
 :-\

At least he's not an anachronism.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 13, 2014, 05:39:58 PM
What? That looks acceptable.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 05:43:05 PM
His outfit looks acceptable especially considering that this is an early years Batman, at least I'm assuming that is the case.

But the suit is not the actor.


Hopefully they'll tie in Dare Devil as well and explain how he can be both at the same time.  ???
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 05:43:56 PM
:-\

At least he's not an anachronism.

I...kind of like it. Reminds me of Frank Miller's.

(http://ditto004.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/dark_knight_returns.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 05:47:36 PM
Except Ben Affleck's Batman is not 55 years old.

Even though this movie should be based on The Dark Knight Returns, but it isn't. This is just some BS the writers are pulling out of their ass and showcases the first time Batman and Superman run into each other. Is Batman even going to be a main character in this film? I doubt it considering it's tentatively titled "Man of Steel sequel" right now..
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 13, 2014, 05:50:17 PM
His outfit looks acceptable especially considering that this is an early years Batman, at least I'm assuming that is the case.

But the suit is not the actor.


Hopefully they'll tie in Dare Devil as well and explain how he can be both at the same time.  ???
Why would they? Daredevil is a Marvel character.

Also, Frank Miller can't draw for shit.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 05:50:47 PM
His outfit looks acceptable especially considering that this is an early years Batman, at least I'm assuming that is the case.

But the suit is not the actor.


Hopefully they'll tie in Dare Devil as well and explain how he can be both at the same time.  ???
Why would they? Daredevil is a Marvel character.

Nope.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 05:51:31 PM
Except Ben Affleck's Batman is not 55 years old.

Even though this movie should be based on The Dark Knight Returns, but it isn't. This is just some BS the writers are pulling out of their ass and showcases the first time Batman and Superman run into each other. Is Batman even going to be a main character in this film? I doubt it considering it's tentatively titled "Man of Steel sequel" right now..

Wikipedia lists it as "Untitled Batman/Superman" and IMDB has it as "Batman vs Superman".

I think I read somewhere that they were drawing Batmans aesthetic from DKR, and I can see that, just, as you said...a touch younger.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 13, 2014, 05:51:49 PM
His outfit looks acceptable especially considering that this is an early years Batman, at least I'm assuming that is the case.

But the suit is not the actor.


Hopefully they'll tie in Dare Devil as well and explain how he can be both at the same time.  ???
Why would they? Daredevil is a Marvel character.

Nope.
pls
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 05:52:46 PM
His outfit looks acceptable especially considering that this is an early years Batman, at least I'm assuming that is the case.

But the suit is not the actor.


Hopefully they'll tie in Dare Devil as well and explain how he can be both at the same time.  ???
Why would they? Daredevil is a Marvel character.

Nope.
pls

How do you explain this official artwork?

(http://i.imgur.com/N64ZEip.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 05:54:18 PM
His outfit looks acceptable especially considering that this is an early years Batman, at least I'm assuming that is the case.

But the suit is not the actor.


Hopefully they'll tie in Dare Devil as well and explain how he can be both at the same time.  ???
Why would they? Daredevil is a Marvel character.

Also, Frank Miller can't draw for shit.

I like Miller's illustrations a lot. Very unique. I'd much rather this
(http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121125200235/villains/images/e/ef/Frank_miller_batman.gif)
than something like
(http://designyoutrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/four_7nkpre90y.jpg).
The former just has so much more character to me.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 13, 2014, 05:55:20 PM
trol harder vauxy
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 06:02:33 PM
Except Ben Affleck's Batman is not 55 years old.

Even though this movie should be based on The Dark Knight Returns, but it isn't. This is just some BS the writers are pulling out of their ass and showcases the first time Batman and Superman run into each other. Is Batman even going to be a main character in this film? I doubt it considering it's tentatively titled "Man of Steel sequel" right now..

Wikipedia lists it as "Untitled Batman/Superman" and IMDB has it as "Batman vs Superman".

I think I read somewhere that they were drawing Batmans aesthetic from DKR, and I can see that, just, as you said...a touch younger.

Yes, but it is a sequel to Man of Steel and is part of a Superman triology directed by Zack Synder. Superman will be the main focus of the film. I think it was actually titled "Man of Steel 2" at some point. I think they just changed the title to generate hype.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 13, 2014, 06:06:27 PM
They're obviously heading towards a Justice League movie.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 06:09:07 PM
Hopefully they'll retcon Daredevil into the Justice League.

They could do this easily by introducing some sort of dimensional portal that jumps between different universes. ala Mortal Kombat vs DC Unvierse.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 06:13:00 PM
They're obviously heading towards a Justice League movie.

Justice League is already listed as being worked on by Snyder.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 06:14:42 PM
Except Ben Affleck's Batman is not 55 years old.

Even though this movie should be based on The Dark Knight Returns, but it isn't. This is just some BS the writers are pulling out of their ass and showcases the first time Batman and Superman run into each other. Is Batman even going to be a main character in this film? I doubt it considering it's tentatively titled "Man of Steel sequel" right now..

Wikipedia lists it as "Untitled Batman/Superman" and IMDB has it as "Batman vs Superman".

I think I read somewhere that they were drawing Batmans aesthetic from DKR, and I can see that, just, as you said...a touch younger.

Yes, but it is a sequel to Man of Steel and is part of a Superman triology directed by Zack Synder. Superman will be the main focus of the film. I think it was actually titled "Man of Steel 2" at some point. I think they just changed the title to generate hype.

I'm still not sold on Batfleck. Wish they'd just get no-name actors that look the part more.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 06:15:22 PM
I don't know. Affleck kinda looks like a Bruce Wayne. Is it just me?

I want to hear his Batman voice.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 06:19:24 PM
I don't know. Affleck kinda looks like a Bruce Wayne. Is it just me?

No, he does.

Its just...all I see is his character from Good Will Hunting when I look at him. I think Keaton played the best Batman, imo. But Bale was probably the better Bruce Wayne. Affleck does look like a billionaire playboy. But he doesn't look a billionaire playboy turned grievous vigilante cloaked in darkness. Bale did, though.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 13, 2014, 06:45:52 PM
Justice League is slated for 2017. It has plenty of time to be cancelled.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 06:54:31 PM
Justice League is slated for 2017. It has plenty of time to be cancelled.

I guess it will depend on how well Batman vs Superman/Man of Steel 2 does.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lemon on May 13, 2014, 06:58:47 PM
Me no like face.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 13, 2014, 07:21:49 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lemon on May 13, 2014, 07:25:04 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

Saddam should star in this movie as Batman, Superman, and all accompanying characters.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: DDDDAts all folks on May 13, 2014, 07:26:27 PM
It looks like batman let one go.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 13, 2014, 07:33:57 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

Incorrect. Ben Affleck's kryptonite is doing movie's that do not take place in Boston. He will be terrible.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 07:37:53 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

Incorrect. Ben Affleck's kryptonite is doing movie's that do not take place in Boston. He will be terrible.

qft, except I'd change it to "movies that he is not writing or directing". Pretty much everything he did with Matt Damon was really good...but most of those were in Boston...so point still holds.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 08:09:43 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/rdI7efT.jpg)

Someone added a touch of color. God I would love for it to be like this. But of course itll just be boring ol' jet black again.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 13, 2014, 08:12:58 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

Incorrect. Ben Affleck's kryptonite is doing movie's that do not take place in Boston. He will be terrible.

qft, except I'd change it to "movies that he is not writing or directing". Pretty much everything he did with Matt Damon was really good...but most of those were in Boston...so point still holds.


I said it that way because although I thought Argo was a good movie (good not great), I thought he was mediocre at best.  I can appreciate a character who is not demonstrative, but his CIA agent was apparently the same person at the end of the story as at the beginning and that, I cannot tolerate from an actor.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 13, 2014, 08:13:23 PM
Affleck is gonna have to munch some roids to get that big, Batman is gigantic in that picture.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 13, 2014, 08:14:05 PM
Affleck is gonna have to munch some roids to get that big, Batman is gigantic in that picture.

Affleck was jacked in "The Town".  It won't be that hard to get back there, he is a big dude.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 13, 2014, 08:14:19 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/rdI7efT.jpg)

Someone added a touch of color. God I would love for it to be like this. But of course itll just be boring ol' jet black again.

That's too cool.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 08:14:53 PM
Affleck is gonna have to munch some roids to get that big, Batman is gigantic in that picture.

Supposedly he's been putting on a good amount of bulk. He's pretty cut in that last movie he wrote I think.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 08:15:48 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/rdI7efT.jpg)

Someone added a touch of color. God I would love for it to be like this. But of course itll just be boring ol' jet black again.

That's too cool.

I've always loved the blue/gray Batman designs. Something about it, idk.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 13, 2014, 08:16:38 PM
Affleck is gonna have to munch some roids to get that big, Batman is gigantic in that picture.

Affleck was jacked in "The Town".  It won't be that hard to get back there, he is a big dude.

Thats the one.

Also here's another recolored pic with a black palette.

(http://i.imgur.com/QYhHlV9.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on May 13, 2014, 08:59:26 PM
Maybe that bat on his chest should lay off the 'roids.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 13, 2014, 09:25:00 PM
Also here's another recolored pic with a black palette.

(http://i.imgur.com/QYhHlV9.jpg)

This one looks like he glued a paper bat to his chest.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 14, 2014, 10:47:48 AM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

This. Also, I'm fairly sure that Affleck's Batman is supposed to be an older, already-established Batman. That's what I've been hearing, at least. I like the idea of Ben Affleck as an older Batman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 14, 2014, 10:52:31 AM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

This. Also, I'm fairly sure that Affleck's Batman is supposed to be an older, already-established Batman. That's what I've been hearing, at least. I like the idea of Ben Affleck as an older Batman.

Well.. it is based on Frank Miller's batman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 04:38:41 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

This. Also, I'm fairly sure that Affleck's Batman is supposed to be an older, already-established Batman. That's what I've been hearing, at least. I like the idea of Ben Affleck as an older Batman.

Well.. it is based on Frank Miller's batman.

No it's not. (http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/11/12/zack-snyder-clarifies-batman-vs-superman-is-not-an-adaptation-of-frank-millers-the-dark-knight-returns/)
“If you were going to do that, you would need a different Superman. We’re bringing Batman into the universe that now this Superman lives in.”

I'm fairly certain it's supposed to be a younger Batman. Although, I would like an adaption of Frank Miller's Dark Knight, I doubt Snyder would be able to pull it off successfully. I think Batman vs. Superman is Snyder's own retarded creation. Also, they've cast Jesse Eisenberg to play a young Lex Luthor. That wouldn't make much sense if Batman was older, unless time travel was involved.

That article does say that Batman is older though, but that doesn't really make sense. Does it?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 14, 2014, 05:19:31 PM
I'm sure Affleck will be fine.  The main reason why this movie will probably be shit is the people making it.

This. Also, I'm fairly sure that Affleck's Batman is supposed to be an older, already-established Batman. That's what I've been hearing, at least. I like the idea of Ben Affleck as an older Batman.

Well.. it is based on Frank Miller's batman.

No it's not. (http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/11/12/zack-snyder-clarifies-batman-vs-superman-is-not-an-adaptation-of-frank-millers-the-dark-knight-returns/)
“If you were going to do that, you would need a different Superman. We’re bringing Batman into the universe that now this Superman lives in.”

I'm fairly certain it's supposed to be a younger Batman. Although, I would like an adaption of Frank Miller's Dark Knight, I doubt Snyder would be able to pull it off successfully. I think Batman vs. Superman is Snyder's own retarded creation. Also, they've cast Jesse Eisenberg to play a young Lex Luthor. That wouldn't make much sense if Batman was older, unless time travel was involved.

I think he means its based on Miller's design (which is obvious that it was at the very least inspired by it, the Bat symbol on the chest proves that) not that its an adaptation of DKR.

Its definitely not an adaptation. But I don't think anyone's said that. Its just that design was inspired by it.

And as far as old/young Batman. I have no idea. Afflecks in his 40s though. How old is Batman when he starts out canonically? I could see it going either way.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 05:22:54 PM
Alright. I'll agree with that. But when someone says "it" instead of "he/she", I'm thinking of something over someone. I got confused, because it does seem like he says its an adaption of Frank Miller's comic.

Btw. In year one, Batman is 25 years old. I don't know how canonical any of the comics are, though. I'm not really a comic buff, so I can tell you facts but I can't really tell you what they mean or how they relate to other comics, etc. Also, batman's bat symbol is a staple. Many iterations of Batman have had a very similar looking crest on their chest. Although, his looks similar in design, since it does look fatter than the normal crest. Google images can give you the answers you seek.


(http://i.imgur.com/cHUh7ZI.jpg)


Also, according to sources, Batman is around 43 years old when the Justice League forms (and the next movie at this one is supposedly the JL movie). So this could very well be an older Batman, but I still don't think it will follow Frank Miller's retelling at all. Although, after LJ... who knows. Snyder could choose to bring Batman out of retirement, since he is 55 in The Dark Knight Returns.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 14, 2014, 06:08:08 PM
I think they were inspired by Jim Lee's Batman, too. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Jim Lee's was inspired by Miller. But the crest is far more Frank Miller to me.

(http://wpc.556e.edgecastcdn.net/80556E/img.news/NE7iGYoleH50a9_1_1.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 06:13:49 PM
The movies follow their own made up canon, right? If so, then any parallels we draw from the comics in regards to storylines relating to movie are probably going to be incorrect.


I really don't understand why there is a young Lex Luthor yet Batman is supposed to be older (late 30s, 40s?). That really shits on the lore.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 14, 2014, 06:18:01 PM
The movies follow their own made up canon, right? If so, then anything parallels we draw from the comics in regards to storylines relating to movie is probably going to be incorrect.


I really don't understand why there is a young Lex Luthor yet Batman is supposed to be older (late 30s, 40s?). That really shits on the lore.

Pretty much. It varies based on franchise, iterations, etc. As far as I know (not an expert at all obvs) the two Burton films were in the same universe. Kilmers and Clooneys are probably the same universe (not sure though). The diff Bruce Waynes throw me off but I think they use the same Robin.

Nolans are obviously the same.

I have no idea about this one, though. If I had to guess Id say different universe than the Nolan films. I didn't finish DK Rises. Didn't Bruce die at the end or some shit?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Onix on May 14, 2014, 06:18:49 PM
The movies follow their own made up canon, right? If so, then anything parallels we draw from the comics in regards to storylines relating to movie is probably going to be incorrect.


I really don't understand why there is a young Lex Luthor yet Batman is supposed to be older (late 30s, 40s?). That really shits on the lore.

Are Bruce and Supe supposed to be the same age? I guess its possible that Wayne is 5-10 years older than Kent. No clue, though.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 06:24:07 PM
Didn't Bruce die at the end or some shit?

No. Well, actually it's kind of ambiguous.


As far as Bman and Supes being the same age, I don't know. It depends on how many years have passed since Man of Steel. I always assumed they were close to the same age, but as you know... Superman is not human, and therefore doesn't age like humans do. He usually looks the same.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 14, 2014, 06:55:44 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/cHUh7ZI.jpg)
I know she's supposed to be just 13, but fucking hell Carrie Kelley is ugly, and has an overall crappy character design. I still stand by that Miller can't draw for shit.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 14, 2014, 06:56:14 PM
Didn't Bruce die at the end or some shit?

No. Well, actually it's kind of ambiguous.

It is not ambiguous.  Bruce totally lives.


Quote
As far as Bman and Supes being the same age, I don't know. It depends on how many years have passed since Man of Steel. I always assumed they were close to the same age, but as you know... Superman is not human, and therefore doesn't age like humans do. He usually looks the same.

In Kingdom Come superman has a little shock of gray.  I kind of like it.

Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 14, 2014, 06:58:08 PM
The ending of TDKR is stupid, but it's not ambiguous.  Bruce fakes his death and leaves his gear to the guy who spent the entire movie failing at everything he did and getting his ass kicked by every run-of-the-mill thug he encountered.  Truly, Gotham is in safe hands. ::)  In any case, no, this new movie won't be in continuity with that trilogy.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:04:59 PM
Didn't Bruce die at the end or some shit?

No. Well, actually it's kind of ambiguous.

It is not ambiguous.  Bruce totally lives.


Interesting, when I saw it I didn't really care for the movie... so my attention was a bit... diverted. I thought it was easily the weakest of the trilogy and I think they fucked up big time with Bane.

Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 14, 2014, 07:07:10 PM
How so?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:08:06 PM
How so?

Mostly his voice. I thought it was awful.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 14, 2014, 07:09:16 PM
I like it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:10:09 PM
I like it.

Awee. I'm sorry. *pats you on the head*


In regards to Frank Miller, he wrote one of my favorite comics: Ronin. Other than that, he's trash. Dark Knight Returns isn't even that good, and the sequel is even worse.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: DDDDAts all folks on May 14, 2014, 07:11:28 PM
We need more female heroes and villains in these things.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: DDDDAts all folks on May 14, 2014, 07:12:27 PM
I liked the Dark knight.

However batmans voice did get on my nerves a bit
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:12:39 PM
Just found this on wikipedia, somewhat relevant.

(http://i.imgur.com/XT7y6yH.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 14, 2014, 07:29:52 PM
I really don't understand why there is a young Lex Luthor yet Batman is supposed to be older (late 30s, 40s?). That really shits on the lore.

No. Superman and Batman will be meeting for the first time and Lex Luthor is a Superman enemy, so his age in contrast to Bruce's is irrelevant. It'll probably be the rise of Lex Luthor, and Batman will likely be an established hero whereas Superman is new. Superman is already ~30 in Man of Steel, so Batman will likely be in his very late 30s or somewhere in his 40s. They don't have any frequently-established constant age difference, so saying it "really shits on the lore" is pretty wrong. Anyway, Jesse Eisenberg (who's playing Lex Luthor) is the same age as Henry Cavill (Superman), so that's all that really matters (though it wouldn't really matter if he wasn't, because changes are fine as long as they work out).
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:36:24 PM
I really don't understand why there is a young Lex Luthor yet Batman is supposed to be older (late 30s, 40s?). That really shits on the lore.

No. Superman and Batman will be meeting for the first time and Lex Luthor is a Superman enemy, so his age in contrast to Bruce's is irrelevant. It'll probably be the rise of Lex Luthor, and Batman will likely be an established hero whereas Superman is new. Superman is already ~30 in Man of Steel, so Batman will likely be in his very late 30s or somewhere in his 40s. They don't have any frequently-established constant age difference, so saying it "really shits on the lore" is pretty wrong. Anyway, Jesse Eisenberg (who's playing Lex Luthor) is the same age as Henry Cavill (Superman), so that's all that really matters (though it wouldn't really matter if he wasn't, because changes are fine as long as they work out).

This is one of the reasons I dislike superhero comics and their movie adaptions. Why don't they follow any sort of canon? It's like each issue is in it's own universe. It's fucking retarted. I guess it actually takes skilled writers to follow a loose timeline and not write a bunch of crap with plot holes and continuity errors. Is that why they're always retconning things in comics? Also, how is Lex's age irrelevant because he's a Superman villain? They live in the same universe.....

Like I said earlier though, the movie adaption is just that. The director will do whatever the hell he wants with the source material, even if it shits on the lore (which it does even if you deny it). Snyder has stated that this movie will show Clark and Lex as friends (and probably when they become enemies as well), which is supported by the comics, but they were not 30 years old when that happened, they were younger... teens & 20s. Lore. Shit on. But of course, due to the nature of comics, anything is possible. Doesn't mean I have to agree with it. A good story doesn't need to be changed every iteration.

I could see Eisenberg playing a young Lex Luthor with hair in flashbacks. I would like to see that.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 14, 2014, 07:55:18 PM
Who gives a fuck about canon? Every time something is adapted people moan about how true it is to the source material when it makes nearly 0 difference, especially with these superheroes that have often been around for 40+ years in all sorts of weird states. He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:55:48 PM
He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?

How do you know that?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 14, 2014, 07:58:37 PM
He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?

How do you know that?

Because to do that he'd have to change actors nationalities, change character's names, write a shit screenplay and make the whole movie delivered in exposition with 1 big fight scene. Man of Steel was a weak movie but it wasn't anywhere near as soul crushingly shit as TLA.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 14, 2014, 07:59:33 PM
He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?

How do you know that?

Because to do that he'd have to change actors nationalities, change character's names, write a shit screenplay and make the whole movie delivered in exposition with 1 big fight scene. Man of Steel was a weak movie but it wasn't anywhere near as soul crushingly shit as TLA.

At least we agree on something.  ;)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 14, 2014, 10:25:54 PM

Like I said earlier though, the movie adaption is just that. The director will do whatever the hell he wants with the source material, even if it shits on the lore (which it does even if you deny it). Snyder has stated that this movie will show Clark and Lex as friends (and probably when they become enemies as well), which is supported by the comics, but they were not 30 years old when that happened, they were younger... teens & 20s. Lore. Shit on. But of course, due to the nature of comics, anything is possible. Doesn't mean I have to agree with it. A good story doesn't need to be changed every iteration.

I could see Eisenberg playing a young Lex Luthor with hair in flashbacks. I would like to see that.

I doubt Snyder has much control over the script. It is likely heavily controlled by WB and DC. If the script betrays the characters then it is mostly DCs fault.

Anyone else concerned they cast a heroine-chic supermodel as a sex-foot Amazonian?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 15, 2014, 02:19:43 AM
He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?

How do you know that?

Because to do that he'd have to change actors nationalities, change character's names, write a shit screenplay and make the whole movie delivered in exposition with 1 big fight scene. Man of Steel was a weak movie but it wasn't anywhere near as soul crushingly shit as TLA.
Totally forgot about that piece of shit. Way worse than The First Avenger.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 15, 2014, 03:34:22 AM
He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?

How do you know that?

Because to do that he'd have to change actors nationalities, change character's names, write a shit screenplay and make the whole movie delivered in exposition with 1 big fight scene. Man of Steel was a weak movie but it wasn't anywhere near as soul crushingly shit as TLA.
Totally forgot about that piece of shit. Way worse than The First Avenger.

WHAT HOW DARE YOU USE THE FIRST AVENGER AS A NEGATIVE COMPARISON

This thread is now about bashing rooster for disliking TFA.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 15, 2014, 03:54:10 AM
I don't think this movie will be as bad as some people think it will. I think the actors are fine (I'm a little dubious about Eisenberg though) and I like Snyder.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 15, 2014, 04:03:54 AM
He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?

How do you know that?

Because to do that he'd have to change actors nationalities, change character's names, write a shit screenplay and make the whole movie delivered in exposition with 1 big fight scene. Man of Steel was a weak movie but it wasn't anywhere near as soul crushingly shit as TLA.
Totally forgot about that piece of shit. Way worse than The First Avenger.

WHAT HOW DARE YOU USE THE FIRST AVENGER AS A NEGATIVE COMPARISON

This thread is now about bashing rooster for disliking TFA.

I wasn't even going to say anything because we've been over it ad nauseum. You're the one stirring the pot, Saddam.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 15, 2014, 04:10:15 AM
The First Avenger? How dare you bring that up. That movie is the worst film ever made. Anyone who disagrees with me is a fucking moron.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 15, 2014, 04:39:47 AM
God damn it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 15, 2014, 04:55:41 AM
The First Avenger? How dare you bring that up. That movie is the worst film ever made. Anyone who disagrees with me is a fucking moron.
Shit taest.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Fortuna on May 15, 2014, 08:54:18 AM
People only watch Batman for the villains. Batman himself is pretty boring.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 15, 2014, 10:12:27 AM
Incorrect.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 15, 2014, 11:26:33 AM
So so incorrect.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 15, 2014, 03:11:58 PM
If they don't bother properly establishing Batman as a character, or his motivations as a superhero, then he can be pretty boring.  Same as any other superhero, really, but the media seems to care a lot less when it comes to Batman.  Is Batman Begins the only film/television version where they bothered to actually explain his origins?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 15, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
If they don't bother properly establishing Batman as a character, or his motivations as a superhero, then he can be pretty boring.  Same as any other superhero, really, but the media seems to care a lot less when it comes to Batman.  Is Batman Begins the only film/television version where they bothered to actually explain his origins?
Origins in regards to his training with Ra's al Ghul? Cause I'm pretty sure almost all Batman shows/movies cover the fear of bats/parents dying part.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 15, 2014, 03:42:01 PM
Batman Begins is the most detailed one I know of. I've seen all the movies, and his parents murder were covered in both the Burton and Schumacher series, although the Burton murder scene is pretty unique because it has Jack Napier/Joker to be the murderer. The murderer in the Schumacher series was never named and was only seen in silhouette. Nolan took from the comic book canon by identifying the murderer as Joe Chill, as it was in the comics.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 15, 2014, 05:53:16 PM
The Burton and Schumacher movies are one series.  But in any case, just saying "His parents were killed, therefore Batman" isn't enough to establish an origin.  Lots of people lose their parents as kids.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 15, 2014, 07:16:56 PM
Maybe they are, but the Schumacher films are so different in both tone and design that you could pretty much consider them sepparate series. Batman and Robin is pretty much the 60's Batman with a new story, modern visuals and effects, and batnipple.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 15, 2014, 11:46:45 PM
'60s Batman was actually funny.  How dare you make such a crude comparison.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lemon on May 21, 2014, 10:32:19 PM
https://twitter.com/krolljvar/status/469166097300611072
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 21, 2014, 10:46:14 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/rbAGMz6.png)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 22, 2014, 03:30:15 AM
Man, that's bad.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 22, 2014, 03:49:11 AM
Sounds like an obvious and unimaginative prequel title to the Justice League. No surprise.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 22, 2014, 04:34:56 AM
Dawn of Justice? Are you fucking kidding me?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Fortuna on May 22, 2014, 04:48:03 AM
I think Superman would just instantly kill Batman. Batman is just a guy in a suit who can do karate and stuff.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 22, 2014, 04:48:38 AM
All of these baaaw's.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 22, 2014, 05:14:08 AM
I think Superman would just instantly kill Batman. Batman is just a guy in a suit who can do karate and stuff.

Superman doesn't kill. You are out of your depth.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Fortuna on May 22, 2014, 05:27:11 AM
I think Superman would just instantly kill Batman. Batman is just a guy in a suit who can do karate and stuff.

Superman doesn't kill. You are out of your depth.

He could just put Batman in a really strong cage then.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 22, 2014, 05:28:25 AM
Batman would find a way to outsmart him. As usual.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 22, 2014, 09:15:09 AM
Sounds like an obvious and unimaginative prequel title to the Justice League.

This. Way too blatant.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on May 22, 2014, 09:17:29 AM
I would be good at naming movies. How about: The Dark Justice: Dawn of Retribution Reborn

Actually, I would be good at writing movie scripts as well. The Dark Justice is about a moody anti-hero who fights evil, by any dark means necessary.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Blanko on May 22, 2014, 12:28:30 PM
I think it's a perfect title to represent what a juvenile genre superhero movies are
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 22, 2014, 12:46:34 PM
Balkno
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 22, 2014, 03:00:32 PM
I think it's a perfect title to represent what a juvenile genre superhero movies are
Yep.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on May 22, 2014, 04:28:42 PM
Batman would find a way to outsmart him. As usual.
It's not as if it would be very hard for either of them to figure out the other's true identity.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 22, 2014, 04:41:51 PM
Batman would find a way to outsmart him. As usual.
It's not as if it would be very hard for either of them to figure out the other's true identity.

A bit harder for batman maybe and its not like Superman's cover being compromised is going to be a huge issue for him anyway.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on May 24, 2014, 09:28:14 PM
Sounds like an obvious and unimaginative prequel title to the Justice League.

This. Way too blatant.
How is this any worse than Captain America: The First Avenger?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 24, 2014, 10:00:04 PM
That was also a poor choice of title.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 24, 2014, 11:28:23 PM
Sounds like an obvious and unimaginative prequel title to the Justice League.

This. Way too blatant.
How is this any worse than Captain America: The First Avenger?

When did I say that was a good title? :P
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 25, 2014, 12:58:08 AM
I can't wait for this dark, gritty, wangsty, broody mcbroodwalking three and a half hour long film.  My bet is that the climax will last an hour, involve a genocide of some sort, and we'll all walk out of the theater wanting to kill ourselves.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lemon on May 25, 2014, 01:03:03 AM
I can't wait for this dark, gritty, wangsty, broody mcbroodwalking three and a half hour long film.  My bet is that the climax will last an hour, involve a genocide of some sort, and we'll all walk out of the theater wanting to kill ourselves.

Knowing what's to come, we'll probably walk in with such a notion in our heads too.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on May 25, 2014, 01:20:46 AM
I wonder if it'll be a "I'm Superman and you, batman, are evil!" until "Oh I'm sorry batman.  I thought you were evil but now I see you're better than me because you haven't killed anyone.... unlike me... "

Or maybe batman will come to metropolis (what's left of it) to kill superman because he's a menace to the world.  And rightfully so!  A fist fight can level a damn city.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 25, 2014, 09:20:23 AM
I think it's going to be the other way around. Batman is going to try to bring Superman in for being a dangerous menace who wreaks destruction around him.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 25, 2014, 01:59:37 PM
I wonder if it'll be a "I'm Superman and you, batman, are evil!" until "Oh I'm sorry batman.  I thought you were evil but now I see you're better than me because you haven't killed anyone.... unlike me... "

Or maybe batman will come to metropolis (what's left of it) to kill superman because he's a menace to the world.  And rightfully so!  A fist fight can level a damn city.


Only kryptonian vs kryptonian fist fights do that drama queen. Sheesh, you level one major metropolis and everyone is on your back.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 30, 2014, 04:33:47 AM
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/134697-Goyers-Martian-Manhunter-Comments-Are-Why-DC-Cant-Have-Nice-Things
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 30, 2014, 05:12:08 AM
Superman is working for the united states government and they have beef with Batman. Superman will then come face to face with batman and fight, a few times. During the fourth encounter they will realize how similar they are and team up to fight the real Big Bad, Lex Luthor.

Or some slight variation of this.

I accept PayPal for betting. Or dogecoin.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 30, 2014, 10:14:58 AM
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/134697-Goyers-Martian-Manhunter-Comments-Are-Why-DC-Cant-Have-Nice-Things

Piece of fucking shit
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 30, 2014, 01:21:25 PM
WB and DC should hire Snupes to make their movies.  She doesn't hate comic books!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 30, 2014, 10:43:09 PM
David Goyer is not a smart man.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 30, 2014, 11:00:25 PM
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/134697-Goyers-Martian-Manhunter-Comments-Are-Why-DC-Cant-Have-Nice-Things
Yeah, I saw that. Apparently he said some very sexist things about She-Hulk in the same podcast. I'm not even crazy about comic books but this guy seems like he shouldn't be anywhere near comic book movies.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 15, 2014, 12:30:39 PM
http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice/235973/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-is-first-of-5-movies-says-kevin-smith

How does Kevin Smith know all this stuff?  Is he somehow involved in making this movie?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on June 15, 2014, 10:54:25 PM
Kevin Smith likes talking.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on June 17, 2014, 03:13:29 AM
http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice/235973/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-is-first-of-5-movies-says-kevin-smith

How does Kevin Smith know all this stuff?  Is he somehow involved in making this movie?
Probably not, but it's very likely that he knows some of the people who are.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on June 17, 2014, 07:50:41 AM
Personally, I'm more interested in Gotham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_(TV_series)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 17, 2014, 12:57:45 PM
Personally, I'm more interested in Gotham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_(TV_series)

This will brutalize Batman lore even more than the Burton-Schumacher tag team did.

I think Superman would just instantly kill Batman. Batman is just a guy in a suit who can do karate and stuff.

Superman doesn't kill. You are out of your depth.

This Superman apparently does.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on June 18, 2014, 11:59:47 AM
Personally, I'm more interested in Gotham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_(TV_series)

This will brutalize Batman lore even more than the Burton-Schumacher tag team did.

I think Superman would just instantly kill Batman. Batman is just a guy in a suit who can do karate and stuff.

Superman doesn't kill. You are out of your depth.

This Superman apparently does.
But only when a small family will die.  When thousands will die?  Totally OK to fight to KO.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on June 18, 2014, 12:30:14 PM
Quote
This will brutalize Batman lore even more than the Burton-Schumacher tag team did.

Apparently they plan to include The Joker. Since he was the Red Hood until he fought Batman it will be interesting to see how it pans out. I just prefer to think of it as an alternative universe Batman.

Also, Sean Pertwee, son of third Doctor Who Jon Pertwee is going to play Alfred. It's going to be awesome.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on June 18, 2014, 12:34:01 PM
I just prefer to think of it as an alternative universe Batman.
I just prefer to think of every superhero movie ever made to be an alternate universe since filmmakers hardly ever follow canon.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on June 18, 2014, 01:51:40 PM
Personally, I'm more interested in Gotham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_(TV_series)

This will brutalize Batman lore even more than the Burton-Schumacher tag team did.

I think Superman would just instantly kill Batman. Batman is just a guy in a suit who can do karate and stuff.

Superman doesn't kill. You are out of your depth.

This Superman apparently does.

This Superman killed once.  The no-killing rule had to have a genesis and the killing of Zod in "Man of Steel" was just that... I hope.... If the writer's are any good.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 18, 2014, 06:18:18 PM
This Superman killed once.  The no-killing rule had to have a genesis and the killing of Zod in "Man of Steel" was just that... I hope.... If the writers are any good.

Fix'd for Thorkiness, and Superman hadn't demonstrated any particular reluctance to kill before Zod, which is why that big dramatic yell of anguish made no sense.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on June 18, 2014, 06:53:56 PM
This Superman killed once.  The no-killing rule had to have a genesis and the killing of Zod in "Man of Steel" was just that... I hope.... If the writers are any good.

Fix'd for Thorkiness, and Superman hadn't demonstrated any particular reluctance to kill before Zod, which is why that big dramatic yell of anguish made no sense.
The odd thing about that scene is that it looked like superman had several options.  The family could run, he could put his hand in front of Zod's face, turn Zod's neck another direction, laser eye the wall behind the people and let them escape, or stomp his foot so hard that they'd both fall down into the basement.

Or fly up.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 18, 2014, 07:40:16 PM
His name is Zod.  Anyway, yes, the film was poorly directed as well as poorly written.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on June 18, 2014, 08:22:38 PM
His name is Zod.  Anyway, yes, the film was poorly directed as well as poorly written.

God Damn auto-correct!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 18, 2014, 08:40:11 PM
Kneel before Zoe!
KNEEEEEEL!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on June 23, 2014, 08:46:27 AM
http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/25742/20140620/batman-vs-superman-teaser-trailer.htm
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 10, 2014, 02:38:18 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2014/07/03/henry-cavill-batman-superman-movie-first-look/11310229/

Quote
Man of Steel was all about Superman finding his place in the world as both a hero and as a man

No, half of the movie was about that.  The other half was one big long nonsensical action scene.  Also:

Quote
The director can't say exactly how the relationship between the two superheroes evolves, "but suffice it to say there is a 'v' in between their names" in the movie title, Snyder says. He explains that having the "v" instead of "vs." is a way "to keep it from being a straight 'versus' movie, even in the most subtle way."

What?  That doesn't make any sense.  "v" means "versus" just as much as "vs." does.  In fact, the only real distinction between them is that "v" is used for court cases, which is precisely why everyone is making fun of it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on July 10, 2014, 03:01:23 AM
Any confidence I had in Snyder (none) has been crushed after that "v" comment.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on July 10, 2014, 03:07:44 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2014/07/03/henry-cavill-batman-superman-movie-first-look/11310229/

Quote
Man of Steel was all about Superman finding his place in the world as both a hero and as a man

No, half of the movie was about that.  The other half was one big long nonsensical action scene.  Also:

Quote
The director can't say exactly how the relationship between the two superheroes evolves, "but suffice it to say there is a 'v' in between their names" in the movie title, Snyder says. He explains that having the "v" instead of "vs." is a way "to keep it from being a straight 'versus' movie, even in the most subtle way."

What?  That doesn't make any sense.  "v" means "versus" just as much as "vs." does.  In fact, the only real distinction between them is that "v" is used for court cases, which is precisely why everyone is making fun of it.

Have you considered that Snyder is just too smart for you Saddam?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 10, 2014, 03:11:11 AM
Any confidence I had in Snyder (none) has been crushed after that "v" comment.

So basically the "v" comment didn't affect your confidence in him at all, it is a non-issue?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on July 10, 2014, 03:12:22 AM
Any confidence I had in Snyder (none) has been crushed after that "v" comment.

So basically the "v" comment didn't affect your confidence in him at all, it is a non-issue?

Yeah. Pretty much.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 25, 2014, 01:53:42 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BtVnM_xCAAAydY8.jpg)

His butt chin is going to be so distracting...
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on July 25, 2014, 09:09:02 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/V7vu28f.png)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on July 26, 2014, 12:59:02 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2014/07/03/henry-cavill-batman-superman-movie-first-look/11310229/

Quote
Man of Steel was all about Superman finding his place in the world as both a hero and as a man

No, half of the movie was about that.  The other half was one big long nonsensical action scene.  Also:

Quote
The director can't say exactly how the relationship between the two superheroes evolves, "but suffice it to say there is a 'v' in between their names" in the movie title, Snyder says. He explains that having the "v" instead of "vs." is a way "to keep it from being a straight 'versus' movie, even in the most subtle way."

What?  That doesn't make any sense.  "v" means "versus" just as much as "vs." does.  In fact, the only real distinction between them is that "v" is used for court cases, which is precisely why everyone is making fun of it.
Maybe Bruce Wayne will sue Superman for the destruction of Metropolis?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 26, 2014, 10:12:55 PM
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/ehrgcnk7wqswlx8wzwpl.jpg)

I've been remaining cautiously optimistic, but I don't like this...she looks so scrawny. Which is fine for her, but Wonder Woman generally looks pretty "big", she looks imposing and tough. Gal Gadot looks like generic prettygirl. :/
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on July 26, 2014, 10:19:37 PM
My god, that image is way too large.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 26, 2014, 10:23:07 PM
I think Wonder Woman is generally portrayed as having fairly broad shoulders and slightly muscular arms in the comics, while in cartoon shows and films maybe less so. Perhaps they were afraid that a fit/muscular actress wouldn't be attractive enough..
Is this picture official, btw?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on July 26, 2014, 10:37:12 PM
They already have female Thor so Wonder Woman doesn't need to be super-buff. Besides, I don't think there should be any female superheroes because in real life they would be too whiny/bitchy to do anything spectacular other than please men (when we're not busy gaming) and make food for us.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 26, 2014, 10:52:40 PM
I think Wonder Woman is generally portrayed as having fairly broad shoulders and slightly muscular arms in the comics, while in cartoon shows and films maybe less so. Perhaps they were afraid that a fit/muscular actress wouldn't be attractive enough..
Is this picture official, btw?

Probably. And yes, it is official.


My god, that image is way too large.

Oops. It auto-resized for me so I assumed it did for everyone.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 26, 2014, 10:54:32 PM
She looks like she's got some guns. She's not huge but she looks strong.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 27, 2014, 08:38:17 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn4fBnWy7Ys

So it looks like Batman will be wearing and using the armour he fought Superman with in The Dark Knight Returns. While the nod is nice, this does not excite me a lot. At least, not if the armour looks as stupid as it did in the graphic novel. Plus I'm worried this'll just be a carbon copy of TDKR with a minor change so that they become best of friends at the end to lead into the Justice League movie. Which would be stupid as Nolan already did a "faked Batman death" scene...
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on July 27, 2014, 08:48:24 AM
The heck are people screaming about? They just showed Batman and Superman looking at each other (presumably) without any context. Goddamn nerds.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on July 27, 2014, 03:45:33 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn4fBnWy7Ys

So it looks like Batman will be wearing and using the armour he fought Superman with in The Dark Knight Returns. While the nod is nice, this does not excite me a lot. At least, not if the armour looks as stupid as it did in the graphic novel. Plus I'm worried this'll just be a carbon copy of TDKR with a minor change so that they become best of friends at the end to lead into the Justice League movie. Which would be stupid as Nolan already did a "faked Batman death" scene...

I remember reading that this movie is not based on Frank Miller's work. Did something come out changing that?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on July 28, 2014, 04:39:33 AM
It's not based on it story wise, but I think zack did say he's taking things from it thematically.. like the suit.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on August 06, 2014, 10:26:10 PM
Supes x Batman V Chronicles release date has been moved to March 25, 2016.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Jack1704 on October 18, 2014, 07:13:52 PM
Jesse Eisenberg is Lex Luthor. I reckon my little girl could take him down.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 26, 2015, 03:04:22 AM
We now have a picture of Eisenberg as Lex:

(http://i.imgur.com/oSEbeu6.jpg)

He shaved his head and made a frowny face for the camera.  That's great and all, but he still looks way too young and dorky for the role.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on March 26, 2015, 03:11:54 AM
It honestly looks better than I thought but then my hope could up in flames the moment he talks. I am still dubious.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on March 26, 2015, 05:09:45 AM
I don't even know what the actor sounds like
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 17, 2015, 02:54:31 PM
The trailer they were screening has leaked Here's the official trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwfUnkBfdZ4
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 17, 2015, 03:05:14 PM
how come these dicks can never seem to hold the camera still and keep the image in focus
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on April 17, 2015, 09:20:19 PM
Because it's leaked ;)

Looks like another depressing superhero film that takes itself too seriously. Hopefully the writers can get that right this time. I reckon it'll be hard to establish Batman in the same movie that he has to fight Superman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 18, 2015, 05:08:11 AM
Okay, now that we have the official release with proper quality, I've noticed a few more details.  Which scene was more stupid - the one with the soldiers kneeling before Superman, or the one with Batman perched in a crow's nest with a sniper rifle?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on April 18, 2015, 05:11:04 AM
Batguy's voice sounds much better than Bale's. Also I'm pretty sure that's his tight rope gun, not an actual sniper rifle.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on April 18, 2015, 05:14:31 AM
Why does his voice sound robotic?


BTW, I'm definitely going to see this cause they're both babes.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 18, 2015, 05:25:20 AM
He's using a widget to distort his voice.  The Arrow does the same thing on Arrow.  One of these days I'd like to see a superhero use a kazoo to disguise their voice.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 18, 2015, 07:01:42 AM
The Flash doesn't even need a gadget. Instead he can vibrate his vocal cords at super high speed to create distortion in his voice. This makes him cooler than both Arrow and Batman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on April 18, 2015, 10:00:29 AM
God, I've seen jollier-looking horror films.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 18, 2015, 09:13:43 PM
It's sad to see that with every new promotion or advertisement about this movie, the hyperbolic jokes that DC's detractors have been making about the tone of their universe seem more and more likely to be true.  They apparently want every character in every movie to be as grimdark and brooding and downright miserable as humanly possible.  Everyone has to scowl.  Everyone has to stand moodily in the rain.  Everyone has to say ominous things in an ominous tone.  It's silly.  They're trying to deconstruct something that they never bothered constructing in the first place.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 18, 2015, 09:19:01 PM
BBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on April 20, 2015, 03:05:50 AM
It's sad to see that with every new promotion or advertisement about this movie, the hyperbolic jokes that DC's detractors have been making about the tone of their universe seem more and more likely to be true.  They apparently want every character in every movie to be as grimdark and brooding and downright miserable as humanly possible.  Everyone has to scowl.  Everyone has to stand moodily in the rain.  Everyone has to say ominous things in an ominous tone.  It's silly.  They're trying to deconstruct something that they never bothered constructing in the first place.

This is primarily a Batman movie, since people care a lot more about Batman than Superman. Batman stories have been moody for a very long time.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on April 20, 2015, 03:35:48 AM
It's sad to see that with every new promotion or advertisement about this movie, the hyperbolic jokes that DC's detractors have been making about the tone of their universe seem more and more likely to be true.  They apparently want every character in every movie to be as grimdark and brooding and downright miserable as humanly possible.  Everyone has to scowl.  Everyone has to stand moodily in the rain.  Everyone has to say ominous things in an ominous tone.  It's silly.  They're trying to deconstruct something that they never bothered constructing in the first place.

This is primarily a Batman movie, since people care a lot more about Batman than Superman. Batman stories have been moody for a very long time.

(http://media.giphy.com/media/jIzXYqaQ0nLkA/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 20, 2015, 07:34:12 AM
Not that long.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 20, 2015, 01:10:27 PM
Since the 80s
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 21, 2015, 06:53:52 PM
Hey, I found a more accurate trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMI6B734Ew4
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 21, 2015, 07:03:29 PM
unfunny
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 22, 2015, 08:59:45 PM
On the positive side, the Batsuit looks nifty.  Do you have any opinions on the how the movie looks to be shaping up that you'd like to share, beardo?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 23, 2015, 01:44:15 AM
No.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 30, 2015, 03:13:26 PM
In a shocking twist, this latest picture of Batman is grimdark, brooding, and edgy:

(http://i.imgur.com/YkMIHK2.png)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on April 30, 2015, 03:56:47 PM
So weird. Batman is typically such a bright and happy character.

(http://i58.tinypic.com/2hi5lp3.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Pete Svarrior on April 30, 2015, 04:06:25 PM
So weird. Batman is typically such a bright and happy character.
(http://i.omgomg.eu/batman)
(http://www.elevateyourstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Pow-300x221.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on April 30, 2015, 04:16:51 PM
They tried their best to make him a dark hero, but they were a victim of the times.

(http://i59.tinypic.com/t9zblf.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 30, 2015, 05:37:16 PM
So weird. Batman is typically such a bright and happy character.

(http://i58.tinypic.com/2hi5lp3.jpg)

I hope Affleck's quads are as jacked as this.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 30, 2015, 05:38:41 PM
In a shocking twist, this latest picture of Batman is grimdark, brooding, and edgy:
Why is this such a problem for you?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 30, 2015, 05:42:10 PM
In a shocking twist, this latest picture of Batman is grimdark, brooding, and edgy:
Why is this such a problem for you?

He really, really, really likes Adam West.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 30, 2015, 06:34:56 PM
In a shocking twist, this latest picture of Batman is grimdark, brooding, and edgy:
Why is this such a problem for you?

Because Batman has cooler things to do than scowl at the camera (as do all of these characters) and there are much more effective ways to communicate a dark tone than draining the color out of everything.  It's darkness in the most superficial and boring way.

He really, really, really likes Adam West.

The '60s Batman series was magnificent and anyone who disagrees is objectively wrong.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on April 30, 2015, 06:42:54 PM
Because Batman has cooler things to do than scowl at the camera (as do all of these characters)
You're talking about a promotion picture. How would you like it to look? Bright colors with Batman smiling into the distance?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 30, 2015, 06:48:52 PM
Like this:

(http://36.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldxjf1jWSm1qzrlhgo1_500.png)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 30, 2015, 07:26:52 PM
Because Batman has cooler things to do than scowl at the camera (as do all of these characters)
You're talking about a promotion picture. How would you like it to look? Bright colors with Batman smiling into the distance?

Something more interesting than glaring at the camera like they're in a Kubrick movie, and a little bit less desaturation in every shot.  Like the picture of Wonder Woman, for example.  That's the only one that doesn't seem to be concerned first and foremost with saying, "Grrr, I can out-brood you!" so it's easily the most interesting one so far.

Also, lol@WB/DC:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/superman-batman-dcs-real-battle-792190
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 30, 2015, 09:34:57 PM
tl;dr
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on May 01, 2015, 12:39:27 AM
(http://i58.tinypic.com/257hbmx.jpg)

Well, she's not staring at the camera and there is some color...
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rushy on May 01, 2015, 02:28:39 AM
Does every DC comic book hero now literally have the personality of Batman? Is that the plot? An evil villain tries to depress all the heroes to death by making them batman impersonators?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 01, 2015, 08:11:32 AM
>high heels
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 04, 2015, 06:00:24 PM
Does every DC comic book hero now literally have the personality of Batman? Is that the plot? An evil villain tries to depress all the heroes to death by making them batman impersonators?

That's what it looks like.  Patton Oswalt made all the best jokes about it here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfBAqauWxzs&feature=youtu.be&t=4m1s).

Anyway, to deviate from the subject of BvS, next summer's Suicide Squad might not be too bad.  It's being written and directed by David Ayer, who is of course far more talented than Goyer and Snyder, and the premise has some potential.  We have some pictures of the cast, too:

(http://i.imgur.com/XJC3gxO.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/klQyVz4.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/hJ2u2vr.jpg)

OMG but Deadshot is supposed to be white!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 04, 2015, 06:28:21 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/hJ2u2vr.jpg)
Terrible
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on May 08, 2015, 01:39:35 AM
OMG but Deadshot is supposed to be white!
So is Nick Fury.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 08, 2015, 04:42:52 AM
OMG but Deadshot is supposed to be white!
So is Nick Fury.

Define "supposed to be", since Fury'd been black in the comics for a good many years before the movies.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 08, 2015, 04:52:32 AM
So Fury was originally white in the comics, then turned black? What?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 08, 2015, 05:27:09 AM
So Fury was originally white in the comics, then turned black? What?
Have you ever heard of Ultimate Marvel?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 08, 2015, 05:46:24 AM
OMG but Deadshot is supposed to be white!
So is Nick Fury.

That's an interesting example, because Nick Fury's character was actually rebooted as a black man - one who was clearly designed to look just like Sam Jackson, in fact - with the Ultimate Marvel imprint in the early 2000s.  Nevertheless, I'm always happy to see more minority representation in popular culture, even in adaptations.  Deadshot's ethnicity isn't particularly relevant to his character, at least not in any interpretation I've ever seen, so there's really no harm in having him be a black man.  A lot of "I'm not racist, but..." fanboys objected to it, but they're dumb.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rushy on May 08, 2015, 05:55:02 AM
OMG but Deadshot is supposed to be white!
So is Nick Fury.

That's an interesting example, because Nick Fury's character was actually rebooted as a black man - one who was clearly designed to look just like Sam Jackson, in fact - with the Ultimate Marvel imprint in the early 2000s.  Nevertheless, I'm always happy to see more minority representation in popular culture, even in adaptations.  Deadshot's ethnicity isn't particularly relevant to his character, at least not in any interpretation I've ever seen, so there's really no harm in having him be a black man.  A lot of "I'm not racist, but..." fanboys objected to it, but they're dumb.

Yes, we all needed a reminder that minorities can be villains too. I'm tired of seeing evil white people in these movies when we all know the minorities are the evil ones.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost of V on May 08, 2015, 06:03:37 AM
So Fury was originally white in the comics, then turned black? What?
Have you ever heard of Ultimate Marvel?

I don't delve too deep into capeshit, so not really.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 08, 2015, 11:32:25 AM
Let's not even get in to what is going on with Fantastic Four's casting.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on May 08, 2015, 02:15:45 PM
So Fury was originally white in the comics, then turned black? What?
Have you ever heard of Ultimate Marvel?
I gave up on trying to keep up with all of the reboots and retcons about 15 years ago.

Let's not even get in to what is going on with Fantastic Four's casting.
Agreed.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 08, 2015, 07:27:58 PM
Yes, we all needed a reminder that minorities can be villains too. I'm tired of seeing evil white people in these movies when we all know the minorities are the evil ones.

Pretty much everyone is a villain in this movie, so in context he's more of an anti-hero than anything.  But yes, members of minority groups should get more exposure as villains, as well as get more exposure as heroes, anti-heroes, sidekicks, comic relief, etc.  Most media these days is still stuck in the unfortunate practice of tokenism, which puts the token in the bizarre position of somehow having to "represent" their entire gender/ethnicity and be a flawless paragon of a character.  That's undoubtedly part of the reason why there was such a backlash over Black Widow's depiction in AoU, even though everyone's character development was awkwardly rushed through in that film.  A misstep with her character becomes a misstep for all women.  Which is ridiculous, but it's part of the culture we're stuck in.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 08, 2015, 07:29:48 PM
No one complained for a strong independent hulk who don't need no woman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 09, 2015, 05:53:42 PM
Let's not even get in to what is going on with Fantastic Four's casting.

There are bigger problems with the upcoming FF movie than Johnny Storm's race.  For example, there's this:

http://io9.com/the-fantastic-four-reboot-is-reinventing-doctor-doom-in-1657191173

Victor von Ethics in Video Game Journalism
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 09, 2015, 07:03:36 PM
Well I won't watch it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 09, 2015, 10:27:58 PM
Of course you will.  You watched that silly Green Lantern movie, after all.  I bet you even watched those Ghost Rider ones.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 10, 2015, 12:51:32 AM
Let's not even get in to what is going on with Fantastic Four's casting.

There are bigger problems with the upcoming FF movie than Johnny Storm's race.  For example, there's this:

http://io9.com/the-fantastic-four-reboot-is-reinventing-doctor-doom-in-1657191173

Victor von Ethics in Video Game Journalism

Why!  Why don't they trust the source material?!  It sounds marginally better than the SNAFU that was Galactus in the last FF movie, and marginally worse than the Doom in the first FF movie.  I am disappoint.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 10, 2015, 01:56:35 AM
Because an evil scientist who hides out in a castle in a small European country while wearing a full-body metal armour clad in a green cloak isn't realistic or modern.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 10, 2015, 03:50:02 PM
Yeah, and everyone knows that capeshit movies that embrace the sillier aspects of their source material always turn out to be terrible and never make any money. ::)  But really, though, turning Doom into some kind of blogger/hacker is about the most bland and generic thing they could have done with him.  It's like how Goyer was saying that if he were writing a Martian Manhunter movie he'd make him an escaped government experiment or whatever.  It's just so uninspired.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 10, 2015, 06:25:57 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on May 10, 2015, 08:19:23 PM
lol, I'm not surprised at all to read that Goyer would do that.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Pete Svarrior on May 10, 2015, 09:47:13 PM
But really, though, turning Doom into some kind of blogger/hacker is about the most bland and generic thing they could have done with him.
B-but we must be diverse and inclusive.

(◕‿◕✿)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 20, 2015, 04:52:56 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/1n9BPeN.jpg)

More like Just Terrible.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 20, 2015, 06:54:52 AM
Eugh...hopefully he turns out much better than he looks.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 28, 2015, 07:35:56 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS2JhenTOnA

I guess Batman's going to be in this?  It must be a very small part, or else you just know they would have hyped the hell out of his involvement and probably renamed the movie something like Batman v. Suicide Squad: Return of the Dark Knight.

[Gotham]'s going to be awesome.

lol
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 28, 2015, 08:09:39 PM
Assault on Arkham is a Suicide Squad movie as well, and Batman has a more than minor role, but the focus is on the squad.

I still hate the look they're goin for Joker and Harley in this one.

Had they kept the eyebrows and made the hair stand up, it would have looked fine. And the makeup on Harley is wrong.


Objectively the best Joker design.
(http://i.imgur.com/PPIkCG0.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 04, 2015, 04:46:51 AM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-film-chief-wonder-799408

On the notion of brooding:

Quote
There were some complaints that the Batman v. Superman trailer was too dark. Is this a trademark of a DC superhero film in the post-Dark Knight era?

There is intensity and a seriousness of purpose to some of these characters. The filmmakers who are tackling these properties are making great movies about superheroes; they aren't making superhero movies. And when you are trying to make a good movie, you tackle interesting philosophies and character development. There's also humor, which is an important part.

What in the world is he talking about with his distinction between "superhero movies" and "movies about superheroes"?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 04, 2015, 04:49:33 AM
On the notion of brooding:
(http://i.imgur.com/PZjBRRW.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on June 04, 2015, 10:56:41 AM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-film-chief-wonder-799408

On the notion of brooding:

Quote
There were some complaints that the Batman v. Superman trailer was too dark. Is this a trademark of a DC superhero film in the post-Dark Knight era?

There is intensity and a seriousness of purpose to some of these characters. The filmmakers who are tackling these properties are making great movies about superheroes; they aren't making superhero movies. And when you are trying to make a good movie, you tackle interesting philosophies and character development. There's also humor, which is an important part.

What in the world is he talking about with his distinction between "superhero movies" and "movies about superheroes"?

It's the difference between the genre of the movie and the subject of the movie.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 04, 2015, 02:02:38 PM
I don't know; I can't help interpreting it as some kind of snooty "I don't read comic books, I read graphic novels" kind of line.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on June 04, 2015, 11:01:49 PM
I don't know; I can't help interpreting it as some kind of snooty "I don't read comic books, I read graphic novels" kind of line.

Maybe that too, but I think he makes a solid point. MoS and the Dark Knight trilogy make a concerted effort to think through the kind of world that heroes would come out of, the effect that they would have and the kind of emotional life that might give rise to.  To me it makes a lot of sense that superheroes would be neurotic, darkly tinged weirdos. Superman survived the annihilation of his world and Batman comes from a home shattered by crime. Both extraordinarily traumatic events.

The Christopher Reeve's superman strikes me as naive and childish really. Fun sure but not particularly realistic by comparison.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 05, 2015, 05:46:21 PM
MoS and the Dark Knight trilogy make a concerted effort to think through the kind of world that heroes would come out of, the effect that they would have and the kind of emotional life that might give rise to.

That's hardly new territory for the genre.  Both the X-Men series and the MCU have spent a lot of time focusing on those very same issues, albeit with a far less somber tone.  If their efforts didn't lift them out of the "superhero movie" ghetto, I don't see why DC's would.

Quote
To me it makes a lot of sense that superheroes would be neurotic, darkly tinged weirdos. Superman survived the annihilation of his world...extraordinarily traumatic

I don't think that's a fair analysis of Superman, given what we know about his lore (lore lore).  Superman survived the destruction of Krypton when he was a baby, remembered nothing of it, and knew very little about his origins until he was well into his adult life.  Prior to that, he had a wholesome upbringing by two loving parents in an idyllic small town.  That's not what I'd consider to be a logical beginning for a dark and brooding anti-hero.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on June 05, 2015, 09:36:58 PM
That's hardly new territory for the genre.  Both the X-Men series and the MCU have spent a lot of time focusing on those very same issues, albeit with a far less somber tone.  If their efforts didn't lift them out of the "superhero movie" ghetto, I don't see why DC's would.

I think some parts of the X-Men and MCU has transcended the "ghetto", but with larger casts of characters they generally do not go as deep as the Nolan films did and none of them really had as good a director as Nolan either, in my opinion.

Quote
I don't think that's a fair analysis of Superman, given what we know about his lore (lore lore).  Superman survived the destruction of Krypton when he was a baby, remembered nothing of it, and knew very little about his origins until he was well into his adult life.  Prior to that, he had a wholesome upbringing by two loving parents in an idyllic small town.  That's not what I'd consider to be a logical beginning for a dark and brooding anti-hero.

He was not an anti-hero.  Not in the slightest.  He was "brooding" (not the right word) in parts; in the "I am lost in this life" part and in the "Kryptonians are trying destroy the human race" part.  Is that weird to you?  That is exactly where I would expect him to have some pretty dark feelings brewing.  He was tender with his mom, earnest with Lois, pretty caring all-around.  I think you have mistaken the film's tone for Henry Cavill's performance.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 06, 2015, 09:21:19 PM
I think some parts of the X-Men and MCU has transcended the "ghetto", but with larger casts of characters they generally do not go as deep as the Nolan films did and none of them really had as good a director as Nolan either, in my opinion.

Well, I had wanted to avoid getting hung up on our own opinions of the quality of these movies, because that doesn't necessarily correlate to the distinction between superhero films as a genre and films that have superheroes as a subject.  I'm just saying that it's not really something that marks the DC films as particularly ambitious when it's already been done.  Also, while I do agree with you that the bloated casts are doing more harm than good, it's worth pointing out that DC is even more likely to stumble with this, seeing how they're going to be introducing their characters much more rapidly than Marvel.  Batman v Superman alone is going to have to establish Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Cyborg, and Lex Luthor.

Quote
He was not an anti-hero.  Not in the slightest.  He was "brooding" (not the right word) in parts; in the "I am lost in this life" part and in the "Kryptonians are trying destroy the human race" part.  Is that weird to you?  That is exactly where I would expect him to have some pretty dark feelings brewing.  He was tender with his mom, earnest with Lois, pretty caring all-around.  I think you have mistaken the film's tone for Henry Cavill's performance.

He was an anti-hero in the classical sense (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ClassicalAntihero) of the term, which is to say that he was struggling with his own self-doubt and sense of purpose in life before discovering his true origins.  Admittedly, Clark's brooding isn't done while posing on a rooftop with his head bowed in contemplation, but there's still a very glum and aimless feel to his journeys, something that tends to be missing from prior interpretations of the character.  The film's justification of that was changing key details of his upbringing with the Kents to be much more negative, especially turning Jonathan from a supportive father who encourages Clark's use of his powers into basically an overbearing coach who treats him as a prophesied messiah who should prioritize keeping his powers secret over helping people, and demands huge sacrifices from him to this end.  Whether or not such changes were improvements to the source material is debatable (you might have guessed I don't like them :P), but they were, nevertheless, changes.  This Superman isn't darker because they cleverly deconstructed the comics to point out all the little details that we overlooked or anything; he's darker because they specifically wrote him to be darker.

I'm also concerned that Superman loses a lot of his potential as a foil to Batman by removing the lightness that's usually inherent to his character.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 06, 2015, 09:54:50 PM
I'm also concerned that Superman loses a lot of his potential as a foil to Batman by removing the lightness that's usually inherent to his character.
Maybe Affleck is playing his Batman like Adam West, and he turns out to a foil to Superman instead, lol.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on June 09, 2015, 04:35:14 PM
http://collider.com/batman-vs-superman-synopsis-revealed/

Quote
Fearing the actions of a god-like super hero left unchecked, Gotham City’s own formidable, forceful vigilante takes on Metropolis’s most revered, modern-day savior, while the world wrestles with what sort of hero it really needs. And with Batman and Superman at war with one another, a new threat quickly arises, putting mankind in greater danger than it’s ever known before.

Batman goes picking a fight with Superman?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 09, 2015, 05:29:53 PM
Why wouldn't he? He's the god damn Batman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on June 29, 2015, 10:38:02 PM
http://collider.com/batman-vs-superman-synopsis-revealed/ (http://collider.com/batman-vs-superman-synopsis-revealed/)

Quote
Fearing the actions of a god-like super hero left unchecked, Gotham City’s own formidable, forceful vigilante takes on Metropolis’s most revered, modern-day savior, while the world wrestles with what sort of hero it really needs. And with Batman and Superman at war with one another, a new threat quickly arises, putting mankind in greater danger than it’s ever known before.

Batman goes picking a fight with Superman?

That actually makes sense.
Batman knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men.  He knows damn well superman can be corrupted or manipulated and would take measures to stop him before he gets to that point.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 29, 2015, 10:54:52 PM
Batman can beat Superman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on June 29, 2015, 11:51:11 PM
Batman can beat Superman.

Maybe beat him off.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on June 30, 2015, 10:11:49 PM
Batman can beat Superman.

Maybe beat him off.
I would watch that.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 30, 2015, 10:51:11 PM
Pervert
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 04, 2015, 03:18:33 PM
http://www.ew.com/gallery/batman-v-superman-dawn-justice-first-look-photos

Nice fucking hair, Lex.  I hope that's a wig within the context of the movie, and they're not going to tell some dumb "and this is how Luthor lost his hair!" story.  Also:

Quote
For his climactic rooftop brawl with Superman, Batman outfits himself with a reinforced mech-suit equipped with strength-augmenting armor and, yes, kryptonite.

I guess Batman can beat Superman.  BUT WILL HE?!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 04, 2015, 11:07:39 PM
He will rape him with a kryptonite dildo
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 05, 2015, 11:39:55 PM
He will rape him with a kryptonite dildo

Nonsense.  Batman wouldn't do such a thing.  Also:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/02/man-steel-ending...-zack-snyder-makes-his-case

Quote from: Zack Snyder
I was surprised because that's the thesis of Superman for me, that you can't just have superheroes knock around and have there be no consequences...[T]here are other superhero movies where they joke about how basically no one's getting hurt. That's not us. What is that message? That it's okay that there's this massive destruction with zero consequence for anyone?

The thesis of Superman is the harsh toll of superhero activity on civilians?  Uh, okay.  And if they were really trying to send a message with all that carnage and Superman's role in it, then I'm very surprised that they decided to wait until the next movie to actually address it.  Was focusing on Superman's anguish over killing Zod really that much more important?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 06, 2015, 12:20:53 AM
He will rape him with a kryptonite dildo

Nonsense.  Batman wouldn't do such a thing.  Also:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/02/man-steel-ending...-zack-snyder-makes-his-case

Quote from: Zack Snyder
I was surprised because that's the thesis of Superman for me, that you can't just have superheroes knock around and have there be no consequences...[T]here are other superhero movies where they joke about how basically no one's getting hurt. That's not us. What is that message? That it's okay that there's this massive destruction with zero consequence for anyone?

The thesis of Superman is the harsh toll of superhero activity on civilians?  Uh, okay.  And if they were really trying to send a message with all that carnage and Superman's role in it, then I'm very surprised that they decided to wait until the next movie to actually address it.  Was focusing on Superman's anguish over killing Zod really that much more important?

Yes. Superman's aversion to taking a life is central to his ethics and addressing the destruction of Metropolis in the last five to ten minutes of the film would have been doing s disservice by rushing it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on July 06, 2015, 07:38:15 PM
He will rape him with a kryptonite dildo

Nonsense.  Batman wouldn't do such a thing.  Also:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/02/man-steel-ending...-zack-snyder-makes-his-case (http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/02/man-steel-ending...-zack-snyder-makes-his-case)

Quote from: Zack Snyder
I was surprised because that's the thesis of Superman for me, that you can't just have superheroes knock around and have there be no consequences...[T]here are other superhero movies where they joke about how basically no one's getting hurt. That's not us. What is that message? That it's okay that there's this massive destruction with zero consequence for anyone?

The thesis of Superman is the harsh toll of superhero activity on civilians?  Uh, okay.  And if they were really trying to send a message with all that carnage and Superman's role in it, then I'm very surprised that they decided to wait until the next movie to actually address it.  Was focusing on Superman's anguish over killing Zod really that much more important?

Yes. Superman's aversion to taking a life is central to his ethics and addressing the destruction of Metropolis in the last five to ten minutes of the film would have been doing s disservice by rushing it.
Superman kills one guy who was going to (pointlessly) kill a family in a corner (who could have escaped) is obviously worse than Superman's actions and mere existence killing hundreds of thousands during the metropolis fight.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 10, 2015, 09:36:41 PM
You think Zod was going to stop there?  Considering this is in the context of B v S following up on the consequences of Superman's actions the rest of your comment seems irrelevant. 
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 11, 2015, 10:13:45 PM
I'm still pretty skeptical that Snyder was always intending to explore the consequences of Superman's wake of destruction in a follow-up film, as opposed to him only deciding on it in response to the massive backlash, but I suppose a late saving throw is better than none at all.  Anyway, we now have a new trailer, and it's much better than the first:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WWzgGyAH6Y

Darkness!  Brooding!  Superman and Batman fighting!  Wonder Woman!  Lex Luthor!  Those weird Superman soldiers again!  More awful parenting from the Kents!  The Waynes being murdered, because apparently every new continuity of Batman needs to show that at least once!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on July 11, 2015, 11:15:45 PM
Good trailer. Although, MoS also had a good trailer and it ended up sucking. I'm also getting the feeling that there's way too many characters in this movie, and that's going to be one major criticism.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 12, 2015, 12:11:14 AM
I'm still pretty skeptical that Snyder was always intending to explore the consequences of Superman's wake of destruction in a follow-up film, as opposed to him only deciding on it in response to the massive backlash, but I suppose a late saving throw is better than none at all.  Anyway, we now have a new trailer, and it's much better than the first:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WWzgGyAH6Y

Darkness!  Brooding!  Superman and Batman fighting!  Wonder Woman!  Lex Luthor!  Those weird Superman soldiers again!  More awful parenting from the Kents!  The Waynes being murdered, because apparently every new continuity of Batman needs to show that at least once!

So you think he shot the courtroom scene in response to fanboy backlash?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 12, 2015, 01:24:42 AM
Not just the courtroom scene, but the fact that a large source of the film's conflict seems to be Superman's role in the chaos of the last one.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 12, 2015, 03:22:17 AM
Not just the courtroom scene, but the fact that a large source of the film's conflict seems to be Superman's role in the chaos of the last one.

but you think it is a logical consequence of the action of MoS. why won't your grant that ZS came to the same conclusion?  Christopher Nolan is lurking nearby and he is also fairly smart. I feel like you are getting wound up in your own bias against this franchise.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 12, 2015, 09:41:32 AM
Of course he is. Saddam needs things to hate on in order to live. It's his fuel.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 12, 2015, 08:15:28 PM
More awful parenting from the Kents!
Kent**
And what did she say that came off as bad parenting?
Quote
The Waynes being murdered, because apparently every new continuity of Batman needs to show that at least once!
Yeah, this is the only thing I will agree with. We know how his parents died already!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 13, 2015, 06:01:44 AM
It's almost as if people who doesn't know won't be watching the film.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 13, 2015, 04:52:06 PM
More awful parenting from the Kents!
Kent**
And what did she say that came off as bad parenting?
Quote
The Waynes being murdered, because apparently every new continuity of Batman needs to show that at least once!
Yeah, this is the only thing I will agree with. We know how his parents died already!

Although it's possible that there are non-expository reasons the death or Bruce's parents are shown, it is unlikely. More annoying, to me, is that they re-shot the event instead of re-using a perfectly good sequence from Batman Begins. I thought this was all the same continuum?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 13, 2015, 05:25:30 PM
It's not. Man of Steel was the first film in this series.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 13, 2015, 05:57:15 PM
Not just the courtroom scene, but the fact that a large source of the film's conflict seems to be Superman's role in the chaos of the last one.

but you think it is a logical consequence of the action of MoS. why won't your grant that ZS came to the same conclusion?  Christopher Nolan is lurking nearby and he is also fairly smart. I feel like you are getting wound up in your own bias against this franchise.

Because if Snyder had always intended the climax of MoS to be so controversial and objectionable, I don't believe that he would have left the subject entirely unaddressed before the movie was over.  You don't deliberately send the audience home on a bad note with a promise that you'll clear everything up with a sequel in a few years.  I think it's much more likely that Snyder just wanted a cool, action-packed climax that showed off all sorts of awesome effects of dudes punching each other through buildings and leveling a major city, and Superman doing less cool things like trying to limit the damage or protect innocent people simply didn't figure into his vision.  It wouldn't be the first time that he got carried away with effects at the expense of the story.

Of course he is. Saddam needs things to hate on in order to live. It's his fuel.

I don't hate.  I brood, in a very powerful, Wagnerian fashion.

Kent**
And what did she say that came off as bad parenting?

I said Kents, plural, to lump her in with Jonathan from the first movie.  I was referring to her "You don't owe them anything!" line, which sounds all wrong coming out of her mouth.  But that's really just a nitpick.  For all I know, in context she'll just be trying to make a point or something.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 13, 2015, 06:19:44 PM
This movie appears to be based on the comic mini-series The Dark Knight Returns, which shares an animated film of the same name. The suit Batman uses to fight Superman, the human factions aligning themselves with super heroes, are all the same.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 13, 2015, 06:34:25 PM
This movie also seems to be sharing the Dark Knight Returns's custom Batman logo:

(http://moviefail.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/bvs5.jpg)

(http://i60.tinypic.com/6gbzsz.jpg)

The suit is essentially the same. From The Dark Knight Returns animation:

(http://i.imgur.com/FkHGZf7.png)

Concept art for this movie:

(http://cdn1.sciencefiction.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Armor-Batsuit-Batman-V-Superman-Dawn-of-Justice.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 13, 2015, 06:53:57 PM
At one point, Batman and his followers are forced to ride horses because a Nuclear Warhead detonated in space causing an EMP, affecting the entire Western Hemisphere.

(http://acephalous.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c2df453ef0153928de36a970b-500wi)

and, lo and behold, from the movie trailer we find a scene with horses:

(http://i61.tinypic.com/33y2onc.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 13, 2015, 07:01:40 PM
w0w tripple postan
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 13, 2015, 07:03:29 PM
I was referring to her "You don't owe them anything!" line, which sounds all wrong coming out of her mouth.  But that's really just a nitpick.  For all I know, in context she'll just be trying to make a point or something.
If everyone was conflicted over my son, wanted to harm him, and it was grieving him- I'd say the same thing. He doesn't owe them anything. I wouldn't want my son getting killed just to prove that he's not some evil alien.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 13, 2015, 07:44:20 PM
Not just the courtroom scene, but the fact that a large source of the film's conflict seems to be Superman's role in the chaos of the last one.

but you think it is a logical consequence of the action of MoS. why won't your grant that ZS came to the same conclusion?  Christopher Nolan is lurking nearby and he is also fairly smart. I feel like you are getting wound up in your own bias against this franchise.

Because if Snyder had always intended the climax of MoS to be so controversial and objectionable, I don't believe that he would have left the subject entirely unaddressed before the movie was over. 

It's fine if you don't believe it but that does not make it true.

Quote
You don't deliberately send the audience home on a bad note with a promise that you'll clear everything up with a sequel in a few years.

The movie generally received positive reviews so this "bad note" business is your own baggage.   

Quote
I think it's much more likely that Snyder just wanted a cool, action-packed climax that showed off all sorts of awesome effects of dudes punching each other through buildings and leveling a major city, and Superman doing less cool things like trying to limit the damage or protect innocent people simply didn't figure into his vision.  It wouldn't be the first time that he got carried away with effects at the expense of the story.


I think it is much more likely that Snyder did not write the film and did not have final cut approval which would mean that the ending was not ultimately his choice. Considering that film's often leave plot and thematic points unresolved for pending sequel, it actually seems likely that that would be saved for a future movie. Especially if there was enough material to fill an entire act more or less of a film.

P.S. I watched MoS again this week. It is still good.

Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 14, 2015, 12:53:20 AM
I will respond to your OBJECTIVELY WRONG (>o<) opinions later.  WB has officially released the trailer for Suicide Squad after a potato-cam version of it was leaked.  Here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLLQK9la6Go

Discuss.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 14, 2015, 01:10:09 AM
I will respond to your OBJECTIVELY WRONG (>o<) opinions later.  WB has officially released the trailer for Suicide Squad after a potato-cam version of it was leaked.  Here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLLQK9la6Go

Discuss.

Harlequin looks like fun. Will Smith looks way too like able. Isn't Joker dead?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 14, 2015, 01:56:15 AM
I think Joker looks a little overdone, but it seems like Leto will do it well. That laugh and the way he talks creeps me out a bit. Ledger never creeped me out.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 14, 2015, 03:06:57 AM
But those tattoos, and the metal teeth...why?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 14, 2015, 03:49:41 AM
But those tattoos, and the metal teeth...why?

Yeah I mean who has tattoos these days?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 14, 2015, 05:31:32 AM
Harlequin looks like fun.
No she looks like shit. Just like her Mr. J.

I'm not stoked for this film.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Blanko on July 14, 2015, 05:35:19 AM
Harlequin looks like fun.
No she looks like shit. Just like her Mr. J.

I'm not stoked for this film.

You just hate fun.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 14, 2015, 05:56:41 AM
I'm not saying I won't watch it or like it. I'm just not excited for it.

Regarding Harley. From what's shown here, her personality is completely wrong. She should be giddy and smiling all the time, and her get-up here looks fucking trashy. She never wore crap like this in other media. There's been enough said about Joker already, so no need to get into that.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Crudblud on July 14, 2015, 07:14:14 AM
I like Ledger's Joker, he comes across as a legitimately disturbed person, Leto looks like a gay cosplayer acting out a BDSM fantasy. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Nicholson will always be the best live action Joker
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 14, 2015, 03:07:28 PM
I like Ledger's Joker, he comes across as a legitimately disturbed person,
He did, but I don't think he was nearly disturbed enough. I've met homeless people that were more deranged than he was. He was a bitter, angry, psychopath.
Quote
Leto looks like a gay cosplayer acting out a BDSM fantasy.
I'm not sure you know cosplayers very well. They're weird, but they're all super friendly and hardly stay in character.
He seems unpredictable and manic.  Ledger was missing the intense mania (I mean, he hardly ever smiled) which is what makes the Joker.

I think Leto is the most interesting part of that trailer.

By the way, this is the best Joker cosplayer.
(http://oi61.tinypic.com/ejciw.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 14, 2015, 03:26:59 PM
Yes, but I don't like his hair. Should be messy, like this.
(http://i.imgur.com/5BZJo9F.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on July 14, 2015, 03:41:06 PM
Regarding Harley. From what's shown here, her personality is completely wrong. She should be giddy and smiling all the time, and her get-up here looks fucking trashy. She never wore crap like this in other media.
Come now, I'm sure that you've been around long enough to realize that characters in TV and movies rarely resemble the character from the original source material.  Apparently the studios think that they know the characters better than the people who created them.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 14, 2015, 03:58:59 PM
WB is butthurt about the trailer being leaked and would like to wag its finger at us:

http://www.polygon.com/2015/7/14/8959615/suicide-squad-trailer-warner-leaked-trailer-reaction

I don't like the Joker's goofy tattoos and teeth, but maybe the writing and acting will be good enough so as to not make it stick out.  And I'm glad they're not just trying to do a rehash of Ledger's take on the role.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Crudblud on July 14, 2015, 04:08:58 PM
I'm not sure you know cosplayers very well. They're weird, but they're all super friendly and hardly stay in character.
What I was getting at is that to me he comes across more as someone who likes dressing up and roleplaying than a legitimate psychopath. I wasn't making a blanket statement about people who dress up as fictional characters at conventions.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 14, 2015, 04:19:32 PM
What I was getting at is that to me he comes across more as someone who likes dressing up and roleplaying than a legitimate psychopath.
Well, he's not a legitimate psychopath. He is just dressing up and roleplaying.

But in the very short time we see him in that trailer, how can you make the judgment that he won't play the part well? That he seems like psychotic than Ledger? What about that short appearance stands out as being disingenuous?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on July 14, 2015, 04:23:46 PM
"I'm not going to kill you, I'm just going to hurt you" (paraphrased)

Really? That's probably the most generic villainous phrase I can think of. If that's his "cool trailer line", then we're in trouble.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 14, 2015, 04:37:14 PM
"I'm not going to kill you, I'm just going to hurt you" (paraphrased)

Really? That's probably the most generic villainous phrase I can think of. If that's his "cool trailer line", then we're in trouble.
The whole script seems really stupid. Another example: when those two people are talking about setting up the squad, they refer to them as "bad guys." I cringed.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Crudblud on July 14, 2015, 05:19:06 PM
What I was getting at is that to me he comes across more as someone who likes dressing up and roleplaying than a legitimate psychopath.
Well, he's not a legitimate psychopath. He is just dressing up and roleplaying.

But in the very short time we see him in that trailer, how can you make the judgment that he won't play the part well? That he seems like psychotic than Ledger? What about that short appearance stands out as being disingenuous?

Where did I say he wouldn't play the part well? All I've said is that he comes across to me a particular way, whether or not that is right for this particular version of the character remains to be seen.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 14, 2015, 06:56:58 PM
What I was getting at is that to me he comes across more as someone who likes dressing up and roleplaying than a legitimate psychopath.
Well, he's not a legitimate psychopath. He is just dressing up and roleplaying.

But in the very short time we see him in that trailer, how can you make the judgment that he won't play the part well? That he seems like less psychotic than Ledger? What about that short appearance stands out as being disingenuous?

Where did I say he wouldn't play the part well? All I've said is that he comes across to me a particular way, whether or not that is right for this particular version of the character remains to be seen.
Oops, meant less psychotic up there.
And if you think he seems like just a roleplaying cosplayer then it seems like you're saying he doesn't pull it off well. All actors are roleplaying cosplayers, so if one actually comes across as nothing but an actor then they're not doing a good job. But I may have interpreted your statement incorrectly.

But I'm still curious why you think he comes across as a cosplayer as opposed to the Joker.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 14, 2015, 07:47:23 PM
I am really not a fan of this Joker so far. Those tattoos are atrocious, and his whole design looks like an out-of-touch executive's idea of what's currently "edgy" since they're often way behind.

And ugh, his voice...he sounds like "standard gruff cuh-razy!!! villain #99". Everything about this movie seems like it's going to be a train wreck for me, yet of course I'm going to see it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 14, 2015, 08:00:49 PM
I would not be surprised if the Joker was in Batman Vs. Superman. The trailer hints that the Joker will make an appearance. The Joker appears in The Dark Knight Returns, and BvS seems to be ripping it off wholesale in terms of action and plot. There are items which suggest his appearance. The newspaper:

(http://i2.wp.com/bitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com/slashfilm/wp/wp-content/images/Screen-Shot-2015-07-13-at-12.32.33-PM-700x286.png?resize=700%2C286)

And the "Ha Ha Joke's on you Batman" scrawled over Robin's costume:

(http://i0.wp.com/bitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com/slashfilm/wp/wp-content/images/Screen-Shot-2015-07-13-at-1.25.42-PM-700x290.png?resize=700%2C290)

In DKR the original Robin Dick Grayson is dead, and his costume in the BvS trailer seems to suggest that Robin is also dead in this movie. The way Bruce Wayne looks at the empty cowl further suggests that he is retired or semi-retired at the start of the film and brought out of retirement to deal with the issues raised by Superman's debut.

Then there's the rifle scene:

(http://media.comicbook.com/uploads1/2015/04/batman-cape-132147.jpg)

This shot of Batman holding a rifle is an obvious callback to the part in DKR where Batman curiously dawns a rifle:

(http://media.comicbook.com/uploads1/2015/04/batmantdkr1-0521-132171.jpg)

I submit that, therefore, this movie will be entirely unoriginal, a direct rehash of the Dark Knight Returns. If anyone wants to know the plot or the ending of BvS, one can do so by picking up a copy of the comic book or watching the adapted Dark Knight Returns animated movie.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Crudblud on July 14, 2015, 08:05:29 PM
What I was getting at is that to me he comes across more as someone who likes dressing up and roleplaying than a legitimate psychopath.
Well, he's not a legitimate psychopath. He is just dressing up and roleplaying.

But in the very short time we see him in that trailer, how can you make the judgment that he won't play the part well? That he seems like less psychotic than Ledger? What about that short appearance stands out as being disingenuous?

Where did I say he wouldn't play the part well? All I've said is that he comes across to me a particular way, whether or not that is right for this particular version of the character remains to be seen.
Oops, meant less psychotic up there.
And if you think he seems like just a roleplaying cosplayer then it seems like you're saying he doesn't pull it off well. All actors are roleplaying cosplayers, so if one actually comes across as nothing but an actor then they're not doing a good job. But I may have interpreted your statement incorrectly.

But I'm still curious why you think he comes across as a cosplayer as opposed to the Joker.

I don't really know why, that's just what I thought of when he showed up, and honestly I'm surprised it has sustained conversation for this long. Anyway, I never intended for my remark to be taken for a value judgement, I would have been clear about it if I had, although I can see how it might have been read that way.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 14, 2015, 08:13:21 PM
Tom: We already know the movies are based on Miller's comics. This was admitted long ago.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 14, 2015, 08:14:16 PM
In DKR the original Robin Dick Grayson is dead, and his costume in the BvS trailer seems to suggest that Robin is also dead in this movie.
Are you sure it's Dick Grayson and not the second Robin Jason Todd who's dead in the comic? Doesn't Alfred ask Bruce something like "Have you forgotten what happened to Master Jason?" when Bruce is thinking about recruiting Carrie?

EDIT:
Indeed. http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Batman:_The_Dark_Knight_Returns
Quote
DKR takes place in a timeline outside the continuity of the DC Universe, but is still considered at least partially faithful to the source material and Batman mythos at the time it debuted, as it makes use of Post-Crisis characters. Certain elements of the main DC Universe did eventually come to match Miller's tale, most notably some of the backstory of the series. For example, Miller's Batman is haunted by the death of Robin, and later the character's lack of popularity led to the A Death in the Family story, where Robin (Jason Todd) is killed by the Joker.

(http://i.imgur.com/4tAPnHG.gif)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 14, 2015, 08:29:40 PM
The movie isn't a direct adaptation of TDKR, Tom.  It's obviously taking a lot of influence from it, but like Snyder pointed out in the article that someone linked a while back, the Superman in the comic is in a very different place than the Superman in the movies.  Also, Jason Todd was the Robin that the Joker had killed in TDKR, not Dick Grayson.

EDIT: What beardo said.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 15, 2015, 01:11:03 AM
In DKR the original Robin Dick Grayson is dead, and his costume in the BvS trailer seems to suggest that Robin is also dead in this movie.
Are you sure it's Dick Grayson and not the second Robin Jason Todd who's dead in the comic? Doesn't Alfred ask Bruce something like "Have you forgotten what happened to Master Jason?" when Bruce is thinking about recruiting Carrie?

Perhaps so.

The movie isn't a direct adaptation of TDKR, Tom.  It's obviously taking a lot of influence from it, but like Snyder pointed out in the article that someone linked a while back, the Superman in the comic is in a very different place than the Superman in the movies.  Also, Jason Todd was the Robin that the Joker had killed in TDKR, not Dick Grayson.

EDIT: What beardo said.

So the director is admitting that it will be the same as the comic with exception of the events of Man of Steel that they are trying to shoe horn into this unoriginal sniper rifle-weilding Batman movie. Got it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on July 15, 2015, 02:17:40 AM
So the director is admitting that it will be the same as the comic with exception of the events of Man of Steel that they are trying to shoe horn into this unoriginal sniper rifle-weilding Batman movie. Got it.
Tom, since when is TDKR the origin story of the Justice League?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 15, 2015, 02:18:39 AM
"I'm not going to kill you, I'm just going to hurt you" (paraphrased)

Really? That's probably the most generic villainous phrase I can think of. If that's his "cool trailer line", then we're in trouble.
The whole script seems really stupid. Another example: when those two people are talking about setting up the squad, they refer to them as "bad guys." I cringed.

And also, "We're some kind of...suicide squad."  Ugh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEi4I6UWuDQ
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on July 15, 2015, 02:14:23 PM
I like the look of Leto's Joker, there's something very... unsettling about him. Harley looks completely wrong, though. It looks like she's being played as a cloud-cuckoolander who is just bad for its own sake, rather than someone who has been dragged into The Joker's madness. I always thought that the most interesting part about her character was the tragedy of her, a promising young psychiatrist who has the misfortune to fall in love with a dangerously abusive maniac.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on July 15, 2015, 02:15:13 PM
I like the look of Leto's Joker, there's something very... unsettling about him.

Is it the "I'm unsettling" tattoo on his shoulder?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 15, 2015, 03:42:18 PM
I really just think it's the wide eyed smile he has going on.
Nicholson had that too, but Ledger did not. A wide eyed smile is always unsettling.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 15, 2015, 03:50:06 PM
I think the only thing that makes him look mad/crazy/scary/whatever is his lack of eyebrows. Yet it's probably the feature of this joker I dislike the most. Well, maybe besides the tattoos.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 15, 2015, 04:45:40 PM
I think the only thing that makes him look mad/crazy/scary/whatever is his lack of eyebrows. Yet it's probably the feature of this joker I dislike the most. Well, maybe besides the tattoos.
This guy with eyebrows is still weird as fug.

(http://i62.tinypic.com/11rc8dh.jpg)

He was also the third option for "manic face" search. I got a few other wide eyed smiles. Horrifying.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 15, 2015, 05:19:50 PM
Now picture him without eyebrows.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 15, 2015, 05:52:30 PM
So the director is admitting that it will be the same as the comic with exception of the events of Man of Steel that they are trying to shoe horn into this unoriginal sniper rifle-weilding Batman movie. Got it.
Tom, since when is TDKR the origin story of the Justice League?

They are cribbing the plot nearly exactly. A dead Robin, a Batman coming out of retirement, the nuke, the emp, the horses, a sniper rifle-wielding Batman, the Joker, a scene where large parts of Gotham are on fire, human factions aligning themselves with superheroes, Batman's super suit. Totally unoriginal. We saw that story already, 30 years ago. The fact that they are shoehorning in the events of Man of Steel and are forcing Wonder Woman and Aqua Man into it for the sole purpose of cashing in on future movies doesn't make it breathtakingly original.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 15, 2015, 05:57:55 PM
The Wizard of Oz is also an adaptation. Discuss.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 15, 2015, 05:59:02 PM
The Wizard of Oz is also an adaptation. Discuss.

The director can't even find the creative ability to remove the scene with Batman holding firearms. That was the old Batman, from a generation ago. This director clearly doesn't know anything about the character. But I guess we can't expect much from a man who built his career retelling old stories written by others.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on July 15, 2015, 06:03:23 PM
Now picture him without eyebrows.
I don't want to, I'm scared.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Particle Person on July 15, 2015, 06:12:04 PM
The Wizard of Oz is also an adaptation. Discuss.

The director can't even find the creative ability to remove the scene with Batman holding firearms. That was the old Batman, from a generation ago. This director clearly doesn't know anything about the character. But I guess we can't expect much from a man who built his career retelling old stories written by others.

It's some kind of rope gun, not a bullet shooting gun.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 15, 2015, 06:18:53 PM
The Wizard of Oz is also an adaptation. Discuss.

The director can't even find the creative ability to remove the scene with Batman holding firearms. That was the old Batman, from a generation ago. This director clearly doesn't know anything about the character. But I guess we can't expect much from a man who built his career retelling old stories written by others.

It's some kind of rope gun, not a bullet shooting gun.

In the DKR comic he also uses it to blow a couple of police helicopters out of the sky in his disagreement with the police.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-trkg_Wdlo14/T5Mb2WZwjCI/AAAAAAAAAfg/2VJwQJcDj_0/s1600/batmanwithguns.jpg)

(http://cdn3.denofgeek.us/sites/denofgeekus/files/styles/insert_main_wide_image/public/3/37//dark-knight-returns-grappling-gun.jpg?itok=4y2WHua-)

The old Batman also has used guns many times over the years.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 15, 2015, 07:18:21 PM
POKITAPOKITAPOKITAPOKITAPOKITAPOKITAPOKITAPO
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 15, 2015, 07:22:28 PM
Those were stolen helicopters, being used by Two-Face in his plan to bomb the city, and Batman's rifle just fired a grappling hook so that he could reach the helicopter.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 15, 2015, 07:34:58 PM
One-armed Green Arrow
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on July 15, 2015, 07:35:28 PM
The Wizard of Oz is also an adaptation. Discuss.

The director can't even find the creative ability to remove the scene with Batman holding firearms. That was the old Batman, from a generation ago. This director clearly doesn't know anything about the character. But I guess we can't expect much from a man who built his career retelling old stories written by others.
Tom, I hate to break it to you, but retelling old stories written by others is what Hollywood does.  The real question is: how well can that story be retold?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on July 16, 2015, 11:40:59 AM
I like the look of Leto's Joker, there's something very... unsettling about him.

Is it the "I'm unsettling" tattoo on his shoulder?

No, I think it's the mania he portrays. With Nicholson or Ledger's Joker, I might get blown up by them, or tortured for a bit if they got in my way, with Leto I get the feeling that anyone could have rather unpleasant things happen to them entirely at his whim. Ledger would cut your face and leave you as a mocking token for Batman whereas Leto might keep up the inventive torture until he got bored of you.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 17, 2015, 11:18:09 PM
I shall now respond to this tomfoolery:

Not just the courtroom scene, but the fact that a large source of the film's conflict seems to be Superman's role in the chaos of the last one.

but you think it is a logical consequence of the action of MoS. why won't your grant that ZS came to the same conclusion?  Christopher Nolan is lurking nearby and he is also fairly smart. I feel like you are getting wound up in your own bias against this franchise.

Because if Snyder had always intended the climax of MoS to be so controversial and objectionable, I don't believe that he would have left the subject entirely unaddressed before the movie was over. 

It's fine if you don't believe it but that does not make it true.

Quote
You don't deliberately send the audience home on a bad note with a promise that you'll clear everything up with a sequel in a few years.

The movie generally received positive reviews so this "bad note" business is your own baggage.   

Quote
I think it's much more likely that Snyder just wanted a cool, action-packed climax that showed off all sorts of awesome effects of dudes punching each other through buildings and leveling a major city, and Superman doing less cool things like trying to limit the damage or protect innocent people simply didn't figure into his vision.  It wouldn't be the first time that he got carried away with effects at the expense of the story.


I think it is much more likely that Snyder did not write the film and did not have final cut approval which would mean that the ending was not ultimately his choice. Considering that film's often leave plot and thematic points unresolved for pending sequel, it actually seems likely that that would be saved for a future movie. Especially if there was enough material to fill an entire act more or less of a film.

P.S. I watched MoS again this week. It is still good.

After reconsidering, I'm actually going to concede this point.  When you break it down, my argument was essentially, "I think this was a bad idea, therefore they wouldn't do it," which is obviously silly.  And you're quite right that Snyder wasn't the only person responsible for this movie - Nolan and Goyer were also heavily involved, and something that the two of them made very clear during the Dark Knight trilogy and (to a slightly lesser extent) MoS is that they like to use dialogue to highlight the issues they're covering.  They're not into subtle social commentary.  Now, I obviously have a lot of issues with the pacing and writing of MoS, so I don't necessarily agree with the way they're going about this, but I'm willing to believe that they always intended to dramatically explore the consequences of the film's climax.

However, the quote from Snyder that started all this, where he mischaracterizes the Marvel movies as people making jokes about how nobody gets hurt, still annoys me a little.  I'm not going to knock these guys for criticizing the Marvel movies, or thinking that they're making better movies than them, as that would of course be pretty dumb of me.  But comments like this, along with Greg Silverman's distinction between superhero movies and "movies about superheroes," make me worry that WB doesn't fully understand why their competition has been so successful, and that in their haste to differentiate themselves from Marvel, they've set the bar much too low for themselves.  Simply giving these movies a dark, somber tone and dwelling on lots of people getting killed won't automatically make them smarter, deeper, more complex, or more deconstructive than Marvel's films.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on July 18, 2015, 12:13:52 AM
I don't like that joker either.  The metal just... ewww.

Granted, I thought Heath Ledger's joker looked like a hobo during the trailers so my judgement isn't that great.

But I see the joker as someone who tries to make jokes.  Horrible, evil jokes, but jokes none the less.  Someone who should be trying to be funny, damnit.

Like "Don't worry, I'm not gonna kill you.  Unless you ask really nicely."  He's an abusive psychopath who doesn't torture you in the traditional sense just for the sake of making you scream but rather because it would be funny/ironic. 

Like making someone who stole drugs from him eat said drugs while strapped to a chair and having the joker make little airplane noises as he spoon feeds the guy.
Or having batman eaten by rabid bats.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 18, 2015, 12:18:29 AM
@ Saddam: Fair enough. If B v S is just a colorless Avengers it will likely suck.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 18, 2015, 10:06:19 AM
I don't like that joker either.  The metal just... ewww.

Granted, I thought Heath Ledger's joker looked like a hobo during the trailers so my judgement isn't that great.

But I see the joker as someone who tries to make jokes.  Horrible, evil jokes, but jokes none the less.  Someone who should be trying to be funny, damnit.

Like "Don't worry, I'm not gonna kill you.  Unless you ask really nicely."  He's an abusive psychopath who doesn't torture you in the traditional sense just for the sake of making you scream but rather because it would be funny/ironic. 

Like making someone who stole drugs from him eat said drugs while strapped to a chair and having the joker make little airplane noises as he spoon feeds the guy.
Or having batman eaten by rabid bats.
They obviously don't want him to be funny in their dark end serious cinematic universe.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 24, 2015, 03:26:58 AM
[Harley's] get-up here looks fucking trashy. She never wore crap like this in other media.

It looks like they took a lot of influence from her depictions in the Arkham games, particularly the two-toned pigtails.  It's not that much of a stretch, really.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 24, 2015, 08:16:03 AM
>short-shorts
>t-shirt
>jacket

She looks like a cheap whore. Nothing like the victorian inspired clothes she wears in the game or the jester costume from the animations.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 26, 2015, 07:05:20 PM
But in general, giving her a grungier, messier look was a trend that began with the games, and was expanded on further in the New 52 reboot.  And they might have figured that dressing her up as an old-timey clown was a bit too silly to work in live action.  Kind of like the Joker actually having white skin and green hair.  I remember that really bugging me about him in Tim Burton's movie.  I know that in the comics he fell into a vat of chemicals and his hair and skin were permanently changed, but something about that just doesn't translate into live action well.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 26, 2015, 08:02:22 PM
They could at least have gotten her personality right.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 31, 2015, 02:42:32 AM
Kind of like the Joker actually having white skin and green hair.  I remember that really bugging me about him in Tim Burton's movie.  I know that in the comics he fell into a vat of chemicals and his hair and skin were permanently changed, but something about that just doesn't translate into live action well.

http://batman-news.com/2015/07/25/latest-suicide-squad-set-photos-hint-at-joker-origin-story/

derp

They could at least have gotten her personality right.

Everyone must brood.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 31, 2015, 06:04:01 PM
Aw naw, they're going to show his origin? Why would they do that?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on July 31, 2015, 11:59:55 PM
Aw naw, they're going to show his origin? Why would they do that?
According to the New 52, Joker threw Harley into the same vat of chemicals that changed him, so it might be her origin.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on August 01, 2015, 02:14:48 AM
Aw naw, they're going to show his origin? Why would they do that?
According to the New 52, Joker threw Harley into the same vat of chemicals that changed him, so it might be her origin.
That annoys me.

The point, I saw with Harley was that she wasn't forced to be crazy, she became crazy of her own free will, then got into an abusive relationship, and now she's more or less trapped like so many other abused women.

With this she's basically just the joker with boobs.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on August 04, 2015, 01:39:36 AM
Aw naw, they're going to show his origin? Why would they do that?
According to the New 52, Joker threw Harley into the same vat of chemicals that changed him, so it might be her origin.

That sounds more likely, actually.  And Harley was the one who the Joker had strapped down in the trailer, so we already know that there's going to be some form of origin for her.

Also, on the notion of Wonder Woman:

http://www.thewrap.com/chris-pine-closes-deal-to-star-opposite-gal-gadot-in-wonder-woman-exclusive/

Yes, yes, insert obligatory joke about how they beat Marvel to casting another guy named Chris here, etc.  Anyway, this part made me raise an eyebrow:

Quote
Steve Trevor will be no mere love interest for Gadot’s Diana Prince, as there will be plenty of action to keep him busy

Ideally, no character should be a "mere love interest," but I'll be very disappointed if this means that they're going to be bending over backwards to avoid implying that Steve is anything less than Wonder Woman's equal in ass-kicking ability and importance to the story.  God forbid, the idea of a relationship where the man is content to take a largely passive, supporting role and the woman is the one who gets shit done.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on October 07, 2015, 04:17:40 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/smith-jared-leto-broke-character-suicide-squad/story?id=34308417

Quote
Will Smith Says Jared Leto Never Broke Character in 'Suicide Squad'

Wow!  That's amazing!

Quote
"I’ve never actually met Jared Leto," he told Beats 1's Zane Lowe. "We worked together for six months and we’ve never exchanged a word outside of ‘Action’ and ‘Cut!’ We've never said 'Hello' ... I've only spoken to him as Deadshot and as him as The Joker."

Well, that's strange.  All it looks like he's talking about here is the hectic nature of making a huge blockbuster film.  It has nothing to do with any supposed method acting from Leto.  It's almost as if the headline is a great big lie.  Seriously, I'm sick of all the (http://www.eonline.com/news/671351/suicide-squad-has-on-set-therapist-for-cast) mythologizing (http://www.eonline.com/news/670674/jared-leto-s-gifts-to-his-suicide-squad-co-stars-a-live-rat-a-dead-hog-and-some-bullets) of what Leto is supposedly doing in this role that's been going on for the past few months.  He's playing a character in a movie.  That's it.  This is hardly the stuff of legends.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on October 08, 2015, 03:06:56 AM
lol

"Leto Doesn't Play Himself In Movie! Plays Character!"
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on October 27, 2015, 11:32:28 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/10/27/joker-suicide-squad-cover-jared-leto

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSVYpa_VEAAyLsk.jpg)

Terrible.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSVcgzMUsAA3fPR.jpg)

what the fuck am I looking at
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on October 28, 2015, 09:16:14 AM
Saddam is confused by punk/gang/goth culture.


And yes, sucky. It's like they decided "Evil is tattoos, pimps, and goth strippers.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on October 28, 2015, 03:27:17 PM
Of all things, they're keeping the retarded "DAMAGED" tattoo? Really?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on October 28, 2015, 03:33:13 PM
You expected them not to?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on October 28, 2015, 03:42:50 PM
Kind of after all the backlash, yeah
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on December 01, 2015, 06:19:21 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6as8ahAr1Uc

Mystery!  Suspense!  Drama!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on December 01, 2015, 07:16:48 PM
That frown looks both fake and silly.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on December 03, 2015, 04:28:45 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6as8ahAr1Uc

Mystery!  Suspense!  Drama!

Do you want to see this movie?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on December 03, 2015, 12:08:49 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fis-9Zqu2Ro

I would say that this trailer seems to give away the whole plot, but then again, this is what pretty much everyone already predicted would happen, so I suppose there's no harm done.  Doomsday!  Jokes!  Lex being ridiculous!

Do you want to see this movie?

Do I want to see a movie about Batman and Superman fighting?  Yes, of course I do.  It could be a trainwreck from start to finish and I'd still want to see it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on December 03, 2015, 01:44:21 PM
Woooo Wonder Woman!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on December 03, 2015, 01:54:20 PM
So it's basically the leaked script. This could be one hell of a messy movie.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on December 03, 2015, 11:14:35 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fis-9Zqu2Ro

I would say that this trailer seems to give away the whole plot, but then again, this is what pretty much everyone already predicted would happen, so I suppose there's no harm done.  Doomsday!  Jokes!  Lex being ridiculous!

Wow, aside from giving away the mystique of Batman and Superman fighting, this trailer is horrible. What a schizophrenic mess. It's like it can't decide what to go for so it tries to shoehorn in every single angle, cram in as many people as possible and throw all their cards on the table just in the hopes that one'll be a winning card. And as happy as I am to see Wonder Woman in a movie, even if I don't like her much, she feels incredibly unnecessary here. Also did they really need to use Superman's biggest enemy already? w0w

I'm gonna see this movie, obviously, but damn I do not like how it looks.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on December 04, 2015, 04:47:02 PM
Can't say I'm surprised. 


I may see this movie on dvd but... Eh.  Its all predictable.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on December 04, 2015, 05:10:54 PM
Why would you watch it on such an outdated format?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on December 05, 2015, 08:29:24 PM
Why would you watch it on such an outdated format?
True, bluray.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on December 05, 2015, 10:23:00 PM
Does anyone else think Doomsday looks like the cave troll from The Lord of the Rings?

(http://www.thelandofshadow.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/HobbitBFABannerTroll2.jpg)

(http://www.darkknightnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/doomsday.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on December 05, 2015, 11:01:49 PM
No, that is probably just you.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on December 06, 2015, 02:21:59 AM
No, that is probably just you.

Far from it.  Plenty of people have been drawing all sorts of amusing comparisons between Doomsday and other CGI monsters:

http://www.techinsider.io/batman-v-superman-doomsday-looks-like-ninja-turtle-abomination-2015-12

http://www.thesuperficial.com/batman-v-superman-trailer-doomsday-jesse-eisenberg-12-2015

The main issue is that Doomsday's spikes are easily the most distinctive part of his design:

(http://i.imgur.com/yqmjpVf.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/CHmerLs.png)

Much better.  But I suppose WB/DC figured that a bone-beard has no place in their dark and gritty universe, so they took his spikes away and made him look like a generic monster instead.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on December 06, 2015, 05:11:21 PM
Doomsday looks stupid as hell. He looks like the bathroom troll from Harry Potter. Not a fearsome creature, but a doofy, derpy thug.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on December 10, 2015, 02:10:45 PM
At least now we know that the movie is going to be more than just a direct ripoff of The Dark Knight Returns like Tom was thinking.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on December 10, 2015, 04:25:25 PM
At least now we know that the movie is going to be more than just a direct ripoff of The Dark Knight Returns like Tom was thinking.

That was really keeping me up at night.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 11, 2016, 12:34:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUN0F5wKbGE
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on January 11, 2016, 01:32:44 AM
Liking the look of this Batman more and more.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 20, 2016, 06:45:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmRih_VtVAs

Hey, it's a much better trailer!  It's a shame that Harley doesn't have her usual accent, though.  And the Joker still doesn't look that good.  Also, Wonder Woman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LzkKR-22IQ

The color, or lack thereof, is hideous.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 26, 2016, 10:45:23 PM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/01/26/new-batman-v-superman-photo-includes-darkseid-omega-symbol

<Snupes> Oh, Saddam
<Snupes> They've crammed Darkseid into BvS
<Snupes> What the fucking fuck
<Saddam> Yes, I saw that
<Snupes> How is DC so amazingly retarded
<beardo> problem?
<Snupes> They're just going to use every single villain in that movie
<Snupes> I mean, after Darkseid, who's gonna be the big big bad?
<Saddam> >mfw Snupes cares more about DC than Marvel
<beardo> Well I guess they won't actually fight Darkseid in BvS, he'll just show up
<Snupes> beardo: As will every single other DC character
<Snupes> There won't be a single surprise left in the DCverse
<beardo> and in a final justice league film they kick his ass
<Snupes> inb4 Lobo shows up in BvS
<Saddam> Everyone will accuse DC of ripping off Marvel with Darkseid
<Snupes> I doubt that
<Saddam> Danny Trejo wants to play Lobo
<Saddam> I would see a Lobo movie starring Trejo
<Snupes> I could see it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 27, 2016, 09:03:22 AM
Wow.

I'm just... Wow. How... Why....

What the everloving fuck are they doing?!  Doomsday would be a two parter by itself, but throwing in Darkseid too?  Toon many badguys.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on January 27, 2016, 11:04:08 AM
He'll probably will just show up for a few seconds in the "knightmare" dream scene or something, foreshadowing his full appearance in Justice League.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 27, 2016, 12:53:29 PM
Its good to see another villian than luthor, at least.

Unless he sucks hard.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 27, 2016, 05:19:15 PM
http://www.empireonline.com/movies/batman-v-superman-dawn-justice/exclusive-new-batman-vs-superman-pics-arrive/

Quote
"[Batman] is not giving people a chance," explains producer Charles Roven. "He is more than a vigilante. He has become not only the cop, if you will, he has also become the jury and executioner."

But what is this?  Does this Batman actually kill?  Also:

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/batman_vs_superman/wonder-woman-is-a-5000-year-old-retired-superhero-when-batman-a130408

Quote
[Wonder Woman has] put her superhero days behind her before unknown circumstances force the character to give up her retirement. Why though has she stopped protecting the world? "Because she's seen it all, she has seen what humans can do, so it was very hard for her to come back and fight," Gadot explains

In other words, she's going to be dark, brooding, and embittered.  Not at all like Batman and Superman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on January 27, 2016, 05:35:00 PM
Oh woe, the horror.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 27, 2016, 06:20:55 PM
What kind of shit focus grouos do these studios get thst say "Man, I wish superheroes were dark and miserable like me."

Superman is not supposed to be dark and gritty.  He's supposed to be the light that shows us the way.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on January 27, 2016, 06:28:05 PM
Superman is not supposed to be dark and gritty.  He's supposed to be the light that shows us the way.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 27, 2016, 06:30:03 PM
Superman is not supposed to be dark and gritty.  He's supposed to be the light that shows us the way.
The two are not mutually exclusive.

Maybe not but I don't want to see Superman brought down to my level, I want to see people elevated to his.  I want him to be better than us and we aspire to that.  Otherwise, what's the point of the character?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on January 27, 2016, 07:30:22 PM
Maybe not but I don't want to see Superman brought down to my level, I want to see people elevated to his.  I want him to be better than us and we aspire to that.  Otherwise, what's the point of the character?
Who says he's brought down to your level?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 27, 2016, 07:52:53 PM
Maybe not but I don't want to see Superman brought down to my level, I want to see people elevated to his.  I want him to be better than us and we aspire to that.  Otherwise, what's the point of the character?
Who says he's brought down to your level?

By having moments of doubt and making hard choices that make you suffer emotionally.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on January 27, 2016, 10:28:23 PM
Are you saying that Superman can't have these? That's extremely unrealistic. And you're being mad and angry over nothing.
Superman is not flawless.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Crudblud on January 27, 2016, 10:42:33 PM
Superman being perfect is literally the most boring thing ever tbh.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 28, 2016, 01:03:41 AM
For a character as physically powerful as Superman, it's a lot more interesting to give him dilemmas about what he will do rather than what he can do.  It would be nice, though, to have these dilemmas be uniquely suited to Superman.  I'm sure Rama Set will disagree, but the angst in MoS bugged me because of how generic it felt - the furrowed brow, the sullen brooding, the frowny face, etc.  I don't know, maybe some more dialogue might have helped it feel more purposeful, but internal struggles about hesitance to accept one's destiny or searching for a purpose in life have been done before, many times, and there are so many more interesting challenges that Superman could be facing instead.  It does look like BvS is going to be addressing some of those bigger issues, though, so hopefully that'll work out.

But making Wonder Woman dark and edgy as well is ridiculous.  Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, but three times...DC/WB really are just going to go dark with every single one of their superheroes and have them all be brooding and cynical.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 28, 2016, 06:28:21 AM
Are you saying that Superman can't have these? That's extremely unrealistic. And you're being mad and angry over nothing.
Superman is not flawless.

No, just speaking my preference.  I'm not angry or mad, I just like less drama in my superman entertainment is all.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on January 28, 2016, 06:49:15 AM
I can't stand dark and edgy Superman.  They have a bunch of morons making these decisions with WB.  "Everybody loves dark and edgy Batman.  I bet dark and edgy Superman will be a hit too!"  The problem is that it's built into Batman's character that he's dark and edgy.  Being tormented and full of angst is perfectly in line with the way he's been characterized in the comics at all times except the hated 60s/early 70s incarnation that was influenced by the campy TV show.  Superman can be tormented, I have no problem with that; he did after all lose his entire race to a planetary disaster.  But that he manages to be optimistic and hopeful despite that background is part of what makes Superman Superman.  Superman should not be emo. 

Did we learn nothing from Guardians of the Galaxy, arguably the best comic book movie of the new millenium that doesn't star Christian Bale, and tonally light years away from the Dark Knight trilogy?  Dark and brooding is fine as long as it fits the character.  It does not fit Superman.

Honestly they're doing it better with their TV properties. 
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on January 28, 2016, 01:41:30 PM
Superman can be tormented, I have no problem with that; he did after all lose his entire race to a planetary disaster.  But that he manages to be optimistic and hopeful despite that background is part of what makes Superman Superman.
Superman was exactly this in the first movie. He was still optimistic and heroic despite losing his entire race and the humans fearing him.

Why are you and LD assuming he will be so emo in this next one?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on January 28, 2016, 07:57:15 PM
I'm sure Rama Set will disagree, but the angst in MoS bugged me because of how generic it felt - the furrowed brow, the sullen brooding, the frowny face, etc. 

All I disagree with is casting judgement before seeing the movie.  Previews necessarily leave out 95% of the content of the film and St. Crispin's Day speeches don't really play well in previews.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Pongo on January 28, 2016, 08:37:49 PM
Oh, so this is what Ben Affleck's Batman will look like.  Neat.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on January 28, 2016, 11:14:08 PM
Superman can be tormented, I have no problem with that; he did after all lose his entire race to a planetary disaster.  But that he manages to be optimistic and hopeful despite that background is part of what makes Superman Superman.
Superman was exactly this in the first movie. He was still optimistic and heroic despite losing his entire race and the humans fearing him.

Why are you and LD assuming he will be so emo in this next one?

Maybe it was the overall dark tone of the first one but I didn't get that impression from it at all. It was just too dark for a Superman movie. And judging from the previews this one looks even worse.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 29, 2016, 02:04:43 AM
Honestly they're doing it better with their TV properties.

I agree, but out of curiosity, which TV properties specifically you were thinking of?  Gotham, for example, is absolutely terrible and I will fight anyone who disagrees with me.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on January 29, 2016, 02:49:03 AM
Honestly they're doing it better with their TV properties.

I agree, but out of curiosity, which TV properties specifically you were thinking of?  Gotham, for example, is absolutely terrible and I will fight anyone who disagrees with me.

Well, specifically, I've been bingeing on Arrow on Netflix (I am up to ep 4 of the 4th season now; it's not available on Hulu so I will probably have to pay for the remaining episodes to get caught up  :() and I think it just might be the best show on TV right now, despite a (slight) dip in quality in Season 3.  Flash which I've been watching since it started is just pure goofy fun.  I am enjoying Supergirl and Gotham to a lesser degree... regarding your opinion of the latter, I don't think it's terrible, although I do absolutely hate the kid they have playing Bruce.  The guy playing Penguin, on the other hand, is brilliant.

Oh yeah, and Teen Titans Go...   ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on January 29, 2016, 03:21:13 AM
I am enjoying Supergirl
I thought you were a guy.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on January 29, 2016, 04:16:15 AM
I am enjoying Supergirl
I thought you were a guy.

Fuck you.  I admit it's a bit chick-centric, but it's still doing the Superman mythos better than the movies.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on January 29, 2016, 04:59:21 AM
lol
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 29, 2016, 07:12:16 AM
Honestly they're doing it better with their TV properties.

I agree, but out of curiosity, which TV properties specifically you were thinking of?  Gotham, for example, is absolutely terrible and I will fight anyone who disagrees with me.

Well, specifically, I've been bingeing on Arrow on Netflix (I am up to ep 4 of the 4th season now; it's not available on Hulu so I will probably have to pay for the remaining episodes to get caught up  :() and I think it just might be the best show on TV right now, despite a (slight) dip in quality in Season 3.  Flash which I've been watching since it started is just pure goofy fun.  I am enjoying Supergirl and Gotham to a lesser degree... regarding your opinion of the latter, I don't think it's terrible, although I do absolutely hate the kid they have playing Bruce.  The guy playing Penguin, on the other hand, is brilliant.

Oh yeah, and Teen Titans Go...   ;D ;D ;D
Arrow is on Hulu.  Paid hulu, but hulu.
Though it might be on the cw's website too.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on January 29, 2016, 07:32:47 AM
Arrow is on Hulu.  Paid hulu, but hulu.
Though it might be on the cw's website too.

When I checked, Hulu only had the first three episodes, then it skipped to the Legends crossover, then the most recent episode (well, the tenth episode, there's been another since then).  And I do have paid Hulu.

I may check the CW's website, but I can't get that on my TV and I'd much rather watch it there than on my computer.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 29, 2016, 08:39:37 AM
Arrow is on Hulu.  Paid hulu, but hulu.
Though it might be on the cw's website too.

When I checked, Hulu only had the first three episodes, then it skipped to the Legends crossover, then the most recent episode (well, the tenth episode, there's been another since then).  And I do have paid Hulu.

I may check the CW's website, but I can't get that on my TV and I'd much rather watch it there than on my computer.

Yeah I see that.  Eeewww.

If you have chromecast you can cast a chrome browser tab to your tv.
The cw app doesn't appear to have chromecast ability though.
But if your phone supports miracast, you can cast from it to a chromecast.  Phone will be on and unusable during the time though.(cause miracast is a mirror cast)

Might be other options depending on what your tv model is.

Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 29, 2016, 03:26:21 PM
You could also just stream or torrent the episodes for free.  I would feel guilty about not supporting shows I like if not for the ridiculous Nielsen system of measuring viewers that only allows the tiny fraction of people with those special boxes to have any say in the matter.  Seriously, that system is bullshit.  They've given the boxes to a disproportionate number of NCIS and American Idol fans, and now they think that those viewers represent the entire country.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on January 29, 2016, 04:02:58 PM
You could also just stream or torrent the episodes for free.  I would feel guilty about not supporting shows I like if not for the ridiculous Nielsen system of measuring viewers that only allows the tiny fraction of people with those special boxes to have any say in the matter.  Seriously, that system is bullshit.  They've given the boxes to a disproportionate number of NCIS and American Idol fans, and now they think that those viewers represent the entire country.

The sad part is, you could get all the data you want from cable subscribers with just an addition to the terms of use and a firmware upgrade.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on January 29, 2016, 04:33:34 PM
Maybe it was the overall dark tone of the first one but I didn't get that impression from it at all.
So then he saved the world when people feared him his whole life because he was wrought with emotion, sadness, and bitterness?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on January 31, 2016, 04:50:21 AM
Dark and brooding is fine as long as it fits the character.  It does not fit Superman.
How can Superman be dark and brooding when his family crest literally means hope?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on January 31, 2016, 05:35:04 AM
Dark and brooding is fine as long as it fits the character.  It does not fit Superman.
How can Superman be dark and brooding when his family crest literally means hope?

How is this question not a total non sequitur?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on January 31, 2016, 05:40:13 AM
Maybe it was the overall dark tone of the first one but I didn't get that impression from it at all.
So then he saved the world when people feared him his whole life because he was wrought with emotion, sadness, and bitterness?

No, he saved the world despite being wrought with emotion, sadness, and bitterness.  It's a pretty standard arc for a classical anti-hero.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on February 01, 2016, 03:58:53 AM
being wrought with emotion, sadness, and bitterness.

Never saw those portrayed.

He had doubt about being able to trust humans, he had fear if he was capable of saving everyone, at least until he spoke with his father on the Kryptonian ship. 

Were we watching the same movie? 
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on February 01, 2016, 01:34:28 PM
It's a pretty standard arc for a classical anti-hero.
>Superman
>anti-hero

what
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on February 05, 2016, 04:59:24 AM
A classical anti-hero, meaning that a significant part of his arc was his struggle with his own fears and weaknesses (for lack of a better word).  Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but like I said, it's realized in such a familiar and predictable way that it doesn't feel much like a story about Superman at all.

As for the TV shows, Arrow is great.  It's not a popular opinion, but I actually think the first season of it was my favorite, possibly because of it being grittier and more realistic.  The dark tone felt less effective when later seasons added more fantastical elements to the show.  Also, I wish they would come up with a different seasonal arc to the villain trying to destroy the city.  The Flash is also great, and its eschewing of darkness in favor of Silver Age wackiness has been to its benefit, although my one big criticism is that the romantic subplots keep repeating the same tired, predictable, and painful-to-watch tropes about how Barry can't tell his love interest that he's the Flash because that'll put her in danger even though she's already been put in danger many times and now his relationship with her is suffering because he has to make excuses and run off at inopportune times, blah blah blah.

Constantine I watched when I heard that Matt Ryan was going to guest-star in an episode of Arrow, apparently linking their continuities together.  I'm not sure if that really did end up making all the events of that show canon within the Arrowverse/Flarrowverse/whatever, or if it was just Ryan's take on the character.  Probably the latter, but I wouldn't blame the CW too much for that, as Ryan's performance was easily the best part of Constantine, which was in all other respects just okay.  Supergirl I've only seen the pilot of, and I suppose I'll have to watch it all now that it's crossing over with The Flash.  I haven't seen Lucifer at all, but frankly, that show just looks terrible.

And then there's Gotham, which isn't a bad show so much as it is completely fucking nuts.  The people behind this don't seem to have any idea what kind of show this is trying to be, and apparently keep trying to re-invent it entirely every few episodes.  Or maybe they all just disagree on what the tone should be.  In one episode they'll be trying to keep it grounded and gritty like the Nolan films, in another they'll be wanting to base it on the Burton films, in other episodes it goes for camp so goofy that it feels like a tribute to the 60s show, and then there are some episodes that I can only assume were inspired by the Frank Miller comics the writers were using to snort lines of cocaine.  This scene, for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yi-oQGyuEs

What the fuck is this shit?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on February 05, 2016, 08:09:51 AM
As for the TV shows, Arrow is great.  It's not a popular opinion, but I actually think the first season of it was my favorite, possibly because of it being grittier and more realistic.  The dark tone felt less effective when later seasons added more fantastical elements to the show.  Also, I wish they would come up with a different seasonal arc to the villain trying to destroy the city.

I loved the first season.  The first season finale is easily the show's finest moment, and even looking back I think one of the best hours of TV ever (helping to cement my opinion that this is the best show currently on TV, even if it doesn't always reach those highs anymore).  I think the second season was the best because Manu Bennett as Slade was the perfect villain; his murdering of Moira felt both shocking and inevitable at the time it happened, which is quite a feat to pull off; on the whole, Slade's thirst for vengeance was terrifying, and Bennett played the part perfectly.  The third season was just too busy (and I echo your opinion that the show loses something the more supernatural it gets, although I think it's still pretty fantastic).  It was still good, some of it great, but it didn't reach the levels that were reached in the first two seasons.  My biggest criticism of the show as a whole is probably the same as yours; they lean too heavily on the entire city being at risk to hang the season on.  I think it might be because that first season finale was so fucking incredible that they keep trying to top themselves, but by now they should probably give it a rest.  It did lead to one of my favorite lines in the series - Detective Lance in the season 3 finale saying "City's under attack, must be May" or something to that effect.

Quote
The Flash is also great, and its eschewing of darkness in favor of Silver Age wackiness has been to its benefit, although my one big criticism is that the romantic subplots keep repeating the same tired, predictable, and painful-to-watch tropes about how Barry can't tell his love interest that he's the Flash because that'll put her in danger even though she's already been put in danger many times and now his relationship with her is suffering because he has to make excuses and run off at inopportune times, blah blah blah.

My biggest problem with the first season was that it took Iris so long to catch on.  Or was she told?  I can't remember exactly.  At any rate, she's a reporter.  There was a point where it seemed like everybody but Iris knew that Barry was the Flash, which kind of just makes her look stupid (of course the exact same criticism can be leveled at Laurel on Arrow... who's a lawyer; but really the less said about Laurel's character the better).  My other criticism of the show is that some of the time travel elements just don't make sense if you stop to think about them.  But it's goofy fun, the TV equivalent of a popcorn movie, so I'm willing to let some of its more glaring flaws slide.  Mark Hamill playing The Trickster, basically using his Joker voice from the Batman animated series, was such a hoot.

Quote
Constantine I watched when I heard that Matt Ryan was going to guest-star in an episode of Arrow, apparently linking their continuities together.  I'm not sure if that really did end up making all the events of that show canon within the Arrowverse/Flarrowverse/whatever, or if it was just Ryan's take on the character.  Probably the latter, but I wouldn't blame the CW too much for that, as Ryan's performance was easily the best part of Constantine, which was in all other respects just okay.

I still have to watch Constantine.  I saw the pilot and I guess it just didn't impress me much, because even though I've been a fan of the comics for a long time I just never made it a point to watch it or get caught up on it.   

Quote
I haven't seen Lucifer at all, but frankly, that show just looks terrible.

I watched the pilot.  The guy playing Lucifer (Tom Ellis) seems to be having a lot of fun with it.  The fact that it's basically a police procedural featuring Satan in the main role feels like a bad joke.  I'd like to think they'll break out of that mold and go for something deeper but I don't have much faith in that happening.  I never read Mike Carey's comic but I always loved Neil Gaiman's take on the character in Sandman.  I enjoyed the show despite the fact that its premise is so dumb, probably because of Tom Ellis' performance more than anything else.

Quote
And then there's Gotham, which isn't a bad show so much as it is completely fucking nuts.  The people behind this don't seem to have any idea what kind of show this is trying to be, and apparently keep trying to re-invent it entirely every few episodes.  Or maybe they all just disagree on what the tone should be.  In one episode they'll be trying to keep it grounded and gritty like the Nolan films, in another they'll be wanting to base it on the Burton films, in other episodes it goes for camp so goofy that it feels like a tribute to the 60s show, and then there are some episodes that I can only assume were inspired by the Frank Miller comics the writers were using to snort lines of cocaine.

I know it's a common criticism that Gotham often feels like it doesn't know what kind of show it wants to be.  I don't think its lack of consistency is quite as bad as you make it out to be; even at its campiest there's a strain of darkness that puts it above the level of the old TV show, and on the flip side of the coin, even at their darkest the comics still retain some elements of camp; with a Rogues Gallery that includes characters like The Ventriloquist, The Riddler and even The Joker I think that's inevitable.  So I don't mind it having a presence on the show and I think it's at least consistent with the comics.

Sometimes the writing is just awful.  That whole Jerome subplot was silly and cliched to the point that they were making it so obvious that he was meant to be the Joker that I saw it coming from a mile away that he wasn't going to end up being the Joker.  I hate to say "This is how I would have done it..." but hell, this is how I would have done it: I think it would have been interesting if they had introduced a series of characters who each in their own way share traits of the Joker, so that we never really know which one it ends up being (it would have been a nice tribute to the multiple-choice nature of his origin in the comics).  But they fucked that up when they made it so obvious that he was Joker, and then fucked it up worse when they killed that goofy motherfucker off, and the show was still the better for the latter, because he was terrible.

I guess it's mostly the performances that keep me going back, particularly Robin Taylor as Penguin, Donal Logue as Harvey Bullock, and Sean Pertwee as Alfred.  The rest of the cast is fine for the most part (and I will never get tired of seeing Morena Baccarin, even if her character is a bit thin), but I really can't stand the kid that plays Bruce.  I don't know; maybe it's just too understated to the point of being boring.  But somehow one of the most interesting and complex characters in comics becomes trite and one-note in that performance; too much the mask that is Bruce and not enough the actual character that is Batman, if you follow.  I also don't miss Fish Mooney.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on February 05, 2016, 12:23:52 PM
The guy playing Lucifer (Tom Ellis) seems to be having a lot of fun with it.  The fact that it's basically a police procedural featuring Satan in the main role feels like a bad joke.  I'd like to think they'll break out of that mold and go for something deeper but I don't have much faith in that happening.  I never read Mike Carey's comic but I always loved Neil Gaiman's take on the character in Sandman.  I enjoyed the show despite the fact that its premise is so dumb, probably because of Tom Ellis' performance more than anything else.
Basically this.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: rooster on February 05, 2016, 04:49:58 PM
Hmm, does this have to turn into a thread about all capeshit?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on February 11, 2016, 05:10:45 PM
Hmm, does this have to turn into a thread about all capeshit?

This became a thread about all capeshit long ago.  Hush.  Also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cle_rKBpZ28

This is the kind of trailer they should have been using from the start.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on February 29, 2016, 08:41:01 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqsDwASsGN8

But Superman has X-ray vision. ???  Maybe this is some special kind of Bat-smoke that he can't see through?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on February 29, 2016, 08:49:59 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqsDwASsGN8

But Superman has X-ray vision. ???  Maybe this is some special kind of Bat-smoke that he can't see through?

Its an active ability though.  He appears not to be using it, because he maybe thought, "Whatever, I got this.  I am going to zip through the smoke and... wtf, where is that bitch?"
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 06, 2016, 01:08:20 AM
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/03/03/batman-v-superman-dawn-justice-green-lantern-dc-movie-universe

So the Flash's appearance is basically just a cameo, and there won't be any Green Lantern, contrary to the dozens of rumors saying that so-and-so will be playing Hal Jordan or whomever.  I know this sounds strange, but I'm looking forward to finding out whether the movie is good or bad almost as much as I am to actually watching it.  Everyone will be talking about how DC either managed to beat Marvel forever or lost to Marvel forever.  Neither of those would be true no matter how the film ends up, but they'll be saying it anyway.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 22, 2016, 01:21:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMltUXZkPUM

e

I suppose this will be our last look at it until it comes out.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on March 22, 2016, 01:44:36 PM
ratedpgthirteen
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 22, 2016, 11:08:13 PM
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_v_superman_dawn_of_justice/

The reviews aren't great so far. :(
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on March 23, 2016, 05:29:08 AM
Reviews are irrelevant.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on March 24, 2016, 05:23:48 PM
(http://media.giphy.com/media/3o7WTEX3U4RRM5kVvG/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 25, 2016, 02:38:19 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwXfv25xJUw

That thousand-yard stare.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on March 26, 2016, 05:33:23 AM
May I be the first to say that all of Saddam's worst nightmares about this movie are true.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on March 26, 2016, 11:44:11 PM
It was pretty bad, I feel that the RT score is spot on. There's so many problems, from the run time, to the excessive plot elements they've shoved in, to jarring tone shifts. I think the biggest problem is the weak script, a lot of the things characters were saying had me rolling my eyes, a good example of which is the Lex, Clark and Bruce scene that was spoiled in the trailers. The first Man of Steel had this issue too, where entire scenes were effectively trailer shots and felt very weird when placed in the context of the movie itself. Snyder's direction really isn't that bad besides all the grim-dark going on, it's Goyer they need to do away with. The whole thing would've benefited from throwing away the Doomsday/JL sequence and focusing on BvS, with a hint of the JL formation in the end. The only compelling part was the BvS struggle, but it's over far too early and far too quickly. It's pretty stupid how it's resolved as well, with Batman not murdering Superman because he loves his mummy.

I also think it's pretty humorous that they effectively ignored all of the criticism surrounding the destruction scenes in MoS, instead choosing to double down on it. Oh, and Batman straight up executes dudes in this, because it's a serious movie for seriously serious people.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on March 27, 2016, 12:12:56 AM
I thought Snyder's direction was terrible. The tone shifts are entirely his fault, the excessive images he uses to trick people in to feeling, particularly the one used in your spoiler, are all style, no substance. He does not give you any context for a Batman who brands people and executed en masse (this is also the terrible scripts fault). I thought the Doomsday sequence was the best part because they stopped trying to tell an epic story and just told a story.

None of the character's actions were as thoughtful or intelligent as you would hope from the subjects and Jesse Eisenberg made every acting mistake you can.

I had really low expects and it failed every one of them.  Anyone who likes this movie deserves their fate.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Vindictus on March 27, 2016, 01:08:31 AM
I thought Snyder's direction was terrible. The tone shifts are entirely his fault, the excessive images he uses to trick people in to feeling, particularly the one used in your spoiler, are all style, no substance. He does not give you any context for a Batman who brands people and executed en masse (this is also the terrible scripts fault). I thought the Doomsday sequence was the best part because they stopped trying to tell an epic story and just told a story.

None of the character's actions were as thoughtful or intelligent as you would hope from the subjects and Jesse Eisenberg made every acting mistake you can.

I had really low expects and it failed every one of them.  Anyone who likes this movie deserves their fate.

Aren't the jarring tone shifts the script? The cape joke and the "LOL IS SHE WITH YOU?????????" joke are both the result of a shit script.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 27, 2016, 01:19:54 AM
Batman spares Superman's life because their mothers shared the same first name?  Are you fucking kidding me?  Who fucking greenlit this shit?

I'm sorry, I had to get that off my chest.  But seriously, I don't think the movie was awful.  Not quite good, but not as bad as I was expecting.  I'd say they've got the Batman side of it down fairly well (his rather cavalier attitude to killing aside), but Superman is once again all scowls and sullen brooding, without a hint of the optimism and positivity the character is supposed to embody.  Like Vindictus mentioned, the BvS fight isn't the climax of the film, but a five-minute prelude to Doomsday, who shouldn't have been in the movie at all.  Or at the very least, they should have given him a design that wasn't so generic and butt-ugly.  And Lex Luthor is just fucking horrible.  He's not funny in the slightest, just obnoxious, and his motivation - something that I've always felt is the most interesting element of his character - is barely touched on.  Something something my daddy hit me tee hee I'm just so cuh-razy!!!  Was he trying to do a riff on the Joker?  I wouldn't be surprised if he was.  WB wants all their superheroes to be like Batman, so it makes sense that they would want all their villains to be like Batman's villains.

They definitely need to get rid of Snyder as surely as they do Goyer, though.  The overall organization of this film, as in its pacing and editing, are completely fucked.  The first hour or so suffers the most from it.  There's no transition, no establishing shots, nothing to help guide the audience along with the flow of the plot.  It just lurches from scene to scene with quick cuts in very short lengths of time.  Suddenly we're in the Indian Ocean.  Suddenly we're in Africa.  Suddenly we're in LexCorp.  Suddenly we're at the Daily Planet.  Suddenly we're in Lois and Clark's home.  Suddenly we're in a prophetic dream.  Snyder zips from scene to scene as casually as he would switch perspectives when two characters are talking.  He's fine for flashy action, but for a multi-pronged story that follows several characters in different subplots, he's no good at all.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on March 27, 2016, 12:06:38 PM
Even the flashy action was muddled. The chase with lexcorp and the batmobile was almost incomprehensible. I could not tell how close batman was to his objective or not. And it finished with superman's terrible intervention giving us the "line we had been waiting for" from the preview: "do you bleed, derp, derp?"

And how about Martha Clark proclaiming to Kal, "you don't owe them a damn thing?"  No one superman is so bitter in the film.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 28, 2016, 03:15:16 AM
I've brought this up a couple of times on IRC, but I might as well do it here too.  Here (http://collider.com/batman-v-superman-killing-zack-snyder/) is Snyder's ridiculous justification for why Batman kills so casually in this movie.  There are a lot of things wrong with it.  First of all, Batman's reputation as a non-killer has long been a canonical element of the comics (with a few exceptions over the years, obviously) - it has absolutely nothing to do with the Burton movies, in which he actually killed quite a lot.  Second of all, Batman doesn't kill a bunch of times in TDKR, and I'm pretty sure that Snyder misinterpreted the scene he was referring to.  It's a little ambiguous (http://dkreturns.blogspot.com/2011/12/i-believe-you.html), but the most logical interpretation is that Batman either shot the wall next to the criminal or else just wounded him, far from shooting him in the head.  A running theme throughout the comic is Batman trying to resist the temptation to kill, even as he fears that he's no longer a physical match for his enemies in his advanced years and Gotham is now more full of crime than ever.  Batman's inner struggle wouldn't make sense if he had just executed a guy with a headshot like it was no big deal and it was never brought up again.

I wouldn't normally be this nitpicky about accuracy to the source material, but faithfulness to the comics, both in terms of visuals and writing, has always been arguably Snyder's biggest - I'm not sure if I want to say "strength," but maybe...defining characteristic? - when it comes to his comic book movies.  Both he and his fans frequently bring it up as his "contribution" to the genre, or what he brings to the table, so to speak.  Both Watchmen and 300's faithfulness to the comics were heavily vaunted.  Snyder usually defends the destruction in MoS by arguing that it's "the real Superman" or accurate to the comics.  And even for BvS, Snyder made a similar appeal to accuracy when he was asked about (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/it-is-what-it-is-zack-snyder-responds-to-reviews-of-batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-20160324) the critical panning the movie had received:

Quote from: Zack Snyder
I’m a comic book guy and I made the movie based as much as I could on that aesthetic. And so I don’t know how else to do it 100%, so it is what it is.

So if faithfulness to the comics is Snyder's one big thing, his main draw, his biggest strength, etc., then it really doesn't look good when he can't even get that right.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on March 28, 2016, 04:16:38 AM
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_v_superman_dawn_of_justice/

The reviews aren't great so far. :(
The Ars Technica review was pretty harsh too:
http://arstechnica.com/the-multiverse/2016/03/batman-v-superman-the-showgirls-of-superhero-films/
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on March 28, 2016, 04:18:29 AM
Everyone is so buttmad.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Thork on March 28, 2016, 07:44:39 PM
Ben Afleck has form for being in bad movies and doing absolutely nothing to save them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z3GJiZqDCI

Still, he'll go home to his gold brick house in his $900,000 super car to have sex with his kid's nanny and pour Cristal Champagne down the toilet and he'll be fine. Batman on the other hand, might never recover from having Afleck's fist that far up his arse.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on March 29, 2016, 01:11:00 AM
The highlight of my trip to the movie theater was playing pool and air hockey with my friend.

I'm not gonna say much about the film, because there isn't much to say other than it was pretty dull, but I will say Batman's solo scene in the warehouse was amazing. The choreography was fantastic and makes me want to see a solo Batfleck movie. Affleck isn't the best Wayne we've had, but is easily the best Batman.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 29, 2016, 02:35:41 AM
I'm really glad they're moving past the "realism" of Nolan's Batman, too.  He zips around with a grappling gun.  He fights like he's in an Arkham game.  And he's finally wearing a Batsuit that doesn't seem to be designed first and foremost as a big clunky suit of armor that he can barely move in.  I'd be delighted to see a solo Batfleck movie, provided that Goyer and Snyder are kept far, far away from it.

Also, on the notion of Wonder Woman.  I liked her, but I can't honestly say that's due to the acting or writing.  I think I just liked her because she felt like something different.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on March 31, 2016, 01:10:59 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/03/30/ben-affleck-batman-script?xid=entertainment-weekly_socialflow_twitter

I hate to say it, but Batman's murder sprees in BvS have kind of soiled the character for me in this universe. I wish he could make a Batman film that bears no relation to it.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on March 31, 2016, 01:21:57 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/03/30/ben-affleck-batman-script?xid=entertainment-weekly_socialflow_twitter

I hate to say it, but Batman's murder sprees in BvS have kind of soiled the character for me in this universe. I wish he could make a Batman film that bears no relation to it.
In fairness, batman murdered people in the '89 batman movie.  The entire church scene has him killing several henchmen AND the joker.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on March 31, 2016, 04:36:04 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/03/30/ben-affleck-batman-script?xid=entertainment-weekly_socialflow_twitter

I hate to say it, but Batman's murder sprees in BvS have kind of soiled the character for me in this universe. I wish he could make a Batman film that bears no relation to it.
In fairness, batman murdered people in the '89 batman movie.  The entire church scene has him killing several henchmen AND the joker.

Are you implying that Batman fans were okay with that?  They really weren't.  Burton's movies received a ton of criticism from fans for its deviations from the comics, and nowadays is respected more for its historical value (helping disassociate Batman from the lighthearted goofiness of the Adam West series, encouraging studios to create big-budget capeshit films, etc.) than for being a faithful adaptation of the character.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on March 31, 2016, 06:09:28 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/03/30/ben-affleck-batman-script?xid=entertainment-weekly_socialflow_twitter

I hate to say it, but Batman's murder sprees in BvS have kind of soiled the character for me in this universe. I wish he could make a Batman film that bears no relation to it.
In fairness, batman murdered people in the '89 batman movie.  The entire church scene has him killing several henchmen AND the joker.

Are you implying that Batman fans were okay with that?  They really weren't.  Burton's movies received a ton of criticism from fans for its deviations from the comics, and nowadays is respected more for its historical value (helping disassociate Batman from the lighthearted goofiness of the Adam West series, encouraging studios to create big-budget capeshit films, etc.) than for being a faithful adaptation of the character.
No, just saying its not new.  I had no idea wbat the fan reaction was to the movie.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 01, 2016, 06:31:49 PM
On the notion of IRC:

<Saddam> Affleck was good
<Snupes> Most of the actors were good.
<Saddam> But Eisenberg tho
<Saddam> terrible, just terrible
<Snupes> Eisenberg was good.
<Crudblud> More like Eisenberk
<Saddam> Look at me tee hee I'm so cuh-razy because the Joker is crazy and he's popular therefore I have to be too!
<Snupes> I can't tell if you honestly think any form of mental instability is equivalent to the Joker
<Snupes> It's like you're trying as hard as you possibly can to find some way to cram villains into a vague archetype
<Saddam> I don't, but I think the influence was the Joker
<Snupes> Luthor was hardly crazy at all in the movie, just gone over the edge by the end
<Snupes> Okay, I disagree completely
<Saddam> Because WB/DC really suck at doing anything but Batman
<Snupes> I saw very little to no Joker influence in him
<Snupes> He seemed more like, I don't know, Lex Luthor from the comics, just younger and more expressive
<Snupes> You know Luthor's even more maniacal in the comics right
<Saddam> Maybe in the ones where he was just a mad scientist
<Snupes> Hmm, no
<Snupes> Basically most of them. He's a bit more stoic at times, but his character and actions are essentially the same.
<Saddam> I thought you only read Marvel and Batman, anyway
<Snupes> No, Batman is just basically the only DC series I really like, along with Green Arrow.
<Snupes> I've read a good amount of the mainline stuff, like Superman and Batman and shit.
<Snupes> But get into the minutiae and vague stuff and I'm lost.
<Saddam> I'll admit that the Joker comparison was a stretch
<Saddam> But I felt that they really just played up his eccentricity at the expense of less superficial character development
<Snupes> The movie had almost no character development for anyone; I highly doubt the eccentricity took anything away

This still doesn't feel right to me.  I know this is going to sound like the vaguest appeal to authority ever made, but after doing some research online, I've found that virtually nobody seems to agree with what Snupes is saying about the comics version of the character and how he compares to Eisenberg's take.  Everyone from pop culture websites to the denizens of nerdy message boards agrees that Eisenberg's Luthor was influenced far more by traditionally wacky villains like the Joker and Eisenberg's previous roles than the Luthor from the comics.  Even the fact that Eisenberg was playing a junior version of Luthor was seized upon (http://www.mtv.com/news/2340099/jesse-eisenberg-lex-luthor-jr/) as an explanation for his lack of resemblance to comics Luthor.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/mar/23/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-comics-geek-review-ben-affleck

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SelfDemonstrating/LexLuthor

^ A couple of articles that seem to support this (the former reiterates that this Luthor is unfamiliar to him, while the latter presents his personality as far more serious).  Again, it's an appeal to authority, but I feel like there would be a lot more people defending Eisenberg's portrayal if it really was true to the comics.  That is to say, the "classic" comics that people want to see represented in film.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 02, 2016, 05:00:17 AM
My beef with Eisenberg is that he made a concerted effort to seem unhinged. He was aware of how antisocial he was and it made him giggle with delight. It was a poor stereotype and unfortunately the script did not help as his plots were generally not brilliant. I mean, why go through the batman v superman stuff when you are going to unleash Doomsday literally 1 minute after Superman pass/fails.

Fucking dumb.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 06, 2016, 01:42:02 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-mulls-releasing-films-881265

This pleases me.  BvS was supposed to be a gigantic Avengers-level hit, but it looks like it won't even reach a billion dollars.  I wish they would get rid of Snyder already, but sadly, it's probably too late to replace him for Justice League.  Also:

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Batman-V-Superman-Might-Dethroned-By-Weekend-Contenders-122967.html

If this happens, I will laugh and laugh.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on April 08, 2016, 04:54:12 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-mulls-releasing-films-881265

Quote
Several sources say Warner Bros. executives were convinced they had the goods with BvS and were shocked when negative reviews began pouring in.

lol

Quote
One says the filmmakers naturally will evaluate what went wrong with BvS, but when it comes to Justice League, "we're not going to take a movie that's supposed to be one thing and turn it into a copycat of something else."

lol.  They are so out of touch it's astounding.  This is essentially what they did when they turned Man of Steel into a clone of the Nolan Batman movies.

I will not be paying to see BvS in theaters.  I was so looking forward to the Justice League cycle of movies because I've always been more of a fan of DC than Marvel in the comics but my interest has fizzled out.  I shudder to think how my favorite character, the Flash, will be mishandled when it comes time for his movie to come out.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 08, 2016, 05:28:29 PM
they turned Man of Steel into a clone of the Nolan Batman movies.
I don't remember a Batman movie with an alien invasion.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on April 08, 2016, 05:38:32 PM
they turned Man of Steel into a clone of the Nolan Batman movies.
I don't remember a Batman movie with an alien invasion.

That's nice.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: EnigmaZV on April 08, 2016, 07:53:33 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-mulls-releasing-films-881265

This pleases me.  BvS was supposed to be a gigantic Avengers-level hit, but it looks like it won't even reach a billion dollars.  I wish they would get rid of Snyder already, but sadly, it's probably too late to replace him for Justice League.  Also:

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Batman-V-Superman-Might-Dethroned-By-Weekend-Contenders-122967.html

If this happens, I will laugh and laugh.

The Boss looks terrible, just terrible.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 08, 2016, 11:35:32 PM
On the notion of Wonder Woman:

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/wonder-woman/news/a789888/wonder-woman-gal-gadot-movie-has-moments-humour/

Quote
It has moments of humour, but it's pretty dark.

Of course it is.  But then again, WWI was a pretty awful period of history, and it doesn't have the benefit of being glamorized in modern times like WWII, so maybe this is just natural.

Quote
We go back 100 years to when she's more naïve...She's this young idealist. She's pure. Very different to the experienced, super-confident, grown-up woman you've seen.

It's nice to know that there's room for a more positive hero even in a dark setting, but I don't like the apparent implication that idealism and purity go hand-in-hand with naïvity, particularly when we take into consideration the previous articles indicating that Wonder Woman in modern times is a brooding grump like everyone else.  Is becoming bitter and cynical this franchise's only idea of character development?

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Batman-V-Superman-Reportedly-Make-Less-Money-Than-Man-Steel-123717.html

:D :D :D

As for The Flash, his movie is being written and directed by Seth Grahame-Smith, the author of mash-up novels Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.  He hasn't directed anything before, but he did write the screenplays of the former's film adaptation and Dark Shadows, both critical flops.  Truly, Barry Allen is in good hands.  He's also writing The LEGO Batman Movie, because with his qualifications and experience, why the hell wouldn't he be?  Oh, and another thing about Wonder Woman - her movie was written by Jason Fuchs, only thirty years old, and with two screenplays to his name, Pan and Ice Age: Continental Drift.  Both critical flops, once again.  Real cream-of-the-crop talent.

But, you know, Hollywood is a strict meritocracy where everyone gets exactly what they deserve according to their talent, and the notion that some people there are unduly privileged and get all sorts of opportunities thrown at them while others are unfairly locked out of even getting a fair shot is complete nonsense.  Anyone who says otherwise is the real racist.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 11, 2016, 03:28:13 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-36013563

It happened.  BvS took second place at the box office to a shitty comedy in only the third weekend since its release.  Also, another Suicide Squad trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZwsbcW-d-E
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Lord Dave on April 11, 2016, 04:22:00 PM
Not impressed with Suicide Squad.

Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 11, 2016, 05:39:19 PM
Not impressed with Suicide Squad.


Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 14, 2016, 01:25:57 AM
I don't want to get my hopes up after BvS, but...maybe it'll be better?  Hopefully?  I mean, it looks fun, it looks lively, and it'll be the first time we've seen some of the characters in a movie.  Also, Jared Leto is a huge douchebag:

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/13/suicide-squad-jared-leto-will-smith-anal-beads-used-condoms

What the fuck does any of this have to do with acting?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on April 14, 2016, 01:21:44 PM
There’s a famous (and probably fictitious) anecdote about the filming of Dustin Hoffman and Laurence Olivier’s Marathon Man: Hoffman—a noted method actor—supposedly ran himself ragged for days before one of the movie’s big scenes, avoiding sleep and pushing his body to the limits to best capture his character’s on-the-run desperation. When he got to set, he explained his preparations to his co-star, who pithily responded with the sort of advice that only a classically trained, Oscar-winning Shakespearean actor could, telling the younger actor, “Don’t be in a big-budget supervillain movie with Jared Leto, because he sounds like a prick.”
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: markjo on April 15, 2016, 08:26:11 PM
Quote from: http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ben-affleck-batman-standalone-directing-1201752021/
A standalone Batman movie starring and directed by Ben Affleck is officially in the works, Warner Bros. chief Kevin Tsujihara confirmed Tuesday at CinemaCon.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Crudblud on April 15, 2016, 10:02:06 PM
I don't want to get my hopes up after BvS, but...maybe it'll be better?  Hopefully?  I mean, it looks fun, it looks lively, and it'll be the first time we've seen some of the characters in a movie.  Also, Jared Leto is a huge douchebag:

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/04/13/suicide-squad-jared-leto-will-smith-anal-beads-used-condoms

What the fuck does any of this have to do with acting?

Without looking at the article, I interpret the title (as derived from the URL) thus: "Jared Leto will smith anal beads and used condoms."
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on April 16, 2016, 02:14:38 AM
He will.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 17, 2016, 04:29:41 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/JXrFpNa.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/F4dCp21.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 17, 2016, 02:43:06 PM
Objection! Relevance?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 19, 2016, 04:39:44 PM
<Snupezaretto> [on the subject of a new Batman film] Maybe all of BvS will have been a Scarecrow-induced dream
<Snupezaretto> Or all of the DCCU up until then
<Saddam> Batman's worst fear is not just that he became the monster he swore he never would become, but that he didn't even realize it, and just thought he was an edgy anti-hero
<Snupezaretto> Yes
<Snupezaretto> Also that Gotham and Metropolis became neighbouring cities
<Saddam> That doesn't make sense in so many different ways
<Snupezaretto> Like you said, it was such a bizarre creative choice
<Saddam> why even bother having two different cities if they're just going to be right next to each other
<Snupezaretto> The reveal was more like a punchline in some Zucker bros comedy. "We're gonna have to go to Gotham", pan over to reveal it's two feet to their left
<Saddam> and how could they be so different if they're right next to each other
<Saddam> They would have swallowed each other up by now
<Saddam> The only thing I can think of is that there could be a state line between them
<Saddam> Like Minneapolis and St. Paul
<Saddam> But even then you'd expect people to think of them as one metropolitan area
<Saddam> Metropolis-Gotham
<Saddam> beardo: Even you have to admit that this was kind of dumb
<Snupezaretto> Metrotham
<Snupezaretto> Gothopolis
<Snupezaretto> I like that one
<Snupezaretto> It perfectly captures the feel of the film
<Snupezaretto> Gothopolis, home of the brooding and dark
<Snupezaretto> The DAMAGED, as Leto's Joker would say and then tattoo on everyone's forehead

http://io9.gizmodo.com/robin-was-also-a-killer-in-zack-snyders-dc-cinematic-mu-1771781312

Robin with a halberd.  Why?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on April 19, 2016, 04:45:50 PM
To be fair. Gotham and Metropolis have been depicted as neighbouring cities in DC comics as well.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 30, 2016, 04:24:53 AM
That's interesting.  I didn't know that, and apparently neither did (http://www.wired.com/2015/07/dawn-of-justice-gotham-metropolis/) Zack "100% comic book" Snyder.  It was still a bad idea for a film adaptation, anyway.  Yes, Superman is technically fast and powerful enough to go pretty much anywhere on the planet he's needed and deal with any situation promptly, but at the very least, some geographical distance between Metropolis and Gotham would help us suspend our disbelief and suppose that Batman actually serves a purpose, that he goes to places and does things that Superman doesn't.  There's no need for a Batman who operates in Superman's backyard.

As for The Flash, his movie is being written and directed by Seth Grahame-Smith

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/flash-movie-loses-director-888994

Good.  Hopefully he'll be replaced by someone who actually has some experience.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on April 30, 2016, 12:06:22 PM
As for The Flash, his movie is being written and directed by Seth Grahame-Smith

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/flash-movie-loses-director-888994

Good.  Hopefully he'll be replaced by someone who actually has some experience.

If everyone thought this way, Citizen Kane never would have been made, or a bunch of other great movies.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on April 30, 2016, 01:32:13 PM
lolwut?  I'm not saying that only experienced directors should ever direct films.  Obviously, everyone has to start somewhere.  But a big-budget, crowd-pleasing capeshit movie isn't a job for a first-timer.  For all we know, he might not even be competent with a camera.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 01, 2016, 12:02:55 AM
lolwut?  I'm not saying that only experienced directors should ever direct films.  Obviously, everyone has to start somewhere.  But a big-budget, crowd-pleasing capeshit movie isn't a job for a first-timer.  For all we know, he might not even be competent with a camera.

Maybe, maybe not.  It is still the same as saying Orson Welles had no business directing Citizen Kane, which was a massive budget movie for the time.  Maybe this guy could have surprised.  Guess we will never know.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 01, 2016, 08:01:38 PM
Citizen Kane would only have been considered big-budget in its day because Hollywood wasn't used to spending truly enormous amounts of money on movies back then.  When adjusted for inflation, it cost about $13.1 million (http://cinema.theiapolis.com/movie-29A3/citizen-kane/faq/budget.html) to make.  Most capeshit movies today have a budget of over ten times that.  And this is going to be part of a franchise that WB hopes will bring in billions for them.  Besides, I think it's pretty obvious when you look at this guy's resume that he is no Welles.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 02, 2016, 12:45:23 AM
Citizen Kane would only have been considered big-budget in its day because Hollywood wasn't used to spending truly enormous amounts of money on movies back then.  When adjusted for inflation, it cost about $13.1 million (http://cinema.theiapolis.com/movie-29A3/citizen-kane/faq/budget.html) to make.  Most capeshit movies today have a budget of over ten times that.  And this is going to be part of a franchise that WB hopes will bring in billions for them.  Besides, I think it's pretty obvious when you look at this guy's resume that he is no Welles.

Look at Orson Welle's resume before Citizen Kane.  He had directed two short films and had a few narration credits to his name.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 03, 2016, 01:03:22 AM
That's not true.  Welles had been working steadily in both radio and theater (both acting and directing) for a few years prior to Citizen Kane, and had already garnered considerable fame and critical acclaim from them.  I won't deny that he was very lucky to get the contract that he did, but looking back on his life, Welles was arguably something of a prodigy, and far more deserving of a chance to write and direct his own movie than the largely-unknown Grahame-Smith, who, once again, would have been in the very different position of helming a tentpole capeshit film with the hopes and expectations of a studio and millions of fans riding on him.  It feels to me like he was meant to be the latest fortunate son plucked from obscurity and groomed to be a big player in Hollywood - which wouldn't bother me nearly as much as it does if not for the fact that Hollywood constantly tells us (both directly and indirectly) that they're terrified of taking risks and want to play it safe as much as possible.  That's why they don't want to involve more women and non-white people in movies, that's why they're constantly rebooting and recycling old properties instead of creating new franchises, that's why they encourage screenwriters to stick to worn-out tropes and "save the cat"-style plotting (http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2013/07/hollywood_and_blake_snyder_s_screenwriting_book_save_the_cat.html), and so on.  But all the while, they're constantly spending tons of money and taking huge risks trying to hype up an unknown white male actor as the next major star or an unknown white male director as the next major Hollywood big shot.

I'm getting a bit off-topic.  I don't mean to bash Grahame-Smith too much.  Maybe he does have some talent, and maybe he's got it in him to make a fine capeshit romp, but the fact is that right now, he has no directing experience, and while directing a tentpole blockbuster might not need an especially distinctive style or a seasoned veteran behind the camera, it still needs competence.  He hasn't demonstrated that yet.  Even the poster child of those lucky directors who have risen far beyond their qualifications, Colin Trevorrow, had directed a movie before he was handed the reins to enormous franchises.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 03, 2016, 01:23:48 AM
I don't know, I look at Grahame-Smith's resume and I see substantial experience in writing and producing, so he obviously would bring knowledge about story and what it takes to get it on the screen.  "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter" most assuredly had heavy special and visual effects and action sequences, and he was very involved in the making of that.  I bet, with the right team around him, he would have done a fine job.

Now WB are probably going to do something desperate like try to convince Terrance Malick to direct the Flash.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 03, 2016, 04:49:56 AM
I don't care who directs The Flash, because I'm not familiar with directors. What they do need to do is cast another actor.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on May 03, 2016, 12:35:49 PM
I don't care who directs The Flash, because I'm not familiar with directors. What they do need to do is cast another actor.

Like the Flash from their successful Tv franchise?  Yea...
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 04, 2016, 04:32:00 AM
Ezra Miller is a fine actor and beardo is just homophobic.  But I do wonder how the movie is going to distinguish itself when the show has already covered so much of the "classic" source material.  It'll have better effects, sure, but what else?  It's the kind of dilemma that almost makes me agree with WB/DC's oddly inconsistent policy of not letting their TV shows cover properties that upcoming movies are about to focus on.  It really is too bad that movies make all the money and so are prioritized above all else.  If Batman wasn't such box office gold, they'd probably be able to make a kickass Netflix show for him, with all the screen time they need to focus on those things that the movies can't.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on May 04, 2016, 08:15:17 AM
He looks wrong for the part.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on May 04, 2016, 02:06:53 PM
He looks like he smells bad
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 08, 2016, 02:11:54 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc7mvrjcDeo

They misspelled "terrific" in the title.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on May 19, 2016, 02:42:08 AM
It sounds like good new to me.  Geoff Johns is probably the best mainstream writer DC has right now and he's done good work retooling classic characters (Flash and Green Lantern in particular) without resorting to an unnecessarily dark and gritty tone, which thank heavens DC/Warner Bros really seems to want to veer away from right now.

Anyway, unless Legends of Tomorrow really blows me away with the finale, or at least tosses out a really good cliffhanger, I think the first season of the show will be the last I watch.  It doggedly refuses to make sense and a few of the actors just irritate me.  Kind of a letdown.

They should spin Leonard and Mick off onto their own show.  And send Sara back to Arrow where she can be Black Canary and probably die again.  Not that I want to see it happen but it has to sooner or later; Papa Lance isn't allowed to be happy.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on May 19, 2016, 04:18:11 AM
(This is a little confusing, as I deleted the original post before Roundy replied.  Sorry!)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-v-superman-fallout-warner-895174

This is good news.  I have no idea if Geoff Johns will prove to be some kind of DC equivalent of Kevin Feige, but transitioning away from whatever loose framework they have with Snyder at the helm is definitely a step in the right direction.  And look at that box office total, too - just $870 million worldwide.  That's plenty of money, to be sure, but what was arguably the most anticipated capeshit film in history should have easily earned well over a billion.  Let's hope they take another hint from all this and dump Goyer too.  In other news:

(http://i.imgur.com/1n75N1Y.jpg)
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on May 20, 2016, 04:59:29 PM
I'm glad LoT was mentioned, as I had some major issues with it too.  The biggest problem was easily the writing.  I accepted some time ago that literally every TV show or movie that focuses on time travel, no matter how good it is, will have plot holes and details that just don't make sense if you think about them long enough, but this show took it to the next level.  How many times did they abruptly rewrite the rules of how time travel worked, do things that were said to be impossible just a few episodes ago, or bring up major new elements that logically should have been mentioned a long time ago?  And that's not even taking into account the many ways it conflicts with how time travel is portrayed in The Flash.  Do the Time Masters take into account speedsters who can hop through time?  And do the Time Wraiths ever try to interfere with what they're up to?

On a more general level, it's hard to make a satisfying seasonal arc over as simple an end goal as "Kill this guy."  There's no way the characters can really "progress" towards that goal and yet not achieve it over the course of an episode.  All they can do is try, inevitably fail, spend the rest of the episode cleaning up their own mess, and they're back to square one.  Heroes who do nothing but constantly fuck up make for very unsatisfying viewing.  And they don't even fail for good reasons - say, that they've misjudged and underestimated Vandal Savage, who turns out to be the world's greatest badass and manages to outsmart and overpower them at every turn.  That could help build up our villain and sell him as a major threat to the audience.  But no, instead their failures always seem to come down to carelessness, basic ineptitude, and the deus ex machina of "Time wants to happen/this event can't be changed, blah blah blah."

Speaking of Vandal Savage, he was terrible.  It's not necessarily the actor's fault, although his goofy accent was a bit distracting at times, but he was nerfed to a huge degree here.  Merging him with the (far more obscure) villain Hath-Set was a big mistake.  Not only did it did it make Savage that much less awesome by reducing his lifespan so drastically, it turned him into a weird parasite who's dependent on the Hawks to survive and pathetically mopes and pines after Hawkgirl.  And in person, he really wasn't all that powerful or impressive.  That last point is an odd one, because in his introduction in the Flash-Arrow crossover, they were definitely playing up the angle that he had some vaguely-defined magical abilities beyond his immortality, but LoT apparently just forgot about that and reduced him to being a decent martial artist who likes knives.

On the notion of other characters.  I never liked Rip Hunter; he always came across as selfish, hypocritical, and shockingly incompetent at his job to me, and I highly doubt that was intentional.  The Hawks didn't amount to anything positive (blah blah love triangle bullshit) between them, and I have absolutely no idea what message the writers were trying to send with them.  They seemed to realize that the idea of telling someone that they're destined to fall in love with some creepy person they don't know and that they'll never find happiness with anyone else is all kinds of fucked up - but at the exact same time, they were committed to reinforcing the truth of it!  What the actual fuck?

I did like the other characters, though, and there were some great moments mixed in with all the nonsense.  The prison break with Wentworth Miller and Dominic Purcell practically smirking at the camera because of the obvious parallel to their roles on Prison Break, hanging out in the Old West with Jonah Hex, the goofy kaiju homage with Ray turning himself gigantic so he could fight that huge robot, and a few others.  I don't regret watching the show, for all my issues with it.  I will probably watch the second season, if only because now the CW plans to do a ridiculous four-way crossover (http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/19/cw-crossover-arrow-flash-legends-tomorrow-supergirl) with all its capeshit shows.

Arrow's latest season can probably be summed up with this gif:

(https://i.imgur.com/B42Wo1n.gif)

Back on the subject of BvS, lol (http://io9.gizmodo.com/jeremy-irons-promises-that-justice-league-wont-be-as-me-1779486023).
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on June 03, 2016, 12:07:45 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AO19XY2rqc

I doubt this will make the movie much better, but I'll still probably watch it for masochistic reasons.

http://deadline.com/2016/06/the-flash-rick-famuyiwa-dope-dc-comics-warner-bros-1201766332/

I approve of this choice.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on June 03, 2016, 04:44:05 AM
Why do you approve?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on June 03, 2016, 05:50:19 AM
Because he's black.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on June 10, 2016, 04:26:35 AM
He's an experienced director with a number of critically-acclaimed films to his name, not a privileged young upstart being handed his career on a silver platter.

Being tormented and full of angst is perfectly in line with the way [Batman]'s been characterized in the comics at all times except the hated 60s/early 70s incarnation that was influenced by the campy TV show.

It was actually the other way around - the comics influenced the show.  Part of the reason why the show adopted such a goofy tone to begin with was to parody the comics it was based on.  Even before the show, we had Batman comics with covers like these:

(http://i.imgur.com/I5upPVE.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/vA0FlTO.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/J8Da64f.jpg)

The history of Batman is a truly fascinating subject.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Roundy on June 10, 2016, 05:55:30 AM
Wow, that last one might be my new favorite Batman cover ever.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on June 10, 2016, 02:17:55 PM
He's an experienced director with a number of critically-acclaimed films to his name, not a privileged young upstart being handed his career on a silver platter.

Oh jesus
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Jura-Glenlivet on June 10, 2016, 04:00:23 PM
He's an experienced director with a number of critically-acclaimed films to his name, not a privileged young upstart being handed his career on a silver platter.




If he’s in it for the money, fine. If he is looking for critical acclamation he’s moved into the wrong genre surely, steroidal men in gimp suits punching each other!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on June 10, 2016, 04:34:14 PM
Aren't most of his films received in the "okay" or "not bad" range? "Critically acclaimed" seems a bit much
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on June 17, 2016, 02:18:35 AM
Aren't most of his films received in the "okay" or "not bad" range? "Critically acclaimed" seems a bit much

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/rick_famuyiwa/

The Family Wedding looks to be his only major flop.  It's a more promising filmography than what Snyder has, at least.

Oh jesus

Please direct your exasperation towards the people behind Suicide Squad.  Their antics have made the news again:

https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/suicide-squad-david-ayer-made-the-cast-punch-each-171700255.html

In other news, it seems like some people have gotten to see BvS's "ultimate edition," or the director's cut including all the deleted scenes, early.  The whole movie hasn't been put online yet, at least not as far as I can tell, but all the extra scenes can be watched here (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVjyFgjZRa9W9E0zwKncVKmj7thwYjSwD).  I don't know where exactly in the film each of these new scenes are placed, but giving the movie the benefit of the doubt (which, based on the pacing and editing of the theatrical release, may be more than it deserves), I'd say that they make for a decent improvement on the final product.  The story makes a lot more sense now, at the very least.  The biggest plot hole of the movie - why anyone in the world would blame Superman for shooting all those people in Africa - is explained, along with a couple of other subplots, like the Senate bombing and Clark's investigation of Batman.

Of course, none of that fixes the main problem, that this is a movie ostensibly about Batman and Superman fighting that refuses to be about Batman and Superman fighting.  But still, it's something.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on June 21, 2016, 07:58:00 PM
On the notion of BvS's best scene.  It's kind of a stretch that Batman can shrug off so many close-range gunshots, but if the alternative is him wearing a big clunky suit of armor that he can barely move in, let alone fight, then we had better just suspend our disbelief and suppose that this Batsuit is so tough that it can even absorb the impact of a gunshot.  That blood splatter was an extremely unnecessary touch, and the part with the grenade had me rolling my eyes as I remembered that Snyder thinks that this sort of killing "by proxy" is okay.  Aside from all that, though, this is a pretty gnarly fight.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/on-the-set-of-justice-league-the-movie-that-wants-to-s-1782290344

I raised an eyebrow at some of the wording from the Snyders, like the notion that the problem with BvS was that it was a deconstruction, but I suppose they're hardly going to come out and say, "Yeah, we fucked up, but we're going to do better this time around."  I like the scenes that we got a description of, too.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on June 22, 2016, 01:44:50 AM
Quote
“The main thing we learned [on Batman v Superman] is that people don’t like to see their heroes deconstructed,” said producer Deborah Snyder.

Ugh, fuck off. What people don't like to see is "their heroes" being useless, idiotic, whiny pieces of shit who make unfathomable decisions and brood so intensely that just seeing one of their films actually sends you into an existential depression.


Quote
“With Justice League, [Batman and Superman] have both been freed of the shackles of the responsibility to be in a place where they would fight each other,” the director explained. “That is liberating for us in making the movie [...]

You put the shackles on you fucking idiot. I hate how he seems to be acting like BvS was something that had to happen, Batman and Superman had to fight for retardedly convoluted reasons Snyder bent over backwards to manufacture in order to find a reason for them to do so (that still barely made sense!!).


Quote
People trying to accomplish goals together is the root of all great comedy in my view.

Boy, I can't wait to see Snyder's idea of comedy. Sounds like a hilarious guy.


Quote
Gordon then turns around and, in classic Batman fashion, Wonder Woman, Batman and Cyborg disappear, leaving the Flash alone.

“Wow, did they just do that?” wonders the fastest man alive. “How rude.”

Yep. Hilarious.


Quote
(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--cgBK9cD---/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/blljfuobuza7kfwzxbpl.jpg)

Does he have divots on the surface he's using his mouse on? Why???


Also, the Flash's humor in general seems like it's got a very good chance of being really cringeworthy in Snyder's style. So we'll see how Snyder handles that.


In general, though, this sounds like a step forward, so I'll peg myself as very, very, very cautiously optimistic I guess???
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on June 22, 2016, 06:58:37 AM
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/06/21/a-hater-tours-the-justice-league-set

Wow. This is a MUCH better article and has me a lot more optimistic.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on July 01, 2016, 12:58:25 AM
If anyone's interested in seeing the ultimate cut, just let me know, and I'll be happy to share.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 05, 2016, 03:30:44 AM
Well I watched it (thanks George) and I have to say it is definitely better than my first viewing of the movie. I am not sure if it is because of extra material or because I could follow it more easily on a second viewing, but the plot seemed to make more sense and have a more substantial development.

I still don't like the story. I think the characters are contradictory and the fights scenes only reinforce how little of a grasp Snyder had in them. I realize now that Diane Lane could have handled the scene where she advises Superman on his duty to the world much better. She chose to play it defiant and bitter instead of playing it as a mother who knew that her son had to choose for himself, even if she knew what would be best and he might choose incorrectly. I can't guess why she chose to make it a smaller-hearted moment, and it surely could have been written better, but it made me rethink that "it was all the writing and direct that made BvS terrible".

Fuck the score sucks. Fuck Jessie Eisenberg sucked. Was that Darkseid at the end?  Fuck that sucked.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 05, 2016, 03:45:22 AM
Oh... And the flashbacks. Fuck they sucked.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Snupes on July 05, 2016, 06:08:23 AM
Fuck that movie sucked
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 05, 2016, 06:44:40 AM
It sucked like fuck
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on July 07, 2016, 03:49:44 AM
The downside to the story being made clearer is that it emphasizes just how dumb the story was to begin with.  One thing the ultimate cut really makes explicit is that Lex was behind literally every single aspect of Batman and Superman's enmity.  Even beyond the obvious things like the shenanigans in Africa and the Capitol bombing, there's also his specifically inviting Clark Kent to his party so that he would confront Bruce Wayne, smuggling shivs to prisoners so that they would kill anyone with Batman's brand on them, sending Clark the information about those prison stabbings that got him started on his investigation, etc.  Setting aside how convoluted and nonsensical his plan is, this fatally undermines the titular struggle.  It wasn't enough to only have Batman and Superman fight when they were tricked into it - their entire ideological conflict is based on them being tricked into it.  Well, I suppose Batman did hate Superman after Metropolis getting rekt during the events of MoS, but I think the movie kind of forgot about that as it went on.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: Rama Set on July 07, 2016, 05:38:49 AM
You don't get it! Lex Luthor is a genius!
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on July 09, 2016, 03:54:07 AM
He must be, seeing how he so easily manipulated the world's greatest detective and discovered the secret identities of all the capeshitters off-screen.  It was very considerate of him to name those capeshitters and create their symbols, too.  Also, that was Steppenwolf at the end, not Darkseid.  He's going to be the villain for the Justice League movie.

In related news:

<George> Snupes: https://gfycat.com/AnyPiercingFennecfox
<Snupes> George: Yes
<Snupes> Perfect
<George> One of the most well-known German expressionist films is called Metropolis
<George> Coincidence? I think not
<Snupes> George: Is there a German expressionist film named "Gotham" next to it?
<George> I don't think so, but there are definitely some Gothic German expressionist films
<George> Close enough
<Snupes> Yeah that'll work
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: beardo on July 09, 2016, 07:55:16 AM
Where? Also, that was Steppenwolf at the end
Where?
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: George on July 09, 2016, 02:44:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-MUzvASr8s
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Blanko on July 09, 2016, 02:59:58 PM
This thread doesn't really seem to be about the first look of Ben Affleck's Batman anymore, so I've renamed it to be about all things capeshit instead. It looks like that's what this thread was already being used for anyway.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on July 09, 2016, 03:48:53 PM
<George> I disapprove of your title change to the capeshit thread, Blanko
<George> You should have used the word "capeshit" in there
<George> I've grown so used to it that the word "superhero" looks foreign to me
<Blanko> I don't want to use profanity in subjects
<Crudblud> How can one man be so moral?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on July 09, 2016, 11:27:30 PM
"shit" really isn't a profanity imo tbh js
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on July 10, 2016, 08:16:02 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-MUzvASr8s
That looks literally nothing like Steppenwolf.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on July 10, 2016, 09:25:54 AM
Warren Ellis' 2014 run on Moon Knight is really good! I'm used to Ellis being kind of a snarky edgelord, and there is some of that in here, but he really gets the dark humour of the character and his unique mental condition. This time around Moon Knight is a private detective, and has more of a cold persona than I've seen before, which leads to some great moments of deadpan humour, but also emphasises his fearlessness. He is still an incredibly violent character, but not quite so over-the-top as he was when Charlie Huston was writing him back in 2006 — a run which was fine, but far too self-serious for my taste — and gets into a lot of fights that would give the Netflix Daredevil a run for its money both in terms of bloodshed and in terms of spectacle.

Speaking of Netflix, I really want to see Moon Knight on there. His multiple personalities mean that he himself could make up half the regular cast, and he has some seriously diabolical villains that would be really cool to see on screen if they were handled properly. I think the biggest barrier to a live action adaptation would be the effects budget, since (in this latest run) he has quite a few gadgets like a drone glider, a self-driving car, tons of Egyptian artefacts which he uses to fight different kinds of enemies etc. (even in older versions he has a technological arsenal to rival Batman) and gets into some pretty weird situations, not to mention his god Khonshu appears to him in many different, typically grotesque guises. If done well, it could be the best thing Marvel has put out so far.

Moony is often compared to Batman, and there are some similarities, but the former is literally the avatar of a bloodthirsty Egyptian god, has no qualms about killing people, and is funding his operation with blood money he made through various shady activities in the past, as opposed to the latter, who does or tries to do everything by the book and is motivated by his belief in justice. Moony also dresses in all white so that his enemies will see him coming, and takes pleasure in extreme violence, whereas Batman prefers stealth and strategy and to only use necessary, non-lethal force. In some ways Moon Knight is closer to the Punisher, though he does not use guns, and indeed they seem to be "friendly" rivals in quite a few publications.

The art by Declan Shalvey (http://i.imgur.com/3ftxFvx.jpg?1) ranges deftly between low key portraiture and dense spectacle and has a great sense of atmosphere. Moony's average day being extremely unpredictable, the art can jump from a realism which anchors the madness to psychedelic dreamscapes, and all without losing that feeling of controlled chaos. There can occasionally be a disjunction between the subtleties in the artwork and the sledgehammer satire that Ellis likes to use, but in an odd way those conflicting extremes serve only to emphasise similar aspects in the protagonist's character. Along with Bendis' 2012 run this is easily the best Moon Knight I've read so far, it's just a real shame that it only lasted six-issues. The stuff afterwards (Brian Wood and Greg Smallwood) looks like Clipart — not by comparison, it literally looks like Clipart. It's written fine, but it looks like Clipart.

Clipart!

Edit: Okay, so actually the story of the later stuff is really cool and the art "grows" on you, I guess, I still prefer the Shalvey stuff though.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 10, 2016, 11:49:58 AM
Yaaaay, I've helped to make a Moon Knight fan! ! !
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 10, 2016, 01:10:33 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-MUzvASr8s
That looks literally nothing like Steppenwolf.

Some people are speculating it is Yuga Khan. I am not familiar but a quick Google search and it looks like that makes more sense.

(http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/marvel_dc/images/3/3d/Yuga_Khan_001.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20091019102554)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on July 10, 2016, 03:56:26 PM
It's definitely Steppenwolf.  They confirmed it in the press tours of the Justice League set from a couple of weeks ago, described in the articles that Snupes and I linked.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 10, 2016, 08:01:42 PM
It's definitely Steppenwolf.  They confirmed it in the press tours of the Justice League set from a couple of weeks ago, described in the articles that Snupes and I linked.

That article just confirmed Steppenwolf was the main villain. Yuga Khan could have a role as well.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on July 19, 2016, 07:35:05 PM
Batman prefers stealth and strategy

(http://i.imgur.com/sHpGRTl.png)

Quote
and to only use necessary, non-lethal force

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgkQS7q6sT0

Also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrjneJvS6dk

In other news:

<George> beardo: In a few weeks Pooicide Squad is coming out
<George> It will be better than BvS, which was bad
<beardo> I sense you're trying to accomplish something with this, but I don't know what.
<George> Bait, obv
<George> They released a final trailer, which I will post
<George> Well, "trailer"
<beardo> Does it have shitty unfitting music like the rest of them?
<George> It's Bohemian Rhapsody again
<beardo> then I dpon't care
<George> How very shallow
<beardo> And tbh, I'm not interested in thise movie
<beardo> Batman can't save it
<George> I thought Batman can save anything
<beardo> unfortunately not this
<George> That's loser talk
<beardo> there's too much wrong
<beardo> I won't pay to watch it, I'll wait a couple of weeks and then download a korean rip with huge korean subtitles or something
<George> lol
<George> That's what I did with Crapocalypse
<George> Stupid Asian censors muffled Magneto's "fuck"

http://io9.gizmodo.com/these-suicide-squad-character-videos-are-like-getting-a-1783803084

Slipknot doesn't even get a line!  He is so getting his head blown up early in the movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on July 24, 2016, 12:03:35 AM
We finally have trailers for the new upcoming movies!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lGoQhFb4NM

I'm hopeful for this one.  No Snyder or Goyer involved, an interesting setting, and a main character who seems very different to Batman and Superman.  The one thing I'm not a fan of is the use of slow motion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gglkYMGRYlE

I'm tentatively hopeful for this one.  WB may have learned some lessons from BvS's poor reception, but they've still got Snyder in the director's chair.  And the scene with the Flash felt like it was trying way too hard to be funny.  Oh, well.  It's too far off to be worrying about it now.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 24, 2016, 02:10:24 AM
Wonder Woman looks good, although that electric guitar theme has to go.  Justice League looks fine, although on top of what you said about the Flash scene, it seems like they are trying too hard to make Aquaman a bad ass.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on July 25, 2016, 11:43:27 PM
I don't actually have too much of an issue with them playing Aquaman up as a badass, because there's a good reason for it beyond just trying to rip off Batman's shtick.  To most people, Aquaman means this:

(http://i.imgur.com/6b78q8O.jpg)

He's the useless guy who talks to fish, in other words.  And most of those people don't even know that this lame interpretation of him began and ended with Superfriends.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 26, 2016, 05:37:15 PM
Yeah, but they're trying so hard that they've gone past "badass" and ended up at "tryhard". I laughed out loud at that stupid scene of him downing whatever alcohol and slamming it on the ground.

Also Cyborg looks like an AMD graphics card. What a horrid design.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 29, 2016, 04:42:37 AM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/jared-leto-has-a-fucking-ridiculous-idea-for-how-the-jo-1784407115

God, Leto sucks. Fuck.

As someone in the comments pointed out, he really should read this:

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/xc9xfqrfsvhoygqj8zxj.JPG)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on July 30, 2016, 01:59:19 AM
They all suck.  What is this shit here?

http://io9.gizmodo.com/in-all-seriousness-was-the-suicide-squad-set-an-actual-1784477978

I can at least understand why an actor portraying the Joker would put in extra effort to make sure they do the role justice, but what the hell is Jai Courtney talking about?  Captain Boomerang is not that deep or complex a character.  He's an obnoxious bigot, a selfish asshole, and a loutish bogan.  And judging from the trailers, Courtney looks like he's nailing the role, so good for him.  But why in God's name would he need to take drugs or burn himself with cigarettes for this?  It makes no sense at all.  If the cast and crew are making up these stories, then they're fucking pathetic.  And if they're not, then the whole operation needs to be investigated by whatever agency handles dangerous work environments and abuses in the workplace.

EDIT: Looks like Courtney was indeed making it up. (http://www.businessinsider.com/jai-courtney-suicide-squad-mushrooms-2016-7)  I wonder how much else they made up.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 02, 2016, 09:00:43 PM
The review embargo ended today, and once again, it's not looking good:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/suicide_squad_2016

One interesting thing I've learned from the reviews is that the Joker plays a very small and inconsequential role in the movie (much like Wonder Woman in BvS), and doesn't share any screen time with any members of the squad beyond Harley.  If you needed any further evidence that Leto's "method acting" was just an excuse for him to be a dick to everyone, there it is.  Oh, and the main villain turns out to be a big ugly CGI nothing trying to destroy the world in a dull and generic way.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on August 03, 2016, 05:17:39 AM
The review embargo ended today, and once again, it's not looking good:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/suicide_squad_2016

One interesting thing I've learned from the reviews is that the Joker plays a very small and inconsequential role in the movie (much like Wonder Woman in BvS), and doesn't share any screen time with any members of the squad beyond Harley.  If you needed any further evidence that Leto's "method acting" was just an excuse for him to be a dick to everyone, there it is.  Oh, and the main villain turns out to be a big ugly CGI nothing trying to destroy the world in a dull and generic way.

So capeshit without capes.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 03, 2016, 09:42:23 PM
A lot of capeshit ends up not involving capes.  In related news, THR reports (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/suicide-squads-secret-drama-rushed-916693) that WB executives panicked after BvS's poor reception and heavily interfered with Soupicide Squid, while this article (https://www.theguardian.com/film/shortcuts/2016/aug/03/from-suicide-squad-to-batman-v-superman-why-dc-films-so-bad-zack-snyder) pins the blame on Snyder.  Did such executive meddling hurt the movie by diluting Ayer's vision, or was that vision just really bad to begin with?  And did Snyder's "Executive Producer" credit mean that he had much involvement with the movie?  I don't know!  But maybe I'll have some ideas when I get to see it on Friday.  I don't want to say too much more about it until then.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 05, 2016, 06:56:27 PM
And now that I've seen it, I have to say that it's really bad.  It's pretty obvious even if you didn't read that THR article that the movie was very messily edited, scrambled around, and reworked by the studio.  Remember the marketing for this movie?  The garish colors, the gaudy pop-art sensibility, the psychedelic imagery, all hinting at a movie that could be really cool and unique?  Yeah, that's not reflective of the film at all.  They tried, to an extent, to make it seem like it was, but there's only so much you can do when the filming is all done.  Freezing the screen and throwing text up there describing the characters in a tongue-in-cheek manner is fine, as is making the beginning and end credits bright and colorful, but all this really ends up doing is dragging the introduction out.  By the time the movie is satisfied that the characters are all fully introduced to the audience, there's no time for there to be a story at all.  I'm serious, there's no story here.  It's all just an excuse to get the characters fighting Enchantress, her shitty CGI brother, and her shitty CGI army.

Oh yeah, about Enchantress.  She sucks.  She's easily one of the worst capeshit villains I've ever seen.  She has no personality, no real motivation beyond some weird thing about humans not worshiping her anymore, and her evil plan is - stop me if you've heard this one before - to open up a big portal in the sky that rains down death and destruction upon the world, and if the heroes don't destroy the portal in time, life as we know it is doomed!  Oh, and there's a MacGuffin that's key to her power, in case this plot didn't seem quite familiar enough to you already.  Can you believe this shit?  What really kills me about it is that Ayer himself openly mocked (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Why-Suicide-Squad-Better-Than-Other-Comic-Book-Movies-According-David-Ayer-91167.html) this cliché in the past as something his movie ostensibly wouldn't do, and then he goes and does it himself!  It's completely contrary to the point of an organization like the squad, too.  They're supposed to handle gritty, grounded, politically-charged missions that the government doesn't want to publicly endorse.  A generic save-the-world thing like this is what you'd expect more conventional capeshitters to take care of.

If there's anything redeeming about this movie, it's the cast, who really do give it their all.  Will Smith basically plays himself, but he's charismatic enough to get away with it.  Margot Robbie is fun as Harley, although she has an annoying tendency to switch between an exaggerated Brooklyn accent and a more generic American one.  Viola Davis is fantastic as Amanda Waller, and it's a testament to her talent that she can make the dull exposition she's saddled with work as well as it does.  Joel Kinnaman is adequate as Rick Flag, and the other actors, who don't get a lot of focus, do well with what they have.  As for the Joker, I honestly can't really say whether he's good or bad.  He's barely in the movie at all, and it seems like most of his scenes were cut.  He started out as pretty annoying, and then in later scenes, I felt like maybe he was starting to grow on me...and then the movie's over, so I can't decide.  A character like the Joker always comes across as grating in the first couple of minutes you're introduced to him.  You need time to look past the tics and see how menacing or twisted he really is, and the movie just didn't give Leto a chance to make a non-superficial impression.  Maybe he has potential, is all I can really say.

In short, don't see this, or at least don't spend money on seeing this.  It's not worth it.
Title: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on August 07, 2016, 06:46:35 AM
By the time the movie is satisfied that the characters are all fully introduced to the audience, there's no time for there to be a story at all. I'm serious, there's no story here.

This is simply not true. The character intros are maybe ~20 minutes of the 2 hour movie... It's hard to take the rest of you review seriously when you say things like this. The story isn't great, it's generic. That's fine for most of the audience I imagine, but telling people not to spend money seeing it is a bit nonsensical. I'd suggest maybe staying away from reading critic reviews before seeing a movie for once, it may be skewing your perspective. Or, you're a huge fan of SS and expected a lot more, which if that's the case, then fine.

I do agree with most of the rest of what you said. Villain is generic and the plot has been seen a million times before. But it's almost like that's what capeshit movies are. I'd suggest having a drink or two before watching the movie, it'll lower your expectations.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on August 07, 2016, 01:46:40 PM
but sadaam is scared of alcohol
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 07, 2016, 03:56:17 PM
Do people still care if plots are generic?  Pretty much every plot has been generic since the beginning of time.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 07, 2016, 06:18:26 PM
Do people still care if plots are generic?  Pretty much every plot has been generic since the beginning of time.

This is true.  All stories are variations on the same seven (or nine, depending on who you ask) basic plots.  And I imagine it's even more true in cases of genre stories (maybe even particularly action movies, most of which seem to more or less follow the same basic structure).  I would argue that Die Hard had a fairly generic plot (and yes, I'm talking about even before they started calling all action movies to come out for the next several years "Die Hard in/on a <blank>"), but it doesn't stop it from being one of the best action films of all time.

To say that the plot is generic is kind of lazy critiquing, almost as bad as saying there's "no story at all" before giving a brief synopsis of the film's story.  Basically if there's a beginning, a middle, and an end, there's a story, whether you were satisfied with it or not.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 07, 2016, 07:07:22 PM
This is simply not true. The character intros are maybe ~20 minutes of the 2 hour movie

It's at least half an hour by the time the movie settles down, and more importantly, almost nothing is established plotwise the whole time, nor is there any chance for the members of the squad to interact.  It's pure exposition.  To compare it to another capeshit movie that's also very formulaic, the character introductions in GotG work as part of the story.  The characters meet in the prison, their initial relationships form there, and then they develop as the movie continues.  By the climax, their bond feels earned.  In SS, however, by the time the helicopter ride begins, everyone is at point zero.  That's my real issue, come to think of it - not so much the underwritten story as the unconvincing character arcs.  I don't buy that Captain Boomerang would return to the team willingly after bolting in the previous scene (a genuinely hilarious moment), nor that El Diablo would come to see the squad as his new family and fully embrace his powers to protect them in the climax, etc.

Quote
Villain is generic and the plot has been seen a million times before. But it's almost like that's what capeshit movies are.

Do people still care if plots are generic?  Pretty much every plot has been generic since the beginning of time.

There's a difference between a plot being generic in terms of basic narrative structure, like what you read about in screenwriting guides, and being generic in terms of specific setpieces or events that we've seen many times in movies before.  For example, you can have the three-act-structure, a reluctant hero who initially "refuses the call," or what Blake Snyder called "the dark night of the soul," a low point at the end of the second act where hope seems to be lost, etc.  That kind of thing isn't perfect, as I noted with a link to an article sharply criticizing the overreliance on Snyder's guide earlier in the thread (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1534.msg96029#msg96029), and it would be nice to see screenwriters try to move past these conventions and tell stories in more innovative ways, but it's not what I'm complaining about here.  Instead, it's the specific setpieces and events being repeated.  For example, I'm sick to death of the villain getting caught and then revealing that it was all part of the plan.  The Dark Knight did it, and then all of a sudden The Avengers, Skyfall, Into Darkness, Sherlock, and probably a bunch of other shows/movies I'm missing had to do it too.  It seldom makes much sense from the villain's perspective, and it's so commonplace that it's just become predictable.  In SS's case, the derivative element that stuck out the most was the climax involving that stupid portal/energy beam of destruction in the sky.  A few years ago, I might not have had a problem with it, but it's shown up in way, way too many capeshit films by now, and it's become dull and boring.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 08, 2016, 01:08:30 PM
This is simply not true. The character intros are maybe ~20 minutes of the 2 hour movie

It's at least half an hour by the time the movie settles down, and more importantly, almost nothing is established plotwise the whole time, nor is there any chance for the members of the squad to interact.  It's pure exposition.  To compare it to another capeshit movie that's also very formulaic, the character introductions in GotG work as part of the story.  The characters meet in the prison, their initial relationships form there, and then they develop as the movie continues.  By the climax, their bond feels earned.  In SS, however, by the time the helicopter ride begins, everyone is at point zero.

Admittedly I haven't seen the movie so maybe I'm not getting what you're criticizing here.  But it sounds like you're describing the first act of a three act structure.  The characters being introduced within the first half hour or so of a movie, before any of the main conflict really comes into play, seems typical to me (it doesn't always happen that way, for sure, but it does a great deal of the time).  If I can compare it to another capeshit movie, one much older and that is considered a certified classic in the genre, look at the original Superman.  The whole first hour is given over to Superman's origin, with nary a trace of the main plot that drives the later parts of the movie; Lex Luthor isn't even introduced until Clark arrives in Metropolis the first time; Clark doesn't meet any of his supporting cast until the same point.  And again, this movie is considered a classic.

And again I haven't seen the movie yet so maybe I should shut up, but Suicide Squad has a running time of 2 hours and 10 minutes.  Surely if the first half hour is given over to introducing the characters on an individual basis, the remaining hour and forty minutes is plenty of time to establish their relationship with each other and the plot.  If it's done clumsily fine.  But I think you're at least misaiming your criticism by complaining that they use the beginning of the movie to introduce the characters.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 08, 2016, 09:13:19 PM
Superman isn't an ensemble film.  The movie promises to be about Superman, and from start to finish, it's all about Superman.  But yes, I might be exaggerating the significance of the padded introductions.  There's probably other factors at play, like large stretches of the film being given over to Waller and/or Flag holding forth.  Part of the reason why I'm complaining about the first act so much is because of all the repetition.  I feel like a couple of different drafts were being used, and then they never cut the redundant scenes.  There's a scene where Waller explains what the point of the squad is, and then there's another scene where she explains the exact same thing.  Deadshot is given an introductory scene, then he's given another introductory scene, and then he's given yet another introductory scene.  And while I'm talking about the first act, the soundtrack deserves mention.  As much as I hate to rag on quality dadrock, these songs have been so awkwardly shoehorned in that it reeks of desperation.  They come in incredibly rapid succession, and are way too obvious and on-the-nose to elicit anything but groans.  We see Deadshot in Belle Reve prison as "The House of the Rising Sun" plays.  Waller is introduced with "Sympathy for the Devil."  Captain Boomerang gets "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap."  Killer Croc gets "Fortunate Son" - I suppose I should be grateful they didn't go with "Born on the Bayou" instead.

Also, relevant (http://www.gq.com/story/more-like-ultralame-beam-am-i-right).
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on August 10, 2016, 04:30:05 AM
Wow...if anything, George is downplaying how bad that movie was. That was bad. The only redeeming feature was Will Smith's charisma. He didn't even try to act like he was Deadshot, though, he was literally just Will Smith occasionally shooting [placeholder monster].

The single best scene in the movie was (Captain!!!) Boomerang bolting out the door as soon as he realized he could go, but they ruined it by making him come back in literally the next scene. Holy shit. Him swiping his shit and leaving immediately made me giggle loudly, then he was RIGHT BACK. wtf. That and Croc's "I'm beautiful". Honestly, that whole bar scene was better than the rest of the movie combined. It's almost as if character interaction and development is good ! ! !

All-in-all, I rate it a I'd-rather-watch-BvS-again/10.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 13, 2016, 02:26:04 PM
Boomerangs come back.  It's a meta thing.

But srsly, BvS really is the better movie.  It was more impressive and memorable visually, its action was awesome (if bombastic), and it had a clear vision of what it was trying to be - a thoroughly unpleasant, cynical vision, but a vision nevertheless.  And even just looking at it as a failure, it's still a far more interesting movie, because it provides an in-depth explanation of how exactly to fuck up what should by rights have been one of the biggest box office successes in history.

http://www.empireonline.com/movies/suicide-squad/suicide-squad-spoilers/

As the URL indicates, there are some spoilers there, so be careful (lol).  What I want to draw attention to, however, is the explanation for the two worst parts of the Joker's design, the "damaged" tattoo and the metal teeth:

Quote
"This is sort of my personal thing and maybe less about a larger connection. But Joker killed Robin and Batman basically smashes his teeth out and locks him up in Arkham Asylum. It’s in the asylum where Joker would have done the ‘damaged’ tattoo as a message to Batman saying, 'You’ve damaged me. I was so beautiful before and now you’ve destroyed my face.' That’s where the grill comes from."

First of all, I think I speak for everyone when I say that we need to see a flashback of Batfleck beating the shit out of the Joker.  But this raises an important question - why, oh why, didn't Batfleck just take the opportunity to snap his neck and be done with it?  Why bother taking him alive?  See, this is the problem when you have a Batman who kills.  Once that option is on the table, so to speak, there's no reason for him to have a rogues gallery anymore.  He knows that these villains will without a doubt continue killing and causing trouble in the future, as opposed to the "one percent chance" of Superman being his enemy that he was willing to take as "an absolute certainty."  He could prevent all that by killing them once he gets the chance.  It's an interesting moral dilemma that Batman has faced before, and usually his best defense is his moral high ground of refusing to kill.  But now he has no defense.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 13, 2016, 03:48:07 PM
And Batman should clearly have a different MO if he is willing to kill.  He could obviously make an excellent sniper/assassin and that would be the most effective way to eliminate these threats.  Even superman would have been better neutralized with a kryptonite bullet in the head.  But unfortunately we are left with these badly realized characterizations.  If the writers and directors simply adhere to the Batman character that has thrived for almost a century, then it becomes very simple to rationalize why he fights superman the way he does and why he doesn't snap Joker's neck.

I find it interesting that people are more opposed to the one person that Cavill/Superman intentionally killed vs the dozens+ that Batman did.  For me, Superman's murder of General Zod was a great place to get the entire motivation behind his policy against not killing.  Unfortunately, the writer's are not as smart as I am  :P
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on August 17, 2016, 10:21:36 AM
Batman got mad and started killing after getting his ass severely whipped by Wesley Willis some time in the 90's.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Jura-Glenlivet on August 25, 2016, 09:44:17 PM

Well I just got back from watching it and I enjoyed it!

People that read comics shouldn't expect it to turn into sheakspear, it's a special effects action movie and in that vein 8/10.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 26, 2016, 02:06:09 AM
I still think it looks like fun.  Money's tight so I'm avoiding extravagances like going to the movies at the moment but I still intend to see it eventually.  If I hate it, so be it.  I didn't think BvS was great, but it wasn't as bad as I was expecting either.  In the hands of a less melodramatic director the basic story could have worked, and I actually loved Wonder Woman and am looking forward to her movie.


Well I just got back from watching it and I enjoyed it!

People that read comics shouldn't expect it to turn into sheakspear, it's a special effects action movie and in that vein 8/10.

Meh, it doesn't have to be great art to be well-received.  Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't Shakespeare either but the fans loved it and critics gave it good reviews (the same could be said of most of the Marvel Cinematic movies, but that one being my favorite it just sticks out).  Still, I have heard positive things about Suicide Squad too, and according to Rotten Tomatoes even though the critics generally thought it stunk more of the audience liked it than didn't (two-thirds, in fact), and unlike BvS it's being considered a box office success.  Snobs like George are always going to hate but it's all relative.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 26, 2016, 03:43:46 AM
Well I just got back from watching it and I enjoyed it!

People that read comics shouldn't expect it to turn into sheakspear, it's a special effects action movie and in that vein 8/10.

Oh yeah, I never talked about the action, did I?  It sucks.  All we see is the camera cutting from character to character, showing them either hitting or shooting one of those weird blob-like monsters, which then disintegrate.  There's very little creativity shown with how the squad members use their weapons or abilities, and the use of those ugly monsters guarantees that nothing interesting can come from the other side of any given fight.  They can't trade blows with our antiheroes, knock them to the ground, grab them from behind, or do anything beyond charge blindly at them and then disintegrate once struck.  Also, if I wanted Shakespearean capeshit, I'd watch Thor.

But hey, if you liked the movie, more power to you.  Don't let my cynicism take your enjoyment of it away.

I didn't think BvS was great, but it wasn't as bad as I was expecting either.

What?  You watched it, and you never even told us?  Unacceptable!  I demand that you briefly summarize your thoughts on the movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on August 26, 2016, 04:06:14 AM
Gotta agree with George. I didn't even think that movie was any good for action. As I've said elsewhere, that was probably the most uninspired choreography I've seen in an action movie in many, many years.

"We have a guy with boomerangs? Let's have him punch and stab people! We have a girl with a bat? Let's have her hit some people, then shoot the rest! We have a guy who never misses? Let's have him use that skill once! We have a giant monster? Let's have him throw a dude on the ground twice! We have a guy who shoots flames? Let's have him stand around idly and awkwardly! We have a girl with a magic katana? Let's have her just cut people! Am I missing anyone? Lol I don't even know because everyone's so forgettable!!"

Ugh. That movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 26, 2016, 05:28:04 AM
What?  You watched it, and you never even told us?  Unacceptable!  I demand that you briefly summarize your thoughts on the movie.

Well, as I alluded to in that post, I think Zack Snyder's biggest weakness is that he tends to go for over-the-top melodrama in a way that can be boring.  In a weird way it works for something like 300, where its coupling with over-the-top action makes the whole thing a spectacle; it didn't work quite as well in Watchmen, but the story in that is enough of a thinker that it may have masked the film's flaws (honestly I thought the opening montage set to Bob Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changin'" was fantastic, and the rest of the movie just kind of lagged in comparison to its opening); and it really didn't work at all in BvS.  I mean, seriously, not at all.  It might be partly that by now he's done things like this so much that it feels trite (is this really the kind of thing you want defining your career as a filmmaker?), but there were long stretches of the movie that were just boring.

I hated Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor.  Hated him.  Even worse miscasting than Affleck.  I suppose that no one will ever match Hackman's performance of the character but Kevin Spacey's take in Superman Returns was one of the highlights in that (also mediocre) movie so it's definitely possible for other people to make the character engaging.  I don't know, I guess the fact that he played a billionaire sociopath to acclaim in the past made them think he would be a good choice?  They were wrong.

And there was a pervasive dumbness throughout.  Some of it was the studio's fault, no doubt; the moment where we see the files on the other future JLA members was clearly meant as advertisement for their respective movies and the Justice League movie itself, and its obviousness as advertising took me out of the story.  Please, WB, get the trailers out of the way before the movie starts in the future; why mess with a winning formula?

But the Martha thing... I'm not sure how much involvement Snyder had with the writing, or who was truly responsible for it, but it was, I don't know, fanboyish?  Like he noticed as no doubt millions of other comic fans in the past have noticed that Superman and Batman both have mothers named Martha, and tried to work it into the story in a way that really didn't make sense, didn't feel the least bit natural or realistic, and had me rolling my eyes.  It was like how they worked in the origin of Lex Luthor's baldness; was it really necessary?

Again, I think structuring the origin of the World's Finest team around Batman fearing Superman because of the extent of his powers was a good idea.  Henry Cavill plays a fine Superman, in both his guises, which I think is important, and Gal Gadot really stole the whole show as Wonder Woman; my delight at her performance was the biggest surprise I got out of the movie, and the only real issue with her was that she was underused.  And even though I resent the fact that they completely changed Doomsday's origin, I thought the action sequences at the end were pretty good; however, they ran too long, which I guess is no surprise with a Zack Snyder product.  I also liked the decision to have Superman die at Doomsday's hands at the end of the movie.  It was actually one nod to the comics that I thought was decent, and the ending had a kind of "ending to Star Trek II" vibe to it.  I dug it.  It does make me wonder where they're going with Superman's story arc next; obviously it's impractical for them to do any kind of adaptation of "Reign of the Superman" as part of the Justice League movie (which is actually a shame as that's one of my all-time favorite Superman storylines) so they'll probably just go in a completely different direction.  It'll probably be lame (especially with Snyder directing) but who knows?

Overall, I don't know, I guess I give it a C-.  It has its positives but the positives just don't come close to outweighing the negatives.  Zack Snyder needs to stop making movies and WB needs to do a better job figuring out what people want to see rather than trying to dictate it.  That they seem to be failing so hard so far is really disappointing because I've been wanting to see DC do with their movies what Marvel has been doing for a while now, because I've always been a DC guy, and it's just too bad the execution is so poor.

Well look, you've done coaxed an entire review out of me.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on August 26, 2016, 06:15:13 AM
Even worse miscasting than Affleck.
miscasting
Affleck.
miscasting Affleck.
bro
bro
bro
bro no
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on August 26, 2016, 11:25:42 PM
While I agree with most of that...

A) Really? You liked mopey Superman? The guy who spends 95% of the movie (I'm probably actually not far off) with his eyebrows furrowed so hard that I'm not entirely confident he doesn't just have a permanent set of wrinkles above his nose?

B) I thought Affleck's casting was one of the few good parts of the film.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on August 27, 2016, 07:46:09 AM
And why isn't Clark a bumbling doofus?!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Jura-Glenlivet on August 27, 2016, 09:50:28 PM
I still think it looks like fun.  Money's tight so I'm avoiding extravagances like going to the movies at the moment but I still intend to see it eventually.  If I hate it, so be it.  I didn't think BvS was great, but it wasn't as bad as I was expecting either.  In the hands of a less melodramatic director the basic story could have worked, and I actually loved Wonder Woman and am looking forward to her movie.


Well I just got back from watching it and I enjoyed it!

People that read comics shouldn't expect it to turn into sheakspear, it's a special effects action movie and in that vein 8/10.

Meh, it doesn't have to be great art to be well-received.  Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't Shakespeare either but the fans loved it and critics gave it good reviews (the same could be said of most of the Marvel Cinematic movies, but that one being my favorite it just sticks out).  Still, I have heard positive things about Suicide Squad too, and according to Rotten Tomatoes even though the critics generally thought it stunk more of the audience liked it than didn't (two-thirds, in fact), and unlike BvS it's being considered a box office success.  Snobs like George are always going to hate but it's all relative.

I think the best comic to film I have seen, casting wise and direction has to be Sin City, deadly little Miho!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 28, 2016, 04:12:16 AM
I hated Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor.  Hated him.  Even worse miscasting than Affleck.  I suppose that no one will ever match Hackman's performance of the character but Kevin Spacey's take in Superman Returns was one of the highlights in that (also mediocre) movie so it's definitely possible for other people to make the character engaging.  I don't know, I guess the fact that he played a billionaire sociopath to acclaim in the past made them think he would be a good choice?  They were wrong.

The best Lex will always be Clancy Brown's version from the DCAU.

Really? You liked mopey Superman? The guy who spends 95% of the movie (I'm probably actually not far off) with his eyebrows furrowed so hard that I'm not entirely confident he doesn't just have a permanent set of wrinkles above his nose?

And it's such generic, purposeless brooding, too!  I'm stressing this point so nobody thinks I'm just pining for the Christopher Reeves portrayal, or that I think Superman can never be challenged or troubled.  He absolutely can, but it can't be his default state, so to speak.  There's no benefit to him being so aloof and standoffish in the face of people questioning his motives and spreading lies about him.  For a character like Batman, who wants people to be afraid of him, it makes sense that he'd play up his villainous image and let the police treat him like he's a menace.  But Superman isn't like that.  He should absolutely be out there giving interviews, cooperating with the world's governments, and explaining very clearly to the public that no, he doesn't think he's a god, and that he really is just trying to do the right thing.  How else can he be the symbol of hope and inspiration to the people of Earth that his father wanted him to be?  It doesn't serve a narrative purpose for him to be a brooding stoic instead.

And why isn't Clark a bumbling doofus?!

This is an interesting point.  Cavill said in an interview that they decided to go in a different direction with Clark because acting too much like a klutz would realistically end up attracting more attention from the people around him, not less.  It's also been convincingly argued by some critics before that a wimpy pushover would never last as a journalist for a major newspaper in a major city.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on August 28, 2016, 08:48:18 AM
*agrees with george*
Broody superman works only in small doses.  But the brooding should end when he realizes that brooding does nothing but show people you're depressed.  Superman is hope.  Hope that one man can fight back.  Hope that you don't need to abandon your morals.  Hope that maybe, just maybe, you can be powerful and not corrupt.

Superman brooding for a little at what he's brought upon the Earth is great but it needed to end once he saw the issues of his inaction. 

Of course, Hollywood's focus groups seem to be focused on broody as "relatable" for some reason.  But I don't want superman to be relatable to me, I want superman to be better than me.  Someone to strive for.  Someone I can look up and say "I want to be as heroic as him."

Also:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y21sm5xB4vk
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 28, 2016, 02:05:29 PM
I didn't find him brooding in his public appearances. Aloof is what I would use to describe it. I also didn't find his brooding to be pointless; he has just had a significant event attributed to him unfairly and is seeing a swell of public opinion against him. Pretty upsetting for someone who tries to help people for its own sake.

His attitude when fighting batman was counter productive, I thought. Who talks to someone like that when they want their help? "If I wanted it, you'd be dead already". Seriously, this line is quintessential tyrannical villain stuff.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 30, 2016, 04:24:39 AM
Sure, he's in a tough situation, but that doesn't mean that what he ought to be doing in response is brooding and wallowing in self-pity.  There's more than one way to communicate a character's distress to the audience, and going with the same montage of furrowed brows, solemn faces, and somber music every time just feels tiresome.  Here's something that I appreciated about SS - it didn't feel the need to do that.  That movie's "dark night of the soul" was the characters having a few drinks.  They didn't need to bow their heads in contemplation as the digital rain fell and they dwelled upon the poetic tragedy of their existence.  It would be nice if the actual heroes didn't have to do that all the time as well.

Also, Roundy, what didn't you like about Batfleck?  He was the one part of BvS that most critics and fans seemed to agree was great.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 30, 2016, 01:00:08 PM
Sure, he's in a tough situation, but that doesn't mean that what he ought to be doing in response is brooding and wallowing in self-pity.

When does he wallow in self-pity?

Quote
There's more than one way to communicate a character's distress to the audience, and going with the same montage of furrowed brows, solemn faces, and somber music every time just feels tiresome.

Yeah, that is mostly the director's fault and/or the editor's. I think Henry Cavill did a good job with in that sandbox.

Quote
  Here's something that I appreciated about SS - it didn't feel the need to do that.  That movie's "dark night of the soul" was the characters having a few drinks.  They didn't need to bow their heads in contemplation as the digital rain fell and they dwelled upon the poetic tragedy of their existence.  It would be nice if the actual heroes didn't have to do that all the time as well.

They don't really do it that much, and Batman is more angsty than Superman. I feel like the design choices let the impact of those few moments linger too long. It makes it seem there is more "brooding" than actually is in the film.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on August 31, 2016, 05:45:50 PM
The scene on the mountain with Jonathan was probably the biggest broody mcbroodwalking moment, and his morose speech to Lois about Superman only being a dream also stood out.  But even when he isn't necessarily brooding within the story itself, we still have to deal with his faces he's pulling the whole time.  I know this might seem like an odd point, but Superman has a ton of scenes where he has no dialogue, and in those cases there's very little to focus on other than his facial expressions.  It's like they set the tone for his character, and that ugly scowl of disgust he so frequently has is just downright unpleasant.

As for Cavill's performance specifically, I'm sure he's doing the best he can with the material he's given.  The only issue I can really lay at his feet rather than simply the writing or direction is his nonexistent chemistry with Amy Adams.  Seriously, Batfleck and the random lady who's in his bed when he wakes up in the middle of the night are a more convincing couple than Clark and Lois.  I can at least believe that those two had sex, while Clark and Lois come across like two awkward strangers together.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 31, 2016, 06:37:47 PM
The scene on the mountain with Jonathan was probably the biggest broody mcbroodwalking moment, and his morose speech to Lois about Superman only being a dream also stood out.  But even when he isn't necessarily brooding within the story itself, we still have to deal with his faces he's pulling the whole time.  I know this might seem like an odd point, but Superman has a ton of scenes where he has no dialogue, and in those cases there's very little to focus on other than his facial expressions.  It's like they set the tone for his character, and that ugly scowl of disgust he so frequently has doesn't set a pleasant tone at all.

Yeah.  I can get behind that.  I think it totally makes sense for Superman to have a very neutral facial expression, but the consternation that Superman often displays is not very condusive to connecting with the audience.

Quote
As for Cavill's performance specifically, I'm sure he's doing the best he can with the material he's given.  The only issue I can really lay at his feet rather than simply the writing or direction is his nonexistent chemistry with Amy Adams.  Seriously, Batfleck and the random lady who's in his bed when he wakes up in the middle of the night are a more convincing couple than Clark and Lois.  I can at least believe that those two had sex, while Clark and Lois come across like two awkward strangers together.

The first scene in the apartment was decent but then the relationship floundered after that.  They should both have slick inner thighs for each other though, it's true.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 05, 2016, 08:33:22 AM
So, I finally saw (most of) BvSDoJ on Saturday and found it bewildering. I know it's both a sequel and an exercise in extended world-building but it should still stand up on its own, this film doesn't. I haven't seen Man of Steel, so that whole segment at the beginning of the film with the Kryptonian invasion and buildings collapsing meant nothing to me. This was supposed to be where Batman's suspicion of Superman first took place, but for the life of me, I couldn't figure out why. The ones slicing skyscrapers apart were the giant lozenges of death, Superman was just stopping them. You'd think that an experienced Batman would by able to emphasise with superheroes not being able to save everyone - especially with that whole Robin-suit bit.

Character motivations in general seemed like they never made their way into the script, especially Lex Luthor's. Maybe I missed it, but why was he funding African civil wars? Why does he hate Superman so much? He was so busy being a manic pixie dream girl that he forgot to demonstrate his motivations for doing anything.

There were bits that were just utterly bamboozling. I worked out quickly that the whole Emperor Superman bit was a dream-sequence, but was confused as to where it came from since the scene before Wayne had been working on his computer without showing much sign of falling asleep. Then he apparently woke up and someone (I think it was the Flash?) appears in a ball of lightning screaming about Lois Lane. Then we're on a mountain with Superman's dad (I thought he was a corn-husker in Ohio not a mountain-man - whatever.) Then there's a side-bit where the rest of the Justice League are unveiled with mini-trailers because... who the fuck knows?

Eventually I stopped watching after the 'Martha' bit (Does Bruce Wayne freak out so much every time the name 'Martha' is mentioned?) when Lex was doing something with a crashed alien MacGuffin and the body of General Zod. I kind of felt like it was a little late in the day to be introducing whole new plot segments, but I don't know, maybe there was another hour of film to go but since it felt like it had been going on for nine hours already I felt that I'd seen enough.

In conclusion, this could have been a fun film if they hadn't been so busy jamming in everything that they found on the cutting-room floor. The tension between Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent was genuinely enjoyable, I can't help but feel like the film would have been massively improved if it was stripped back and we spent more time watching the cat-and-mouse chase between them.

I think I did the right thing by staying faa-aarr away from Suicide Squad.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 05, 2016, 10:46:23 AM
Eventually I stopped watching after the 'Martha' bit
You missed the best scene in the film then.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 05, 2016, 10:51:36 PM
You did.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 06, 2016, 03:44:26 AM
Batman's anger at Superman over the climax of MoS was a nod to that movie's critics.  People complained that Superman was far too reckless and cavalier when he fought Zod and showed little to no concern for the thousands of innocent people being killed all the while in his wake.  There's also the fact that the earth was only in danger because Zod had followed Superman there.  It was an interesting premise to base the two capeshitters' enmity on, but that issue seemed to sort of fade away as time went on, and in the end it was nothing more than Lex's manipulations that brought them to blows.  That's something that I complained about earlier in the thread, so I might as well just quote myself:

The downside to the story being made clearer is that it emphasizes just how dumb the story was to begin with.  One thing the ultimate cut really makes explicit is that Lex was behind literally every single aspect of Batman and Superman's enmity.  Even beyond the obvious things like the shenanigans in Africa and the Capitol bombing, there's also his specifically inviting Clark Kent to his party so that he would confront Bruce Wayne, smuggling shivs to prisoners so that they would kill anyone with Batman's brand on them, sending Clark the information about those prison stabbings that got him started on his investigation, etc.  Setting aside how convoluted and nonsensical his plan is, this fatally undermines the titular struggle.  It wasn't enough to only have Batman and Superman fight when they were tricked into it - their entire ideological conflict is based on them being tricked into it.  Well, I suppose Batman did hate Superman after Metropolis getting rekt during the events of MoS, but I think the movie kind of forgot about that as it went on.

It's really strange.  I can't understand how Snyder or Goyer/Terrio seriously thought that Lex tricking/manipulating Batman and Superman into fighting would make for a more compelling and interesting story than them choosing to fight because of their own goals or motivations.

Snupes and beardo are right about you missing the best scene in the film.  I posted a link to it earlier, but that's been taken down now, so here's a new one, along with my comments from earlier in the thread:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyVPh3Usrho

It's kind of a stretch that Batman can shrug off so many close-range gunshots, but if the alternative is him wearing a big clunky suit of armor that he can barely move in, let alone fight, then we had better just suspend our disbelief and suppose that this Batsuit is so tough that it can even absorb the impact of a gunshot.  That blood splatter was an extremely unnecessary touch, and the part with the grenade had me rolling my eyes as I remembered that Snyder thinks that this sort of killing "by proxy" is okay.  Aside from all that, though, this is a pretty gnarly fight.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 06, 2016, 06:55:17 AM
If that's the best scene in a movie about batman vs superman, then I'm not sorry I missed it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 06, 2016, 08:26:56 AM
Eventually I stopped watching after the 'Martha' bit
You missed the best scene in the film then.
If I hadn't stopped watching I'd have been asleep and missed it anyway.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 08, 2016, 11:42:46 PM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/geoff-johns-on-the-future-of-dc-movies-relax-were-cha-1786394751

This is good.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/joe-manganiello-will-play-deathstroke-in-the-batman-sol-1786389222

Interesting choice of villain.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 09, 2016, 07:47:38 AM
Is it?  They took justice league and now made it a single film.  Can they do it?  Probably but they don't have all the setup that Marvel had with Avengers. (everyone having their own movie already)

So... not sure how they're gonna do it.  Also, they said it's almost done filming yet they're changing the tone so it's going to be a quick flip, cutting room floor full, movie.

I predict failure.

But I'm all for the direction of hope and optimism.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 09, 2016, 08:20:40 AM
So, it's going in a more lighthearted and hopeful direction whilst remaining in the same gritty Grimdark universe and directly addressing murder, torture, and attempted supercide?

Oh, and Zack Snyder's still directing.

Sounds like a train wreck waiting to happen.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 09, 2016, 01:52:54 PM
They took justice league and now made it a single film.

I'm sure there's going to be a sequel, but it's not a two-part story anymore.  I think that's for the best.

Quote
Also, they said it's almost done filming yet they're changing the tone so it's going to be a quick flip, cutting room floor full, movie.

The tonal change was decided upon after the poor reception to BvS, before the filming for JL began.

Oh, and Zack Snyder's still directing.

This is my main concern.  I'm guessing that firing him and getting a new director would have ended up delaying JL, but that would still be preferable to continuing on with him.  Presumably WB disagrees.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 09, 2016, 08:15:04 PM
Oh, actually, having seen it. I did watch that scene at the time.

You thought that was the best scene in the movie? It's really, really boring. We've established that Batman can take a bullet to the back of his armoured head without flinching, and we know that he doesn't have try hold back to save himself from killing these thugs, so where's the tension? Is it just the satisfaction of watching an admittedly well-choreographed fight scene?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 10, 2016, 02:38:33 PM
Is it just the satisfaction of watching an admittedly well-choreographed fight scene?
No, it's the satisfaction of watching the coolest and best choreographed Batman fight scene. It's literally the most exciting scene in the movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 10, 2016, 03:47:01 PM
Is it just the satisfaction of watching an admittedly well-choreographed fight scene?
No, it's the satisfaction of watching the coolest and best choreographed Batman fight scene. It's literally the most exciting scene in the movie.
I preferred the battle in the office block from Dark Knight. Beating up the bad guys, whilst stopping the good guys from accidentally killing hostages, and not being able to just resort to machine-gunning them. Genuine tension, you know that Bats isn't going to be killed, but can he rescue the hostages? Can he beat the SWAT guys in time to stop either the joker or the two ferries full of hostages from blowing everyone up?

The BvS scene is fun, in the same way watching someone execute a difficult combo on Arkham Asylum is fun, but there's no tension, no depth to the fight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFSqcqK3KB4
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 10, 2016, 06:57:50 PM
Nolan's action scenes definitely worked better from a storytelling perspective, but as far as style and choreography went, they were severely lacking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oubpznpVtvI

Just look at how slow and ungainly Batman is.  I mean, I wouldn't want to fight him or anything, but I don't buy him as any kind of brilliant martial artist capable of taking on crowds of enemies and winning.  With Batfleck, however, I can accept that this is how the goddamn Batman fights.  With the exception of all the murder, of course.  Fast and brutal, making extensive use of his gadgets as well as his environment, fending off multiple attackers at once, plowing through walls, etc.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 12, 2016, 01:33:01 AM
Saddam basically nailed it. The Dark Knight trilogy had better fights story-wise, but they were really...really...boring most of the time. BvS pulled off the first badass actual Batman-like fight scene, and that's why it's exciting. Plus, yeah, that choreography. Idk, I guess I just really appreciate choreography as an art as well. Just like a dance doesn't need to have tension to be awesome and/or beautiful.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 12, 2016, 08:33:35 AM
I'm not disputing that it was well choreographed, but  when Batman can shrug off bullets and isn't adverse to murder, I have to wonder what the point o the fight scene is. Why not just walk in the front door with a machine-gun?

I think that the scene perfectly encapsulates BvS - stylish but unnecessary.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 12, 2016, 12:38:25 PM
The point of the fight scene is the god-damn Batman being god-damn awesome, duh.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 12, 2016, 01:38:40 PM
If you like.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 13, 2016, 02:31:27 AM
Almost all live-action Batman fight scenes are pretty bad, to be honest.  My personal favorite is the one at the climax of the first Burtman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbyGEKKlaKo

He's getting his ass handed to him by a guy who looks like Ray Charles.  Fucking Ray Charles!  And that dive from the bell, only to be caught and flung into the staircase, is just embarrassing.  Come on, Batman, up your game!  His eventual victory (by murder, no less) feels more like a stroke of luck than any kind of strategy paying off.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 13, 2016, 02:44:50 AM
Nolan Batman fight scenes are embarrasing. Slow and stiff movements.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 13, 2016, 12:32:04 PM
Nolan Batman fight scenes are embarrasing. Slow and stiff movements.

Even if that were true, at least they had more than 5 minutes of decent film for every 2.5 hours of screenplay.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 13, 2016, 12:53:50 PM
Actually the films are p. overrated, js.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on September 13, 2016, 02:49:08 PM
Actually the films are p. overrated, js.

Not compared to BvS. They're like Shakespeare in comparison.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 13, 2016, 05:22:25 PM
lmao
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 15, 2016, 07:52:47 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIHH5-HVS9o

Looks much lighter than BvS.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 15, 2016, 09:16:25 AM
I know this sounds nitpicky at this point, but I really hope they don't make Bruce super light and wisecracky. He's a p. stoic person with a dry sense of humour.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: rooster on September 15, 2016, 12:09:57 PM
mmm, Jason Momoa.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 16, 2016, 07:14:39 PM
I already posted that trailer, months ago (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1534.msg101442#msg101442). >o<  But now that we're talking about it again, it seems like a good time to post a video criticizing Snyder's directorial style:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38Cy_Qlh7VM

He's right that the tone wasn't BvS's biggest problem, but I think that a lighter feel might discourage Snyder from prioritizing epic moments and visual awe.  In other news, Harley movie (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/margot-robbie-signs-first-look-928813), discuss.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 16, 2016, 07:59:32 PM
I already posted that trailer, months ago (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1534.msg101442#msg101442). >o<  But now that we're talking about it again, it seems like a good time to post a video criticizing Snyder's directorial style:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38Cy_Qlh7VM

He's right that the tone wasn't BvS's biggest problem, but I think that a lighter feel might discourage Snyder from prioritizing epic moments and visual awe.  In other news, Harley movie (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/margot-robbie-signs-first-look-928813), discuss.

Well shit, sorry.  I forgot.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 16, 2016, 08:25:11 PM
Harley movie (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/margot-robbie-signs-first-look-928813), discuss.
Terrible. End of discussion.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on September 17, 2016, 03:29:47 AM
Well shit, sorry.  I forgot.

How very ferngetful of you.

Harley movie (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/margot-robbie-signs-first-look-928813), discuss.
Terrible. End of discussion.

the rustling of the jimmies

I know this sounds nitpicky at this point, but I really hope they don't make Bruce super light and wisecracky. He's a p. stoic person with a dry sense of humour.

I don't think they'll do that.  They demonstrated some decent dry humor in the scenes between Alfred and Bruce, so it makes sense they'd keep to that tone.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on October 04, 2016, 02:48:01 AM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/try-not-to-be-shocked-to-the-core-of-your-being-when-yo-1787352637

http://collider.com/ben-affleck-deathstroke-batman/

From the latter article:

Quote from: Ben Affleck
He's a great villain because—I just had an instinctive feeling that he would match up with him well. You know, I'm a big admirer of that character as well, especially in the New 52 the way that they did Deathstroke, and I thought that it could work.

Very descriptive.  Well, he wouldn't necessarily have been my choice of villain, but hopefully they'll make it work.  There are at least two major advantages to going with Deathstroke - it's extremely unlikely that he'll be reinvented as a hammy ripoff of the Joker the way Lex was, and it's also extremely unlikely that the climax will revolve around a dull portal/energy beam of destruction or whatever.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on October 04, 2016, 06:07:03 AM
Superhero fight club.
Amusing trailer.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qR4UyEBi0A
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on October 04, 2016, 09:01:16 AM
No it's not.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on October 04, 2016, 11:12:29 AM
No it's not.
I was amused.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on October 08, 2016, 01:00:54 PM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/suicide-squads-getting-an-extended-edition-but-whats-b-1787444148

I suppose I'll have to check this out just to see if Leto's Joker is any better with more footage.  I still maintain there's a (small) chance that his performance was hurt by the extensive meddling and editing the studio arranged.  I doubt that the movie itself will end up being better, though.  Also, JL has wrapped filming, and they've released a fun video of some of the behind the scenes shenanigans:

https://twitter.com/ZackSnyder/status/784425976117747712

Alas, we've been here before:

(http://i.imgur.com/mdBHqJF.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on October 12, 2016, 11:41:00 PM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/our-first-look-at-justice-leagues-mera-queen-of-atlant-1787709305

The concept art seems a bit too weird and alien to me, but in live action, she looks great.  Of course, Snyder had to be edgy and drain out all the color as usual.  Still, at least not everything about Aquaman is going to be desperately trying to convince us how badass and hardcore it really is.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on October 13, 2016, 08:12:40 AM
Justice League is going to be awful. DC could barely juggle two superheroes in BvS.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on October 13, 2016, 09:55:28 AM
It might be awful, but it's gonna be cool.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on November 03, 2016, 05:55:04 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q8fG0TtVAY

Discuss.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/flash-movie-loses-dope-director-rick-famuyiwa-942604

w0w
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on November 04, 2016, 04:23:40 AM
Apparently Doctor Stranger premiered over a week ago here. derp.
Gonna watch tonight.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on November 04, 2016, 04:40:12 AM
Apparently Doctor Stranger premiered over a week ago here. derp.
Gonna watch tonight.

While you aren't the most controversial member on this forum, I'd still like to know what you think of it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on December 14, 2016, 05:39:47 PM
The extended version of Suicide Squad was released digitally a couple of weeks ago, and not much is changed from the theatrical cut.  A handful of extra lines are sprinkled throughout it, and all the added scenes can be seen here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70HfPC97tlo

The only thing I'll credit it with is that I think I see the arc Ayer was trying to give the Joker - something about how he tries to resolve his discomfort when faced with the prospect of a woman's love by murdering her, only to eventually realize that he's fallen in love with her too and refuse to go through with it.  Interesting idea, but both the writing and Leto's performance would need a lot more nuance for it to work.  Also, you might notice there are still some scenes prominently shown in the trailers that still weren't included here, most notably the one with the Joker holding a grenade.  Maybe they'll be included with the deleted scenes on the DVD.

Now that you don't need to pay to watch it (lol piracy), has anyone else seen it?  Roundy?  I'm looking for an excuse to complain and nitpick again.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/gotham-city-sirens-movie-david-ayer-margot-robbie-reteam-all-female-dc-villains-project-

Ayer is directing again?  Your movies aren't going to get any better if you keep rewarding critical failure like this, WB!  At least he isn't writing it, I guess?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 14, 2016, 05:52:56 PM
The extended version of Suicide Squad was released digitally

How else would it be released?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on December 14, 2016, 06:20:56 PM
Physically, via DVD or Blu-ray.  Which happened just yesterday, it looks like.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 14, 2016, 07:15:18 PM
Physically, via DVD or Blu-ray.  Which happened just yesterday, it looks like.

Both DVD and BR are digital media.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 14, 2016, 08:05:26 PM
What a fascinating exchange.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on December 14, 2016, 08:09:28 PM
Physically, via DVD or Blu-ray.  Which happened just yesterday, it looks like.

Both DVD and BR are digital media.

They store digital information, but they aren't digital in and of themselves.  You can hold a disc in your hand.  It's a physical object.  You can't hold a digital file in your hand.  Now please discuss the important issue of capeshit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 14, 2016, 10:33:25 PM
They store digital information, but they aren't digital in and of themselves.  You can hold a disc in your hand.  It's a physical object. You can't hold a digital file in your hand.

Digital and physical are terms that are not comparable in that way. Maybe when speaking colloquially, but since this is a place of pedants, it is worth pointing out. Even if you were to download on iTunes or stream from Netflix, there is still a physical object that the digital files reside on. Regardless of downloading to your local hard drive, streaming from someone else's hard drive, or using a different physical media, the content is still digital.

Quote
Now please discuss the important issue of capeshit.

Not this capeshit. SS was terrible; why do you want to keep diving into it? I will say I enjoyed it the first time I watched it when I was hammered. Seeing it a second time while sober cleared up my misunderstanding.

Talk about some interesting capeshit. Like maybe the new Spiderman.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on December 15, 2016, 12:32:11 AM
Even if you were to download on iTunes or stream from Netflix, there is still a physical object that the digital files reside on.

Well, no shit.  It hardly floats above our heads in the ether.  But you aren't buying that physical object when you pay to stream or download a movie, you're only buying the file itself.

Quote
Regardless of downloading to your local hard drive, streaming from someone else's hard drive, or using a different physical media, the content is still digital.

I know that.  I literally just said that:

They store digital information

You have no ammo.  Even pedantically, you're just rephrasing what I said and acting like that makes me wrong.  Digital distribution is a thing, and it's a separate thing to selling DVDs and Blu-rays.

Quote
Not this capeshit. SS was terrible; why do you want to keep diving into it? I will say I enjoyed it the first time I watched it when I was hammered. Seeing it a second time while sober cleared up my misunderstanding.

Talk about some interesting capeshit. Like maybe the new Spiderman.

I guess I've just sort of seen this thread as being for DC capeshit because it started out as all about Batfleck.  But, very well.  On the notion of Spider-Man:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrzXIaTt99U

Looks fun.  I might be more excited if there hadn't already been five movies about this guy, but I suppose they've got to keep milking the biggest moneymaker.  And Michael Keaton is always great, although I still maintain that he was miscast in the Burtman movies.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 15, 2016, 04:28:22 AM
Suicide Squad's extended cut was hilarious. I watched it so my nephew and friend could see it as well. We just spent the whole time ripping on it and making fun of it. Just sitting there and going "we some kinda...hara-kiri harem?" any time Deadshot stepped up to speak, making fun of Heath Lesser's laugh, just tearing it a new one.

This has become a new tradition with the DC films. I'm finally excited for them.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 15, 2016, 06:40:07 AM
But you aren't buying that physical object when you pay to stream or download a movie, you're only buying the file itself.

Actually, no, Mr. e-lawyer, you are not buying the file itself. You are buying a license to use the file (regardless of the medium used).

Quote
You have no ammo.  Even pedantically, you're just rephrasing what I said and acting like that makes me wrong.  Digital distribution is a thing, and it's a separate thing to selling DVDs and Blu-rays.

You should stick to things you are good at, such as being the most controversial member of the forum. You know words have meanings, right? Physical and digital are not comparable how you are using them, period. Just because others use a term incorrectly doesn't make your position correct.


Quote
I guess I've just sort of seen this thread as being for DC capeshit because it started out as all about Batfleck.  But, very well.  On the notion of Spider-Man:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrzXIaTt99U

Looks fun.  I might be more excited if there hadn't already been five movies about this guy, but I suppose they've got to keep milking the biggest moneymaker.  And Michael Keaton is always great, although I still maintain that he was miscast in the Burtman movies.

Now we are getting somewhere. I think this Spiderman movie has an interesting backstory. Especially with Sony and the weird licensing agreement, and how the last trilogy got nixed, etc. This iteration of Spiderman was the highlight of Avengers 2.5 aka CA: Civil War (which was a very mediocre installment on the whole). I am really looking forward to this one.

EDIT - Spiderman is objectively the best superhero ever.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on December 16, 2016, 02:23:40 PM
Speaking of Suicide Squad...

Haley Quinn is getting her own solo movie and she'll be Hella Gay (http://moviepilot.com/p/harley-quinn-poison-ivy-gotham-city-sirens-movie-gay/4168775).

Side note: I remember watching Batman: The Aminated Series growing up.  I never knew Harley Quinn was created in that series.  Kinda gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling seeing the first iteration of a character when it was new.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on December 16, 2016, 02:32:04 PM
Speaking of Suicide Squad...

Haley Quinn is getting her own solo movie and she'll be Hella Gay (http://moviepilot.com/p/harley-quinn-poison-ivy-gotham-city-sirens-movie-gay/4168775).

Side note: I remember watching Batman: The Aminated Series growing up.  I never knew Harley Quinn was created in that series.  Kinda gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling seeing the first iteration of a character when it was new.

Another abortion set in this godawful DCU?

(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/0f/0f4a3ddf9bd24eeba10519167c2a81f7824b45fb60db517e28eea99f82116b80.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on December 16, 2016, 02:55:28 PM
Abortion?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 17, 2016, 06:24:51 PM
Speaking of Suicide Squad...

Haley Quinn is getting her own solo movie and she'll be Hella Gay (http://moviepilot.com/p/harley-quinn-poison-ivy-gotham-city-sirens-movie-gay/4168775).

Side note: I remember watching Batman: The Aminated Series growing up.  I never knew Harley Quinn was created in that series.  Kinda gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling seeing the first iteration of a character when it was new.

Ugh...I like this idea in concept, but with Ayer on board it's probably just gonna end up being Harley and Ivy fetishized and being all sexy for the viewer, rather than depicting an actual decent lesbian relationship. We'll see.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 17, 2016, 07:01:46 PM
I watched Suicide Squad last night. What an unmitigated piece of shit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on December 17, 2016, 07:31:18 PM
Speaking of Suicide Squad...

Haley Quinn is getting her own solo movie and she'll be Hella Gay (http://moviepilot.com/p/harley-quinn-poison-ivy-gotham-city-sirens-movie-gay/4168775).

Side note: I remember watching Batman: The Aminated Series growing up.  I never knew Harley Quinn was created in that series.  Kinda gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling seeing the first iteration of a character when it was new.

Ugh...I like this idea in concept, but with Ayer on board it's probably just gonna end up being Harley and Ivy fetishized and being all sexy for the viewer, rather than depicting an actual decent lesbian relationship. We'll see.
Harley, Ivy, and Cat Woman.
But yeah, it probably will be but I'm pretty sure the comic was too.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 17, 2016, 07:33:49 PM
I watched Suicide Squad last night. What an unmitigated piece of shit.

Bro, did you even read what I said before? You have to be hammered the first time you watch it. Then, to preserve the experience, never watch it again. I watched it again and realized it was an unmitigated piece of shit as well. You could have avoided this. You will never get that time back.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on December 17, 2016, 11:07:19 PM
Now we are getting somewhere. I think this Spiderman movie has an interesting backstory. Especially with Sony and the weird licensing agreement, and how the last trilogy got nixed, etc. This iteration of Spiderman was the highlight of Avengers 2.5 aka CA: Civil War (which was a very mediocre installment on the whole). I am really looking forward to this one.

EDIT - Spiderman is objectively the best superhero ever.

ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

Batman is the best capeshitter.  Yes, he's even more overexposed than Spidey, but I don't care, because he's awesome.  Who else could pull off a stunt like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgCkmUS1IYI

And he's badass.  He could easily whup Spidey's ass - and yes, I know that ScrewAttack said that he'd lose if the two of them fought, but that's bullshit.  Batman can beat anyone as long as he has time to prepare.  The only two people who could beat him are Wesley Willis and Jackie Chan if he were frantically trying to juggle a baby or priceless artifact.  beardo will back me up on this.

As for Gotham City Sirens, I would be extremely surprised if they included the romance between Harley and Ivy at all.  Harley and Joker is the relationship that's famous, so that's the one they're most likely going to be counting on to bring audiences in.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 18, 2016, 01:08:32 AM
The "batman can beat anyone as long as he has time to prepare" argument is fucking dumb.  It is basically a tautology.  Besides there are a goodly number of people Batman wouldn't stand a prayer against with his whole life to prepare i.e. Scarlet Witch, Franklin Richards, Silver Surfer...  I would cite DC characters, but they suck and I don't read their shitty comics.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on December 18, 2016, 07:32:27 AM
ouch
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on December 18, 2016, 02:02:05 PM
The "batman can beat anyone as long as he has time to prepare" argument is fucking dumb.  It is basically a tautology.  Besides there are a goodly number of people Batman wouldn't stand a prayer against with his whole life to prepare i.e. Scarlet Witch, Franklin Richards, Silver Surfer...  I would cite DC characters, but they suck and I don't read their shitty comics.

"Here's a bunch of checkers moves that would totally beat this chess strategy."
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: George on December 28, 2016, 05:24:33 AM
The "batman can beat anyone as long as he has time to prepare" argument...is basically a tautology.

Indeed!

Quote
Besides there are a goodly number of people Batman wouldn't stand a prayer against with his whole life to prepare i.e. Scarlet Witch, Franklin Richards, Silver Surfer...

He'd find a way to beat them, because he's the goddamn Batman.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on January 13, 2017, 04:05:17 AM
I suppose I might as well talk about Batman video games here. Arkham Knight is fun - when it actually works. I've had to reinstall it three times so far because of the game suddenly declaring that it's corrupted and refusing to work. And this is on PS4, too, so they don't even have the excuse of it being a bad port. Unbelievable.

I can offer more complete thoughts on Telltale's new Batman game. It's good! It's my first Telltale game, but from what I've read online, it is more or less the same as any other Telltale game from a technical perspective, and it does have its own share of annoying bugs and glitches, although I can't bring myself to complain about that, given my current struggles with Arkham Knight. My favorite part is actually how it puts the focus on Bruce Wayne rather than Batman. It makes a lot of sense when you consider that the action scenes, although cool-looking, are of course just QTEs. There's no point in trying to compete with the Arkham series with that, so they don't. The real meat of the game is how you handle your personal and professional life as Bruce, and to that end, there's plenty of sharp dialogue, difficult decision-making, and rich character development. The one thing I will criticize it for, beyond the aforementioned technical issues, is that there are quite a few moments in the story that don't really make sense or aren't properly explained. But that's just a minor issue. I enjoyed this a lot, and I'd be delighted to see a second season.

http://deadline.com/2017/01/green-lantern-corps-warner-bros-david-goyer-justin-rhodes-dc-1201884133/

Quote
David Goyer to write the script

For fuck's sake, WB.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on January 31, 2017, 03:44:35 AM
On the notion of more DCEU news:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/dwayne-johnson-is-getting-his-own-dc-solo-film-1791392844

I guess this isn't a bad idea. No sense in sidelining Dwayne Johnson for the next few years when he's ready to make a movie with you right now. And in absolutely terrible news:

http://variety.com/2017/film/news/ben-affleck-the-batman-will-not-direct-1201971566/

God fucking damn it. Yeah, it's possible that he means no more than what he said in the statement he provided about simply being unable to both direct and star, but this being Hollywood, it could just as easily be code for "This is a fucking dumpster fire and I don't want to be associated with it any more than I have to." Everything is awful.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 01, 2017, 07:51:51 AM
I mean, I wouldn't be shocked if it honestly were just the pressure of it all. That's a lot of pressure to work under, especially since a ton of people (including myself) are looking to this movie eagerly as hopefully a sort of shining light in the DCCU.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on February 01, 2017, 11:11:02 AM
I mean, I wouldn't be shocked if it honestly were just the pressure of it all. That's a lot of pressure to work under, especially since a ton of people (including myself) are looking to this movie eagerly as hopefully a sort of shining light in the DCCU.

In fairness, it doesn't have to do much to be a shining light in the DC project at the moment.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 01, 2017, 10:15:06 PM
Sure, but I don't think that'd lessen the pressure much for him.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 16, 2017, 03:13:25 AM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-movie-director-matt-reeves-talks-ben-affleck-departs-as-helmer-972900

That's interesting. Also, behold the think pieces that have resulted from The Lego Batman Movie's release!

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/fun-batman-vs-dark-batman/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/02/10/the_lego_batman_movie_embraces_the_character_s_campy_history_including_the.html
http://www.avclub.com/article/and-why-doesnt-batman-dance-anymore-importance-dar-250064
http://www.vulture.com/2017/02/what-lego-batman-gets-about-batman-that-zack-snyder-doesnt.html

That last one links to another great article (http://www.vulture.com/2014/07/frank-miller-batman-stories-hollywood-stop.html) from a few years ago about Hollywood's overreliance on Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One whenever it adapts Batman to film.

In other news, there's a rumor that Affleck may want to stop being Batman (http://www.avclub.com/article/its-rumor-time-ben-affleck-wants-stop-being-batman-250293), and WB is apparently interested (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/warner-bros-courts-mel-gibson-suicide-squad-sequel-974436) in getting Mel Gibson, of all people, to direct Suicide Squad's sequel. Yes, that piece of shit is getting a sequel.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on February 17, 2017, 10:36:37 AM
WB is apparently interested (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/warner-bros-courts-mel-gibson-suicide-squad-sequel-974436) in getting Mel Gibson, of all people, to direct Suicide Squad's sequel. Yes, that piece of shit is getting a sequel.

Gibson is good at doing large-scale chaotic action stuff, which could be highly beneficial for the sequel to what was rather a soporific squib.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: totallackey on February 17, 2017, 04:52:06 PM
Something worth seeing at the movies, rather than waiting for release on DVD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Div0iP65aZo

Maybe you guys can grow up and start watching Marvel.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 17, 2017, 07:57:43 PM
start watching Marvel

>implying

Logan does look pretty cool, although I'll never stop being amused at how utterly warped the continuity of Fox's capeshit is.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 18, 2017, 04:04:37 AM
Er...you realize most of us watch Marvel, right?

Also >implying Fox's Marvel movies are grown up

They're often shitty edgelord wankfests, just on a smaller scale than DC's.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on February 18, 2017, 05:34:39 AM
Er...you realize most of us watch Marvel, right?

Also >implying Fox's Marvel movies are grown up

They're often shitty edgelord wankfests, just on a smaller scale than DC's.

X-Men: Days of Diamond Absoluture Past

i just woke up go easy on me
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 24, 2017, 06:42:10 PM
(2/18)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-negotiations-break-down-director-matt-reeves-977266

For fuck's sake, WB, what the hell is going on down there? This is the goddamn Batman we're talking about! Your comfort zone! And yet you've got people not wanting to play him, not wanting to direct him...if JL turns out to be shit - which it probably will - then I'll have no choice but to conclude that WB has managed to thoroughly ruin Batman.

...

http://io9.gizmodo.com/matt-reeves-is-officially-directing-the-next-batman-mov-1792685477

Oh, okay. That's good.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/warner-bros-plotting-nightwing-movie-lego-batman-movie-director-978737

Well, uh...cool? I mean, LEGO Batman was great. Maybe this will work out all right?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 25, 2017, 10:06:33 PM
(3/12)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INLzqh7rZ-U

It looks good, but WB will probably find a way to fuck it up.

...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cxixDgHUYw

I can't get over how bad Cyborg looks. I'm not even sure which is worse - his messy, convoluted design, or how badly integrated the CGI is. Besides that, this movie looks terrible. I can barely even see what's happening half the time. It's visually muddy, full of obvious CGI, seems to have been filmed entirely at night, and basically just seems to be Snyder at his Snyderiest. Also, that's a terrible cover of "Come Together."
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on March 26, 2017, 04:05:46 AM
Guys I just got the lowdown on the Spider-Man: Homecoming villain.

(http://i.imgur.com/9j8Vkoy.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on May 02, 2017, 02:14:40 PM
Sadly, that is impossible. Sauron is owned by Fox. Also, Sony seems determined to destroy the Spider-Man brand via a series of shitty spinoffs:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/sony-just-randomly-announced-a-venom-movie-will-be-out-1793351904

http://io9.gizmodo.com/next-up-for-the-spider-man-movieverse-black-cat-and-si-1793543558

Nolan's action scenes definitely worked better from a storytelling perspective, but as far as style and choreography went, they were severely lacking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oubpznpVtvI

Just look at how slow and ungainly Batman is.  I mean, I wouldn't want to fight him or anything, but I don't buy him as any kind of brilliant martial artist capable of taking on crowds of enemies and winning.

(http://i.imgur.com/QIBraNK.gif)

(http://i.imgur.com/wC8mRoY.gif)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 04, 2017, 04:48:10 AM
That first one is brilliant
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: rooster on May 04, 2017, 02:01:43 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cxixDgHUYw

I can't get over how bad Cyborg looks. I'm not even sure which is worse - his messy, convoluted design, or how badly integrated the CGI is. Besides that, this movie looks terrible. I can barely even see what's happening half the time. It's visually muddy, full of obvious CGI, seems to have been filmed entirely at night, and basically just seems to be Snyder at his Snyderiest. Also, that's a terrible cover of "Come Together."
How can you not see what's happening? Is there something wrong with your eyes?

I agree it looks dark, but you can still see what's happening. I think it looks okay. Yeah, the CGI looks obvious and muddy. But almost all movies in this genre rely on CGI and it's always pretty obvious so I won't hold that against this movie in particular, it's just something I hate in general.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on May 10, 2017, 12:41:09 PM
I was being somewhat hyperbolic, but a lot of these action beats are happening really fast, and they all seem to take place in a world of very similar dark blues/grays. Even the Flash's lightning is blue, for some reason. Look at this shot, for example:

(http://i.imgur.com/JtVJBYJ.gif)

The supposed impact is an incomprehensible blur, and afterward, not only does the shot slow down quite a bit, but Wonder Woman very awkwardly lands in a pivot to face the camera. The reason she does this is to help the viewer understand what just happened. I bet you didn't even notice what happened to the two Parademons she hit the first time you saw the trailer, did you? And I can't imagine there won't be plenty more scenes like this in the movie.

Hopefully Wonder Woman will be good, though?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSB4wGIdDwo
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 11, 2017, 02:47:24 AM
It's even worse of a shot because that city(?) hardly looks like a city(?). It looks like Silent Hill, some place disconnected from reality; blue, orange, , washed-out and foggy.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on May 11, 2017, 03:57:21 AM
Speaking of the colors, while it's an old cliché to complain about Hollywood's overreliance on blue/orange contrasts, there isn't even enough orange here to make the contrast work the way it's supposed to. It's like, 10% orange and 90% blue. Just explosions, fire, and lasers to occasionally light up the digital darkness. Bringing up Wonder Woman again, at least the contrast looks quite nice there. They can play around with elements like the shine of Diana's bracelets, sunrises, sunsets, deserts, etc.

I will say one positive thing about the trailer, though - at least they're finally letting Aquaman have some fun.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 12, 2017, 11:08:43 AM
http://io9.gizmodo.com/supermans-mom-hates-to-be-honest-but-justice-league-is-1795127854

lol
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on May 23, 2017, 05:41:41 AM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/zack-snyder-steps-down-justice-league-deal-family-tragedy-1006455?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=THR+Breaking+News_now_2017-05-22+14%3A52%3A33_jkonerman&utm_term=hollywoodreporter_breakingnews


How sad. :(
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 24, 2017, 11:50:18 PM
Just finished season three of The Flash. This show is really fucking bad. Holy shit.

Shout out two those two trees that fell down faster than the speed of sound, though.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on May 25, 2017, 02:03:52 AM
Just finished season three of The Flash. This show is really fucking bad. Holy shit.

It definitely has its flaws. It has some good things going for it though. I rolled my eyes at the more serious-minded stuff but really enjoyed the more humor-oriented episodes this season. They have to stop using time travel as a shortcut for plot development because they have no clue how to make it make sense, from either a logical or a character perspective. They also have to stop making the Big Bad another speedster every fucking season because it's just lazy. Where is Vandal Savage?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on May 25, 2017, 07:15:14 AM
Just finished season three of The Flash. This show is really fucking bad. Holy shit.

It definitely has its flaws. It has some good things going for it though. I rolled my eyes at the more serious-minded stuff but really enjoyed the more humor-oriented episodes this season. They have to stop using time travel as a shortcut for plot development because they have no clue how to make it make sense, from either a logical or a character perspective. They also have to stop making the Big Bad another speedster every fucking season because it's just lazy. Where is Vandal Savage?
Dead.  Legends of tomorrow killed him.  And they had a crossover with flash so its all the same universe.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on May 25, 2017, 12:35:58 PM
Oh that's right. I forgot he was on Legends. I stopped watching that one because they can't make time travel work either and the show is all about time travel. And Savage really is Flash's best villain in the comics, what a waste.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on May 25, 2017, 03:02:46 PM
Oh that's right. I forgot he was on Legends. I stopped watching that one because they can't make time travel work either and the show is all about time travel. And Savage really is Flash's best villain in the comics, what a waste.
Agreed.
And how they beat him was just... stupid.

By contrast, The Savage from Smallville?  Him I liked.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on May 27, 2017, 04:46:03 AM
Oh that's right. I forgot he was on Legends. I stopped watching that one because they can't make time travel work either and the show is all about time travel. And Savage really is Flash's best villain in the comics, what a waste.

The second season was an enormous improvement. It replaced the weaker characters with much more likable ones, stopped focusing on the whys and hows of time travel, stopped having the main characters cause most of the problems they have to solve, and gave them a goal that they could actually progress towards over the course of an episode, rather than one single task they could only fail repeatedly at until the finale. And in contrast to how tragically Vandal Savage was wasted, the villains in this season were fantastic. Not because they had especially flashy abilities or powers, but because they were fleshed-out characters with distinctive personalities and interesting motivations. They were fun to watch. That's what Flash has been missing from its last two main villains. It's not the fact that Zoom and Savitar were evil speedsters that stopped them from working well; it's that they spent most of their respective seasons as anonymous figures with no real character or personality, until the dramatic reveals that essentially turned them into completely different characters with nonsensical motivations.

That being said, though, it would be nice to get some variety and not have a speedster for once. Grodd would probably be too expensive from a CGI standpoint. I feel like they really missed an opportunity with Mirror Master by introducing and defeating him in a single episode; he could easily have made for a great arc villain under different circumstances. Shade is cool too, but he was completely fucking wasted by the show - I vaguely remember that he was only the B story in the episode that introduced him. The show hasn't done anything with T. O. Morrow or the Thinker, despite teasing the latter - oh, who am I kidding, they'll just go with this asshole, who'll be voiced by Steve Blum until he pulls his mask off two episodes from the finale and reveals he's fucking Cisco:

(http://i.imgur.com/bSse8Lm.jpg)

...

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/wonder_woman_2017

Holy shit, it looks like they finally made a good one.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 03, 2017, 05:29:42 AM
Almost all live-action Batman fight scenes are pretty bad, to be honest.  My personal favorite is the one at the climax of the first Burtman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0qm6tnSlJE

(lol video was deleted here's another one)

He's getting his ass handed to him by a guy who looks like Ray Charles.  Fucking Ray Charles!  And that dive from the bell, only to be caught and flung into the staircase, is just embarrassing.  Come on, Batman, up your game!  His eventual victory (by murder, no less) feels more like a stroke of luck than any kind of strategy paying off.

With Batman Returns, the fight choreography was improved quite a bit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL6nuZUONQE

<Saddam> Crudblud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL6nuZUONQE&t=75s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL6nuZUONQE&t=75s)
<Saddam> This is terrible
<Saddam> Why couldn't he just throw Batarangs at all of them?
<Saddam> Surely he carries enough
<Saddam> And it can't have been very powerful if a tiny little dog could intercept it like that
<Crudblud> Saddam: Who gives a fuck
<Blanko> Saddam: But that's hilarious
<Blanko> Why can't capeshit be like that anymore
<Saddam> It is, but I'm not sure that was the intention
<Blanko> A dog catching a batarang isn't meant to be comedic
<Crudblud> Burton Batman was very knowingly goofy
<Crudblud> It fits with his other films of the period like Ed Wood and Beetlejuice

I forgot to note that the batarang apparently dropped several feet closer to the ground before the dog jumped up and caught it. To better explain my issue here, though, while I understand that this scene is clearly meant to be silly, it makes Batman look inept by having a dog intercept him like this. Even in silly takes on Batman (an approach every bit as valid and narratively-rich as him being a tormented vigilante), it doesn't work to portray him as a bumbler who doesn't know what he's doing. Instead, he's the straight man, the one who responds to every new challenge and enemy with the same level-headed pragmatism and steely competence, no matter how overtly ridiculous they are. He has no time to be shocked and overwhelmed by his nonsensical circumstances when the city needs saving, after all. Virtually every silly/lighthearted portrayal of Batman I'm familiar with* uses him like this, and to his credit, so did Burton in his movies, for the most part. Keaton almost always played the Batman side of his role straight, with his dialogue, fighting style, and movement being very minimal and to-the-point. And it was the right call. It's true to the character, and far more funny than having him be someone just adding to the goofy chaos.

*The one example I can think of where Batman is arguably something of a screw-up is Will Arnett's turn as him in the recent Lego movies, where he's largely a parody of himself and certainly not the straight man. Even then, though, he's shown to be an extremely effective crimefighter and an unmatched master of combat and technology.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 22, 2017, 08:54:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_6yBZKj-eo

I can't seem to find any of these trailers more than sorta kinda vaguely having one or two moments of entertainment.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 23, 2017, 04:17:15 AM
I suppose we're expected to assume that Superman's death erased the (enormous) controversy surrounding him and turned him into a universally-beloved martyr. Cyborg's "Relax, Alfred..." moment was about as funny as cancer, and the scene with the Flash up on the rooftop takes what had the potential to be a decent joke and ruins it with a horrendously-written and horrendously-delivered punchline. I get that he's supposed to be awkward and have poor social skills, but there are ways to make that funny, and this isn't one of them. Alfred is the only one getting any laughs here.

My view of the action and general aesthetic hasn't really changed since the last trailer. It's ugly, incoherent, drowning in CGI, and the villain is looking to be yet another generic CGI nothing who'll have another destructive DBZ-style beatdown with the heroes in the end. And speaking of Steppenwolf, he's so obviously just going to be a prelude to Darkseid for a sequel that it's tiring. I'd say that they should drop the pretense and just go straight to Darkseid, but they won't do that simply because Marvel is using Thanos right now.

Also, on the notion of an extremely gratuitous ass-shot.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 23, 2017, 01:07:27 PM
They are re-shooting a bunch, so perhaps a bunch of this stuff will be moot by the time the finished project came out.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 25, 2017, 04:33:48 AM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ben-afflecks-batman-future-doubt-as-warner-bros-plots-franchise-future-1023296

We've heard rumors like this before, but if THR is reporting it, it's almost certainly true. (Affleck has denied it (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ben-affleck-denies-hes-exiting-as-batman-at-comic-con-1023603), but of course he would.) It's a shame, as I liked Batfleck, but WB/DC were bound to run into this problem before too long, even if BvS had been well-received. What can you do with a Batman who's clearly at the end of his career? There's the Justice League, sure, but it's not the best jumping-off point for a solo Batman movie, let alone a new trilogy of them. It just goes to show how shortsighted it was to immediately jump to partially adapting TDKR for no better reason than it being the most famous and successful Batman story. It's interesting that the author speculates about legacy characters inheriting the name, because the idea that WB would make a Batman movie without Bruce Wayne being the man in the cowl is fucking insane. I'm not saying that there aren't any worthwhile stories about different Batmen, but for a big-budget, mainstream tentpole film - no, there's no way it'll happen, at least not any time in the next several years.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on July 25, 2017, 03:01:58 PM
Batman Beyond was successful enough that I wouldn't write the idea off completely, though it seems unlikely.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 11, 2017, 04:41:34 AM
I also meant to comment on the news that the Flash movie will be an adaptation of Flashpoint. It seems like a really weird choice to turn his first solo movie into what'll essentially be another event movie. Some people have suggested that WB might use the time-travel/alternate-universe shenanigans involved as a way to retcon out the poorly-received elements of the DCEU, and/or possibly replace Batfleck with a younger actor with less A-list pull. But really, though, we all know that this is just going to be a grimdark Batman movie in disguise, starring Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Lauren Cohan as the alt-Batman and alt-Joker, respectively. The Flash himself might occupy the same role that Wolverine did in DoFP, but the movie won't truly be about him.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 11, 2017, 06:20:21 AM
I'm sure it will be an attempted retcon of the less popular elements of the DC cinematic universe and yet another grimdark Batman movie, don't be so negative Saddam.

And if this doesn't work there's always Crisis the Movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on August 11, 2017, 06:30:00 AM
DCCU's big problem is that they saw batman as being so successful and assumed it was because of grimdark, not realizing that it was because batman is supposed to be grimdark and we liked it because it was batman.


This is why executives should not make movies based on numbers and polls.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 16, 2017, 06:50:50 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/DEltNXI.gif)

(http://i.imgur.com/HvpQ24G.gif)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on August 17, 2017, 09:55:17 AM
Batman's outfit looks so hilariously uncomfortable in all the older movies. Honestly in a lot of Nolan's work, too. Batfleck doesn't seem as comfortable as many of the spandex heroes do, but it's better.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on August 20, 2017, 11:06:06 PM
I'm three episodes in and Defenders is kinda decent so far.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 23, 2017, 03:56:18 AM
nobody cares Crudblud this thread is all about Batman and WB's shenanigans now

http://www.deadline.com/2017/08/the-joker-origin-movie-todd-phillips-martin-scorsese-scott-silver-batman-dc-universe-1202154053/

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joker-movie-works-hangover-filmmaker-1031828

What the fuck? This is a terrible idea.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on August 23, 2017, 05:56:13 AM
I want to vomit just reading that.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 23, 2017, 12:11:43 PM
Unless it's awesome. Then it would be awesome. Unlikely, I know, but let's stay positive.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 24, 2017, 02:34:21 AM
The concept defies the potential of awesomeness. The Joker doesn't need an origin story, and to give him one, or even spend too much time focusing on his past, just weakens the character and the mystery that surrounds him.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joker-harley-quinn-movie-scores-crazy-stupid-love-filmmakers-write-direct-1032210

please no

what is even happening now
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on August 24, 2017, 02:26:49 PM
tragic
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on August 24, 2017, 05:21:16 PM
Seriously....

I mean, they do a Joker origin story like every batman reboot.  You wanna do one?  Do Red Hood.

And Harley Quinn was in it well after the Joker was established as a psycho.  That's basically two origin stories in one movie and let's just... no. 
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 24, 2017, 09:39:02 PM
I mean, they do a Joker origin story like every batman reboot.

You mean in the adaptations? The first Burtman gave him an origin story, and I suppose the Telltale series is currently in the middle of one, but that's all I can think of. Adaptations like The Dark Knight, the DCAU, Bamham, and Batman '66 all wisely kept his origin ambiguous. Even Gotham is currently staying vague about what connection, if any, Jerome has with the future Joker, and this from the show that delivers (what it imagines to be) fanservice with all the subtlety of an elephant crashing into a grand piano. (Incidentally, the best episode involving Jerome, and one of Gotham's strongest overall, was when he squared off against young Bruce Wayne in a quasi-adaptation of The Killing Joke. It's almost as if the Joker is at his best when he's fighting Batman!)

Quote
And Harley Quinn was in it well after the Joker was established as a psycho.  That's basically two origin stories in one movie and let's just... no.

I'm not sure what this means. Harley was in what?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on August 25, 2017, 10:37:30 AM
I mean, they do a Joker origin story like every batman reboot.

You mean in the adaptations? The first Burtman gave him an origin story, and I suppose the Telltale series is currently in the middle of one, but that's all I can think of. Adaptations like The Dark Knight, the DCAU, Bamham, and Batman '66 all wisely kept his origin ambiguous. Even Gotham is currently staying vague about what connection, if any, Jerome has with the future Joker, and this from the show that delivers (what it imagines to be) fanservice with all the subtlety of an elephant crashing into a grand piano. (Incidentally, the best episode involving Jerome, and one of Gotham's strongest overall, was when he squared off against young Bruce Wayne in a quasi-adaptation of The Killing Joke. It's almost as if the Joker is at his best when he's fighting Batman!)
...
Right, right... Grimdark batman just had "Oh and this guy called the joker suddenly appeared".

Quote
Quote
And Harley Quinn was in it well after the Joker was established as a psycho.  That's basically two origin stories in one movie and let's just... no.

I'm not sure what this means. Harley was in what?
Wow... I did not write that well.
Harley Quinn's creation was in Batman: The Animated Series.  Where they also showed her Origin story, which takes place a while after the joker's origin.

My point was you'd have a movie that showed one villain's origin then move onto another villain's origin in the same movie. Which doesn't sound like a good idea.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 25, 2017, 10:20:05 PM
I imagine if they go that way they'll simply change the details so the two origins coincide. I mean, it's not as if the people who make the movies tend to rigidly stick to the mythology in the comics. Even really good ones like Spiderman or Guardians change significant details in the lives of their characters.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 30, 2017, 05:23:25 PM
http://batman-news.com/2017/08/29/joker-origin-movie-bullied/

Quote
It’s dark. It’s like a dark Joker. As a kid, he had a permanent smile and everyone made fun of him. It’s like on the streets of Brooklyn. It’s super dark and real.

I would seriously rather see Snyder/Goyer be given yet another shot at a DCEU movie than this.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on August 30, 2017, 09:07:43 PM
That's retarded.

"Hey, I have a permanent smile for X reason.  Let me go crazy and become a psychopath!"
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 02, 2017, 03:27:09 AM
Wow... I did not write that well.
Harley Quinn's creation was in Batman: The Animated Series.  Where they also showed her Origin story, which takes place a while after the joker's origin.

My point was you'd have a movie that showed one villain's origin then move onto another villain's origin in the same movie. Which doesn't sound like a good idea.

Why would a movie about the Joker's origin include Harley's origin? We already saw pretty much all there was to her origin in SS, anyway.

In other news, the madness (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/leonardo-dicaprio-joker-movie-warner-bros-wants-actor-role-1034392) continues.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 06, 2017, 12:18:00 AM
While I'm on the subject of rambling about Batman, I'll at least credit the Burtman movies with having some fantastic set designs:

(http://i.imgur.com/leKzCPM.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/R3kqic7.jpg)

Every Batman adaptation should try to make Gotham look and feel unique. As much as people mock Schumacher's movies, his vision of Gotham as a neon-lit nightlife hub punctuated by enormous statues also had some merit to it:

(http://i.imgur.com/RLVmPyY.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/HGm45jB.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/EvT8eoL.jpg)

In many ways, this aesthetic was a modern update of how the city was portrayed in Silver Age comics, particularly ones drawn by Dick Sprang. Giant advertising props were something of a recurring theme back then:

(http://i.imgur.com/S9cuXyK.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/qIfWEKI.jpg)

There's a lot more I could say about this subject by bringing up TAS, Gotham, and Bamham, but I think I've made my point by now, and I don't want to have thirty pictures in one post. Anyway, it was disappointing to see the Nolan movies portray Gotham as only a little more interesting than real-world Chicago, and I was genuinely surprised when BvS's take on Gotham was even more generic, given Snyder's love of recreating comic panels and showing off big, flashy shots. And what really kills me about this is that there was a cool, stylized Gotham...in this weird Turkish Airlines ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS7JBHxdxko

That looks awesome! Why couldn't Gotham have been like that in BvS? Hell, even Metropolis looked great in its own ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXek6jW3eWI

Why did they have to go with dull warehouses and alleys instead? We have CGI now! They can make the setting look like anything they want!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 06, 2017, 03:41:13 AM
A city with cranes. Very cool and stylized.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on September 06, 2017, 04:28:47 AM
It's more realistic, Sadaam.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 06, 2017, 05:20:48 AM
A city with cranes. Very cool and stylized.

Don't be so cynical. It's things like the Ace Chemicals sign, the golden opera house, the gargoyle, the great shot of the skyline from what's presumably Bruce Wayne's penthouse. Obviously they're just little details, but if they had actually been representative of the movie's setting, we might have had a Gotham as unique and memorable as Burtman's. Which would have had its legacy ruined by the shitty movie it was in, admittedly. Maybe they'll revisit the idea for the solo Batman movie.

It's more realistic, Sadaam.

We already had three Batman movies that were as realistic as Batman movies could feasibly be. BAAAWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 06, 2017, 08:23:12 AM
The takeaway studios really need to get is:

If we wanted realism, we wouldn't be going to a Superhero movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 13, 2017, 05:29:09 AM
<Saddam> SnapapaTheRappa: The Gotham shown in the Turkish Airlines ad looked cool, admit it
<SnapapaTheRappa> Saddam: I mean, it looked like a city with some Gotham stuff CGI'd in
<Saddam> Yes
<SnapapaTheRappa> I wouldn't call it "cool and stylized"
<Saddam> It was a foundation for it
<SnapapaTheRappa> At most I'd say "cool, they put in minimal effort to make it Gotham"
<SnapapaTheRappa> Right, which is a far cry from "cool and stylized"
<Parsifal> More like Gotbacon amirite
<Saddam> CGI can design settings more effectively and efficiently than sets
<Anastas> Hmm
<SnapapaTheRappa> Okay?
<Saddam> If Anton Furst could do it with all his models and elaborate set designs in 1989, they can do it with CGI now
<Anastas> It's a spicy take
<Saddam> baaawwwwwww
<SnapapaTheRappa> I think you're missing that my key disgreement here is that that ad was a "cool and stylized" Gotham
<Saddam> It hinted at one, I should say
<Saddam> In and of itself it wasn't that
<SnapapaTheRappa> Also that Metropolis ad had sunlight and colour and it scares me seeing it with DCEU characters
<SnapapaTheRappa> I would agree it hinted at something better
<Saddam> My favorite Gotham is the one in Bamham Knight
<Parsifal> Gotpork
<Saddam> It mashes every adaptation together
<SnapapaTheRappa> Gotmilk
<SnapapaTheRappa> Saddam, I actually agree, Arkham Knight had a fucking great Gotham
<Saddam> One of these days I'll write another rambling post about other adaptations' portrayals of Gotham and include a bunch of pictures
<SnapapaTheRappa> Just too much blue or too much red depending on how much you secured
<SnapapaTheRappa> I didn't like that
<SnapapaTheRappa> Also please do, I like comic talk

I won't say too much about the Gotham of TAS, simply because that show has been written about a million times before. Indeed, the Internet is still in the middle of a surge of new articles about it because of its recent 25th anniversary. I'll just say that it's cool. Art deco, red skies, black backgrounds, airships, and so on:

(http://i.imgur.com/L2myge8.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/M0E3dmE.jpg)

The Bamham series, and especially Knight, has the best Gotham of all. The architecture splits the difference between Burton's sinister Gothic design and Schumacher's bright-lights-big-city aesthetic, ensuring that neither of them are as exaggerated as they were in the movies, while the airships are no doubt a nod to TAS:

(http://i.imgur.com/ZdqSkOx.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7j6eXWl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/iBn5ASO.jpg)

Finally, there's Gotham itself. You can't really get a sense of what the titular city is like from a few pictures, and it's hard to describe it in words too. This article is the best explanation I could find:

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/oct/06/designing-gotham-production-designer-doug-kraner

Bear in mind that was when the show was starting out. It's gotten steadily more flamboyant over the years. I've had my issues with plenty of the things they've done, like supermarkets that cater to criminals (PA system and all!), assassins that chase their targets on motorcycles while waving machetes wildly, and...this scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kakblvktqdg

(I actually love that scene. The guitar riff is the best part.)

However, there's no denying that these occurrences lend the city an unmistakable personality and character. Whatever insane thing the show introduces next, I'll believe it, because it's the kind of thing that happens in this Gotham.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on October 08, 2017, 03:36:10 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9-DM9uBtVI

I like this trailer a little more than the previous ones, but it's still a mess. What's happening? Where is it is happening? Why does this look more like a video game than a movie? I guess I kind of like the goofy dudebro thing Aquaman has going on, but that's about it. I wish I had more to say about this, I really do. Snyder gonna Snyder.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on October 09, 2017, 01:59:44 AM
I still think all the attempts at humour are awful, Jesus. That Flash bit at the end...yikes.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 08, 2017, 03:30:28 PM
(10/17) Oh, and it looks like there's been some extensive recoloring of the movie, including a few scenes we saw in previous trailers. Everything is now a (very ugly) hellish red, and there are tendrils or some shit growing out of the ground...is this leading to some bullshit repeat of the villain's plan from MoS, transforming Earth into an alien planet? And yeah, the comedy isn't working here. It feels like it's very standard "ha ha I'm self-aware" Whedon humor that he'd use in a standard Whedon production, and it clashes terribly with, well, pretty much everything else going on in the trailer.

...

WSJ has a story that I won't bother linking to because fuck them and their paywall, but it's essentially summarized here (http://collider.com/justice-league-runtime-budget-revealed/). It's not good. A nightmarish post-production process, an enormous budget, endless experimentation in trying to meld the work of two extremely different directors together, and so on. It's SS all over again.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on November 08, 2017, 03:38:30 PM
Oh yeah, it has a really good chance of flopping but hey, that won't stop Justice League 2.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 08, 2017, 04:10:20 PM
The article did say that test audience reactions compared closely to the response to WW, so perhaps not all is lost?  Asking for a time constraint isn’t the end of the world and can actually be a huge boon as it requires careful consideration of what is in the movie and how important and effective it actually is. This can leave shoehorned humor or overly drawn out moments better delivered or perhaps out of the film altogether.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 15, 2017, 05:14:17 PM
The reviews are out, and while RT is hiding its own aggregation for some dumb reason until midnight, we can still judge the general consensus for ourselves:

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/justice-league/critic-reviews

It looks to be yet another chopped-up mess, and even the reviews tending positive come with a lot of reservations.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on November 15, 2017, 07:09:25 PM
The new Deadpool trailer is pretty great, so is the description of the movie and what is supposedly the movie's new name.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 16, 2017, 05:51:16 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-5Wv9UGkN8

A couple of the gags were amusing, but I feel like a lot of it was very shallow, bottom-of-the-barrel memes and references of the sort that Deadpool's most vocal fans - idiots on the Internet - are most fond of. The reference to reddit especially concerned me. I don't want the filmmakers paying attention to reddit or anything said there, let alone trying to cater to them. There's something about Deadpool that makes redditors' brains fall out of their heads and start eagerly writing "jokes" in which Deadpool runs around yelling about chimichangas and Internet memes. Take a look at this (https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/6s68f5/first_image_of_josh_brolin_as_cable_in_deadpool_2/dlabq55/), for example. I'm not cherry picking. Every reddit post about Deadpool dissolves into cringe that inexplicably garners hundreds of upvotes.

On the notion of JL:

(https://i.imgur.com/JQvKVfx.gif)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/justice-league-gets-delayed-rotten-tomatoes-score-43-percent-1058391

(https://i.imgur.com/DiqB9cB.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on November 16, 2017, 04:14:29 PM
Just stick to complaining about shitty DC movies, Saddam. Let the rest of us troglodytes have fun with Untitled Deadpool Sequel.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on November 16, 2017, 04:37:18 PM
Is it me or is that Cyborg gif look really... weird?  Like his head is swirling around in ways it's not supposed to?  Less like a cyborg and more like a slight delay in the CGI and human face?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 17, 2017, 12:38:32 AM
Of course it's not you; the CGI is obviously horrendous. That's why I posted it.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/justice_league_2017/

lol it's another dud
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on November 17, 2017, 04:27:01 AM
I won't have fun with Untitled Deadpool Sequel.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on November 17, 2017, 04:56:58 AM
I just really just hope Untitled Deadpool Sequel is a little sharper and less like it's written by a 12-year old. I enjoyed the first, for the most part, but man it could've been so, so much better. Especially when they weren't content to let the jokes just be and had to draw them out and explain them to make sure the audience really gets that HEY LOOK IT'S THE JUMP IT'S THE JUMP SHE'S DOING IT SHE'S GONNA DO IT THEY DO IT IN EVERY SUPERHERO MOVIE HAHA LOOK SHE'S ABOUT TO WOW SHE DID THE JUMP HAHA NO REALLY THEY REALLY DO IT GO WATCH THE MOVIES THEY DO
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 19, 2017, 05:03:29 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/YSxlhjJ.jpg)

This is a real ad for JL.

(https://i.imgur.com/331a1nx.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/gkHYsDi.jpg)

These are also real.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on November 19, 2017, 09:22:57 AM
oh I'm sure its real. 
There's always a few people.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 19, 2017, 02:03:51 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/YSxlhjJ.jpg)

This is a real ad for JL.

(https://i.imgur.com/331a1nx.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/gkHYsDi.jpg)

These are also real.

Did you see the movie yet? Or are you just in he process of sorting out what your reaction will be based on what others think and say?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 19, 2017, 02:27:33 PM
I'll have my own opinion when I see it, which won't be anytime soon, as I'm not going to see it in theaters. I just think a lot of this is really funny.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on November 19, 2017, 07:12:35 PM
It is. Also I think it's pretty safe to hazard an estimate to whether a movie directed by a guy who has a consistent track record (7 out of 7) of shitting out awful cinema is going to be good or not. Then when all the critical reception after its release is bad in a way consistent with all his other efforts so far...well, I get that blindly listening to critics or fans is a bad idea, but there's no point in being dense and pretending context doesn't exist around any film and you literally can't make any assumptions until you see it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on November 19, 2017, 08:28:36 PM
Quote from: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/11/justice-league-review
The film is, plainly stated, terrible, and I’m sorry that everyone wasted their time and money making it—and that people are being asked to waste their time and money seeing it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 20, 2017, 05:58:13 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/sbh9PYp.gif)

wtf am I looking at
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 20, 2017, 01:23:24 PM
The Flash running.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 20, 2017, 02:00:12 PM
Yeah, but why can't he just run normally? The exaggerated movements make him look weird. And why is he so slow?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/movies/justice-league-wonder-box-office.html

lol
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 20, 2017, 02:19:48 PM
Yeah, but why can't he just run normally? The exaggerated movements make him look weird.

It’s possible this gif isn’t representative of the theatre experience.

Quote
And why is he so slow?

Ummmm... he is super fast. The world is whizzing by. But seriously, I wouldn’t take this clip as a super-accurate example of the in-theatre experience.

Quote
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/movies/justice-league-wonder-box-office.html

lol

Not really surprising I guess.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on November 20, 2017, 02:33:48 PM
Yeah, but why can't he just run normally? The exaggerated movements make him look weird. And why is he so slow?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/movies/justice-league-wonder-box-office.html

lol

The article has to strain a bit to cast this movie's performance in a negative light, doesn't it? I mean like 10 percent less than projected (ooh Warner's gonna go broke) and favorable audience ratings, what a dismal failure! ::)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on November 20, 2017, 06:42:10 PM
Yeah, but why can't he just run normally? The exaggerated movements make him look weird.

It’s possible this gif isn’t representative of the theatre experience.

That's certainly possible, but as soon as I saw that GIF I'm like, oh, Cr1TiKaL wasn't lying when he said the Flash's running looked like a retarded Boston Dynamics robot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTm6uRQTRjo
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on November 20, 2017, 07:02:13 PM
His feet are touching the ground way too long there. His legs are moving too slow. It's like he's skating or something.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on November 22, 2017, 04:54:29 PM
His feet are touching the ground way too long there. His legs are moving too slow. It's like he's skating or something.

You know it's bad when The Big Bang Theory has better special effects.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 23, 2017, 06:04:29 AM
Ummmm... he is super fast. The world is whizzing by.

It takes him a couple of seconds to cross a city block. Not really what comes to mind when you think of the "fastest man alive," especially when we've seen Superman traveling much faster than this before.

The article has to strain a bit to cast this movie's performance in a negative light, doesn't it? I mean like 10 percent less than projected (ooh Warner's gonna go broke) and favorable audience ratings, what a dismal failure! ::)

Saying something in a mocking tone is not an effective counterargument. Yes, underperforming to this degree is a very bad sign, and even the projection is embarrassingly low. $110 million, when the Avengers movies are opening at around the $200 million mark. This is a franchise that should be making billions upon billions for WB, but now they've tarnished their brand, and so public interest has dropped. The goodwill from the Nolan movies is gone. People are now associating Batman and Superman with Snyder and his shitty movies.

Also:

(https://i.imgur.com/5Nffx5l.jpg)

<Saddam> Rushy, beardo Snupes: https://i.imgur.com/5Nffx5l.jpg
<Saddam> The seamless collaboration of two directorial visions
<Snupes> I'm so confused
<Snupes> Why is Affleck chubby on the right
<beardo> sadaam'
<Saddam> roid after-effects
<Snupes> Is that in the same scene?
<Saddam> I haven't seen JL, but I'm guessing that the scene with Fatleck replaced the previous one
<Saddam> The previous one being seen in the first trailer
<Snupes> I will tell you when I see it
<Snupes> I really want Chubfleck to be randomly interspersed throughout the movie
<Saddam> Watching the trailers, you can see a ton of scenes re-worked once Whedon came on board
<Snupes> His weight just shifts rapidly
<Rushy> Batman is just going on a gainz streak
<Saddam> I'm sure his weight does fluctuate, seeing how Whedon didn't reshoot the entire movie
<Saddam> I just doubt it would be in the same scene
<Saddam> He is cultivating mass, like Mac
<Snupes> I want it to be in the same scene though
<Snupes> I feel if you're gonna make a shitty movie you may as well go all-out in its shittiness
<Saddam> How Batman Got Fat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFB3L1FZnqY

(https://i.imgur.com/ur6mV8z.jpg)

These pictures are doing far more to tempt me into seeing the movie than any of the actual marketing.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 29, 2017, 11:16:53 PM
I have once again taken the bold step of being the first one here to watch and review a new DC movie, thanks to a camrip of passable quality. JL isn't a terrible movie. If you've set your standards low, and/or you're desperate to see any kind of improvement in the DCEU, then you'll probably like it reasonably well. But I can't look at this and see it as anything other than a bad movie. It's not as bad as BvS, but it's not trying hard enough for that to even be possible. The story of an alien invasion should be pretty simple, but they manage to overcomplicate things by giving the audience a crash course on the nature and history of Mother Boxes and the war that was fought long ago to protect them, along with creating an elaborate plan where Steppenwolf has to collect three Mother Boxes so he can transform the earth into a hostile alien planet. First of all, yes, that is a dopey rehash of Zod's scheme from MoS. Was that such a great evil plot that they felt they just had to use it again? Second of all, there was no reason why the story of the Mother Boxes had to be so, well, comprehensive. Mother Boxes are basically miracle technology. That's all we needed to know for this movie, and all the movie needed to provide stakes was one of them. Preferably stakes not involving yet another generic skybeam/portal of doom.

On the notion of the characters. The Flash is atrocious. Virtually every single line out of his mouth is a lousy joke, and he never, ever shuts the fuck up. The few lines he has that could potentially have been funny are ruined by Ezra Miller's delivery. What the fuck is up with the way he talks? That weird, almost singsong cadence that keeps going UP and down from WORD to word? He's going for quirky and charming, but he's just obnoxious and irritating. As I noted earlier in the thread, I liked Jason Momoa playing Aquaman as a goofy dudebro who yells things like "YEAH!" and "MY MAN!" - but those moments are few and far between, and his character spends most of the movie as a surly grump (real original, guys). Surprisingly, I found Cyborg to be my favorite of the newcomers, largely due to Ray Fisher's charismatic performance. He has some real screen presence, and he does more with just half his face than Miller does with his entire flailing, overacting body.

Wonder Woman is cool as usual, although she doesn't have a whole lot to do here. And although this might not matter to some people here, I noticed that there was a lot more male gaze in the camera's treatment of her this time around. Like, there's definitely one or two upskirt shots, and the camera often settles at ass-level when following her around. Superman has a couple of odd scenes to get through before he returns to the team, so to speak, but once he does, I found it jarring just how warm and pleasant he suddenly was. Don't get me wrong, Cavill is great at playing this more friendly Superman, but it's pretty incongruous with his previous characterization. Sadly, Batman stands out as being terrible here. BvS turning out to be shit has obviously weighed heavily on Affleck, and while he was committed in that movie, he phones in a mediocre performance here. He's just going through the motions, and it's obvious he's eager to get out of the role. I highly doubt we'll be seeing Batfleck again, and the fact that Snyder and WB have squandered what had the potential to be a fine run on the character is yet another cinematic crime.

The effects and action scenes are terrible. They're Snyder at his most indulgent and least creative. Constant slow-motion and extreme closeups, incoherent blurs when everything speeds back up. The Flash in particular looks terrible - the above gif of him spazzing out while pretending to run is not an isolated incident. Steppenwolf looks like shit, and I don't know why they even felt the need to turn him into an ugly CGI monster when in the comics he's just a dude with a silly hat. Are they going to do that with all of the New Gods? Cavill's face doesn't look too bad if you aren't specifically looking for any inconsistencies with it, except for the opening scene of the movie (the source of the last image I posted) in which it looks incredibly fake and obvious. On a related note, yes, Batman does randomly turn portly and back again throughout the movie, although it's never quite as obvious as it is in the scene where he meets Aquaman while bearded. The movie is full of awkward green screens, poor lighting giving away the artificial nature of the movie, a hideously ugly, murky aesthetic, and effects that look more at home in a bad video game than a film.

More assorted thoughts. To hear Batman spout Whedon-penned quips is a painful experience, although his lines are nowhere near as bad as Flash's. A lot has obviously been cut from this movie, including what must have been more universe-building about the New Gods and shit like that, along with, I suspect, a payoff to the whole Knightmare scene and Flash appearance from BvS. The end result is a movie that's way too short. Was this all that they were left with after cutting out the extraneous parts left over from BvS? Whatever the case, WB needs to stop making movies like this - waiting to see how test audiences react to their first draft, then frantically cutting and reshooting in the last few months before its release to awkwardly turn the film into something it isn't. That's not trying to make a good movie, that's just trying to limit the damage of a bad movie. They're five movies in, and they still don't have any kind of reasonable plan or strategy for how to make the most of this franchise. They're just throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on November 30, 2017, 07:25:36 AM
Excellent, classic saddam.

The Avengers trailer is more enjoyable than JL just offending.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Jura-Glenlivet on November 30, 2017, 08:47:25 AM

So, against my better judgement, (one of my offspring is home from a place that hasn’t got a cinema), I agreed to go see Ragnarök, and to be honest I enjoyed it, mainly as they have done it as an out and out comedy, Thor and Hulk “bouncing” off each other quite well and a couple of the visual gags made me laugh out loud.
Which is just as well as the story is appalling, I know it shouldn’t bother me that a kid’s film plays fast and loose with myths,  but Hela is Loki’s daughter FFS and Odin doesn’t just fade away he dies fighting, he’s a Viking god not a fucking Buddhist!

But it still made me laugh.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on November 30, 2017, 02:00:09 PM
I love how marvel seem to be taking pleasure in showing up DC nowadays. BvS:DoJ came out basically the same time as Civil War, a film with a very similar Hero v Hero premise but - you know - good. Now Marvel has let them release their big tent-pole Justice league movie and just as it's getting torn apart by critics, casually releases the trailer for Infinity War. It's almost cruel.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 30, 2017, 05:49:15 PM
Almost, until you realize DC has thrown almost a billion dollars in to producing movies that should be milediocre without trying that hard. Somehow their level of incompetence is so high that they can’t make Batman fighting Superman any good. I don’t get it. Disney should just buy DC as well and make good movies for them.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on November 30, 2017, 06:38:45 PM
You think WB is selling?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 30, 2017, 09:25:22 PM
You think WB is selling?

If the price is right why not? 
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 01, 2017, 03:16:41 PM
DC makes WB (or Time Warner in general, whatever) a lot of money even without the movies. TV shows, video games, merchandising, etc. They almost certainly won't even license out the film rights, just because the possibility of turning it into a box office juggernaut still exists. Just look at Fox still stubbornly clinging onto the Fantastic Four rights.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on December 01, 2017, 04:03:52 PM
DC makes WB (or Time Warner in general, whatever) a lot of money even without the movies. TV shows, video games, merchandising, etc. They almost certainly won't even license out the film rights, just because the possibility of turning it into a box office juggernaut still exists. Just look at Fox still stubbornly clinging onto the Fantastic Four rights.

Plus they had Wonderwoman.  It proves they CAN have a hit, if they copy Marvel from the start.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 01, 2017, 06:05:28 PM
If it were me, I would cut Snyder loose. That should solve a bunch of their problems right away. Next is directing their development execs to chill the fuck out.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 02, 2017, 03:16:08 PM
DC makes WB (or Time Warner in general, whatever) a lot of money even without the movies. TV shows, video games, merchandising, etc. They almost certainly won't even license out the film rights, just because the possibility of turning it into a box office juggernaut still exists. Just look at Fox still stubbornly clinging onto the Fantastic Four rights.

Plus they had Wonderwoman.  It proves they CAN have a hit, if they copy Marvel from the start.

They really didn't copy Marvel. They just made a solid, self-contained movie that was neither drowning in grimdark nihilism nor up its own ass about how clever it supposedly was. Also:

https://www.thewrap.com/justice-league-zack-snyder-batman-v-superman-wonder-woman/

The time I would have lol'd at this has passed. It's just sad now.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on December 02, 2017, 03:31:22 PM
It's not funny but it makes for a more interesting and entertaining saga than any of their movies. It's like a long, slow train wreck.

I didn't even know about Cavill's digitally altered face. How embarrassing.

Have they considered rebooting everything ( except maybe Wonder Woman, which they could get away with without it being weird since her movies stand on their own)? Just scrapping what they've done and starting over? Or do they feel they've invested too much in the"story" so far for that to be feasible?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 05, 2017, 04:55:43 AM
If they were too stubborn to fire Snyder after BvS, then no, they're almost certainly not seriously considering rebooting the franchise. I'm not sure I really want them to at this point, though. If something in a previous movie stops them from telling a good story now, they can just quietly retcon it. I think they already have, actually. A minor issue that I had with BvS, one that I haven't talked about here before, is the in-universe public perception of Batman. This dude has been operating for twenty years in Gotham, he's a seasoned veteran who's already fought some of his worst enemies, there's even a Batsignal - and yet the police are openly hostile towards him, the papers report on him like this is the first time they've ever heard of him, and the public see him as something of an urban legend. It doesn't make sense. You can't have a veteran Batman who's still in the phase of his career where he's making a splash and shaking up the establishment. And I honestly think that Snyder and/or Goyer took this approach because they wanted to have an "edgy" Batman who clashed with the police instead of helping them out, and also because Batman was frequently in conflict with the police in TDKR too (albeit for very different reasons).

It was a dumb idea, and one that JL pivots away from immediately. Far from being hunted in dreary warehouses by trigger-happy cops, Batman is well known to the Gotham police and has his traditional relationship with Gordon. It's a much better interpretation than, well, this:

(http://i.imgur.com/sHpGRTl.png)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 05, 2017, 07:12:10 PM
I'll never not love that scene.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 05, 2017, 11:57:27 PM
I'll never not love that scene.

Yeah. It’s the most primal I have ever seen Batman depicted. I love it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 06, 2017, 09:39:05 PM
He looks retarded. He's so big (or the room is so small) that clinging to the corner isn't even hiding him at all. He might as well have just been standing right there.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on December 07, 2017, 09:18:54 AM
He looks retarded. He's so big (or the room is so small) that clinging to the corner isn't even hiding him at all. He might as well have just been standing right there.

Yeah, it's like they wanted to do the awesome gargoyle-swinging bits from the Arkham games but the room  with the high roofs and criss-crossing girders wasn't available so they had to settle for this.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 08, 2017, 12:53:15 AM
I went to see Justice League and it was not as bad as I expected.  I agree now that that gif of the Flash was as bad as it was made out to be, but other than that, and the first video of superman, I had no issues with the CG.  I generally liked the story as a popcorn movie quality movie, and there was a lot of moments that I exceeded my expectations.  I thought all of the story with superman was good, and particularly the moments with Lois Lane, and the fight with the rest of the JL.  I really disliked the Flash.  He was badly written and badly acted, but everyone else did well.  Overall, I think it probably warranted the Rotten Tomatoes rating it received: 40% from critics, 81% from audience.  It makes me think a reboot is unnecessary and that they can right the ship with future projects.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 08, 2017, 04:44:01 AM
Yeah, it's like they wanted to do the awesome gargoyle-swinging bits from the Arkham games but the room  with the high roofs and criss-crossing girders wasn't available so they had to settle for this.

Dull settings are more realistic, after all.

moar drama:

http://variety.com/2017/film/news/dc-films-justice-league-1202632214/

Quote
Warner Bros.’ corporate leaders at Time Warner support the moves and are said to be unhappy with the financial performance of [JL]...With a budget reported to be as high as $300 million, it represents an expensive bet. After three weeks of release, it has managed to gross $570.3 million worldwide. In contrast, the first “Avengers” film racked up $1.5 billion.

Yeah, I'd be unhappy with that too.

Quote
Time Warner is said to be frustrated that Warner Bros. leaders continue to bring the director back, especially after “Batman v Superman” was excoriated by critics even though it made money.

WB's faith in Snyder continues to perplex. Somehow they must have got it in their heads that he was the next best thing to Nolan and deserved just as much artistic freedom with a franchise potentially worth billions as him. I won't begrudge him getting the job for MoS (although I personally wasn't in favor of it), but they absolutely should have replaced him in the face of that movie's relative underperformance and mixed critical reception.

Quote
While Ben Affleck is expected to appear as Batman in a standalone Flash movie, it is highly unlikely he will don the cape and cowl in Matt Reeves’ planned standalone Batman movie. The director is said to want to cast the role with fresh talent, according to sources.

Fresh talent, and also a face that won't remind viewers of the two shitty movies leading into this one. Or maybe Reeves just wants to tell one of the countless Batman stories that could only have taken place earlier in his career. It's almost as if introducing Batman with a story that was always meant to indicate the end of his career was a really stupid idea!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 08, 2017, 01:55:08 PM
If they recast batman, they will have to reboot the whole thing and that will suck. I can’t believe that WB wants to keep on with these movies. I can’t believe Snyder wants to keep on with these movies. There must be some seriously out of control egos steering their respective ships. Either that or Snyder has blackmailed someone?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 09, 2017, 01:30:37 AM
There was a brief rumour that Jake Gyllenhaal would be Batman in Matt Reeves' movie(s?) and I think that's the only casting choice I'd be gung-ho for, because Jake Gyllenhaal.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 09, 2017, 05:53:56 PM
There was a brief rumour that Jake Gyllenhaal would be Batman in Matt Reeves' movie(s?) and I think that's the only casting choice I'd be gung-ho for, because Jake Gyllenhaal.

I like my Bruce Wayne’s waspier than Jake.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 09, 2017, 06:16:14 PM
That's fine, in this case I'm talking about myself when I say "I".
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 09, 2017, 07:36:24 PM
That's fine, in this case I'm talking about myself when I say "I".

Like what I like or gtfo
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 14, 2017, 05:57:26 AM
If they recast batman, they will have to reboot the whole thing and that will suck.

I honestly think that all they'd have to do is downplay the idea that this Bruce is at the end of his rope and entirely burned-out, and they could keep going with a slightly younger and hopefully far more enthusiastic actor. I agree with you that a reboot would suck, as would a prequel, because WB would no doubt decide that the problem with their last two movies was that they were out of their comfort zone with Batman, and therefore the new movie should be a return to the pseudo-realism of Nolan's movies where Batman fights street thugs in a boring, generic city.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 14, 2017, 01:44:21 PM
If they recast batman, they will have to reboot the whole thing and that will suck.

I honestly think that all they'd have to do is downplay the idea that this Bruce is at the end of his rope and entirely burned-out, and they could keep going with a slightly younger and hopefully far more enthusiastic actor. I agree with you that a reboot would suck, as would a prequel, because WB would no doubt decide that the problem with their last two movies was that they were out of their comfort zone with Batman, and therefore the new movie should be a return to the pseudo-realism of Nolan's movies where Batman fights street thugs in a boring, generic city.

If they wanted to do a prequel that showed Batman’s triumph over the Joker and Penguin that has been alluded to, I would be fine with that. If it didn’t suck.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 22, 2017, 04:42:09 AM
They already made the prequel showing Batman defeating the Penguin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APs3qbAE1FY

The Burton movies are in continuity with the DCEU! Burtman and Batfleck are one! This explains so much, like their shared willingness to murder their enemies! (I actually feel that there are some defenses to be made of Burtman on that subject, but I don't want to get into that without exploring the movies in greater detail, and I'm trying to convince Crudblud to join me on a side-by-side retrospective of all the live-action Batman movies. That's not including the serials, because they are horrendous.)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 22, 2017, 06:08:19 AM
They already made the prequel showing Batman defeating the Penguin:

This was the first movie I ever saw in at a drive-in cinema. I was around 7 or 8 at the time. I remember the Penguin vaguely, and then falling asleep. Also popcorn. Good times.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 27, 2017, 02:04:20 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/KpyhUA8.jpg)

Why did Whedon even reshoot this scene? Seriously, Affleck randomly turns fat, delivers a dumb joke about Atlantis, and then slims down again. Also, I meant to talk about the fact that there's an action scene where the Flash trips and faceplants into Diana's chest. Because that joke was so fucking funny the first time in AoU, Whedon apparently felt he had to do it again!

Mugthulhu: Steppenwolf is a video game CGI cutscene from 10 years ago
moobs: Did you watch it
Mugthulhu: I currently am
moobs: good
Mugthulhu: someone should make an edit that cuts out all Barrys lines
moobs: Yes, he is terrible
Mugthulhu: done
moobs: on the notion of it being bad
Mugthulhu: better than expected
moobs: terrible quips from Batman
Mugthulhu: cyborg was good
moobs: He looked like a Transformer
moobs: write a review plz
Mugthulhu: It would probably be moved to CN for being low content
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on January 08, 2018, 05:05:52 AM
Just look at Fox still stubbornly clinging onto the Fantastic Four rights.

so much for that comparison lol

If they wanted to do a prequel that showed Batman’s triumph over the Joker and Penguin that has been alluded to, I would be fine with that. If it didn’t suck.

An adaptation of "A Death in the Family" would be interesting. Suitably grimdark, and yet not based on those same two Batman stories from Frank Miller that Hollywood loves to mine for influence. What I really meant, though, was that I like that we have a Batman who lives in a world that's now firmly immersed in fantasy and science fiction, where people can yell out nonsense about soul-capturing swords and nobody blinks an eye, and it would be neat to see later movies exploring the possibilities further. But I feel like WB is thinking that now they have to backtrack with Batman and return to grounded, "realistic" stories where nothing supernatural happens, and that idea was beaten to death by the Nolan movies.

https://www.polygon.com/2018/1/5/16853524/justice-league-zack-snyder-alternate-cut-youtube-cosplayer

On the notion of people who don't understand how movies are made. I can sympathize, though. If this "Snyder cut" really does exist, it would be a lot more interesting than the chopped-up mess WB gave us, along with looking much better. On that subject:

(https://i.imgur.com/5xyBzV3.png)

One of these pictures is of Batman. The other is of a guy waiting for his order in a drive-through.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on January 08, 2018, 05:37:55 AM
Hey, they wanted realism.  What do you think Batman eats at 2am while out on patrol?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on January 12, 2018, 06:23:04 AM
He gets McDonalds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6HYnNq5ElY

No, but seriously, I'd guess that he eats something like MREs, possibly a homemade style with a recipe designed to ideally suit his nutritional requirements. I have no idea if the comics have touched on this subject before, but it would be a neat detail for a movie to include. On the notion of Batman's diet, there's one dumb part in BvS where Alfred comments on Bruce's excessive drinking and questions if Bruce will leave an empty wine cellar to the next generation of Waynes, or if there will even be a next generation. It's one of many scenes lifted from TDKR:

(https://i.imgur.com/1FxqBWf.jpg)

And like so many of those scenes, it doesn't work because it's been stripped of its original context. In TDKR, this takes place before Batman comes out of retirement. Bruce has been drinking due to his boredom, frustration, desperation, and general inability to fill the void in his life that's been there since the end of his capeshitting. But once he revives Batman, he puts the wine away. Which makes sense, as a guy who goes out at night to climb buildings and beat criminals up is hardly going to be pounding back drinks when he gets home. He's got to stay in shape and keep his mind sharp. It's a hollow recreation, designed to pander to fanboys rather than faithfully adapt anything that was going on in the comic in terms of story.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 01, 2018, 03:13:11 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeFIjzfUcz0

What a ridiculous scene. What the hell were they thinking with this? It's almost like a short film just nestled within the rest of the movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 02, 2018, 04:39:44 AM
AM I TOO EARLY??? I'M TOO EARLY!!!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on February 02, 2018, 09:03:29 AM
Yeah, this is the kind of out-of-context ridiculous franchise-building that Marvel sensibly leaves until after the credits have rolled. As someone who isn't a massive comic reader, I had (and still have, even after reading a bit of Wikipedia around it) no idea what the hell was going on.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on February 02, 2018, 09:13:27 AM
I watched the first minute then flashed through the key images, then the last minute.

So... it's a dystopian future where Superman is evil and rules the world?  But the Flash comes back in time to warn bruce about it and that Lois Lane is the key?

Is there more to this than: "If Lois Lane Dies Superman goes crazy"?
And why the fuck doesn't batman have kryptonite already?  He's the god damn batman.  That was the first thing he'd get.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on February 02, 2018, 09:20:11 AM
My thoughts when watching it the first time:

-Why is Supes evil?
-Who are the flying mothmen?
-Is the world becoming a desert because of Supes or is it the other way around?
-Wait, is this a prophecy or a paranoid dream sequence?
-What is the flash doing appearing out of Bruce's computer? Isn't his thing that he runs fast?
-Wait that's a dream? Is it a dream within a dream, or are they two separate dreams?
-Why is everything so murky and hard to see?
-If this is Bruce's dream then why can he see the world around him before the blindfold is taken off?
-Why did they clearly spend a lot of money on something that expands an already bloated film for no reason?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on February 02, 2018, 09:41:13 AM
Wasn't this in one of the trailers?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on February 02, 2018, 01:10:56 PM
I would be this was Zack snyder giving a “strong emotional foundation” to his vendetta against Superman. It also could be Zack Snyder trying to be as good as Terrence Mallick. It was weird and ineffective though.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on February 02, 2018, 01:27:14 PM
The "strong motivation" for batman to want to stop Superman doesn't need to be anymore than "Superman leveled a city in a fight."

Like seriously, Batman would have tried to take him out anyway.  Why would you need to add in "Dystopian future dream/premonition"? I mean, is there a version of batman who would trust Superman before they really got to know each other?  Or... you know... ever?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on February 02, 2018, 03:27:06 PM
Wow, what did I just watch.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on February 02, 2018, 03:32:23 PM
I don't understand why they went so convoluted in this, apart from trying to shoehorn The Dark Knight Returns in.

Given the chance to write the BvS script, I'd have doubled down on the Superman as an Act of God vs Bruce as Humanity metaphor. After the destruction of Metropolis, Bruce would have already resented Supes enough anyway, but in my version I would have had him reacting to a couple of big disasters (probably some big supervillain stuff masterminded by Lex Luthor) but in a way that, despite his best efforts, leaves lots of collateral damage and innocents dead.

Bruce decides Supes is a menace and sets out to find ways of stopping him. Lex let it slip that he's recovered some kryptonite from Zod's ship but oh-no, it's been stolen by a B or C-List Batman baddy. Batman stops the baddy, recovers the kryptonite, and then there's one last big super-fight and Bruce resolves to stop Supes, as Lex knew he would.

They get into a fight, Supes tries to explain that he didn't mean for people to die, there's a big argument (intercut with kryptonite punches) where Bruce flat out tells Supes that he's too dangerous to let live. At this point, both of them are on their knees, bleeding and weak, but they begin to understand each other. Bruce begins to see that Supes never meant for anyone to die and Supes realises that in his titanic battles, he hasn't been paying enough attention on the little people caught in the crossfire. (Hey! Character development)
 Lex suspected this would happen, so he decides to finish off the weak superheroes himself. Neither is strong enough to  beat Lex alone, so they have to learn quickly to work each other's strengths and cover each other's weaknesses to beat Lex.

Blah blah blah, they realise that they could each learn from each other and make a bigger difference to the world together and form the Justice League.

Post Credits sequence: There's a baddy tearing up Metropolis/ Gotham, Supes and Bats arrive together to stop him, but then the smoke and dust clears and the baddy lies beaten on the ground, cut to Wonder Woman all sweaty and battle-scarred. "What took you boys so long?" Or words to that effect.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on February 02, 2018, 03:47:53 PM
Basically, I'd strip it back to the bare bones as much as possible, and let the characters and their different perspectives be the main focus of the story. Throw in a couple of easter eggs with the disasters and baddies from the comics, and save the franchise-building for after the main story is over.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on February 02, 2018, 04:02:08 PM
Instead we get Batman walking around in a trench coat concealing a small handgun that he pew pews someone with.

Why on earth would anyone watch this?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 05, 2018, 04:13:04 AM
What especially kills me about the Knightmare is the sheer fanboyism that was clearly driving it. It practically revels in its obscurity and inaccessibility to most viewers, making it a lousy teaser even in purely commercial terms. Like others have pointed out, if you aren't familiar enough with DC lore to understand what's going on, you're going to get absolutely nothing out of this scene, because of how vague, bizarre, and confusing it is. And it's so long and extravagant, too. How much time and money went into this scene? I understand that creating an action scene in a movie like this is always going to be expensive, but when you've got a scene that doesn't serve the narrative in any way and is clearly just the director spending millions of dollars smashing his action figures together...well, you'd think it might call for a bit more oversight from the people in charge.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on February 06, 2018, 05:46:31 PM
I kind of enjoyed it. I'm a bit of a DC nerd, though, so that might be a factor.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 09, 2018, 05:40:04 AM
I kind of enjoyed it. I'm a bit of a DC nerd, though, so that might be a factor.

(https://i.imgur.com/B0m380H.png)

http://variety.com/2018/film/news/joaquin-phoenix-the-joker-origin-movie-todd-phillips-1202692188/

Joaquin Phoenix is in his forties! How's that going to work for an origin movie? This doesn't make sense. None of it makes any sense.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on February 09, 2018, 06:07:40 AM
It does if they wanna make him a pathetic, washed up comedian who falls into a vat that makes him look younge forever.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on February 09, 2018, 05:32:49 PM
It does if they wanna make him a pathetic, washed up comedian who falls into a vat that makes him look younge forever.
Exactly what I was thinking!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on February 09, 2018, 05:55:40 PM
Joker origin movie in general is a terrible idea.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on February 09, 2018, 07:58:59 PM
I kind of enjoyed it. I'm a bit of a DC nerd, though, so that might be a factor.

(https://i.imgur.com/B0m380H.png)

http://variety.com/2018/film/news/joaquin-phoenix-the-joker-origin-movie-todd-phillips-1202692188/

Joaquin Phoenix is in his forties! How's that going to work for an origin movie? This doesn't make sense. None of it makes any sense.

That’s how old Jack Nicholson was when he played the Joker

EDIT: He was 50 actually.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on February 09, 2018, 09:36:46 PM
Well shit...
He did NOT look 50.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 12, 2018, 04:25:27 AM
That’s how old Jack Nicholson was when he played the Joker

EDIT: He was 50 actually.

Yeah, but that wasn't an...oh, shit, it was an origin story for the Joker! But at least it had Batman too. This is such a stupid idea.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on February 12, 2018, 01:21:52 PM
That’s how old Jack Nicholson was when he played the Joker

EDIT: He was 50 actually.

Yeah, but that wasn't an...oh, shit, it was an origin story for the Joker! But at least it had Batman too. This is such a stupid idea.

Yes, but the origin is a direct prelude to the main action of that film, Burtman Joker is born middle-aged. A younger Jack Napier makes an appearance in the flashback to the murder of Bruce's parents, and he's played by a different actor.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 19, 2018, 04:51:44 AM
A younger Jack Napier makes an appearance in the flashback to the murder of Bruce's parents, and he's played by a different actor.

One who didn't look all that much like Nicholson:

(https://i.imgur.com/46LhSDA.jpg)

This was also a dumb idea. I've always disliked it when adaptations try to play up the Wayne murders as being more than just a mugging gone wrong, like revealing that it was a deliberate assassination and/or part of an elaborate conspiracy. Batman's war is against crime in general, not this one specific criminal who committed this one specific crime some time ago. Tying it all the villain of the movie turns things personal in a bad way. And even setting my fanboyism aside, it was a lazy addition to the movie that added almost nothing to the conflict between Batman and the Joker. How could it, when the Joker has no idea who Batman even is? The comics handled the idea of Batman confronting his parents' killer much better:

(https://i.imgur.com/JMWSqBs.jpg)

Justice League (Zack Snyder/Joss Whedon, 2017)

Wow. Watched it with my friends. That may be the worst DC movie I've seen. I'm so burned out I don't even want to write about it. Writing was trash, Barry was cringe, Batman was useless, Cyborg looked awful, Aquaman was cringey dudebro, Wonder Woman was ok, Superman was OP. The story is everyone is useless until Zack Snyder wanks Superman to life, has him show up everyone, then win everything. End movie.

That was bad.

Come on, it wasn't as bad as BvS or SS.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 19, 2018, 05:20:39 AM
It really was, though. I don't know if I can think of any scenes where I wasn't cringing or thinking about how awful it was.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 23, 2018, 03:01:59 PM
I don't know, I felt like it was too bland to really be awful. It's like the difference between a ride on a roller coaster that crashes and a ride on one that barely moves at all. The worst thing about the movie for me was the sheer lack of ambition - or even interest in being anything more than mediocre - behind it. WB's actions make no sense. They spent so much money turning this into a bizarre Snyder/Whedon chimera that somehow managed to show off the weaknesses of both directors while playing to neither of their strengths. Why didn't they just pull the plug and start over? They would have saved money, saved audience goodwill, and freed themselves up to make a (hopefully) good movie at some point down the road. Even the added time difference between the next movie and BvS would arguably have helped them out. It makes me feel like this:

(https://i.imgur.com/6RwuKWb.jpg)

And speaking of Whedon:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joss-whedon-exits-batgirl-movie-1087384

Quote
Batgirl is such an exciting project, and Warners/DC such collaborative and supportive partners, that it took me months to realize I really didn't have a story

Uh, okay. I mean, it's kind of wild that he couldn't come up with a story for a capeshitter with such a long history, but at least they're biting the bullet now, rather than shooting a film and then realizing that they had no idea what they were doing.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 24, 2018, 07:18:03 AM
He filmed it and everything. Only realized at the last second.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on February 24, 2018, 03:08:20 PM
He filmed it and everything. Only realized at the last second.

Really? That’s so fucking brutal. If that is really what happened, then he is the worst director ever.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 24, 2018, 04:21:56 PM
Hey, it's not too far off from what happened with SS.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on February 24, 2018, 10:07:27 PM
Nah I was goofing, I just like the idea of him filming a whole movie and then realizing "oh wait I forgot to add a story". Just scenes of them standing around and occasionally quipping and punching people with no coherence to it.

Oh, well, I guess that would fit into the DCEU. Dunno why he scrapped it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Skeptic on February 25, 2018, 06:07:32 AM
Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed with the new DC movies. All the new superhero movies really, but I still watch them because I'm a fan haha.

Personally, I'd like to see a television series made that takes all the superheroes back to their roots. I'm a big fan of Golden Age comic books. Superheroes should wear tights in my mind, not rubber bodysuits or armor haha.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on February 26, 2018, 10:06:50 PM
Comic book movies are for children and 40 year old overweight virgins. Buncha betas in here.

That is your opinion and you are welcome to it.
I'm a Brony so I'm sure I'm even lower on your scale.  That's ok.

Go in peace and let your anger flow. :)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 28, 2018, 01:55:22 AM
Just scenes of them standing around and occasionally quipping

Hilarious quips!

"That's not the saying, that's the opposite of what the saying is."

"They, uh... they have a rhythm that I haven't quite been able to - like brunch! What is brunch? You wait in line for an hour for, essentially, lunch. I mean... I don't know."

"I'm a snack hole!"

"Jesus, he is tall."

"Something's definitely bleeding."

"I don't...not...[like Superman]"

There is no character in the world less suited to Whedon's distinctive style (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BuffySpeak) of dialogue than Batman. I actually think that Whedon already has a tendency to indulge in this too much, and that it really only makes sense for preppy teenagers to talk that way, but having it be Batman makes it all feel so much worse.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on March 01, 2018, 05:49:21 PM
Speaking of Batman, what do you think about Joaquin Phoenix possibly becoming the Joker?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on March 04, 2018, 11:18:07 PM
Speaking of Batman, what do you think about Joaquin Phoenix possibly becoming the Joker?
I think he could do a fine job, but I also think the movie is going to suck, and it won't necessarily be the fault of anyone on the creative side of things, although the premise itself is pretty shaky. If Scorsese is still involved during post-production he probably has enough clout to keep executives from meddling too much, but I would still be very surprised if it wasn't fucked with to its detriment after shooting is done.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on March 05, 2018, 06:26:11 AM
Please, when has WB ever done that?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on March 05, 2018, 12:27:28 PM
Please, when has WB ever done that?
Moustache League was clearly the product of a single authorial vision.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 05, 2018, 03:15:25 PM
I'm calling it now - they'll shoot a gritty, grounded movie that downplays the capeshit elements heavily, and then at the last minute WB will decide to go in the opposite direction and reshoot half the movie to add a bunch of Batman cameos and lines of dialogue referencing capeshit. Bonus points if we can see the actors gain weight and the backgrounds turn into shitty green screens mid-scene.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on March 05, 2018, 03:48:56 PM
I'm calling it now - they'll shoot a gritty, grounded movie that downplays the capeshit elements heavily, and then at the last minute WB will decide to go in the opposite direction and reshoot half the movie to add a bunch of Batman cameos and lines of dialogue referencing capeshit. Bonus points if we can see the actors gain weight and the backgrounds turn into shitty green screens mid-scene.
And the origin story will be retarted. But other than that, agreed.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 10, 2018, 04:15:58 AM
https://www.thewrap.com/todd-phillips-joker-batman-80s-comedian-scorsese-king-of-comedy-scorcese/

https://twitter.com/TheInSneider/status/966027694440763392

It's infuriating that out of the dozen or so capeshit movies WB seems to be planning, this is the one that they're so eagerly and quickly pushing forward. On the one hand, it's not really fair to expect them to be cowed by the overwhelmingly negative response online. There's a long history of Batman movies defying fan complaints and making unorthodox decisions (mostly regarding casting) work. But this is such a bad, bad idea, and clearly doesn't have a hint of genuine artistic inspiration behind it. And a year or so from now, when this movie has completely flopped, WB will be shrugging and asking who could have possibly seen this coming.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on March 10, 2018, 09:49:52 AM
https://www.thewrap.com/todd-phillips-joker-batman-80s-comedian-scorsese-king-of-comedy-scorcese/

https://twitter.com/TheInSneider/status/966027694440763392

It's infuriating that out of the dozen or so capeshit movies WB seems to be planning, this is the one that they're so eagerly and quickly pushing forward. On the one hand, it's not really fair to expect them to be cowed by the overwhelmingly negative response online. There's a long history of Batman movies defying fan complaints and making unorthodox decisions (mostly regarding casting) work. But this is such a bad, bad idea, and clearly doesn't have a hint of genuine artistic inspiration behind it. And a year or so from now, when this movie has completely flopped, WB will be shrugging and asking who could have possibly seen this coming.

I love The King of Comedy. I also think Joaquin Phoenix is great, but how the fuck is a 43 year old man going to play "Young Joker"? Someone in that Twitter thread suggested Will Poulter, which is a good choice. The way it's going is sounding worse by the minute. Scorsese's involvement is also starting to look bizarre. "Hi Martin, this is DC Exec #71491, we'd like to take your best film and rework it as a Joker origin story." "But that's a terrible idea." "We're doing it anyway!" "Well, I'm not sure I want to be involved." "Yes, but for some reason you are." "Oh, okay."
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on March 11, 2018, 12:30:53 AM
tbh a clean shaven JP looks hella young
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on March 13, 2018, 02:53:23 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFjFxgHedgM

They'd best kick Joaquin Phoenix out of the way. He can't compete with this.

No but really what the fuck is this. Tho I'm not gonna lie, his Joker laugh isn't bad. Definitely better than Leto's wheezing.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on March 13, 2018, 12:02:50 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFjFxgHedgM

They'd best kick Joaquin Phoenix out of the way. He can't compete with this.

No but really what the fuck is this. Tho I'm not gonna lie, his Joker laugh isn't bad. Definitely better than Leto's wheezing.
Wiseau's joker is pretty good, Heath Ledger is still my favorite though. RIP
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: honk on March 16, 2018, 04:14:46 AM
Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe

A mediocre game with lame, toothless finishers. The Injustice games have done a much better job of depicting savage brutality while working within the constraints of a T rating. And on a related note, dialogue from Sub-Zero and Raiden in Injustice 2 references Dark Kahn and meeting the DC heroes before, suggesting that MK vs DC is canon to the Injustice series. But that can't be true, because the Lex Luthor of that game was his classic scheming self, while the Injustice Luthor was a good man and Superman's best friend. Weird, but it was probably just meant as a fun little reference, nothing more.

http://deadline.com/2018/03/ava-duvernay-new-gods-movie-warner-bros-dc-jack-kirby-1202338680/

This will not happen. She'll drop the project because of "creative differences" or something like that in a few months.
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: StapleBattery on March 16, 2018, 11:03:10 AM
Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe

A mediocre game with lame, toothless finishers. The Injustice games have done a much better job of depicting savage brutality while working within the constraints of a T rating. And on a related note, dialogue from Sub-Zero and Raiden in Injustice 2 references Dark Kahn and meeting the DC heroes before, suggesting that MK vs DC is canon to the Injustice series. But that can't be true, because the Lex Luthor of that game was his classic scheming self, while the Injustice Luthor was a good man and Superman's best friend. Weird, but it was probably just meant as a fun little reference, nothing more.

http://deadline.com/2018/03/ava-duvernay-new-gods-movie-warner-bros-dc-jack-kirby-1202338680/

This will not happen. She'll drop the project because of "creative differences" or something like that in a few months.
The Lex who was Superman's friend was the Lex from the alternate universe in Injustice 1, the 'original' universe Lex still hates Superman so it could be canon.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 16, 2018, 12:27:05 PM
But Injustice 2 takes place entirely within the alternate universe.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on March 16, 2018, 03:06:12 PM
But Injustice 2 takes place entirely within the alternate universe.
But there's still the Lex Luthor from the original universe. And if there is the alternate universe, who's to say there isn't more universes?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 22, 2018, 04:12:54 AM
There is the multiverse, yes, but the dialogue during battles makes it clear that these fights are still clearly set in the Injustice universe, even if they're not necessarily canon to the storyline of the series. I suppose the MK universe might have interacted with a completely different DC universe, and Sub-Zero and Raiden simply assumed that the DC characters were the same ones they met back then,*   but that's kind of boring, isn't it?

*Possibly backing this up is the fact that the DC characters don't give much indication that they know or remember the MK characters, but we have to bear in mind that a voice actor strike meant that almost all of the core characters' dialogue during their battles with the DLC characters was simply recycled from the core game. It's honestly one of my biggest gripes with the game, because the banter between the core characters had been so great.

...

https://www.supermanhomepage.com/images/man-of-steel-movie10/Skipped/MOS-Excerpt.pdf

This is a behind-the-scenes booklet for MoS, where the most interesting part for me was the introduction that Snyder wrote, and especially the first paragraph:

Quote
The single point at which everything we know and everything we question exists in one place; the ultimate crossroads in the journey of discovering the true meaning of ‘self;’ the collision point of science and religion, tangible and ethereal, physical and philosophical; the place where a question that may never truly have an answer can be embodied in a singular character – in many ways, that is the why of Superman.

That's one way to make a bad movie - treat your main character as an idea rather than a person. The rest of the introduction continues in this vein, repeatedly likening Superman to a god, talking about how he'd impact the world, how he'd challenge our perceptions, blah blah blah. What's Superman like as a character, Zack? His personality? His worldview? His motivations?

https://io9.gizmodo.com/justice-league-is-officially-the-lowest-grossing-dc-uni-1823902130

lol
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Dither on March 22, 2018, 06:14:25 AM
I'm calling it now - they'll shoot a gritty, grounded movie that downplays the capeshit elements heavily,

All this dark gritty realism, its so 2010's,
What we really need is a Batman The Musical version.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ucV8mqlZ4DA
Title: Re: First Look at Ben Affleck's Batman
Post by: honk on March 25, 2018, 04:32:11 AM
The Injustice games have done a much better job of depicting savage brutality while working within the constraints of a T rating.

Like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvFGf5tD5eY

If you didn't know anything about MK, you'd probably just assume that Sub-Zero was lifting his opponent into the air. But that horrible squelching sound leaves no doubt as to what he's really doing.

It's honestly one of my biggest gripes with the game

Another was the portrayal of Batman in the main story. He's just so bland here, and doesn't feel at all like the same (and much more interesting) character from the first game. The positioning of him as the de facto protagonist of the game whose playable chapters bookended the story was an especially dull and predictable choice, one that I suspect was informed more by worries of fan expectations than genuine artistic desires. We have to make Batman the main character who ends up saving the day or the game won't sell!

And then there's Wonder Woman, whom NetherRealm just seems to hate. They worked extra hard to make her as unlikable as possible, depicting her as an opportunistic Lady Macbeth with none of the tragic motivations or redeeming qualities that all the other Regime members had. Even Black Adam, the evil, power-hungry tyrant, is portrayed more sympathetically than her.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 05, 2018, 02:25:16 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/RjaNhR6.png)

Lolwut? Is the idea of a wealthy, troubled anti-hero banging random ladies really something that needs this kind of "symbolic" representation? Especially when the scene it's in already conveys the idea pretty clearly?

(https://i.imgur.com/TBv7rBb.jpg)

For fuck's sake, Zack, that's why you decided to have it be a spear, not Batman! This really is the worst combination of pretension and stupidity.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on April 05, 2018, 03:00:46 PM
2deep4u
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on April 05, 2018, 03:31:44 PM
Why would he choose the work of a gay erotic photographer to represent Bruce banging random women to deal with his shit?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on April 05, 2018, 11:20:58 PM
Why would he choose the work of a gay erotic photographer to represent Bruce banging random women to deal with his shit?

Clearly it is representative of Bruce's latent and repressed desire to fuck dudes.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on April 06, 2018, 03:18:03 AM
Why would he choose the work of a gay erotic photographer to represent Bruce banging random women to deal with his shit?

Clearly it is representative of Bruce's latent and repressed desire to fuck dudes.

That would explain the way he looks at Superman when he tries to run him over.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 06, 2018, 04:10:06 AM
Why would he choose the work of a gay erotic photographer to represent Bruce banging random women to deal with his shit?

I doubt if there's anything more to it beyond Snyder's apparent belief that framed pictures add a sense of artistry to a scene. He's been throwing out a lot of these odd explanations for little details in BvS lately. Evidently he knows that his stint in the DCEU is over and he's trying to spell out as much of his vision as he can. This article mentions a few of them:

https://www.cbr.com/zack-snyder-explaining-batman-v-superman/

The one about the Anti-Life Equation took me by surprise. I had honestly thought that the Knightmare was simply referring to Injustice, with some Darkseid thrown in for franchise-building. That wouldn't have made the scene any less pointless, but at least it would be a simpler and clearer explanation than "and also Darkseid is secretly controlling him."

That would explain the way he looks at Superman when he tries to run him over.

(https://i.imgur.com/bF4c8rm.gif)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 06, 2018, 05:09:21 AM
The fuck?
Did Snyder read comics?  Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Anti-Life equation a way to unmake life and not mind control people?  And implying Darkseid has it is like saying Thanos has all the infinity stones but is gonna fuck with Captain America's head instead of wiping out half the universe.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on April 06, 2018, 11:40:31 AM
half the universe.
Like Marvel would do that. He'll probably just kill off some characters, destroy a few cities, and then be heroically defeated by a ragtag group of Avengers. It's hard to further your massive cash cow if you just killed off everyone in it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 06, 2018, 02:23:21 PM
The fuck?
Did Snyder read comics?  Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Anti-Life equation a way to unmake life and not mind control people?

No, it's mind control.

(https://i.imgur.com/cmHjqr9.png)

Darkseid specifically hates free will, not the concept of life itself.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on April 06, 2018, 08:15:54 PM
Why would he choose the work of a gay erotic photographer to represent Bruce banging random women to deal with his shit?

Clearly it is representative of Bruce's latent and repressed desire to fuck dudes.

That would explain the way he looks at Superman when he tries to run him over.

You really have to go back to the old TV show to see this level of homoerotic subtext in a Batman work.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 07, 2018, 05:46:42 AM
The fuck?
Did Snyder read comics?  Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Anti-Life equation a way to unmake life and not mind control people?

No, it's mind control.

(https://i.imgur.com/cmHjqr9.png)

Darkseid specifically hates free will, not the concept of life itself.


Ah...
That is far less cool than I thought it was.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 08, 2018, 04:56:19 AM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/04/06/zack-snyder-suggests-dead-robin-in-batman-v-superman-was-dick-grayson-2

Having Dick be the dead Robin rather than Jason is exactly the kind of dumb "edgy" detail Snyder would include without thinking about what it meant for the franchise going forward, much like introducing Jimmy Olsen for the sole purpose of shooting him in the head. WB thankfully won't pay any attention to this.

(https://i.imgur.com/AgyT6cE.jpg)

God, he's such an idiot.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on April 10, 2018, 05:24:12 PM
I love that part in the Bible where Jesus floated in the water after saving workers from a flaming offshore rig.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 18, 2018, 02:05:52 AM
http://whatculture.com/film/10-dceu-revelations-from-zack-snyder?page=9

I can't find an image of this exchange, or even another article talking about it, so I can't guarantee that this one is true. Assuming that it is, though, this is awful storytelling, just like having Superman becoming evil because Darkseid was controlling him or Batman and Superman fighting because Lex tricked them into it was awful storytelling. I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating, especially seeing how Snyder has apparently learned nothing from the response to BvS and has continued to triple down on his "everybody was being controlled or manipulated by somebody else" approach to plotting and character motivations. Nobody who fails to understand the importance of proper character motivations has any business working in a creative medium, and even the comics that Snyder cribs from so heavily were never so lazy as to keep relying on these stupid villainous master plans forming the entirety of the plot.

https://screenrant.com/zack-snyder-justice-league-knightmare-plan/

As you can see, the JL two-parter that Snyder had planned promised to be complete fucking garbage. It also looks like it would have been even more grimdark than BvS, despite claims from Snyder and Terrio that a lighter tone going forward was always the plan and not something hurriedly decided on after BvS's poor reception. Also, none of this makes the Knightmare any less lousy as a part of the story or more effective as an advertisement.

In other news, the Harley thing seems to be progressing (http://deadline.com/2018/04/harley-quinn-margot-robbie-cathy-yan-birds-of-prey-warner-bros-dc-entertainment-bat-girl-christina-hodson-1202365866/). I love this part of the article:

Quote
This is a bold bet for Warner Bros’ Geoff Johns and Walter Hamada, who oversee DC under Toby Emmerich. Yan got the job over numerous well established male directors, and because she is taking this giant leap with just one small-budget indie movie under her belt.

A studio entrusting an enormous blockbuster to a director who's only handled one small movie before? Well, I'll be! This has never happened before!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 19, 2018, 05:47:16 AM
Ugh.... you do not need mind control or complex manipulation that ends up being stupid.


Batman would fight to stop superman because a god damn city was destroyed in a fist fight.


And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Darkseid more "Soften them up with minor villians then invade with an army?" Not a "Puppet from the shadows until they have no defense"?


He always struck me as a hands on,crush them with force (though intelligently) kind of villian.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on April 20, 2018, 02:46:51 PM
Ugh.... you do not need mind control or complex manipulation that ends up being stupid.


Batman would fight to stop superman because a god damn city was destroyed in a fist fight.


And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Darkseid more "Soften them up with minor villians then invade with an army?" Not a "Puppet from the shadows until they have no defense"?


He always struck me as a hands on,crush them with force (though intelligently) kind of villian.

Legends had Darkseid executing a complicated scheme through his minions to turn Earth's people against its heroes before trying to attack. "Puppet (er, puppet master?) from the shadows until they have no defense" is consistent enough with his character imo.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 20, 2018, 03:23:52 PM
Fair enough.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on April 21, 2018, 09:11:03 AM
At this rate, Snyder is going to ruin Batman forever. 
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on April 21, 2018, 02:12:04 PM
At this rate, Snyder is going to ruin Batman forever.

>implying he hasnt already
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 23, 2018, 01:02:45 PM
Snyder's damage is done. I'm reasonably certain that future filmmakers are not going to be taking these musings into account for planning out their movies. Like, if the Nightwing movie ever gets made, it'll be about Dick Grayson. They're not going to have it be someone else because Snyder wanted to be edgy and have it be Dick who was killed rather than Jason Todd. Same with his idea of Bruce never living in Wayne Manor as an adult. If Matt Reeves or whoever wants to show a flashback of Bruce living there, they will. It's kind of like how JL wisely set aside Snyder's dumb notion that Batman was still an urban legend after twenty years of capeshittery and too edgy to work with the police. Never forget:

(http://i.imgur.com/sHpGRTl.png)

Behold the master of stealth, perched two feet off the ground with his enormous frame filling up almost the entire corner of the room. You know what, I think this one needs to be seen in motion for the full effect:

(https://i.imgur.com/MG5Rvno.gif)

Was having him slither away like a snake really the best they could do? Why not have him, I don't know, set off a smoke grenade, or throw a batarang that emitted a noise as a distraction, or even just escape the room stealthily without the cop noticing? They'd all have been better introductions to Batman than this. But I guess Snyder really wanted to emphasize his inhumanity or something.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on April 23, 2018, 02:31:26 PM
There is a Teen Titans series, centering around Dick Grayson, being shot in Toronto right now. If they make a Nightwing movie, do you think they will be smart and cast the same actor in the movie? I don’t.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 23, 2018, 03:27:17 PM
There's a god damn Teen Titans GO! movie for some dumb fuck reason.


Why? 
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on April 23, 2018, 04:13:42 PM
I'm going to imagine probably because it's popular and enjoyed?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 23, 2018, 05:57:42 PM
I'm going to imagine probably because it's popular and enjoyed?
It's shit.  A total joke.

Like they had one episode where the teen titans ate so much food their bellies got super big and Cyborg and Beast-boy's bellies became sentient and took over their bodies, eating all the food so they could grow bigger.

I'm sorry but if that's popular enough to get a movie, America is one fucked up country.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on April 24, 2018, 06:08:24 AM
I'm going to imagine probably because it's popular and enjoyed?
It's shit.  A total joke.

Like they had one episode where the teen titans ate so much food their bellies got super big and Cyborg and Beast-boy's bellies became sentient and took over their bodies, eating all the food so they could grow bigger.

I'm sorry but if that's popular enough to get a movie, America is one fucked up country.

Keep in mind that Teen Titans GO! is a children's show, so you may not be the target audience.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 24, 2018, 10:24:46 AM
I'm going to imagine probably because it's popular and enjoyed?
It's shit.  A total joke.

Like they had one episode where the teen titans ate so much food their bellies got super big and Cyborg and Beast-boy's bellies became sentient and took over their bodies, eating all the food so they could grow bigger.

I'm sorry but if that's popular enough to get a movie, America is one fucked up country.

Keep in mind that Teen Titans GO! is a children's show, so you may not be the target audience.
I watchalot of kids shows.  I have a 3 year old.
Target audience or not, it's shit.  It's random, unexplained hijinks for no reason than to make fart jokes.  It's crass, low brow humor with no characters keeping any consistency.  Even SpongeBob is a better show.  Hell, Ren & Stimpy was better, and that made almost no sense.  But at least it was segmented without pretending to have consistency between segments.

I can't believe the first cartoon was canceled in favor of that garbage.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on April 24, 2018, 03:36:03 PM
I'm going to imagine probably because it's popular and enjoyed?
It's shit.  A total joke.

Like they had one episode where the teen titans ate so much food their bellies got super big and Cyborg and Beast-boy's bellies became sentient and took over their bodies, eating all the food so they could grow bigger.

I'm sorry but if that's popular enough to get a movie, America is one fucked up country.

Keep in mind that Teen Titans GO! is a children's show, so you may not be the target audience.
I watchalot of kids shows.  I have a 3 year old.
Target audience or not, it's shit.  It's random, unexplained hijinks for no reason than to make fart jokes.  It's crass, low brow humor with no characters keeping any consistency.  Even SpongeBob is a better show.  Hell, Ren & Stimpy was better, and that made almost no sense.  But at least it was segmented without pretending to have consistency between segments.

I can't believe the first cartoon was canceled in favor of that garbage.

It is not a show for a 3 yr old, it is for a 6-8 year old.  Wait until fart jokes are the epitome of humor, it's a thing that kids go through and I highly recommend you embrace it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 24, 2018, 03:43:57 PM
It is not a show for a 3 yr old, it is for a 6-8 year old.  Wait until fart jokes are the epitome of humor, it's a thing that kids go through and I highly recommend you embrace it.

I am aware.
I/we watch shows that are not just for 3 yr olds.  We both watch My Little Pony.  (Shush)

Look, my issue isnt that the fart jokes are bad cause fart jokes.  My issue is that they take the Teen Titans and turn them into a bunch of bumbling idiots dealing with stupid problems with no writing worth a damn.  Like they have a random word generator to determine a plot:

"Belly... fat... living"
"Puppet... wizard... souls...."

It just ... its bad.  Its really bad writing.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on April 24, 2018, 08:47:55 PM
Don't you ever like to just turn your brain off and enjoy a little silliness once in a while for its own sake, Dave? I enjoy Teen Titans GO! pretty much because it's so silly and random. You're entitled to your opinion that it's poorly written but that's really all it is. Just because it's your opinion doesn't make it right.

And making statements like "Even SpongeBob's a better show!" doesn't really suggest you're as in tune with kids' tastes as you seem to think you are. Just saying.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 25, 2018, 05:07:20 AM
Don't you ever like to just turn your brain off and enjoy a little silliness once in a while for its own sake, Dave? I enjoy Teen Titans GO! pretty much because it's so silly and random. You're entitled to your opinion that it's poorly written but that's really all it is. Just because it's your opinion doesn't make it right.

And making statements like "Even SpongeBob's a better show!" doesn't really suggest you're as in tune with kids' tastes as you seem to think you are. Just saying.


I turn my brain off in other ways.
And yes, it is my opinion and its strong.  Maybe because I liked the other cartoon.  Or because its just one of those things that pushes my buttons.


Either way, we can leave it at that: personal taste.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on April 25, 2018, 05:42:16 AM
Lord Dave just hates fun.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 25, 2018, 08:09:48 AM
Lord Dave just hates fun.
Not true.  I love fun.  You all just wrong about what's fun.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on April 25, 2018, 09:11:49 AM
Imagine being a grown man and getting this upset about children's cartoons.

P.S.: FromSoftware should definitely make Belly Fat Living Puppet Wizard Souls.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 25, 2018, 11:34:28 AM
Imagine being a grown man and getting this upset about children's cartoons.

P.S.: FromSoftware should definitely make Belly Fat Living Puppet Wizard Souls.
Imagine being a father and getting this upset at what your children and their friends watch, knowing it will shape and influence their minds for the next few years, if not longer.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on April 25, 2018, 02:49:09 PM
Imagine being a father and getting this upset at what your children and their friends watch, knowing it will shape and influence their minds for the next few years, if not longer.
You can't control what they watch at their friends' houses, but you can control what they watch at home. I don't want to tell anyone how to raise their kids, but it seems like there's a pretty obvious solution if you don't approve of what they're watching on your TV.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on April 25, 2018, 03:23:04 PM
Imagine being a father and getting this upset at what your children and their friends watch, knowing it will shape and influence their minds for the next few years, if not longer.
You can't control what they watch at their friends' houses, but you can control what they watch at home. I don't want to tell anyone how to raise their kids, but it seems like there's a pretty obvious solution if you don't approve of what they're watching on your TV.


True, but I can still weep for society.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 26, 2018, 02:40:10 AM
I hated the first Titans show. The faux-anime style and music really irritated me. In other news, the trailer for Venom has come out, and it looks hilariously awful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Mv98Gr5pY

Tom Hardy embracing his inner Cage is the only thing that promises to be entertaining here. I am here for his latest ridiculous voice, slovenly appearance, and goofy faces.

(https://i.imgur.com/nRxPIG1.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/3IdXFpr.png)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on April 26, 2018, 08:07:43 AM
I hated the first Titans show. The faux-anime style and music really irritated me. In other news, the trailer for Venom has come out, and it looks hilariously awful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Mv98Gr5pY

Tom Hardy embracing his inner Cage is the only thing that promises to be entertaining here. I am here for his latest ridiculous voice, slovenly appearance, and goofy faces.

(https://i.imgur.com/nRxPIG1.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/3IdXFpr.png)
That looks like it's going to be complete trash.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on April 27, 2018, 05:58:52 AM
Saw Avengers. Go see it. Also post credit spoiler

Captain Marvel
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on April 29, 2018, 02:18:35 PM
Infinity War is some good shit right there mmhmmm good shit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on April 29, 2018, 06:53:46 PM
Infinity War is some good shit right there mmhmmm good shit.

Real good shit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on April 29, 2018, 08:05:08 PM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/04/29/avengers-infinity-war-destroys-box-office-records-with-630m-global-bow/#5960942739b0

Estimated $630 million global box office. It's now the highest grossing US domestic and global movie, ever. I'm gonna go watch it again cause like I said:

Infinity War is some good shit right there mmhmmm good shit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on April 29, 2018, 08:50:47 PM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/04/29/avengers-infinity-war-destroys-box-office-records-with-630m-global-bow/#5960942739b0

Estimated $630 million global box office. It's now the highest grossing US domestic and global movie, ever. I'm gonna go watch it again cause like I said:

Infinity War is some good shit right there mmhmmm good shit.


Real good shit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 30, 2018, 04:18:41 AM
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/avengers-infinity-war-box-office-a-rundown-records-broken-1106802

It made almost as much in its opening weekend as JL did in its entirety. Incredible.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on April 30, 2018, 10:40:25 AM
Infinity War is some good shit right there mmhmmm good shit.
I pirated it the day after it was released. Aargh.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on April 30, 2018, 08:56:56 PM
Can confirm, Infinity War is some fantastically good shit.

Saw Avengers. Go see it. Also post credit spoiler

Captain Marvel

m8 I don't know if I've ever felt pleasure like I did when that post-credits scene rolled by
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on May 01, 2018, 12:01:30 PM
Can confirm, Infinity War is some fantastically good shit.

Saw Avengers. Go see it. Also post credit spoiler

Captain Marvel

m8 I don't know if I've ever felt pleasure like I did when that post-credits scene rolled by
lol Captain Marvel   is easily the worst
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 01, 2018, 05:16:10 PM
Nice troll
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on May 01, 2018, 05:25:20 PM
Nice troll
It's not a troll. Captain Marvel is essentially Marvel saying "Let's make our own version of Superman that has literally every power."
Plus, I'm a misogynistic pig.  :P
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on May 01, 2018, 05:53:33 PM
Nice troll
It's not a troll. Captain Marvel is essentially Marvel saying "Let's make our own version of Superman that has literally every power."
Plus, I'm a misogynistic pig.  :P

That is Sentinel.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 02, 2018, 04:26:41 PM
Nice troll
It's not a troll. Captain Marvel is essentially Marvel saying "Let's make our own version of Superman that has literally every power."
Plus, I'm a misogynistic pig.  :P

I feel like you must have never read a comic before, or you don't actually know who that is. Or both, I guess. Or maybe there are only 3-4 powers in comics and I've been imagining the rest.

Also Rama I'm guessing you mean Sentry, who, yeah, is basically Superman with some modifications. I'd say Hyperion is even a little closer.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on May 02, 2018, 04:32:18 PM
Nice troll
It's not a troll. Captain Marvel is essentially Marvel saying "Let's make our own version of Superman that has literally every power."
Plus, I'm a misogynistic pig.  :P

I feel like you must have never read a comic before, or you don't actually know who that is. Or both, I guess. Or maybe there are only 3-4 powers in comics and I've been imagining the rest.
Wikipedia says that her powers are:
 Carol Danvers initially possessed superhuman strength, endurance, stamina, flight, physical durability, a limited precognitive "seventh sense", and a perfectly amalgamated human/Kree physiology that rendered her resistant to most toxins and poisons. As Binary, the character could tap the energy of a "white hole", allowing full control and manipulation of stellar energies, and therefore control over heat, the electromagnetic spectrum and gravity. Light speed travel and the ability to survive in the vacuum of space were also possible.

This is a lot of powers, wouldn't you say?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on May 02, 2018, 10:28:52 PM
Also Rama I'm guessing you mean Sentry, who, yeah, is basically Superman with some modifications. I'd say Hyperion is even a little closer.

Totally meant Sentry thanks and good call on Hyperion, except he’s a bad guy mostly isn’t he?

Wikipedia says that her powers are:
 Carol Danvers initially possessed superhuman strength, endurance, stamina, flight, physical durability, a limited precognitive "seventh sense", and a perfectly amalgamated human/Kree physiology that rendered her resistant to most toxins and poisons. As Binary, the character could tap the energy of a "white hole", allowing full control and manipulation of stellar energies, and therefore control over heat, the electromagnetic spectrum and gravity. Light speed travel and the ability to survive in the vacuum of space were also possible.

This is a lot of powers, wouldn't you say?

And yet not really like Superman.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on May 03, 2018, 02:30:25 AM
Wikipedia says that her powers are:
 Carol Danvers initially possessed superhuman strength, endurance, stamina, flight, physical durability, a limited precognitive "seventh sense", and a perfectly amalgamated human/Kree physiology that rendered her resistant to most toxins and poisons. As Binary, the character could tap the energy of a "white hole", allowing full control and manipulation of stellar energies, and therefore control over heat, the electromagnetic spectrum and gravity. Light speed travel and the ability to survive in the vacuum of space were also possible.

This is a lot of powers, wouldn't you say?

That is a fair amount of powers, albeit ones that all kind of group together and function in a couple of general categories, rather than Superman's absurdly diverse amount of powers. So I don't really see the Superman comparison at all, just "this character has a fair amount of abilities". And I'm assuming you're not talking about their personality, as that's even less Superman-like. So your comparison is...kinda weird to me.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on June 06, 2018, 03:15:33 AM
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/joker-jared-leto-standalone-movie-warner-bros-1202831025/

WB has to be meming us at this point. This can't be real.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on June 06, 2018, 07:59:04 AM
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/joker-jared-leto-standalone-movie-warner-bros-1202831025/ (https://variety.com/2018/film/news/joker-jared-leto-standalone-movie-warner-bros-1202831025/)

WB has to be meming us at this point. This can't be real.
Quote
When Warner Bros. announced last fall that it was developing a Joker origin tale from Todd Phillips (https://variety.com/2017/film/news/joker-origin-film-todd-phillips-1202536083/), the studio emphasized that this did not mean the end for Leto’s Joker. Rather, Phillips’ film would fall under a new origins banner that would be separate from the current cinematic DC universe. This new banner would allow multiple actors and versions based on the same character with no overlap, and WB has already tapped Joaquin Phoenix to star (https://variety.com/2018/film/news/joaquin-phoenix-the-joker-origin-movie-todd-phillips-1202692188/) in Phillips’ Joker pic.
It's like they said "Shit, we fucked up.  But we can't admit it.  Let's reboot while keeping the same stuff going."
It'll only make people more divided or confused.  Or both. 

I hope they find a writer who writes well and they just cancel the whole project cause they didn't like it.

Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on June 08, 2018, 02:05:12 PM
In the meantime, I will offer commentary on Crudblud's review of Burtman here, so as to avoid cluttering up the Just Watched thread.

Michael Keaton is not a square-jawed, buff dude, so his casting might seem a little odd in comparison both to the typical depiction of Bruce Wayne in the comics and what we've come to except from Hollywood action movie stars. Keaton plays Wayne as an unassuming, charming, and witty eccentric, his lack of imposing stature and physique makes it that much easier to believe his secret identity is secure, because Batman's sculpted body armour makes him look much bigger.

Keaton is easily the most charismatic actor to have held the role so far, and his Bruce is definitely the most likable.

Quote
Even so, when as Batman he must rescue Vicki Vale from the Joker he is careful not to have her see him too close in good lighting.

He also disguises his voice, but thankfully only to a reasonable degree, unlike Christian Bale's cartoonish growl and Batfleck's unnecessary voice modulator. The fact that Bruce Wayne and Batman sound alike is something that Hollywood is convinced is a major problem that needs to be addressed in the movies, despite the fact that nobody in real life actually cares about it.

Quote
The identity issue is one he goes back and forth on as he gets closer to Vale, and while he thinks hard over the question of whether or not to tell her it is actually revealed to her quite unceremoniously, as Alfred allows her into the Batcave. It can be assumed that Bruce wanted this, or gave up and realised that it would be better to show her than tell her who he was, since his reaction is completely without surprise or worry when she arrives.

It was a last-minute addition to the script randomly thrown in during a writer's strike (much like the dumb idea of Jack Napier/the Joker being the Waynes' murderer) and was an obvious ploy to lazily avoid having to actually write a scene between the two characters where the secret was revealed.

Quote
The film features an extremely theatrical Batman. He does a lot of impractical things for dramatic effect, for image's sake, to lend himself a kind of supernatural mystique. Compared with later more “realistic” interpretations, it is pretty far out there in terms of how he acts and how people react to him. It's very stage-y, and your willingness and ability to accept that realism is not what Burton is interested in will probably impact heavily on your overall feelings about the film. This is not super-genius ninja Batman who takes out a whole room full of thugs without them even seeing him. In some ways he's more like Marvel's “anti-Batman” Moon Knight, who makes sure the bad guys see him coming and who will gladly withstand being beaten half to death if it gets the job done. In a time before superhero films and TV shows started to get gritty, the hits Batman takes are fairly soft, and there isn't much blood in the film, but he does find himself on a couple of occasions in real struggles with Joker's henchmen. I think this works here mainly because Keaton is not a big beefy dude, he's an average-sized dude, and he uses his gadgets and his wits to get the upper hand on opponents who are often physically stronger than he is.

That's an interesting view. I'm not necessarily opposed to an alternate take on Batman, but my problem is that Burtman seems to rely on blind luck as much as he does on his gadgets and wits. The very first thing he does in this movie is get shot and fall down! Later on, he's incapacitated by gunshots again, and could have very easily been casually executed with a headshot (roughly the 3:10 mark):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T78lwKBIQYs

And then there's the fight during the climax (which I have posted before, but it merits another look), which is just embarrassing to watch (roughly the 1:30 mark):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oABhL6zCVRw

He's not fighting Bane here. He's fighting a generic, nameless thug who bizarrely resembles Ray Charles, and he's getting his ass kicked. Maybe the intention was that he was trying to tire him out, or lull him into a false sense of security or something, but none of that is communicated to the audience. This looks simply like Batman was getting a one-sided smackdown from a typical heavy until he managed to essentially blunder his way into victory via murder.

That being said, a lot of the problems with the action scenes were undoubtedly due to the limitations of the awful Batsuit. Even as a kid, I could tell that the suit was a piece of shit. Keaton can barely move in it, to say nothing of fighting. Frankly, all the live-action Batsuits were shitty up until BvS. Apparently it took that long for Hollywood to realize that what they needed was a good costume, not an actual suit of armor.

Quote
Opposite Keaton, Jack Nicholson is cast as the Joker. I almost don't want to talk about it, because it is such a classic, ubiquitous performance...

I don't agree with this at all. Nicholson is a fantastic actor, but in this movie he basically just plays himself dialed up to eleven. Like with Batman, I'm not opposed to an alternate take on the Joker (insert obvious reference to Heath Ledger's performance in TDK here), but it feels very lazy to me to have it be so heavily informed by the movie star who happened to end up in the role. There's nothing transformative or iconic about his performance; it's exactly what you'd expect when you think of Jack Nicholson playing the Joker. Even Jared Leto - no, wait, that's going too far. My apologies. To put it a better way, I don't feel like this Joker is insane, or that he's even a genuine foil to Batman. His shtick is too affected, too rehearsed, too forced. And that might have been interesting if it was intentional, but I really don't think it was - I think Burton just decided to let Nicholson's scenery-chewing essentially define the character.

Quote
While Burton is often quoted as saying that he was never big into comic books, much is made of his endorsement of The Killing Joke, an Alan Moore one-shot that came out the previous year, and whose depiction of Batman and Joker has coloured pretty much everything since. Alan Moore himself, noted curmudgeon who enjoys shitting on mainstream comics whenever he gets the chance, said that it was “far too violent and sexualised a treatment for a simplistic comic book character like Batman and a regrettable misstep on my part”. But Moore's insistence that Batman just doesn't have the complexity as a character to handle that kind of material has fallen on deaf ears, generally speaking. In any case, for all that Burton apparently makes of Moore's disowned work, it doesn't actually seem to have imprinted on the film at all.

This is an interesting subject. Many capeshit fans consider Burton's endorsement of The Killing Joke, along with DC's eagerness to use said endorsement as a marketing point, as a condescending backhand against capeshit in general. It's meant to appeal to people who, like Burton, weren't ordinarily fans of comics, and so it represents the age-old fear of becoming too mainstream. As for Moore, I suspect that his dislike of his comic is really more about the impact it had on the character and capeshit in general than the comic itself. Like you said, though, this doesn't have much to do with the movie itself. Burton is known for directing a Batman movie, and he's known for liking a famous Batman comic, so popular consciousness has simply mashed those two facts together.

Quote
I'm not crazy about Kim Basinger as an actor, but Vale is a fun and likeable character, one notable issue with the portrayal—and this is not necessarily Basinger's fault—being that she screams and faints and all that stereotypically womanly stuff despite supposedly being a hardened war photographer. It's something that feels a little dated now since women have become more prominent and active in action movies, and especially superhero movies, in recent years, but even without all that taken into consideration it's just not great writing.

It was dated even for 1989. It was probably meant to be part of Burton's homages to classic horror cinema you talked about, as many of those films feature a screaming, though largely passive woman being victimized by the monster or villain.

For myself, the successes of this movie largely lie in style over substance. The set design is terrific, Elfman's score is magnificent, and a great cast give it their all. But underneath these cool superficial elements, there's none of the heart that's been present in all of Burton's good movies. There was definitely more of an effort on that front with the sequel, for better or worse. I haven't seen it in years, though, and will need to revisit it before offering further opinions.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 12, 2018, 05:20:32 AM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/people-are-asking-at-t-customer-service-to-release-the-1826902634

I'm sure this is just a few people being dumb and not some kind of widespread movement, but still, it's very amusing.

...

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joaquin-phoenixs-joker-origin-movie-officially-a-go-1126127

And now it's official. This is so stupid. Joaquin Phoenix finally decided to sell out and slum it in a capeshit movie, and this is the one he chose?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 13, 2018, 12:26:48 PM
Shazam? Suicide Squad 2? Flashpoint? Wonder Woman 1984? Green Lantern Corps? So many movies for DC to wreck in the next two years.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: JRowe on July 13, 2018, 02:25:40 PM
I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 13, 2018, 02:45:28 PM
I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

Dwayne Johnson as Black Adam tells you everything you need to know.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on July 13, 2018, 02:57:42 PM
Dwayne Johnson actually seems like a good choice for Black Adam.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: JRowe on July 13, 2018, 03:43:54 PM
I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

Dwayne Johnson as Black Adam tells you everything you need to know.
I quite like him as an actor, he could definitely pull off a decent role, but he's both not in the Shazam movie and not responsible for the god-awful poster that screams unfunny comedy.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 13, 2018, 04:21:58 PM
I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

What poster? I didn't think DC released one yet.

Also, some fan color-graded the first official image of the film in Zack Snyder's style for fun, and...well, his paraSnydes basically had an orgasm (https://www.reddit.com/r/DC_Cinematic/comments/8y1i15/humor_if_shazam_was_color_graded_by_zack_snyder/).
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 14, 2018, 01:19:05 AM
I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

Dwayne Johnson as Black Adam tells you everything you need to know.
I quite like him as an actor, he could definitely pull off a decent role, but he's both not in the Shazam movie and not responsible for the god-awful poster that screams unfunny comedy.

I like Dwayne Johnson as an all-American action hero but I wouldn’t trust him to pull off something with more depth. The article I read said he was in Shazam, but I guess he is getting a solo movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 14, 2018, 03:40:11 AM
I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

What poster? I didn't think DC released one yet.

I think he's just talking about the official picture released. I didn't think it was great either, but it seems like a stretch to assume it's representative of the movie's quality. My own issue with the movie is that I don't like how they've made Billy Batson a teenager. I feel like him being a kid is the key to the innocence at the heart of the character. On the bright side, though, Mark Strong as Dr. Sivana sounds pretty sweet.

On the notion of Dwayne Johnson. I think he'll be fine as Black Adam, but I'm not sure WB knows where to put him. I'm not keen on the idea of a Black Adam movie, and there's a rumor floating around that the plan is for the sequel to Suicide Squad to focus on the discovery of his tomb or something like that, which is an idea so bad it makes me want to choke. The worst thing WB could do with a SS sequel is give it another standard save-the-world capeshit plot, and the worst thing they could do with one of the biggest stars in the world is waste him on a franchise that's most likely tainted beyond repair because of its horrendous first installment. I'll never understand how SS was such a commercial hit. It would be one thing if it just had a front-loaded first weekend and then fizzled due to negative word-of-mouth, but it had staying power. People were watching it, liking it, and recommending it. Did they really enjoy the awful one-liners? Feel invested in the idiot plot? Find Jared Leto compelling?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 14, 2018, 11:25:40 AM
I still occasionally argue with coworkers who insist that the Joker was the highlight of that film and want him to have his own movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 19, 2018, 10:09:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PPofXaJ4go

2edgy4me

No, but seriously, I just about lost it at "Fuck Batman." Also, in what should be non-news to any reasonable person:

http://collider.com/justice-league-snyder-cut-zack-snyder/
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on July 19, 2018, 10:51:50 PM
At least a Snyder cut would be uniquely terrible instead of the blandiose mess Whedon cobbled together.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 22, 2018, 03:19:01 AM
Yes, the work of a misguided auteur will always be more interesting than mediocre corporate pap. I'm just baffled by people who are this ignorant of the filmmaking process despite having such an interest in it. There's so much more to making a movie that has to happen after filming wraps.

In other capeshit news, a couple of trailers came out today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDkg3h8PCVU

I like this, for the most part. James Wan is a proven talent, they've got some great actors here, and I love how wacky they're willing to go with the setting. I've seen some people grumbling about how they shouldn't have included the silly giant animals because humans would logically have noticed them and blah blah blah, and I just wonder how anyone could be so dull as to nitpick about something like that for a movie like this. I am a little bit concerned if Jason Momoa really has the gravitas to be an effective lead, though. He can't carry the movie entirely on his goofiness.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go6GEIrcvFY

This one looks decent, too. Like I said earlier, though, I don't like that they've aged Billy up, and even less so that they've made him troubled and rebellious in such a generic way. And the outfit looks like a foam muscle suit. :-\
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 22, 2018, 12:47:39 PM
Aqua man looks like fun, but already has two villains which is not encouraging.

Why are you assuming Billy is generic from the first trailer. You go off on plebs not understanding how the filmmaking process works and then say things like that.

Also, filmed in my city and I didn’t get an audition :(
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 22, 2018, 02:02:54 PM
I didn't say the movie was generic; I think that this portrayal of Billy as a troubled, rebellious teenager is generic. And you not getting a audition is outrageous. They must have not have seen your masterful, Emmy-nominated performance in that Kiefer show.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on July 22, 2018, 02:51:08 PM
I watched Justice League again to see if a second viewing allows me to appreciate Snyder's true artistic genius.

It didn't.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 23, 2018, 01:16:06 PM
I didn't say the movie was generic;

I didn’t say you said the movie is generic.

Quote
I think that this portrayal of Billy as a troubled, rebellious teenager is generic.

What would have been better?  It’s tough to get away from hat cliche because it is super relevant to the age group and provides a lot of authentic material. Perhaps you should hold off on judging it until you actually know anything about the movie other than a 2 minute preview?

Quote
And you not getting a audition is outrageous. They must have not have seen your masterful, Emmy-nominated performance in that Kiefer show.

Fuck off Saddam.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 24, 2018, 05:55:45 PM
James Wan is a proven talent

You keep saying this, but he hasn't made a single "good" movie. Even if we look at critics, his absolute best score is a 68/100. They go all the way down to 34/100. Right within the range of quality of the Worlds of DC so far. Is his batting average better than Snyder's? Sure, slightly. But that's a far cry from a "proven talent", it's just "not cancerous".

Also I was excited for the Aquaman trailer since my friend said it actually looked good, but I thought it looked pretty awful. The writing was *really* bad cliché ("redheads...gotta love 'em hurhurhur"), the CGI looked like it would have been great a decade ago (why are sharks rubber?), the directing itself looks bland from what we can see; the only real plus I've gotten from it is there's more color and that one sea side shot looks really cool.

Shazam! on the other hand does look pretty fun. So hopefully that's good.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 24, 2018, 09:00:20 PM
Shazam looks like DCs opportunity to do something like GotG, which is a good thing.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on July 24, 2018, 09:25:08 PM
Shazam! looks like it could be okay. Aquaman looks like some bullshit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 28, 2018, 03:25:45 AM
You keep saying this, but he hasn't made a single "good" movie. Even if we look at critics, his absolute best score is a 68/100. They go all the way down to 34/100. Right within the range of quality of the Worlds of DC so far. Is his batting average better than Snyder's? Sure, slightly. But that's a far cry from a "proven talent", it's just "not cancerous".

Metacritic is a really weird choice of website for analyzing critical consensus. It draws on a relatively small pool of reviewers (it counted 35 reviews for The Conjuring, compared to RT counting over 200), its system of assigning a numerical score to every review is arbitrary and confusing, and in general it seems like most movies will get a score that's either bad or only middling there. Over half of the MCU has a score under seventy, and only one of them managed to get into the eighties. RT's binary system isn't perfect, but the simpler system and broader scope are exactly why it's the more popular and more commonly cited aggregate.

That being said, it's true that Wan's filmography is a little slimmer than what I was imagining. Maybe I mixed him up with someone else? From the articles I've read and things I've heard about him, the guy seems to have a lot more artistic clout than he's, well, really earned.

Quote
Also I was excited for the Aquaman trailer since my friend said it actually looked good, but I thought it looked pretty awful. The writing was *really* bad cliché ("redheads...gotta love 'em hurhurhur"), the CGI looked like it would have been great a decade ago (why are sharks rubber?), the directing itself looks bland from what we can see; the only real plus I've gotten from it is there's more color and that one sea side shot looks really cool.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the CGI and directing (I'll definitely concede that the banter here is weak), as I'm not sure how to have a productive debate on something so subjective. The one thing I will say in defense of the CGI is that it looks like the movie is so far managing to avoid what I feel are the DCEU's two biggest weaknesses there - hideously ugly designs that become an eyesore whenever they're on-screen and poor compositing between the live-action elements and digital effects.

What would have been better?  It’s tough to get away from hat cliche because it is super relevant to the age group and provides a lot of authentic material. Perhaps you should hold off on judging it until you actually know anything about the movie other than a 2 minute preview?

What would have been better is having him be a kid, like in the source material. There's a world of difference between having a kid turn into an adult and a teenager turn into an adult. And yes, of course it's early right now. I'm just saying I don't think it's off to a good start with the premise.

Shazam looks like DCs opportunity to do something like GotG, which is a good thing.

I'm not trying to turn this into the honk vs. Rama thread, I promise, but, uh, what does this mean?

I watched Justice League again to see if a second viewing allows me to appreciate Snyder's true artistic genius.

It didn't.

I was far too generous to JL when I first saw it. It's not better than BvS. That movie was garbage, but at least it was trying to do something. All that shit about Lolita, Excalibur, Jesus, Icarus, Dick Cheney, and whatever else was crammed in there was laughably stupid, but it indicated a deeper motivation behind all the derring-do of capeshit. Everybody involved really wanted to make this grand, ambitious, and powerful film that artfully deconstructed Batman and Superman, honored their roots, and revealed deep truths to the audience. A small part of me admires them for that, even if they fell flat on their faces in the attempt and dethroned Batman and Robin as the most notorious "what not to do" case study in capeshit history.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on July 28, 2018, 08:23:18 AM
James Wan has never been good. He made a name for himself with Saw, which sucked ass but was vaguely novel at the time it came out, so everyone tripped over their genius-boners in their race to suck him off. Then he made The Conjuring or what the fuck ever, and that's just about the shittiest mainstream horror series ever. Right, so what if, right, guys, we use Tiny Tim in the soundtrack, but it's playing over some shitty CGI demon that crawls around and goes "boo!", what an ebinly T W I Z T E D use of SOUNDTRACK DISSONANCE (this troper loves eating shit in all its forms) huhuhuhuhuh. I'm James Wan please clap.

brb killing myself because i live on the same planet as james wan

p.s.: aquaman still looks like some bullshit
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Baby Thork on July 28, 2018, 08:41:42 AM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44915149

I think DC have lost the plot.

https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/ryan-reynolds-deadpool-will-be-the-first-queer-superhero-film/

Why is every superhero either black, gay or transsexual as of late?

Why can't they be superheroes doing super things, without needing to also tick PC boxes?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 28, 2018, 01:43:36 PM
Quote
Quote from: Rama Set on July 24, 2018, 09:00:20 PM
Shazam looks like DCs opportunity to do something like GotG, which is a good thing.

I'm not trying to turn this into the honk vs. Rama thread, I promise, but, uh, what does this mean?

That they are trying to mesh a super hero story with a lighter comedic tone. What did you think i meant?

Fwiw, I am not sure how old Billy Batson is usually portrayed in the comics, but he doesn’t really seem like a teenager to me and more of a pre-teen.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 28, 2018, 04:15:53 PM
We'll have to agree to disagree on the CGI and directing (I'll definitely concede that the banter here is weak), as I'm not sure how to have a productive debate on something so subjective. The one thing I will say in defense of the CGI is that it looks like the movie is so far managing to avoid what I feel are the DCEU's two biggest weaknesses there - hideously ugly designs that become an eyesore whenever they're on-screen and poor compositing between the live-action elements and digital effects.

I implore you to go watch that trailer again and really look at the CGI. Look at this rubber shark (https://i.imgur.com/7Jlfcvm.jpg) that is entirely consistent with the rubber fish family (https://i.redd.it/9dvcu5439ca11.jpg) from the poster. When the poster came out I thought "oh it's just a poster, the lighting and texturization won't be that bad in the film" but I was wrong, Sadman.


Why is every superhero either black, gay or transsexual as of late?

Why can't they be superheroes doing super things, without needing to also tick PC boxes?

Uhhhhh probably because Deadpool has been pansexual in the comics for a long-ass time?

Also out of all the most recent superheroes, not many of them are black, gay or transsexual.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Baby Thork on July 28, 2018, 04:40:43 PM
We'll have to agree to disagree on the CGI and directing (I'll definitely concede that the banter here is weak), as I'm not sure how to have a productive debate on something so subjective. The one thing I will say in defense of the CGI is that it looks like the movie is so far managing to avoid what I feel are the DCEU's two biggest weaknesses there - hideously ugly designs that become an eyesore whenever they're on-screen and poor compositing between the live-action elements and digital effects.

I implore you to go watch that trailer again and really look at the CGI. Look at this rubber shark (https://i.imgur.com/7Jlfcvm.jpg) that is entirely consistent with the rubber fish family (https://i.redd.it/9dvcu5439ca11.jpg) from the poster. When the poster came out I thought "oh it's just a poster, the lighting and texturization won't be that bad in the film" but I was wrong, Sadman.


Why is every superhero either black, gay or transsexual as of late?

Why can't they be superheroes doing super things, without needing to also tick PC boxes?

Uhhhhh probably because Deadpool has been pansexual in the comics for a long-ass time?

Also out of all the most recent superheroes, not many of them are black, gay or transsexual.
No, Deadpool was declared pansexual in 2013 ... when raging leftists were already at full voice about 'inclusion' which includes everybody accept the vast majority of people.

Then we had the mess that was Wakanda, now Supergirl has a teeny-weeny, Captain America woke up black one morning, Thor is now a woman and have you noticed it is always the hero that has to be gay or ethnic? Never the villain? Like gay people and black people can't be bad? Nope, the bad guy is always a straight white guy.

Its making characters terrible. You used to have writers create a new character by starting with ... what special power should they have? Let's allow him to climb walls a bit like a spider ... hey we'll call him spiderman. Let's make a guy who has x-ray vision, can fly and is super strong ... lets call him superman.

Now its ... lets make a black character. His super power is being black. Oh, and he has to be good. Good and black. Lets call him Goodblackman. No wait ... ok he needs more stuff. Lets make him gay. No, black people aren't gay, we only do that to white characters. Let's just give him a cape, some undescribed powers we can make up as we go along and call him something noble sounding ... erm how about Nightmare ... you know alluding to the fact he's dark. Cool.


No one is interested in this apart from people who don't even read or watch comic films/book, that just want the 'message' conveyed. People need to carry on voting with their wallets and boycotting this brainscrubbing trash.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 28, 2018, 04:48:39 PM
I love it when Thork pretends to know stuff about comics.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on July 28, 2018, 06:14:13 PM
And this is why I didn't bother responding to his first post.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Baby Thork on July 28, 2018, 06:27:21 PM
And this is why I didn't bother responding to his first post.
Is that addressed to me?

I spend money going to the cinema. I watched x-men again today. I don't have to read every comic that ever comes out to still be a consumer that enjoys good films ... and recently they have all been sh*t.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 29, 2018, 04:22:41 AM
No, Deadpool was declared pansexual in 2013 ... when raging leftists were already at full voice about 'inclusion' which includes everybody accept the vast majority of people.

Deadpool's "pansexuality" begins and ends with his frequent discomforting remarks and suggestive humor. Nobody with creative control of the character has any real interest in portraying him as anything other than a more-or-less straight dude with a weird sense of humor. It's kind of like how Dumbledore from Harry Potter is apparently gay, but it's never once acknowledged or hinted at in the books, and WB has no intention of doing so in the upcoming movies.

Quote
No one is interested in this apart from people who don't even read or watch comic films/book, that just want the 'message' conveyed. People need to carry on voting with their wallets and boycotting this brainscrubbing trash.

Yeah, like the great success we had in boycotting Black Panther. That'll teach them!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on July 29, 2018, 01:26:32 PM
Other than the racist joke about the CIA agent being a colonist in Black Panther, there really wasn’t much in this movie that was show-horned by the Progressive Left. It’s pretty much a faithful comic book adaptation from what my friend and Black Pabther connossieur told me.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on July 31, 2018, 03:49:44 AM
I implore you to go watch that trailer again and really look at the CGI. Look at this rubber shark (https://i.imgur.com/7Jlfcvm.jpg) that is entirely consistent with the rubber fish family (https://i.redd.it/9dvcu5439ca11.jpg) from the poster. When the poster came out I thought "oh it's just a poster, the lighting and texturization won't be that bad in the film" but I was wrong, Sadman.

But the fish from the poster aren't CGI, they're real. Some of them seem to be stock images (https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2018/07/18/aquaman-fans-slamming-first-poster-featuring-jason-momoa/798480002/). They look off because of poor compositing, blatant recycling of the same images, and the fact that the shark in particular is very recognizable. I'm beginning to think that the problem is on your end rather than the film's. Also, this should be the movie's actual poster:

(https://i.imgur.com/Del9HPf.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on July 31, 2018, 08:54:20 PM
So you agree that they look bad, but because I thought it was bad CG instead of realizing it was badly-edited images of real sharks it's a problem on my end? And does it make the fish in the film look any better?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on July 31, 2018, 11:21:48 PM
So you agree that they look bad, but because I thought it was bad CG instead of realizing it was badly-edited images of real sharks it's a problem on my end? And does it make the fish in the film look any better?

That's what I was wondering, Saddam's reply doesn't make a lot of sense.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 01, 2018, 04:24:47 AM
So you agree that they look bad, but because I thought it was bad CG instead of realizing it was badly-edited images of real sharks it's a problem on my end? And does it make the fish in the film look any better?

I was jokingly questioning your ability to recognize bad CGI sharks if you thought that real sharks were bad CGI. I know what you meant, of course, but you have to admit that you walked right into a snarky comeback by criticizing the CGI of real sharks during a discussion on CGI sharks. As for the shark in the aquarium, I think it's fine. Not amazing, but passable, serviceable, and not appreciably worse than much of the MCU. It's the speed and general movement of the shark that stood out the most to me, just because we know that it's unnatural for sharks to move in that way. It's not so much bad CGI as it is uncanny valley.

That they are trying to mesh a super hero story with a lighter comedic tone. What did you think i meant?

I wasn't sure what to think about what you meant, but my immediate thought was that GotG, as great as it was, had a certain level of crudeness and mean-spiritedness to it that I feel would be inappropriate for a movie like this. I agree that a lighter comedic tone is what's called for.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 01, 2018, 10:58:54 AM
I wasn't sure what to think about what you meant, but my immediate thought was that GotG, as great as it was, had a certain level of crudeness and mean-spiritedness to it that I feel would be inappropriate for a movie like this. I agree that a lighter comedic tone is what's called for.

I didn’t have that perception of GotG, but assuming that is true kids can be crude and mean. It seems entirely appropriate to have moments of that in the film seeing as its protagonist is a kid. Regardless, I didn’t say that Shazam should try and be GotG, just that a comedic tone is a good look for the DCEU.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 02, 2018, 02:54:54 PM
New Venom trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70JIXsey2iI

Looks like the CGI might be distracting, but could be good story-wise.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on August 03, 2018, 12:23:48 AM
Quote from: Amy Pascal
"First, there is Spider-Man happily in the place where he’s supposed to be which is in the Marvel Universe. I think everything comes from that. This is the signpost, the tentpole, the signature and… the other movies that Sony’s going to make, in their relationship to this [MCU] Spider-Man, take place in this world. Although you’re not going to see them in the Marvel Universe, it’s in the same reality."

When your producer has to admit that Venom isn't in the MCU but also isn't allowed to admit Venom isn't in the MCU you get amazing quotes like this right here.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 03, 2018, 12:26:51 AM
Shit son, gotta feel bad for the producer.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on August 03, 2018, 04:26:42 AM
could be good

(https://i.imgur.com/3IdXFpr.png)

It looks terrible. This dialogue is laughable, Hardy sounds like Elmer Fudd, and the climax of two oily, stringy symbiotes having a clusterfuck fight is about the most boring, generic thing they could have dreamed up for this, short of including a skybeam/portal of doom. Sony is even more lost than WB. They can't accept that their current deal with Marvel is as high as they'll ever rise in the capeshit game, and all they're going to do is dilute the brand by slapping the Marvel name on these shitty spinoffs, along with presumably spoiling their potential for inclusion in the MCU for a few years or so. And on the notion of lousy capeshit:

http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/justice-league-zack-snyder-robin-dceu

I talked about this earlier in the thread, but I guess this is the "confirmation" that Snyder intended Dick to be the dead Robin in BvS. And really, this is the kind of stupid, cynical shit that takes away from the small amount of respect I had for Snyder for trying to be a bold auteur and going his own way with such valuable properties. As easy as it is to mock Snyder's edgy sensibilities, most of his creative decisions were genuinely meant to serve the story or characters. Like, Batman's hostile relationship with the police isn't a statement that this Batman is too cool to pal around with the boring old cops - it's meant to contribute to the sense that he's lost his way and become a corruption of himself and everything he once stood for. But having Dick specifically be the dead Robin doesn't add to anything. It's not necessary to establish that Batman is broken or disillusioned, as Batman would rightly be traumatized by the death of any sidekick he ever took on, it doesn't add emotional impact, as the franchise hasn't introduced any Robins yet, it doesn't add stakes, as the death of Robin is only background detail rather than part of the story proper, it's not true to the comics, and it shoots the franchise in the foot by needlessly robbing it of such an important character. It's edge for edge's sake.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on August 03, 2018, 04:52:47 AM
As someone who’s heavily plugged in to pop culture you’re probably right.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on August 03, 2018, 05:33:07 AM
I mean, I just took it for granted that it was Jason. Why wouldn't it be? I guess if Batman's first and only Robin was killed it makes it that much darker, oooooh.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 12, 2018, 09:35:56 PM
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/henry-cavill-as-superman-warner-bros-dc-universe-shake-up-1142306

Well done, WB. Truly, this will be remembered as an iconic take on this character. ::)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on September 12, 2018, 09:55:06 PM
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/henry-cavill-as-superman-warner-bros-dc-universe-shake-up-1142306

Well done, WB. Truly, this will be remembered as an iconic take on this character. ::)

Quote
That's because the studio has shifted its focus to a Supergirl movie, which will be an origin story featuring a teen superheroine.
Because of course.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on September 12, 2018, 10:31:14 PM
Quote
That's because the studio has shifted its focus to a Supergirl movie, which will be an origin story featuring a teen superheroine.
Because of course.
inb4they cast a dark-skinned person.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 13, 2018, 05:12:30 AM
Quote
That's because the studio has shifted its focus to a Supergirl movie, which will be an origin story featuring a teen superheroine.
Because of course.
inb4they cast a dark-skinned person.
https://www.ebony.com/entertainment-culture/michael-b-jordan-considered-as-replacement-for-henry-cavill-as-superman?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 13, 2018, 02:51:58 PM
I actually don't have a problem with a black Superman, but not him plz. Cast someone more like Idris Elba. There are a number of hotheaded, snarky heroes I could see Michael B. Jordan playing, but not Superman.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 14, 2018, 04:07:57 AM
With the twenty or so DC movies that WB is already supposedly working on, I'm highly skeptical of a Supergirl movie happening any time soon. Much like with the Flash, the current TV show already covering all the classic material and doing a fine job of it makes a potential movie seem a little redundant. Interestingly enough, the one capeshitter whom I think is both well-suited to exist in separate continuities on film and television and could avoid audience confusion/burnout is Batman. He can be a gritty, vengeful brute, a charming, suave adventurer, a wholesome community figure, and so on. This is partially why Batman is the best capeshitter.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on September 15, 2018, 08:41:22 PM
This is partially why Batman is the best capeshitter in the DC universe (maybe).

ftfy
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 15, 2018, 09:27:38 PM
Batman a shit I want Moon Knight.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 16, 2018, 09:49:44 PM
(https://scontent-ort2-2.cdninstagram.com/vp/bb87783eac9e584cd1d402704a954e83/5C277E29/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s750x750/41466537_2261923980697503_1188041514126656034_n.jpg)

First image of our new Joker for the origin movie. Directed by Todd Phillips, who's made the Hangover films and a bunch of other trash, and co-written by the dude who wrote X-Men Origins: Wolverine. What a stellar dumpster fire.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on September 17, 2018, 03:18:19 AM
I finally saw the trailer for Kazaam (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA9AtHjJxWM)  Shazam (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go6GEIrcvFY)

And wow, it looks really fucking stupid.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Baby Thork on September 17, 2018, 08:41:05 PM
Its for kids and it doesn't look they are trying to ram a message down their throats. I think it looks like good clean fun.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 17, 2018, 10:11:00 PM
I'm actually with Thork on this one. Maybe I just find it to be a nice palate cleanser from the dark and gritty bullshit DC's been trying to make stick, but Shazam looks like a fun flick even if it doesn't seem like something substantial and complex.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on September 17, 2018, 11:07:41 PM
Yeah it’s why people lived Antman and Guardians of the Galaxy. A superhero flick can just be fun. The reason Dark Knight, Iron Man and Winter Soldier were exceptional is they were fun and substantial.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 18, 2018, 04:37:12 AM
(https://scontent-ort2-2.cdninstagram.com/vp/bb87783eac9e584cd1d402704a954e83/5C277E29/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s750x750/41466537_2261923980697503_1188041514126656034_n.jpg)

Still a better Joker than Leto.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 18, 2018, 08:29:04 AM
"You wanna know how I got this hair?"

I like Joaquin Phoenix and all but this has trainwreck written all over it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: markjo on September 19, 2018, 08:27:00 PM
The official Captain Marvel trailer is finally out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1BCujX3pw8

Take that, "sweet, innocent little old lady".  >o<
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on September 19, 2018, 11:37:44 PM
Yeah I think I’m more interested in Shazam based on the trailers...

But I have to watch it cause IW2.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 20, 2018, 01:51:13 AM
But the agenda.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: markjo on September 20, 2018, 03:20:14 AM
Yeah I think I’m more interested in Shazam based on the trailers...
I don't know about Shazam.  The super suit just screams cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle suit.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on September 20, 2018, 05:05:41 AM
I don't know about Shazam.  The super suit just screams cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle suit.

That is what I was getting at when I said it looked terrible. I was quickly countered by the "good clean fun" crew.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 20, 2018, 08:22:48 AM
Yeah I think I’m more interested in Shazam based on the trailers...
I don't know about Shazam.  The super suit just screams cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle suit.
For the tone they're going for I think it works. Shazam should absolutely be a cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle movie.

In other nudes I'm not watching the Captain Marbles trailer because Marvel movies are mostly not terrible so why spoil it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: markjo on September 20, 2018, 11:21:07 PM
Yeah I think I’m more interested in Shazam based on the trailers...
I don't know about Shazam.  The super suit just screams cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle suit.
For the tone they're going for I think it works. Shazam should absolutely be a cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle movie.
Thing is, cheesy movies like that are hard to pull off well and I don't know if DC is up to the challenge.

In other nudes I'm not watching the Captain Marbles trailer because Marvel movies are mostly not terrible so why spoil it.
It's more of a teaser trailer, so it doesn't really give too much away (unless you're one of those uber nerds who over analyzes it frame by frame).
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 21, 2018, 09:45:25 AM
Yeah I think I’m more interested in Shazam based on the trailers...
I don't know about Shazam.  The super suit just screams cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle suit.
For the tone they're going for I think it works. Shazam should absolutely be a cheesy, overly padded, fake muscle movie.
Thing is, cheesy movies like that are hard to pull off well and I don't know if DC is up to the challenge.
Any kind of movie is hard to pull off well, and DC isn't monolithic, it depends entirely on who's involved. The actors in the cast that I'm familiar with are capable, the director I have less faith in (directing Conjuring spin-offs is not a way into my good books) but who knows. DC is definitely lagging way behind Marvel right now, but I think it will be possible for them to ultimately overcome the tonal baggage of Zack Snyder's overly serious garbage fires. Whether or not they actually manage to do that is of course yet to be seen, the Batman solo movie will be the real test of that, I think.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 25, 2018, 04:27:24 AM
https://www.cbr.com/former-dc-president-harassed-off-twitter-by-angry-zack-snyder-fans/

wtf lol

how does such a shitty director command such rabid loyalty

Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 25, 2018, 08:26:33 AM
https://www.cbr.com/former-dc-president-harassed-off-twitter-by-angry-zack-snyder-fans/ (https://www.cbr.com/former-dc-president-harassed-off-twitter-by-angry-zack-snyder-fans/)

wtf lol

how does such a shitty director command such rabid loyalty


Same way a shitty presodent does, I'd wager.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on September 25, 2018, 01:38:05 PM
https://www.cbr.com/former-dc-president-harassed-off-twitter-by-angry-zack-snyder-fans/

wtf lol

how does such a shitty director command such rabid loyalty

You just can't comprehend Snyder's masterpieces. Have you even noticed the deep and thoughtful Bible imagery? I thought not.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on September 25, 2018, 02:23:07 PM
https://www.cbr.com/former-dc-president-harassed-off-twitter-by-angry-zack-snyder-fans/ (https://www.cbr.com/former-dc-president-harassed-off-twitter-by-angry-zack-snyder-fans/)

wtf lol

how does such a shitty director command such rabid loyalty

You just can't comprehend Snyder's masterpieces. Have you even noticed the deep and thoughtful Bible imagery? I thought not.


Absolutely.  Like, can you believe the subtle placing of the fig tree painting over the bed to symbolize empty sex and booze immediately after the "meaningless sex with booze" scene.

Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 30, 2018, 03:13:34 PM
(http://crudblud.sjm.so/1538319804298.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on September 30, 2018, 03:47:39 PM
Van Damme is such that I don't know if I believe that movie exists or not.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 30, 2018, 04:04:39 PM
Van Damme is such that I don't know if I believe that movie exists or not.
He is the new superhero who challenges an artificial intelligence drone predator that is an artificial intelligence drone army which takes on a new kind of superhero.

Also To Be Confirmed is putting in serious work on this film. Have some respect, damme you.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on September 30, 2018, 05:05:10 PM
http://techgeek.com.au/2015/02/09/meet-falconman-hilarious-crappy-ripoff-batman/

wtf is this movie
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on September 30, 2018, 06:18:19 PM
So it's a Van Damme vehicle that is also a feature length advert for a fashion TV network?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on October 01, 2018, 05:02:27 PM
Saddam found this amazing Falconman content but did not post it here for some reason so here we go. Just feast your eyes on these incredible composite shots (http://www.micheladam.tv/falconman/scene-visualizations/). Also they straight up posted the plot synopsis (http://www.micheladam.tv/falconman/synopsis/).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqF2NicfvBU
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on October 10, 2018, 10:46:26 PM
Changing the subject back to actual movies that are actually going to come out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaWnLiffxJ4

This feels like essentially more of the same in terms of quality; both the good and bad. The banter between Arthur and Mera is terrible. Not a single one of their zingers got more than an eye-roll from me. I'm still unsure if Momoa is up to the task of being an effective leading man, and both he and Amber Heard are clearly the weakest spots in what's otherwise a very respectable cast. The CGI looks iffy in a few spots, like Nicole Kidman's weird dive (Couldn't they have just gotten a stunt double to do a real dive?), but for the most part it seems perfectly okay. I'm more interested in the style and visual design of the movie than the technical strength of the CGI, and so far all that does look really cool and delightfully silly.

In other news:

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/10/james-gunn-suicide-squad-2-director-writer-dceu-1202010779/

haha what

https://variety.com/2018/film/news/joker-extras-locked-subway-car-tracks-1202976071/

haha what
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on October 10, 2018, 11:21:05 PM
Does this mean we might actually get a Suicide Squad that'll make me want suicide in my life in a better way? Hopefully it's more Guardians 1 than 2.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on October 11, 2018, 08:59:20 AM
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/joker-extras-locked-subway-car-tracks-1202976071/

haha what
We’re you there? NO. Then how can you even comment and comment against the crew?It is irresponsible to make such comments that you obviously have no knowledge of.

I’m am elected officer of SAGAFTRA so I have knowledge of the situation.
I won’t answer anymore comments or inquiries from persons with false identities.
Use your real name and own up to your comments.
Really “honk” how old are you!
Again ,use your real name if you want an adult conversation
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on October 13, 2018, 08:50:07 AM
Ronnie Fisticles just got cancelled. Based on what they were teasing at the end of this season, that's a shame, but I'm also not surprised. Hopefully Colleen has enough fan support to move to other shows like Claire did.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on October 13, 2018, 09:59:18 AM
I'm never going to watch that show. A decision based purely upon what I've read about the ending.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on October 20, 2018, 04:59:01 PM
Large Black Man also got cancelled. I wonder if there's going to be a Heroes For Hire show replacing the individual shows? Probably not, but hey, it could happen!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on October 21, 2018, 01:05:20 AM
Well apparently Disney is about to launch a new streaming service. Guessing that might have something to do with it...
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on October 21, 2018, 09:51:44 AM
Well apparently Disney is about to launch a new streaming service. Guessing that might have something to do with it...
Yes, that might have something to do with it, but apparently the decision to cancel those shows was entirely on Netflix. Of course, it might be that Marvel wants Netflix to pay more to use their characters now that they are streaming competitors, so the less popular ones have to go. Daredevil might stick around but I'm not sure it needs a fourth season. Jessica Jones could definitely have a good third season, but then I think the other shows could have as well, so that's not exactly encouraging.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on October 24, 2018, 01:05:12 AM
Daredevil (Season 3)

Loved this. I think it might be my favorite season of Daredevil.


Titans (Season 1, Episodes 1-2)

I wish I was lobotomized.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on November 30, 2018, 08:46:58 AM
Dareduder just got cancelled. I guess this really is it for Marvel content on Netflix.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on November 30, 2018, 11:58:51 AM
None of this is surprising. Disney’s streaming platform launches in 2020 I think? No doubt there will be capebingeing then.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on November 30, 2018, 01:29:55 PM
It was clear that they were going to stop licensing their movies to stream on Netflix, but it always seemed to be the case that Disney didn't want that kind of programming on their own service (however, this was probably mostly moronic speculation from the same kind of people as those who think Obsidian is making a new Fallout game or that Konami will graciously give up the rights to MGS). Whatever, I guess it was good while it lasted. And this is better than having it go on for too long and deteriorate into garbage.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on November 30, 2018, 10:35:02 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/is-aquaman-moist-or-soggy-the-first-reactions-are-in-1830663261

Oh boy, positive first reactions. Never heard that one before.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on December 05, 2018, 07:53:07 PM
https://io9.gizmodo.com/is-aquaman-moist-or-soggy-the-first-reactions-are-in-1830663261

Oh boy, positive first reactions. Never heard that one before.
He's moist, by the way.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 06, 2018, 05:15:24 AM
I hope it is moist, but I'm not convinced by the enthusiasm of early audiences. They'll cheer anything on. Also, behold a terrible fight scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p-UF7kDzrs

Ugh! How nauseating!
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 06, 2018, 12:56:35 PM
Looked pretty cool on my phone but probably is incoherent on a big screen.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on December 06, 2018, 01:33:52 PM
Saddam is just complaining for the sake of complaining again.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: totallackey on December 06, 2018, 01:49:26 PM
People were tuning out for Daredevil, Luke Cage, and Iron Fist. The latter I understand, but the first two I found worthy of continued lines, especially Daredevil as they just introduced Bullseye into the mix. The Punisher is still a go in Jan of 2019 I think.

I believe Disney streaming will pick up the gauntlet on these characters, especially Daredevil.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 06, 2018, 02:57:33 PM
If they do it will probably be less violent. Or gory, I should say.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 06, 2018, 04:21:05 PM
I hope it is moist, but I'm not convinced by the enthusiasm of early audiences. They'll cheer anything on. Also, behold a terrible fight scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p-UF7kDzrs

Ugh! How nauseating!

I wish I could find the article I read this morning praising that fight scene to the high heavens. When really that just reminded me of the fight scene at the end of Black Panther, grossly clunky CGI and all.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: totallackey on December 06, 2018, 04:35:18 PM
If they do it will probably be less violent. Or gory, I should say.
Well that wouldn't be good IMO. Part of the reason I liked Daredevil so much was the realism and portrayal of the dark nature. Especially D'onofrio and Bernthal.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 06, 2018, 05:22:31 PM
If they do it will probably be less violent. Or gory, I should say.
Well that wouldn't be good IMO. Part of the reason I liked Daredevil so much was the realism and portrayal of the dark nature. Especially D'onofrio and Bernthal.

Removing gore does not have to decrease the realism.  It depends on directorial choices for shot selection and storytelling.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 06, 2018, 05:49:52 PM
I wish I could find the article I read this morning praising that fight scene to the high heavens. When really that just reminded me of the fight scene at the end of Black Panther, grossly clunky CGI and all.

This one, perhaps?

https://io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-aquaman-clip-teases-what-might-be-dcs-most-badass-1830877066

I love how all the comments are openly contradicting him. Some highlights:

Quote
“actors’ choreography”

How much are they actually there, though?  Considering the water physics and the awful, spinning camera, I’d say very little.

Quote
Loads of motion capture and motion sickness all in one bucket...

Hope theaters are selling Dramamine before each showing.

Quote
This fight scene is completely not awesome. It looks like a sped up video of two guys with giant hors deuvres forks fighting over the last crab puff.

Quote
Is there 1% of this that is not CGI? After 10 seconds of smack-talk, with CGI faces, I can’t even identify who is who in the fight.  Couldn’t one be wearing, say, bright orange armor? I get they have to make it look like turbulent water, but if Injustice video games look better than your movie, you’re doing something wrong.

Quote
Bad, yes. Ass, yes.

Badass, not so much.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 12, 2018, 06:29:01 PM
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/aquaman_2018/

All right, decent reviews. There may be hope for the DCEU yet.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on December 12, 2018, 07:32:42 PM
I want an Aquaman movie based on the Silver Age. Now that's a movie I want to see.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 13, 2018, 04:56:25 PM
53/100 on Metacritic so far. Rated a little better than Batman v Superman and slightly worse than Man of Steel. That's...well, that's something.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 13, 2018, 09:50:09 PM
Stop going by Metacritic! It's flawed! Flawed! >o<
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on December 14, 2018, 02:31:38 AM
Stop going by Metacritic! It's flawed! Flawed! >o<
So is rottentomatoes
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 14, 2018, 07:02:47 AM
Yeah lol wtf. Metacritic isn't perfect, but Rotten Tomatoes is ass. Telling me what percentage of people thought something wasn't shit doesn't do me many favors.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on December 14, 2018, 09:28:30 AM
It's almost like relying on complete strangers to tell you if something is good or not is a stupid thing to do.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: totallackey on December 14, 2018, 12:31:52 PM
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/aquaman_2018/

All right, decent reviews. There may be hope for the DCEU yet.
Decent reviews until Marvel does Namor...

Namor is totally superior to Aquaman.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 15, 2018, 11:24:18 PM
It's almost like relying on complete strangers to tell you if something is good or not is a stupid thing to do.

I mean, not inherently. You shouldn't take their word as gospel or be Saddam and take it as your own opinion even if you haven't seen it, but if you tend to share tastes with a critic (or critics) and they say something's shit, it's not necessarily dumb to think you probably won't like it. And avoid it thusly.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on December 16, 2018, 11:18:38 AM
It's almost like relying on complete strangers to tell you if something is good or not is a stupid thing to do.

I mean, not inherently. You shouldn't take their word as gospel or be Saddam and take it as your own opinion even if you haven't seen it, but if you tend to share tastes with a critic (or critics) and they say something's shit, it's not necessarily dumb to think you probably won't like it. And avoid it thusly.

When I say "complete strangers" I mean critics reduced to homogeneous mush in the form of an aggregate score, which is what both of those sites do as far as I'm aware. I think it has been a long time since I looked at either, so maybe I'm forgetting something, but what I remember both of them doing is replacing individual voices with a hard number that tells you whether a thing is good or bad.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on December 18, 2018, 01:49:53 AM
I really liked Venom. The entire movie was hilarious without the use of Marvel's normally verbose and corny comedy involving ice cream flavors.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on December 18, 2018, 04:18:24 AM
I really liked Venom. The entire movie was hilarious without the use of Marvel's normally verbose and corny comedy involving ice cream flavors.

tried to  tell everyone that a couple months back no offence (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=700.msg168858#msg168858)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 19, 2018, 06:11:51 AM
You shouldn't take their word as gospel or be Saddam and take it as your own opinion even if you haven't seen it

This is such a weird meme. I don't even remember how it got started, as it's certainly not based on reality. All I'm saying as far as the Metacritic thing goes is that if there's a movie that an overwhelmingly majority of critics liked, as in a percentage in the eighties or nineties, and then I check a website that's meant to aggregate critical reviews and discover that the overall score is something mediocre in the forties or fifties, something is most likely very wrong with that website and its apparent goal of measuring the critical response of a movie. Metacritic's scoring system is weird, it's arbitrary, and all that combined with its relatively small pool of critics leads to it frequently presenting critically-acclaimed movies as having only a tepid reception. RT isn't perfect, and I feel no obligation to ever necessarily agree with the consensus it shows for any given movie (and am on record disagreeing with it many times), but it is a far superior aggregate.

Also:

(https://i.imgur.com/bfqRpnt.jpg)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 19, 2018, 03:55:56 PM
It started when you began heavily criticizing movies and games that you haven’t seen based on internet articles.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on December 19, 2018, 07:47:18 PM
It started when you began heavily criticizing movies and games that you haven’t seen based on internet articles.

Irrelevant to the subject of RT.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on December 20, 2018, 12:28:29 AM
It started when you began heavily criticizing movies and games that you haven’t seen based on internet articles.

Irrelevant to the subject of RT.

If you say so.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on December 20, 2018, 12:59:23 PM
When I say "complete strangers" I mean critics reduced to homogeneous mush in the form of an aggregate score, which is what both of those sites do as far as I'm aware. I think it has been a long time since I looked at either, so maybe I'm forgetting something, but what I remember both of them doing is replacing individual voices with a hard number that tells you whether a thing is good or bad.

Yeah that's fair. I'd still say it's pretty safe to say that if a movie is sitting at 20/100 I'd probably be safe staying away from it, but whether or not a movie looks good to me personally will always outweigh whatever "score" it's gotten. But the scores are more important in that audiences and studios pay attention to them (movie studios less so than game studios, I think), so keeping track of them is a way to follow that I guess.


All I'm saying as far as the Metacritic thing goes is that if there's a movie that an overwhelmingly majority of critics liked, as in a percentage in the eighties or nineties, and then I check a website that's meant to aggregate critical reviews and discover that the overall score is something mediocre in the forties or fifties, something is most likely very wrong with that website and its apparent goal of measuring the critical response of a movie.

Why, though? I don't understand how you reach that conclusion. I forget what the threshold is for a "fresh" from RT, but if every critic in the world rated numerically and gave a film a 5.5 or 6 out of 10, Rotten Tomatoes would say it was at 100% fresh. Whereas Metacritic would say it's at 55/100 or 60/100. Rotten Tomatoes is literally only good for seeing if most critics agree that a movie is at least okay-ish. Is Metacritic perfect or even great? No, but I'd say it's a far better indicator of critics' general opinions. 6/10 and 10/10 are very different scores.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on January 06, 2019, 06:35:14 AM
In keeping with my tradition of discussing DC shit here so as not to clog up "Just Watched" with endless capeshit discussion, I watched a camrip of Aquaman. I'm a little mixed on it. The writing is extremely lazy, being packed full of clunky "As you know..." dialogue and a story that can't decide whether it should be a jaunty, lighthearted adventure or a darker faux-Shakespearean struggle for power. I honestly suspect that it was a first draft. There are times when the designs of Atlantis and the undersea world look amazing, and there are times when Wan goes full Lucas and crams way, way too much shit into the frame, making everything look ugly, tacky, and incomprehensible, although I was relieved to discover that no other scene comes even close to matching the hideousness of Arthur and Orm's gladiator match. Momoa is likable and enthusiastic, but he's barely even acting in this movie. He's just coasting as himself. And the movie, instead of perhaps building Arthur's arc around his demonstrated character flaws, instead makes up some nonsense about how he would be the ideal king if only he'd learn to accept himself for being of two different races and the worthy heir to the throne. None of that is ever reflected in any of Arthur's lines or Momoa's performance.

As terrible as I may have just made it all sound, I did still enjoy Aquaman. The movie is charming almost in spite of itself. Everyone involved seems to be having a lot of fun, the visuals are imaginative and embrace the source material's silliness, the action scenes are mostly done well, and in general there's a childlike sense of exuberance and joy propelling everything along. But a movie having that sort of feel to it is not something that's easy to manufacture, which leads me to my final point here that WB needs to start working harder on the scripts for these movies. I'm beginning to think it's going to take yet another major failure for them to realize that writing actually matters. David Goyer is writing another script for the DCEU, despite being just as responsible for its early stumbles as Snyder. Even WW, easily the DCEU's best movie, wasn't exactly what you'd call written well. I'm not saying they need to get auteurs coming up with the next TDK or anything, but their current system of putting together a slapdash sequence of action beats, quips, and worn-out tropes just isn't sustainable.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on January 06, 2019, 02:39:02 PM
a slapdash sequence of action beats, quips, and worn-out tropes just isn't sustainable

inb4 "ha ha you just described Marble movies"
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on January 06, 2019, 03:51:55 PM
ha ha you just described Hollywood movies
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on January 06, 2019, 04:20:50 PM
Actually Saddam just described himself.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on January 19, 2019, 01:44:40 PM
The Punisher likes pancakes.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: maxwell54687 on February 03, 2019, 03:12:33 AM
They're clearly heading towards a Justice League motion picture.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on February 03, 2019, 04:08:11 AM
They're clearly heading towards a Justice League motion picture.

Delete the sig shilling your shitty app before we have to.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on February 03, 2019, 03:20:18 PM
Batfleck is officially done (https://deadline.com/2019/01/the-batman-june-2021-release-date-ben-affleck-not-starring-1202545821/), at least as far as the solo movie goes. He had some potential to be great, but between Snyder's shitty movies and WB's weird decision to introduce the character with a semi-adaptation of TDKR, I suppose recasting was inevitable. June 2021. I'll be thirty by the time this movie comes out. The movie will most likely be ready to go by fall of 2020, but then they'll sit on it for close to a year as they wait for the optimal release date. Oh, well. Can't wait to see the Waynes being killed again!

In other news, we appear to have further evidence (https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/kevin-smith-reveals-zack-snyders-apparent-plans-for-his-justice-league-trilogy) that Snyder's plans for JL and the follow-up movies were going to be jumbled grimdark messes.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Roundy on March 07, 2019, 09:36:24 PM
There may be hope for the DCEU yet.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2457426/the-dceu-as-a-shared-cinematic-universe-is-done

Oops. Guess not.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: StapleBattery on March 08, 2019, 01:56:11 PM
Quote from:  Roundy's shit article
At this point, DC Comics should be implementing Flashpoint as their ultimate reset button / dazzling finale to the DCEU,
Yes please.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: markjo on March 08, 2019, 02:07:43 PM
There may be hope for the DCEU yet.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2457426/the-dceu-as-a-shared-cinematic-universe-is-done

Oops. Guess not.
It seems that shared universes in general may be dying out, including the only one that actually worked.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/avengers-endgame-will-cinematic-universes-end-1192844
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 09, 2019, 05:13:19 AM
There may be hope for the DCEU yet.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2457426/the-dceu-as-a-shared-cinematic-universe-is-done

Oops. Guess not.

Old, though it does make some good points. However, I was referring to the DCEU in terms of the general franchise. Also, on the notion of Batfleck leaving, here's what Snyder had to say about it:

(https://i.imgur.com/UCUmsgz.jpg)

Bruce's opening monologue wasn't the worst part of BvS, far from it, but it was definitely one of the most pretentious, and this time the blame lies with Chris Terrio rather than Snyder. I read somewhere that this was inspired in part by Yeats (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming) and Seamus Heaney (https://www.poemhunter.com/best-poems/seamus-heaney-3/exposure-9/). "The Second Coming" is an allegory about a crumbling world's supposed savior that turns out to be a monster, while "Exposure" is about a man struggling to find his place in the world. Okay, those are both genuinely pretty interesting parallels for a character like Batman, especially in relation to his status as a fallen hero. But the themes are what should have been emphasized, not specific phrasing that just sounds silly out of context, like "diamond absolutes" or "things fall." I don't know what the ideal way to communicate these powerful ideas would have been, but I'm sure an Oscar-winning screenwriter could have figured out something better than this.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on March 09, 2019, 05:27:20 AM
Captain Marvel is a pretty okay Marvel movie. It's not the worst one (a title I still give to the second/third Ironman movies) but it's definitely reaching for that spot. It's got some good humor in it, but overall the story feels forced. I'm not sure why Marvel felt like they needed to introduce Captain Marvel at all in the MCU and I'm not sure how to feel about the role she might play in Endgame.

And while I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone, I do want to say that the way the MCU Captain Marvel receives her powers is completely ridiculous and is a scene that I wish simply wasn't in the movie at all.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Fortuna on March 09, 2019, 06:58:30 AM
And while I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone

I'll take a crack at it. The good guy wins just barely?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Lord Dave on March 09, 2019, 07:06:23 AM
And while I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone

I'll take a crack at it. The good guy wins just barely?
And then gets out into stasis for years?
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: SeaCritique on March 09, 2019, 01:41:41 PM
https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2457426/the-dceu-as-a-shared-cinematic-universe-is-done

Oops. Guess not.

At least we have Joker to look forward. I could do with a Joaquin Phoenix-helmed standalone.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on March 09, 2019, 07:11:31 PM
I'm not sure why Marvel felt like they needed to introduce Captain Marvel at all in the MCU and I'm not sure how to feel about the role she might play in Endgame.

Hemsworth and Ruffalo are not under contract for much longer, so it gives them one of their more powerful characters in the universe. I hate that they are claiming she is more powerful than Thor or Hulk, but whatevs. She also nicely fills their diversity agenda. She is apparently supposed to be the focus of the next phase of Avengers development, which is too bad. Scarlet Witch has better stories for them to do.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on March 09, 2019, 08:22:52 PM
I don't give a fuck about any of this knowing that I'm never going to get an extremely violent Moon Knight show.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on March 11, 2019, 02:46:31 AM
Aquaman is a Not Good movie. I'm sorry that people spent their time and money making it and that people are being asked to spend their time and money seeing it.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: SeaCritique on March 22, 2019, 02:45:55 AM
Captain Marvel was a flawed popcorn movie that executed Marvel's formula with machine-like precision.

2 (1/2)/4
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on March 27, 2019, 05:49:42 AM
(thanks to Crudblud for bringing this to my attention)

http://collider.com/zack-snyder-why-batman-kills-in-batman-v-superman/

If I were the director of three movies starring the most iconic superheroes in the world, and all three of them were received poorly by critics and general audiences, I think I would be somewhat humbled, and choose my words carefully when discussing the subject in public. Zack Snyder, on the other hand, has over the years continued to get more and more defensive about his precious vision, and by this point has come to personify the "Am I out of touch?" meme from The Simpsons. The response to this weirdly-phrased outburst is so obvious that I'm almost hesitant to put it into words, but the entire genre of capeshit is, to borrow Snyder's eloquent phrasing, a "dream world." One that was created for children. If we can believe that there's a man dressed as a bat who fights crime every night, zips across rooftops with a grappling gun, and can overpower a dozen or so heavily-armed mercenaries, then it's not a stretch to believe that he can do all this without needing to kill people. And what he's trying to hint at with Alan Moore and Watchmen - "No, they do this" - isn't correct. Watchmen was always intended by Moore to be a cautionary tale, a warning against itself. This seems to be confirmation of the old cliché that Snyder never "got" Watchmen, and interpreted what was meant to be disturbing and horrifying as unironically cool and badass.

In brighter news, Shazam! has gotten good reviews (https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/shazam). Yes, even if we go by Metacritic (https://www.metacritic.com/movie/shazam!).
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 05, 2019, 04:57:01 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t433PEQGErc

This is not at all what I was expecting, especially coming from Todd Phillips. That doesn't mean it looks good, though. It seems almost low-concept, like a depressing piece of Oscar bait focusing on a man's tragic descent into mental illness. The worst part of the trailer is the Joker on a subway laughing to himself. That's what real-life crazy homeless guys do, not supervillains, and it seems like the kind of stupid thing someone like Jared Leto would do as part of his supposed method acting. The high point is Joaquin Phoenix running. There's something hilarious about his graceful, loping strides.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Crudblud on April 05, 2019, 06:52:11 PM
I dunno, with the exception of the "trailer opening with a bass boom" thing that needs to stop because it's dumb and I hate it, it seems like it could be decent. A Joker movie that paints him as a pathetic victim is probably the most interesting thing they can do with it now. We've already had goofy Joker, theatrical Joker, haha anarchy lmao Joker, and nu metal throwback Joker, so I feel like this could be a positive move. Also it seems like the "inspired by Scorsese" thing wasn't far off, but the trailer makes it look more like The King of Comedy than anything (and that's a good thing). Still, it's a DC movie, so I don't have high hopes, but there is potential.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on April 06, 2019, 10:29:35 PM
I hate the clown makeup. Drink if you knew I would say that.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on April 11, 2019, 04:31:28 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/PU4pV6R.png)
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Bette Davis Eyes on April 13, 2019, 03:15:44 AM
Haven't seen the trailer but maybe it's based on the graphic novel "The Killing Joke", which is a Joker origin story?  The story is pretty rough.  Basically an average guy has a series of bad things happen to him in 1 day that destroys everything he had and was, which turns him into the Joker.

If anyone has ever had their life turned upside down in an instant, and knew they would never be the same again (and not in a happy way), they may relate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_The_Killing_Joke
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Snupes on April 13, 2019, 11:07:21 PM
I, too, have read The Killing Joke, and it looks almost nothing like that.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on April 14, 2019, 01:01:46 AM
Aquabro is the best DCEU movie.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rama Set on April 14, 2019, 01:31:30 AM
Aquabro is the best DCEU movie.

Damning the DCEU with faint praise.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Bette Davis Eyes on April 14, 2019, 12:41:04 PM
I, too, have read The Killing Joke, and it looks almost nothing like that.

Ah, thank you, I'm sorry to hear that, had high hopes it was.  Thanks for letting me know.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: honk on May 17, 2019, 08:27:37 PM
https://variety.com/2019/film/news/robert-pattinson-batman-matt-reeves-bruce-wayne-dc-comics-1203125473/

This has predictably led to a shitstorm online, as if the residual shittiness of the Twilight movies will somehow contaminate this one. It's a very immature position to take.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on May 17, 2019, 09:15:30 PM
It should be Keanu.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: Rushy on May 17, 2019, 10:40:42 PM
One wonders just how many batman movies the world really needs.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on May 17, 2019, 10:44:03 PM
It should be Keanu.
n o
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: junker on May 17, 2019, 10:47:56 PM
One wonders just how many batman movies the world really needs.
Always one more than currently exists at the present day.


It should be Keanu.
n o
Okay fine Jason Statham. I'd settle on RDJ.
Title: Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General
Post by: beardo on May 18, 2019, 12:20:00 PM
Karl Urban