Erronius
<WoW Guild Officer>
- 17,319
- 44,963
You literally either didn't read what I wrote or didn't understand a word of it.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
- Thread starter Shonuff
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
I read your quote just fine, where you said that his point was meaningless, because these movies always do well based on name alone. That is not true. You tried to kill his argument based on an untruth. High School debate tactics at their best.
Drakain
Trakanon Raider
- 1,585
- 689
Excellent point, thank you. My 19 year old niece and her boyfriend loved this Lex. I'm too old lol.
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
If you aren't into superhero movies, probably stop posting on them? The core of the problem is something Stan Lee said. In order for comic book movies to do well, you have to take the essence of who they are in the comics, and show that on the big screen. DC is doing the opposite. They are changing the essence of Superman and Batman, and giving us the opposite of who they were. Superman's relationships used to be important. He's now a loner. He used to have charm. Snyder deleted that. Batman only kills or uses lethal force in the direst of situations in the comics.Even my five year old asked during the movie, why is Batman shooting people? Maybe my five year old is more perceptive than you are, because he knows Batman doesn't do what he did.In the BvS, he killed and maimed guys he didn't need to. Snyder gives us more violent versions of the characters and more 'splosions. Michael Bay would be proud. All the while, they've done the opposite of what Stan Lee said.
These are not my quotes, but please continue to feel free white-knighting a movie with a 30% score.
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,643
I wonder how much of that is tied to his age and not necessarily the performance.
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,643
Mind you never read any of the Batman comics (was a Marvel guy) but my understanding is that the Frank Miller version of him was a much more violent take on the character. Is that correct?
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
In alternate reality stories, and in stories from the 30's, he kills. He killed more people in the warehouse scene than he has in 70 years of the comics in the mainstream universe. And he has a rule, no guns. Dream or not, that was jarring.
There's a reason why he hasn't killed The Joker. He doesn't do that, even though we all know the next time Joker breaks out of Arkham, he's going to kill a minimum of 30 people.
When DC toyed with the idea of Batman using lethal force, they had to put someone else in Bruce's suit, because they knew we wouldn't believe it.
Ambiturner
Ssraeszha Raider
- 16,076
- 19,628
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
Chanur
Shit Posting Professional
- 28,979
- 46,845
Personally I think Superhero's not killing Supervillains is kind of retarded in this day and age. It's not the1950s anymore. Every time Batman let's the Joker go to jail he is complicit in the deaths of the hundreds he murders on his sprees.
I have not seen this movie yet though and am not making a comment on how bad or good it may be.
I have not seen this movie yet though and am not making a comment on how bad or good it may be.
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,925
- 52,671
Yes, it's retarded, but at least in Batman's case it's a pillar of the character at this point. Maybe THE pillar. In my opinion his no killing rule is the single biggest thing that indicates Batman is just as much of a sociopath as his villains are. I love when Jason rants at him about refusing to kill the Joker in Under the Red Hood and how many hundreds or thousands of people have died as a result.
Cantatus
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 1,437
- 79
Which I think speaks to why DC is having trouble establishing their universe. It isn't so much that they're using Batman and Superman as a crutch, but that they seemingly have no confidence in their other properties to be able to sell themselves. That's why they're working backwards and Justice League gets priority over the lesser-known characters' movies. That's not really an option Marvel had due to selling off the rights to most of their well-known characters (Iron Man and Thor were obviously nowhere as big a part of pop culture as Spider-Man), which I think ended up working to their benefit. They were forced to sell their characters based on their own merit rather than rely on a tie-in to a popular character. I also think a part of it was they didn't have any previous successes to influence the direction they would take. The best they could do was emulate Sony or Fox if they wanted to go that route.
DC's is playing it far too safe, which is sort of understandable given the potential of these movies and the risk involved, but given how successful and popular comic book movies have become, I don't think "safe" is an approach which will blow away audiences. Not to mention, Marvel has proven you can have successful movies based around unknown characters if you do them well enough.
One of the approaches to Batman's character that I like is that this is a flaw in who he is as a person. There have been some storylines where the idea is thrown out that BatmanneedsJoker the same way Joker needs Batman. There is some fundamental part of Batman's core that is doing what he does for vengeance, and if he truly succeeds in getting rid of his enemies for good, he can no longer feed that part of himself. Some writers also point out that Batman isn't too far removed from the villains he chases. Not killing is him keeping himself from crossing that line and losing who he is - which is why there are a bunch of storylines where Joker tries to push Batman to that point (see: The Killing Joke and The Dark Knight).
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,643
I'm not sure if it a case of them just playing it safe or they simply don't have talented people of the same caliber that Disney has assembled for their Marvel properties. From the studio exec, to the directors they bring in, to the actors cast in the roles, Marvel is just showing everyone how it's done. There is a broader vision at work over there.
Drakain
Trakanon Raider
- 1,585
- 689
Doesn't Warner Bros own/run the DCCU? And is the DCCU it's own entity within WB? Who is the Kevin Feige at the DCCU? That's who should be taking the blame.
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,643
I don't know that they have anyone who is directly comparable to Feige in responsibilities solely for their comic book film and television properties.
Angelwatch
Trakanon Raider
- 3,053
- 133
I'll be generous and give it a 4 / 10.
It's going to do really well this weekend but it's going to die off completely once word gets out how bad it was. The pacing was really bad. Way too dream sequences. It was very dark and depressing and what little humor it had was very out of place. And every scene had a Zack Snyder patented "slow motion dramatic sequence."
It's going to do really well this weekend but it's going to die off completely once word gets out how bad it was. The pacing was really bad. Way too dream sequences. It was very dark and depressing and what little humor it had was very out of place. And every scene had a Zack Snyder patented "slow motion dramatic sequence."
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
Go see the movie, 90% of them are dead, the other 10 are paralyzed, quadriplegic, etc (if those are real world physics). I don't think any of them were simply KO'd. I thought about going to go see this at an IMAX again today to see if I missed any details, but didn't want the punishment. If anyone has a link to a screener, it would be appreciated.