DC MOVIE THREAD

[The Natural]

[pipGofern]

Re: the redoing of the Batman origin. I groaned when the movie opened up with that sequence because at this point Batman's origin story has probably reached Washington chopping down the cherry tree level of general public awareness. However, I totally understand why they did it again: to get over the point that Bruce's mother was named Martha. Since the climax of the film sorta hinges on it, it's storytelling 101 to really drive the point home right at the beginning (which is why we got Thomas mouthing her name with his dying breath).

I have to admit, I've been reading comics for about 30 years and the fact both of DC's iconic heroes have a mom named Martha never occurred to me. 

[J.T.]

12 hours ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

Zod even causes 90% of the destruction by spearing Superman through the buildings. Your post doesn't address that you know Superman actually saved billions of lives that day. 

That is the benefit of being an omniscient observer.

IMO, people unfairly criticize the whole premise that Bruce blames Superman for what happens in Metropolis while casting a blind eye on Zod, but the conclusions Wayne draws concerning the dangers of the Man of Steel living on earth are very realistic and are not unlike another billionaire playboy's reaction to the collateral damage caused by superheroes and that billionaire playboy also takes well intentioned but destructive actions along the way in the attempt to curtail the activities of augmented beings who are allegedly here to protect humanity..

The misguided actions of this billionaire playboy are well documented in a couple of movies.  One featuring a certain genocidal android antagonist made quite a bit of money and yet another movie where these augmented beings actually come to blows over the issue of superhero oversight comes out in May.

Even so, yeah, (again as omniscient observer and comic book nerd) you'd like to think that Bruce, being a super hero himself, would give Superman the benefit of the doubt for the disaster porn of the last thirty minutes of MoS given that if it weren't for Kal-El's intervention, everyone on earth, including Gotham City, would all be top soil fertilizing trees on New Krypton just as earth would be a planet populated by sentient robots if that other group of superheroes had not interfered on our behalf.

Hopefully it will come out in a Director's Cut that the dream sequences were perhaps the result of mental suggestion from Darkseid aimed at getting Batman and Superman to fight each other.  That would make this mishmash movie plot make a lot more sense.  Doomsday becomes Plan B if the MAD of BvS does not come to fruition.

[EVA]

9 minutes ago, J.T. said:

 

Hopefully it will come out in a Director's Cut that the dream sequences were perhaps the result of mental suggestion from Darkseid aimed at getting Batman and Superman to fight each other.  That would make this mishmash movie plot make a lot more sense.  Doomsday becomes Plan B if the MAD of BvS does not come to fruition.

 

Here's an interesting tidbit I saw recently:

The dreams were in the original Goyer draft, and it's revealed in the end that Brainiac is responsible for messing with the Earthling's minds  However, they were NOT in the Terrio shooting script at all.  Yet they did ultimately make it into the movie, only without any suggestion that some greater force was behind them.

[Niners Fan in CT]

8 hours ago, Jingus said:

"But other movies made the same mistakes before" and "I'm sure they'll get around to explaining that... eventually..." aren't real answers.  

So go nitpick those movies as well.  But you won't because you are the worst type of "critic"   

You allow your own personal biases to dictate the narrative.  I read a lot of reviews, A LOT of reviews that said "I don't like this because it's not Marvel."  That's not a review. Thankfully, their opinions meant jack shit.

[J.T.]

1 hour ago, EVA said:

Here's an interesting tidbit I saw recently:

The dreams were in the original Goyer draft, and it's revealed in the end that Brainiac is responsible for messing with the Earthling's minds  However, they were NOT in the Terrio shooting script at all.  Yet they did ultimately make it into the movie, only without any suggestion that some greater force was behind them.

The more I think about the Darkseid angle, the more it sounds comic book logical even if it does sound like apologist's rhetoric.

Is it really coincidence that Batman and Superman (the two most visible superheroes on earth) all of a sudden find it necessary to eliminate the other at almost the exact same moment in time or that Diana and a time traveling Flash show up to prevent them from taking each other out?

[wpdougie2180]

The Martha moment didn't work for me among other reasons because Batman mentions Superman's parents literally 1 min. before the Martha moment when he says your parents probably told your your special speech. He acknowledges that Superman has parents but then is shocked & taken aback that Superman has parents (Mother). Total WTF moment  

[Brysynner]

58 minutes ago, wpdougie2180 said:

The Martha moment didn't work for me among other reasons because Batman mentions Superman's parents literally 1 min. before the Martha moment when he says your parents probably told your your special speech. He acknowledges that Superman has parents but then is shocked & taken aback that Superman has parents (Mother). Total WTF moment  

He wasn't shocked that Superman had parents, he was shocked that with Superman's dying breath, he was asking for help for his mother. In Batman's rage, he just sees Superman as an alien who has the ability to destroy the planet if he so chooses. The moment where Superman is prepared for death and he uses his last words to save his mother humanizes Superman in Batman's eyes.

[TheVileOne]

Perfect example of how tone deaf Zack Snyder is:

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2016/03/21/zack-snyder-on-how-batman-v-superman-is-like-watchmen/?mod=e2tw

Quote

Snyder was mystified when someone told him that they couldn’t think of a movie in recent memory that’s had as much collateral damage as “Man of Steel.” “I went, really? And I said, well, what about ['Star Wars: The Force Awakens']?” the director says. “In ‘Star Wars’ they destroy five planets with billions of people on them. That’s gotta be one of the highest death toll movies in history, the new ‘Star Wars’ movie, if you just do the math.”

Well fuck Zack Snyder.  That just excuses everything.  Evil space Nazis annihilating a star system with their evil weapon to show how evil they are is way worse than Superman fighting Zod and wrecking buildings without showing any regard for the people getting killed.  

[Jingus]

7 hours ago, (BP) said:

Has anyone addressed that one of the biggest plot points in the movie is that Superman is framed for murdering a bunch of terrorists by Lex's version of Blackwater, but that no one seems concerned  that they were shot with automatic weapons and not laserd to death or ripped in half or killed in any way that would make sense for Superman to kill them?

I didn't address it, because it made so little sense that I assume I must've missed something.  Really, that's all it is?  "A bunch of people were shot dead, to frame FUCKING SUPERMAN of having shot them?"  That's... astoundingly moronic, even in a movie filled with bad ideas.  

 

5 hours ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

So go nitpick those movies as well.  But you won't because you are the worst type of "critic"   

Gee, if only I'd done that in the post you're criticizing...

21 hours ago, Jingus said:

That is NOT acceptable behavior for Batman, ever, period!  We've spent almost thirty years complaining about Keaton doing it in '89

You are the worst type of "reader".  

 

Quote

You allow your own personal biases to dictate the narrative.  I read a lot of reviews, A LOT of reviews that said "I don't like this because it's not Marvel."  That's not a review. Thankfully, their opinions meant jack shit.

Everyone allows their own personal biases to influence how they enjoy a movie, regardless of what that movie is and regardless of what their biases are.  It happens every single time.  Objectivity doesn't exist in art.  

 

And when the fuck did I say "I don't like this because it's not Marvel"?  Or anything which even implied it?  Yeah, by all means, feel free to throw around dumb accusations without a single shred of evidence.  Come on, find a quote of me ever saying that, I dare you.  

[EVA]

55 minutes ago, TheVileOne said:

Perfect example of how tone deaf Zack Snyder is:

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2016/03/21/zack-snyder-on-how-batman-v-superman-is-like-watchmen/?mod=e2tw

Well fuck Zack Snyder.  That just excuses everything.  Evil space Nazis annihilating a star system with their evil weapon to show how evil they are is way worse than Superman fighting Zod and wrecking buildings without showing any regard for the people getting killed.  

 

But he's not wrong about that.  MoS was not an extreme outlier in the amount of devastation it depicted on screen.  In fact, it was pretty par for the course in terms of blockbuster sci-fi action movies.

What's different about MoS is that, unlike Star Wars and Marvel and countless others, it didn't gloss over the human colateral; it showed you every excrutiating detail.  Audiences only remember it as being worse than others because Snyder held their nose in it, made them feel uncomfortable about it.  And that's always been a mark in the film's favor IMO.

[Niners Fan in CT]

Yes, you've proved you have a hard on for WB but that's about it.  I didn't say anything about you and Marvel. I said you have personal biases not unlike a lot of reviews I've read who hated the movie because it wasn't what THEY wanted it to be about. That's not a review.

[TheVileOne]

25 minutes ago, EVA said:

 

But he's not wrong about that.  MoS was not an extreme outlier in the amount of devastation it depicted on screen.  In fact, it was pretty par for the course in terms of blockbuster sci-fi action movies.

What's different about MoS is that, unlike Star Wars and Marvel and countless others, it didn't gloss over the human colateral; it showed you every excrutiating detail.  Audiences only remember it as being worse than others because Snyder held their nose in it, made them feel uncomfortable about it.  And that's always been a mark in the film's favor IMO.

The fact that Snyder is confused about why this would upset people is proof of how out of touch he is. 

Man of Steel pretty much did gloss over the collateral, and it didn't really show you any collateral damage at all.  It was pretty much Superman and Zod wrecking everything in sight.

You are also ignoring the fact with how he's comparing the actions of Superman, who is the HERO, with that of evil space Nazis of the First Order, who deliberately sought to blow up a star system with their weapon.

[Casey]

34 minutes ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

Yes, I've proved I have a hard on for WB but that's about it. 

FTFY

[EVA]

I profoundly disgree that the death and destruction was glossed over in MoS.  I mean, it's PG-13, so they can't specifically show crushed bodies and blood flowing in the streets, but Snyder did everything in his power to illustrate the true human impact of an event of that magnitude.

 

I also don't think he's making the comparision you think he's making.  You're projecting that.

[Brian Fowler]

I'll quibble with his statement though. Those planets were the target, they aren't collateral damage in a way as much as they are the victims of a terrorist attack.

[Jingus]

1 hour ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

Yes, you've proved you have a hard on for WB but that's about it. 

Wait... what?  Usually "you have a hard on for ______" means that you really really like whatever ______ is, but you seem to be using it in the opposite way. 

And even if what you meant to say is "you have a bias against Warner Brothers films", you're flatly wrong again, Niners.  I fucking loved The Dark Knight, and still consider it to be one of the greatest comic adaptations of all times.  Are we living in an alternate universe where TDK is NOT a Batman movie produced by Warner Bros?  Are we living in an alternate universe where The Lego Movie is either 1.NOT a Warner Bros movie featuring Batman, or 2.NOT my favorite movie from that year?  Boy, I sure must HATE Warner Bros, since they keep releasing all these other movies that I liked!  

Same deal with both the Richard Donner Superman movies, I adored those.  Hell, I'd argue that Superman Returns and Man of Steel were both overall good flicks.  And then there's the Tim Burton movies, produced by WB, which I do still enjoy quite a bit.  Most importantly?  ALL OF THE ABOVE were better individual films than Batman V Superman was.  That's my "bias": I like good movies, and this new one fucking sucked. 

EDIT: and just for purposes of clarity and full disclosure: yes, there are Warner Bros superhero movies which are WORSE than this one.  Batman V Superman is a better film than Superman IV, Batman & Robin, and Catwoman.  I'm making very specific distinctions about exactly what I liked and exactly what I didn't.  So don't pretend like I'm making "durrr, ALL those movies suck!" broad generalizations.  

 

So, are you gonna take back any of your bullshit statement, or are you just gonna keep no-selling all the times I keep proving you wrong?  

[Niners Fan in CT]

Did you nitpick about all the people Christian Bale killed in those movies?  You are obsessed with this idea that Batman was a murderer in this flick. If you claim he's a murderer here, then he was also a murderer in those films.

Back to the destruction in Man of Steel vs. what happened in the Force Awakens.  Yeah, all of those people died in Force Awakens. Maybe Luke could have done something about it if he didn't up and leave to some remote island somewhere. Who is the true hero? The guy who gets the fuck out of town when shit gets hot or the guy who stays and battles and SAVES billons of lives?

[Brian Fowler]

Honest question here, Niners: are you honestly trying to argue Bruce killing people want significantly more blatant and less debatable in this movie than TDK?

[Niners Fan in CT]

7 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

Honest question here, Niners: are you honestly trying to argue Bruce killing people want significantly more blatant and less debatable in this movie than TDK?

First I have to ask if we are leaving out the nightmares because I would say that yes he seemed pretty ruthless in the nightmares but they shouldn't count. Skipping over the nightmares, he didn't kill anyone at the warehouse except for the dude with the flamethrower because Bats shot the tank and it exploded.  Some thugs died in the chase scene but that is exactly what I'm talking about..  Bale's Batman killed a bunch of people in that chase scene and pretty much everyone at the dojo when he blew that place up. Then there's the "I don't have to save you line"  among other things. 

Keaton was a murdering bastard in the Burtons but at least Jingus acknowledged that though I'd be interested to know if Jingus wrote up a 72 things wrong with Batman '89 thing.

[Jingus]

I probably COULD list 72 things wrong with Burton's film, but why bother?  I liked Batman '89 AS A WHOLE MOVIE much better than I liked Batman VVVVVV Superman, even taking that one issue entire out of the conversation.  You keep saying "You only disliked this movie because of ______!" and then keep changing whatever ______ is supposed to be.  

And I guess you must've missed that three-paragraph-long analysis I did of a killing in The Dark Knight a few pages back when you keep whining that I never say a word about the killing in those movies.  

[Brian Fowler]

The two guys he threw the grenade in with? The truck he blew up with people in it? That's deliberately killing people. To me it was significantly more blatant than anything since the Burton films at least. 

[Niners Fan in CT]

Just now, Brian Fowler said:

The two guys he threw the grenade in with? The truck he blew up with people in it? That's deliberately killing people. To me it was significantly more blatant than anything since the Burton films at least. 

Didn't they drop the grenades on themselves?

[(BP)]

It's a bad movie. Batman could have safely neutralized every henchman in the movie and put a pillow under them before they hit the floor and it would still be a bad movie. 

[Raziel]

36 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

The two guys he threw the grenade in with? The truck he blew up with people in it? That's deliberately killing people. To me it was significantly more blatant than anything since the Burton films at least. 

More blatant than dropping a bomb from the Batmobile in front of several mooks when he nuked Ace Chemicals, or when he launched MISSLES from the Batwing into the Parade?  I mean, let's shit on BvS, fine, but let's not gloss over that Batman 89 tried to kill Joker with 2 chain guns and several missles and lessen that one's blatant killing, and Keeton's Bats didn't have the 20 years of being Bats making him terrible.

 

And honestly, the INaction of Nolan's Bats and his moody shit post TDK into TDKR caused a higher body count than Snyder's Bats has.