Batman v Superman *spoilers from post 2434*

Bacchus

Mickeroo wrote: »

More or less the same as what they did with Smallville sure. Lex is one of those characters that's had very different iterations down the years anyway so they're fairly free to do what they want with him.

Which is why I find the change quite odd. There have been loads of iterations of Lex before so why

the need to make this Lex... Lex's son?

techdiver wrote: »

I still see a risk of pissing off the hard core nerd following (of which I'm a "Lite" member ).

I'm fine with the change, but I can see people being outraged for the sake of being outraged as usual. They are certainly being brave with the adaptation. They could have just played it safe especially since Man of Steel polarized opinion.

Normally I would agree but this change seems like a change just for the sake of a change so any outrage would be fitting. I mean, what is the point of the change when

he's still going to be pretty much Lex Luthor doing Lex Luthor evil stuff

, could they not just have

had him as a 21st century Lex Luthor and scrap the son nonsense?

. It's a pointless change that will upset some hardcore fans and TBH, for once I think it's with legitimate reason. It's no different than if they had Superman in MoS

not actually be Superman, but Superman's son, Jor-El's grandson. It's not the same character.

techdiver

Bacchus wrote: »

It's no different than if they had Superman in MoS

not actually be Superman, but Superman's son, Jor-El's grandson. It's not the same character.

I don't agree that it's at the same level as above.

Penn

Bacchus wrote: »

Normally I would agree but this change seems like a change just for the sake of a change so any outrage would be fitting. I mean, what is the point of the change when

he's still going to be pretty much Lex Luthor doing Lex Luthor evil stuff

, could they not just have

had him as a 21st century Lex Luthor and scrap the son nonsense?

.

I'd say it's so that further down the line, they can bring in Lex Sr.

Mickeroo

Really is it any different than if the father was named Lionel? The change is superficial imo, as long as he's a compelling character what does it really matter?It's not like they're making Superman a killer or something.......oh wait.

Clareman

In a lot of iterations of Superman Lex and Clark grew up together, having had Supes take off for years or not being known until recently means that there's a big gap to be filled, they could fill it by telling the same old story or by introducing a slight change, I'm all good with that.

techdiver

Mickeroo wrote: »

Really is it any different than if the father was named Lionel? The change is superficial imo, as long as he's a compelling character what does it really matter?It's not like they're making Superman a killer or something.......oh wait.

Ah, this old chestnut!

Man of Steel was not the first time Superman has killed. He has done so in all forms over the years.

Mr Freeze

techdiver wrote: »

Ah, this old chestnut!

Man of Steel was not the first time Superman has killed. He has done so in all forms over the years.

And sure if they stay true to the comic, Woman Woman is gonna be killing without a second thought.

As long as they don't have Batman going killing....

IncognitoMan

Mr Freeze wrote: »

And sure if they stay true to the comic, Woman Woman is gonna be killing without a second thought.

As long as they don't have Batman going killing....

And sure Batman has killed a few times as well so its all a bit pointless :pac:

Mickeroo

IncognitoMan wrote: »

And sure Batman has killed a few times as well so its all a bit pointless :pac:

Ah, it's always "accidental" when he does it

Clareman

I don't think Supes has a problem with killing, Batman does, which is why in the Keaton movies which is why when he drove the batmobile into a factory full of baddies and just dropped a bomb on them I was really annoyed.

IncognitoMan

Clareman wrote: »

I don't think Supes has a problem with killing, Batman does, which is why in the Keaton movies which is why when he drove the batmobile into a factory full of baddies and just dropped a bomb on them I was really annoyed.

Doesn't he kick a baddie down a hole with a bomb as well? :eek:

James74

Does Keaton's Batman not pretty much murderize Joker, Penguin & Two Face?

edit... Val Kilmer kills Two Face

Mr Freeze

Ah in the Burton films he was killing constantly, machine guns on the batmobile, stuff dynamite down goons pants, etc....But it was tame compared to other 80s movies.

In the comics he killed a few times too now that I think of it, KGBeast and Darkseid anyways.

Disregard my point about Batman killing, as long as they don't have him using guns....:pac:

Mickeroo

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Ah in the Burton films he was killing constantly, machine guns on the batmobile, stuff dynamite down goons pants, etc....But it was tame compared to other 80s movies.

In the comics he killed a few times too now that I think of it, KGBeast and Darkseid anyways.

Disregard my point about Batman killing, as long as they don't have him using guns....:pac:

Cue pics from the comics of Batman with guns

IncognitoMan

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Ah in the Burton films he was killing constantly, machine guns on the batmobile, stuff dynamite down goons pants, etc....But it was tame compared to other 80s movies.

In the comics he killed a few times too now that I think of it, KGBeast and Darkseid anyways.

Disregard my point about Batman killing, as long as they don't have him using guns....:pac:

:pac::pac::D

Mr Freeze

Mickeroo wrote: »

Cue pics from the comics of Batman with guns

There are loads from the 30s and 40s I think, those hardly count...he was rebooted\retconned loads since then.
Think he even shot someone in their sleep back then.

Nor do Jason Todd dual pistols Batman count, or Batman shooting Darkseid, that was handled well.

:pac:

James74

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psVIG7YvdjM

Mr Freeze

That Talia death scene is still cringe.

desertcircus

e_e wrote: »

I'll be biting my lip if people here dismiss it for not being "faithful" even if the film making is leagues above what Marvel's crew have done (which wouldn't take much tbh).

Say what you want about Man of Steel or Dark Knight Rises but they were at least visions of the director that didn't pander to their audiences. I'll take interesting and personal failures over safe bets (I.E every Marvel studio movie) any day of the week.

Dark Knight Rises was abysmal. Even Iron Man 2 was better than it.

ricero

desertcircus wrote: »

Dark Knight Rises was abysmal. Even Iron Man 2 was better than it.

Ah jasus :pac:

Rises was a good movie. Looking forward to seeing affleck in this movie though he could be the best adaption ever

No, I have to say that Rises was actually pretty poor. Well, I mean, it wasn't as good as Returns. I think the biggest issue is that I felt bored towards the end and I felt that the whole ending scene of

Alfred seeing Wayne and Kyle together should have been left out

Icaras

desertcircus wrote: »

Dark Knight Rises was abysmal. Even Iron Man 2 was better than it.

Whoa now, let's not be saying things we can't take back. There were some great parts , but there were some terrible bits too

maximoose

Deleted User wrote: »

No, I have to say that Rises was actually pretty poor. Well, I mean, it wasn't as good as Returns. I think the biggest issue is that I felt bored towards the end and I felt that the whole ending scene of

Alfred seeing Wayne and Kyle together should have been left out

You're probably right, but if that part was left out, the whole

OMG BATMAN DIED!

debate would have been so much worse :pac:

Mickeroo

maximoose wrote: »

You're probably right, but if that part was left out, the whole

OMG BATMAN DIED!

debate would have been so much worse :pac:

As it was we got "OMG it was all a dream!!" for no other reason than the fact Chris Nolan made Inception as far as I could tell

desertcircus

Icaras wrote: »

Whoa now, let's not be saying things we can't take back. There were some great parts , but there were some terrible bits too

I'm not joking - Rises was one of the worst films I've ever watched. It was insufferably po-faced and serious for a film about a billionaire cosplaying as a bat versus an orc in a gimp mask, it gave off a completely unearned air of superiority, and the plot was utterly riddled with holes that destroyed any suspension of disbelief. Just awful.

Mickeroo

desertcircus wrote: »

I'm not joking - Rises was one of the worst films I've ever watched. It was insufferably po-faced and serious for a film about a billionaire cosplaying as a bat versus an orc in a gimp mask, it gave off a completely unearned air of superiority, and the plot was utterly riddled with holes that destroyed any suspension of disbelief. Just awful.

You must have hated the second one if you thought Rises was overly po-faced.

Is the Nolan trilogy cannon in the MvS universe? If not, then it could easily be explained that way.

I just felt it would have set up Wayne's heroic sacrifice so much more and it took away so much from that scene with the nuclear weapon

.

desertcircus

Mickeroo wrote: »

You must have hated the second one if you thought Rises was overly po-faced.

Nah, I enjoyed Dark Knight. It was pretty po-faced alright, but it managed to carry it off in a way the next film completely failed to. I'm not sure how, but TDK managed to sweep me along despite those issues, while Rises just fell utterly flat.

Bacchus

techdiver wrote: »

I don't agree that it's at the same level as above.

Agreed, it's not the same level but the principle is the same. They are

switching a major character simply for the sake of it and then having this new character aping the character they replace

. Anyway, it's not really something that will bother me, it just seems like one of the most pointless changes they could have made.

Of course, if they have something big planned for

Lex Snr. in the future

then it could work out to be a great move.

The biggest issue with Rises was the villains. Bane was just.. eh. I saw a version where the voice was so overdubbed and distorted, that I couldn't understand a single word he said, so instead of menacing, he came across as just.. annoying.

Arghus

I thought I hated the Nolan Batman movies, but each Avengers Universe film I've seen since, has made me look vack at them with ever greater fondness.

Penn

Out of the 12 MCU films released to date, I'd put at least 7, probably 8 of them above Man of Steel or Dark Knight Rises.

Jon Stark

Penn wrote: »

Out of the 12 MCU films released to date, I'd put at least 7, probably 8 of them above Man of Steel or Dark Knight Rises.

I always enjoy the MCU films, but I find it hard to rewatch them. Guardians is the only one I've rewatched and I actually came out with a dimmer view of it, once the buzziness of Pratt's performance wears off and the cheap nostalgia grab doesn't achieve the same effect on 2nd viewing.

For all how frustrating I found MoS I must have rewatched it 3 times at least. It's flawed, but undoubtedly bolder in what it set out to do than any MCU film. I actually prefer Fox's X Men films to the MCU for the same reason. Simply bolder and more interesting filmmaking.

Penn

Jon Stark wrote: »

It's flawed, but undoubtedly bolder in what it set out to do than any MCU film.

Simply bolder and more interesting filmmaking.

See, this is the part I don't get though. All this talk about how the MCU films aren't bold enough, and the "director's vision" can't be fully realised etc.

That doesn't always equate to whether or not a film is good. Marvel's movies may be kinda by the book and formulaic, but it's a formula that works and that people enjoy, and that just because you're drawing from the same well doesn't mean you can't still draw fresh water.

MoS was bolder than what most of the Marvel movies set out to do, and for me, it didn't work. Should a film be classed as better because the director tried to be bolder but made a worse film because of it, subjectively speaking of course.

I've rewatched most of the Marvel movies numerous times, some way more than others. Hell I saw both Avengers movies 3 times in the cinema and more on dvd. The Marvel movies aren't trying to be bold, they're giving their audience what they want. They're fun, with great characters, great action sequences and some pretty good stories. I just don't get all the constant complaining about what the MCU movies aren't rather than accepting them for what they are, and celebrating them doing what they do really well.

To me, the MCU V DC argument is a non-runner because they're both going for very different tones and very different takes on superhero movies. There is a place for both.

Jon Stark

I'm not trying to make a Marvel v DC argument, as I said I feel Fox's X Men films are superior to most of the MCU as well.

You made a comment about 7 or 8 MCU films being ahead of MoS and TDKR that I personally couldn't agree with, mostly due to the repetitiveness of the former films. The latter films worked for me even though MoS in particular needs to step up on what was established.

I'm not anti MCU or anything, like Daredevil blew me away for example. You know why? Because it actually tried to do something different which worked!

Foxtrol

Jon Stark wrote: »

I'm not trying to make a Marvel v DC argument, as I said I feel Fox's X Men films are superior to most of the MCU as well.

You made a comment about 7 or 8 MCU films being ahead of MoS and TDKR that I personally couldn't agree with, mostly due to the repetitiveness of the former films. The latter films worked for me even though MoS in particular needs to step up on what was established.

I'm not anti MCU or anything, like Daredevil blew me away for example. You know why? Because it actually tried to do something different which worked!

I’ve no problem with people comparing DC and Marvel movies but I can’t understand how people try to justify preferring what DC has produced because they claim the are so different.

DC have on released MOS in their universe, you can’t use one as an example to show that they’re being unique.

If you want to look at the separate Nolan series, the 3 movies weren’t a massive jump from the other so if you pushed them to 12 movies then you’d have the exact same issues.

Penn

Jon Stark wrote: »

I'm not trying to make a Marvel v DC argument, as I said I feel Fox's X Men films are superior to most of the MCU as well.

Apologies, I was speaking generally based on other people's posts throughout this thread and Marvel threads.

Jon Stark wrote: »

You made a comment about 7 or 8 MCU films being ahead of MoS and TDKR that I personally couldn't agree with, mostly due to the repetitiveness of the former films. The latter films worked for me even though MoS in particular needs to step up on what was established.

I get far more enjoyment out of watching both Avengers films, both Cap.Americas, Iron Man 1&3, GOTG and the first Thor film. Repetitive? Sure. But to me, they're all great films, are a lot of fun, great characters, great action scenes, and unlike MoS and TDKR, none of them leave a bad taste in my mouth after. I enjoy them both, and I'll even defend most of what people would consider to be TDKR's negative points (I liked Bane), but to me they're simply not as enjoyable as the MCU films I mentioned (though still probably better than the likes of Iron Man 2 and Thor 2).

All I'm doing is making the point that just because MoS and TDKR did (or tried to do) something different, or because you can tell that the director had a big hand in shaping the film, doesn't make it a better film because of it.

(again, not necessarily responding to you directly, but giving my opinion generally)

Jon Stark wrote: »

I'm not anti MCU or anything, like Daredevil blew me away for example. You know why? Because it actually tried to do something different which worked!

And its medium as a long-form on-demand story allowed it that opportunity. But again, with the films, it's a formula they're largely going to stick to because it's a formula that works for the majority of its fans.

Jon Stark

I wouldn't even bring personal preference up in this thread if the same people weren't dragging up the same irrelevant comments about previous DC films that they did 5, 10, pages ago.

I'm on record in this thread already airing frustration at it being derailed. I was too busy in work earlier to post on the latest news but by the time I was free it was no longer the topic at hand.

Foxtrol

Jon Stark wrote: »

I wouldn't even bring personal preference up in this thread if the same people weren't dragging up the same irrelevant comments about previous DC films that they did 5, 10, pages ago.

I'm on record in this thread already airing frustration at it being derailed. I was too busy in work earlier to post on the latest news but by the time I was free it was no longer the topic at hand.

You know that you are free to bring up a topic again, it might move the discussion more in the direction that you'd prefer.

Agent Coulson

Let's build a better tomorrow. Today

http://www.lexcorp.io/

Sphynxinatron

Will Justice League surpass this movie box office wise? Honestly after seeing Batman and Superman battling and Wonder Woman and an updated Aquaman cameoing in the same film, I personally will have fulfilled my DC cinematic dreams lmao. Hope either Darkseid or Doomsday are the JL villains, Brainiac doesn't seem too interesting in my opinion.

Mr Freeze

Sphynxinatron wrote: »

Will Justice League surpass this movie box office wise? Honestly after seeing Batman and Superman battling and Wonder Woman and an updated Aquaman cameoing in the same film

Aren't Cyborg and The Flash rumoured to appear also in BvS?

I wonder how they'll manage Cyborg's backstory. Will it just leap straight into the fact that he's a cyborg or cover his origin somehow?

Mr Freeze

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder how they'll manage Cyborg's backstory. Will it just leap straight into the fact that he's a cyborg or cover his origin somehow?

Origin I would say, if Star Labs is in the film, they will squeeze him in somehow. Like how one of the recent DC animated films did.

Mr Freeze

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Origin I would say, if Star Labs is in the film, they will squeeze him in somehow. Like how one of the recent DC animated films did.

Which one?

Professey Chin

Deleted User wrote: »

Which one?

Justice League: War
I recommend!

Oh yes, I've actually seen that one. Thought there was a DC animated feature that I hadn't seen yet!

allibastor

Mickeroo wrote: »

Ah, it's always "accidental" when he does it

Didn't Batman Kill in the older comics?

Plus, any time you watch any form of films in ANY comic, is there never any collateral damage? I think DOJ and MOS are the first time we see the film from the people on the ground.

McDermotX

FortuneChip

Supes looks awfully disappointed that it's not Christian Bale!