Batman v Superman *spoilers from post 2434*

syklops

Mickeroo wrote: »

I'm at two minds, I can't see it being good with Snyder at the helm but on the other hand I've wanted a superman/batman movie made since I was a child

Im not against the premise, its the timing and the seeming rush I am not happy about.

Some people may be annoyed at me comparing the premise with the Avengers/Avengers Assemble, but as another comic book crossover movie, and an exceedingly successful one at that, it is hard not to.

Thor had a stand alone move. Iron Man had a stand alone move(technically 2 but the second was crap), Hulk had had a number of outings on the big screen and so it was plausible for him to join them in the new universe. A number of smaller characters had been seen before. It came together, and came together rather well.

We don't currently have that same cohesion. Both Superman and Batman need to be rebooted at around the same time before a credible Superman vs Batman can happen. We just finished a very gritty Batman which many people consider the best ever outing for Batman on the big screen.

Its too early to reboot Batman, and Batman needs at least 1 standalone movie before he teams up with Superman. Whats the rush? Theres tons of decent comic characters who have never, and probably never will see the silver screen.

TonyD79

They are not going to release a Batman film before this considering they are shooting this film in the coming weeks.The 10'month delay happened with the first film when they would have been up against the Hobbit on release. The fact that the new Star Wars film and the Avengers sequel is out the summer of 2015 made that release window strange.

Soft Falling Rain

Mickeroo wrote: »

So it begins, I can actually see this getting canned completely yet.

I think it's come too far in casting to be canned. Pushing it back a full year though is simply bizarre, there must be something badly amiss.

McSasquatch

Has to be an early-mid summer release though. Not worth releasing a film like this outside of it's prime audience window, so a delay of a few months essentially means waiting til the following year.

FlashD

An extra year because this will be 99% CGI. Synder is big into that kind of stuff, story will be non existant of course!

Bullseye1

This is a mess.

norrie rugger

The delay of Star Trek did not harm its box office.

coolisin

Hmmm if they work on the story being great and everything else then fine by me if there is a delay releasing it.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

To be fair the earlier release dates being talked about worried me. Originally they were saying 2014 for a release.
Assuming they're delaying it to get it right then I'm not bothered.

FlashD

Corholio wrote: »

Warner Bros official reason:

"To allow the filmmakers time to realize fully their vision, given the complex visual nature of the story."

Does anyone here read the official statements anymore before speculating and making stuff up.

This is going ahead but its got a ton of CGI....look at Avatar or any other CGI heavy stuff, takes absolutely ages to generate these visuals on computers.

Bullseye1

I'm hoping this movie is actually Trinity a prequel to JL. Everyone knows who Superman and Batman is. Time to get down to introducing other important JL members and WW needs a proper introduction which Trinity would allow.

I'm really happy for the delay. The last time a DC character was given a release date that couldn't be moved we got the rather terrible Green Lantern, a film that was obviously being written as it was bring shot, a film where actors are obviously reading their lines off of cue cards and CGI that looked like someone had unplugged the computer before it was fully rendered.

Hopefully the delay means that they plan on doing it right and aren't simply going to race to meet an realistic release date.

Corholio

The delay puts a lot more pressure on Snyder now. Can he craft quite a good movie now he has a lot of time to so? I have my doubts but we'll see.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm really happy for the delay. The last time a DC character was given a release date that couldn't be moved we got the rather terrible Green Lantern.

GI Joe Retaliation was delayed 1 year and that turned out ........ well it turned out

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

GI Joe Retaliation was delayed 1 year and that turned out ........ well it turned out

G.I. Retaliation was pushed back a year to shoot additional scenes with Tatum and to allow a 3D conversion. This delay is occurring before a single scene has been shot so it means that the time can be put to good use.

Penn

They've put too much on themselves making it into a JL prologue movie by throwing in the likes of Wonder Woman and Nightwing (rumoured) instead of focusing just on Batman and Superman and following on with the rest later. They could have made another movie in 2016 featuring the beginnings of the JL and still gotten Batman V Superman out in 2015.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

G.I. Retaliation was pushed back a year to shoot additional scenes with Tatum and to allow a 3D conversion. This delay is occurring before a single scene has been shot so it means that the time can be put to good use.

Additional scenes ? He was killed at the start There was the scene with the rock were he was playing video games. It wouldnt take a year to do that.

Anyway i dont mind them delaying it a year as long as they get some good movies done. I dont mind having wonder woman and nightwing either. But yes they could have been left for a later movie. Would like to see them do something with Green arrow too or even tie it into Arrow.

Mr Williams

This sounds like its going to be a turkey. They should recast the role of Batman.

Otacon

Mr Williams wrote: »

This sounds like its going to be a turkey. They should recast the role of Batman.

Turkey or not, the one role the studio will not recast is Ben Affleck as Batman. That was a coup for a project like this (in terms of bankability at least).

Sad Professor

I’d imagine the extra year is to give them time to finish the script. There’s no way Goyer threw together anything remotely shootable in the last 6 months.

Rubber_Soul

Mr Williams wrote: »

This sounds like its going to be a turkey. They should recast the role of Batman.

They may well be doing just that if the gossip going around is correct. The speculation I've seen is that the delay will allow Affleck to bow out citing scheduling conflicts. Obviously a pinch of salt required.

Kylo Ren

I'd say Affleck saw the script and wants to rewrite it or have it rewritten.

Bullseye1

I am all for delays to get it right. Hopefully they do get the right balance and that this is indeed a Trinity movie

In saying that, WB was about to commence shooting on what looks now to be a poor script. This fact and the fact that there is no clear visible route for their DC universe does not fill me with any confidence. Whatever you may think of Marvel and their approach you can see a clear vision. Hopefully at this years comic con DC has a proper presentation of how their universe will develop.

Soft Falling Rain

I came across someone making the very fair point that Warner Brothers are pushing out a hell of a lot of films every year, in comparison to Marvel Studios who are pushing out an average of maybe 1/2 a year.

So in that regard it's pretty easy for Marvel to focus on coherent delivery of a single universe. That's not to say Warner shouldn't get the finger out as it is obviously in their own best financially speaking to do so. Maybe the possible development of a sub DC studio wouldn't be a bad idea?

Just read today that a Brazilian jounalist tweeted that Ben Affleck has been sacked as Batman

http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/rumour-ben-affleck-sacked-batman-175100268.html

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Just read today that a Brazilian jounalist tweeted that Ben Affleck has been sacked as Batman

http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/rumour-ben-affleck-sacked-batman-175100268.html

I can't see it happening. It would be a clear sign that the film is on serious trouble and is not the kind of press that the studio wants.

If it is true them I would love to see them go with my first choice for role of an aged Batman, Michael Keaton

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

It's not true. That rumour has been around for about a week now. If he had been sacked either his PR guys or the film's PR guys would have been battling it out to get the news out first to put their own spin on it, it wouldn't have come from some random Brazilian guy.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

If it is true them I would love to see them go with my first choice for role of an aged Batman, Michael Keaton

He is actually my first choice too and when i read that story i was thinking how great it would be if they did that.

Burt Macklin

Deleted User wrote: »

He is actually my first choice too and when i read that story i was thinking how great it would be if they did that.

He's Michael Douglas is playing an older Hank Pym in Ant Man I think, so Edgar Wright must have been thinking along the same lines. For the record, I reckon Jon Hamm would have been great as a slightly older Bruce Wayne.

Sorry, got mixed up between Keaton and Douglas there

Nervous Wreck

Burt Macklin wrote: »

He's playing an older Hank Pym in Ant Man I think, so Edgar Wright must have been thinking along the same lines. For the record, I reckon Jon Hamm would have been great as a slightly older Bruce Wayne.

Michael Douglas.

Mickeroo

Don't see why they would suddenly decide to go with an aged Batman even if they did sack Affleck. Article sounds like bull to me.

Mr Freeze

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't see it happening. It would be a clear sign that the film is on serious trouble and is not the kind of press that the studio wants.

If it is true them I would love to see them go with my first choice for role of an aged Batman, Michael Keaton

The article/comment is probably too good to be true, but Keaton returning as Batman would be very interesting.

True or not, Man of Steel 2 is in trouble anyways, including Batman, shoehorning loads of JLA characters in, it strikes me that Warner don't think Superman can hold up his own sequel, they gotta put in Batman to give it a huge boost.

Rushing into a JLA launch with MoS2 is gonna kill the film.

Soft Falling Rain

Deleted User wrote: »

Just read today that a Brazilian jounalist tweeted that Ben Affleck has been sacked as Batman

http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/rumour-ben-affleck-sacked-batman-175100268.html

"Fan reaction was too strong."

Because fan power has always gotten the big studios cowering and back tracking on decisions.

Oafley Jones

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Michael Douglas.

Funnily enough, also Michael Keaton's real name.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor
Jeremy Irons as Alfred.

I genuinely don't care about this film anymore.

Corholio

Irons as Alfred I don't mind but Eisenberg as Luthor is hilarious. Not only is it a terrible choice but I can barely stand to watch him on screen deliver dialogue in the exact same way in every film.

I didn't mind Afflecks casting as Batman as much as a lot, but Eisenberg's casting is awful. Marvel certainly don't need to be worried.

I think that both are interesting choices and with Irons attached I wonder will Alfred be more in line with Geoff Johns' take on the character.

splashthecash

Go home DC, your drunk!

Bullseye1

Eisenberg. Seriously?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I like Ben Affleck, I was perfectly happy with his casting as Batman, I didn't even really mind that they weren't giving Superman his own sequel to himself but everything since then has just been terrible, in my opinion.

Agent Coulson

Noooooooooooooo.

Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor and Jeremy Irons as Alfred

I'm done with it now.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/jesse-eisenberg-cast-as-lex-luthor-in-supermanbatman-jeremy-irons-set-as-alfred-1201079902/

kronsington

Very underwhelming IMO!!! Especially when you consider who was linked with the role (Cranston and Phoenix)

sky88

Affleck im fine with hes a big star think hell actually do a really good job at batman

Jeremy irons as alfred seems like it could be really cool

Jesse Eisenberg as lex luthor doesnt fit at all unless hes going to whine superman an batman to death

pixelburp

A very odd piece of casting; I'm guessing they're angling towards a younger Luthor, less established perhaps; maybe it'll be a riff on Eisenberg's previous role as Mark Zuckerberg, who knows. While make-up can do wonders, I can't see it, I can't see Eisenberg having the gravitas and magnetism that someone like Luthor is supposed to have - he did get elected President of the US after all...

norrie rugger

could have had Mark Strong, Brian Cranston or even someone like Idris Elba.
This film is looking more and more like production by focus group and they don't know where they are going from one day to the next.
Irons is a good casting choice though imo

Kylo Ren

"Eisenberg? I said Heisenberg god ****ing dammit"

IvaBigWun

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Noooooooooooooo.

Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor


http://variety.com/2014/film/news/jesse-eisenberg-cast-as-lex-luthor-in-supermanbatman-jeremy-irons-set-as-alfred-1201079902/

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I see people defending the casting by comparing it to the reaction Heath Ledger's casting as The Joker got.

It's hardly the same thing.

Duggy747

Goldstein

I must Google Jesse Eisenberg as I am obviously thinking of the wrong guy.