Jump to content

Batman and Superman IV: "Do you bleed?" "Only on the home release..." (Now with SPOILERS)


Rhom

Recommended Posts

So the uncut version has an extra 30 minutes. Given it can't possibly be entirely due to too much violence, I'm hoping it will make for a less disjointed film. Weird how I'll probably wind up buying BvS but not having bought a Marvel film since Incredible Hulk. Maybe WB's are actually being very clever duping people out of more money with the blu-ray? Not that this is an old trick and not that it's one you can play too often before people wise up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hoping this will be like the extended version of Lord of the Rings (not like the extended Hobbits...) or even Kingdom of Heaven where the theatrical version lacked major story elements to hit the studio time limit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to derail this thread, but I found the extended editions of LotR much more satisfying. Can't think of plot elements off hand, but the added character moments did build a better story. YMMV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the movie well enough.

 

Ben Affleck did a killer job as Batman and even an older Bruce Wayne.

Lex manipulated and was smarter than everyone.

Doomsday should have been saved. Luthor in jail but with the scene intact of him putting Zod in the water.

This leads to a solo Superman flick where Lex escapes prison and releases him.

That way we would have gotten solo Wonder Woman and Superman flick and Batman gets this movie and Suicide Squad to have some background on at least three of the members.

Then at the end of Doomsday Lex accidentally activates a beacon in the ship which Darkseid is shown in an after credits scene picking up.I say accidentally because Lex at this point is not wanting to destroy Earth or the people on it.

Leave this movie more or less how it is.  Just with Diana leaving on the plane and the 20 minutes of doomsday and funeral replaced by Lex in prison, superman helping rebuild the Senate building and Alfred and Batman building information on the other 4 possible members.

 

That way in Justice League, Bruce can gather all of them because he has been keeping track of them.

 

And this went on a tangent...

 

Oh well still liked it enough. More of a slow burn compared to Marvel flicks and I liked the atmosphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, red snow said:

So the uncut version has an extra 30 minutes. Given it can't possibly be entirely due to too much violence, I'm hoping it will make for a less disjointed film. Weird how I'll probably wind up buying BvS but not having bought a Marvel film since Incredible Hulk. Maybe WB's are actually being very clever duping people out of more money with the blu-ray? Not that this is an old trick and not that it's one you can play too often before people wise up.

I probably liked BvS more than most but to me what sets it apart especially from the Marvel movies is that it tries to do something else.  Now you may think it doesn't work, and that's fine lots of people don't.  But to me (even had I not liked it) a failed experiment is still better than getting the exact same thing for the 12th time and calling it new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Slurktan said:

I probably liked BvS more than most but to me what sets it apart especially from the Marvel movies is that it tries to do something else.  Now you may think it doesn't work, and that's fine lots of people don't.  But to me (even had I not liked it) a failed experiment is still better than getting the exact same thing for the 12th time and calling it new.

I agree with you 100%. I'd rather they fail at trying something different. The frustrating thing for me is that there was a lot to like but it never fully gelled. It's why I'm hoping the extra footage helps as my main problem was with the characters being pretty isolated throughout. It may turn out that's a stylistic choice which could fit with a mythic treatment of the characters. It weirdly reminded me of Nicolas Wending Refn's works where I can see why people love them but am not really onboard with it as entertainment. Then again there's a fine line between being artistic Refn and "sucker punch" Snyder. I try and balance it out by remembering how much I liked Synder's watchmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Slurktan said:

I probably liked BvS more than most but to me what sets it apart especially from the Marvel movies is that it tries to do something else.  Now you may think it doesn't work, and that's fine lots of people don't.  But to me (even had I not liked it) a failed experiment is still better than getting the exact same thing for the 12th time and calling it new.

I think this description fits Interstellar perfectly, but I'm not really sure what you mean when you say BvS tried to do something new. What exactly was it trying to do, in your opinion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Leap said:

What major plot element does the Lord of the Rings Extended edition have that the theatrical release didn't have? It's been 15 years and I still haven't gotten round to getting the extended editions. That's almost entirely because of that one scene where the Witch King meets Gandalf in Minas Tirith, which I hate with a thousand burning suns. 

Saruman getting a death scene rather than just being forgotten about springs to mind. It's been so long since I watched the non-Extended Editions I can't really remember the details now, of what else was left from the initial film. I think they did generally improve the film, although there are maybe a couple of dubious additions in ROTK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Leap said:

What major plot element does the Lord of the Rings Extended edition have that the theatrical release didn't have? It's been 15 years and I still haven't gotten round to getting the extended editions. That's almost entirely because of that one scene where the Witch King meets Gandalf in Minas Tirith, which I hate with a thousand burning suns. 

Here's a list of dadditions (scant on details though): https://www.quora.com/What-is-difference-between-the-extended-version-and-the-theatrical-version-of-movie

Up to you to decide if they make much difference plot wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Slurktan said:

I probably liked BvS more than most but to me what sets it apart especially from the Marvel movies is that it tries to do something else.  Now you may think it doesn't work, and that's fine lots of people don't.  But to me (even had I not liked it) a failed experiment is still better than getting the exact same thing for the 12th time and calling it new.

Honestly I'm not quite sure what you mean. I don't feel like it was them trying to do 'something else'. In fact it felt like the opposite. It felt like they wanted Avengers, but they didn't know how to copy Avengers whilst still differentiating it. So they just made it darker. 

I really cannot see a great deal of differences otherwise in their approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Leap said:

Thanks, folks, and sorry for the derail. 

As for trying something new and failing instead of doing the same thing and calling it new...I disagree. 

Marvel have a formula, it's true, but speaking personally I'm not getting sick of it. I think there's enough variation in the MCU to keep me interested for a while longer, and it only looks like they're expanding that with Doctor Strange. 

I respect Snyder's vision for BvS, and I think he should stay on board in the DCEU in some advisory capacity - almost akin to George Lucas in Star Wars. Taking risks is one thing, but releasing a film as messy as BvS is another. If they go overboard at quality control in the MCU, then they went way, waay underboard in the DCEU. I know which one I prefer. I prefer The Force Awakens to The Phantom Menace.

The UK has a chain pub that does cheap food and beer. The beers are sometimes excellent (they have a lot of variety) and the food is serviceable. I know what I'm getting with a trip to Wetherspoons. That's what the MCU is like and the plots are the "food" - the cast and franchises are probably the beer.

I'll be going to see Civil War sometime next week but I'm not eagerly awaiting it. I know it's there when I have time for it and know I'll enjoy it (unless it's Age Of Ultron). Not a bad track record for over 10 movies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leap said:

Hey, the MCU is much better than Wetherspoons :P (I live in the UK) 

I do take your point though, and I while I agree that I'd rather a rural country pub in summertime to Wetherspoons. For me though, BvS was like going for a long walk on an overcast day to the rural country pub, and finding that they only served Carling for £4 a pint. 

Perhaps it's time to stop with the analogies now though. I love the idea that every DCEU film is going to be tangibly different, I just hope they manage to be really good films in the process. 

 

Your analogy actually summed up my BvS experience surprisingly well.

Well the Wonder Woman trailer seemed exactly the same as Cap:First Avenger just a different world war and a woman instead of a man. If that trailer's anything to go by (and it may just be they were trying to look like Cap for that trailer) we'll get something a bit more MCU-ish. Suicide Squad appears to be its own beast although it has the dark and miserable aesthetic of BvS carried over. I'm still intrigued by the Flash. He seemed to be wearing weird armour in his cameo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Stannis Eats No Peaches said:

I think this description fits Interstellar perfectly, but I'm not really sure what you mean when you say BvS tried to do something new. What exactly was it trying to do, in your opinion?

in regards to Superhero movies, BvS has a few things its trying to do that are new or at least different at least in comparison to Marvel.  The biggest being the approach of how the world reacts to Superman.  Another is that they introduce a superhero who is matured and has been doing the job for 20 years already.  There's more, I don't feel like rehashing this thread and the ones before but it gets talked about quite a bit,  But sufficed to say BvS generally goes the route of the opposite of the Marvel movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Slurktan said:

in regards to Superhero movies, BvS has a few things its trying to do that are new or at least different at least in comparison to Marvel.  The biggest being the approach of how the world reacts to Superman.  Another is that they introduce a superhero who is matured and has been doing the job for 20 years already.  There's more, I don't feel like rehashing this thread and the ones before but it gets talked about quite a bit,  But sufficed to say BvS generally goes the route of the opposite of the Marvel movies.

Mm OK. I'm not convinced either of those are particularly innovative, but even if they were, the movie failed to handle either of these well as well as pretty much everything else. I'd rather see an entertaining movie that doesn't deviate from the formula too much than see a movie that is a complete clusterfuck. There's a difference between experimenting with something new and missing the mark and thinking about experimenting with something, but getting tied down with a bunch of other shit and accomplishing nothing. Interstellar is the former, BvS the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys look for WAY more out of superhero movies than most people.  BvS was a decent superhero movie.  There's been better, there's been worse.  It was enjoyable for what it is, if you can let yourself be entertained by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't say I totally agree with this. In terms of the way people react to superheroes.. well ever since the Avengers almost the entire MCU is full of stories about how the role of superheroes is changing. Civil War is about superheroes being a law unto their own hands, Ultron did something similar. BvS actually felt like it was treading old ground, and doing it less well because in what way did it even deal with the subject of a superhero's role in the world? 

Bruce Wayne got upset his building got destroyed and they took Superman to court.. but then the court exploded.. there was some big fights and then everything is totally sorted and ok again! It only dealt with the issue in the most superficial way and didn't really attempt to answer any of the questions it asked.

And while I like the idea of an older superhero, especially Batman, it was such a direct rip from ' Dark Knight Returns', but worse because it pulled out the bits it wanted and didn't deal with them very well. Old Bruce wasn't explored at all. I'm hoping a new Batman movie will do a better job.

On 4/29/2016 at 6:09 PM, Slurktan said:

in regards to Superhero movies, BvS has a few things its trying to do that are new or at least different at least in comparison to Marvel.  The biggest being the approach of how the world reacts to Superman.  Another is that they introduce a superhero who is matured and has been doing the job for 20 years already.  There's more, I don't feel like rehashing this thread and the ones before but it gets talked about quite a bit,  But sufficed to say BvS generally goes the route of the opposite of the Marvel movies.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Can't say I totally agree with this. In terms of the way people react to superheroes.. well ever since the Avengers almost the entire MCU is full of stories about how the role of superheroes is changing. Civil War is about superheroes being a law unto their own hands, Ultron did something similar. BvS actually felt like it was treading old ground, and doing it less well because in what way did it even deal with the subject of a superhero's role in the world? 

But it didn't do that much special about it. Superheroes were still able to just run around and do whatever until...well, Civil War. And even then they can. Society hasn't changed one bit - it's still completely and totally the same. Culture hasn't changed. Essentially what Marvel looks like is if a new kind of weapon or special forces (say, drones) got introduced into our world. The world didn't change drastically, people don't wear drone shirts, etc.

Despite Marvel's universe literally having a norse god walking around. Who is also an alien. 

And the world being invaded by another alien species. 

And being able to invent true artificial intelligence.

Just think - if we, right now, knew that alien life exists, looked almost precisely like us, and was named after Norse gods - how would that fuck up the world? What would ISIS look like if they knew teutonic gods existed? What would the Germans and Swedes look like? If the world had just seen an honest-to-goodness alien invasion, what would governments look like? What would military forces look like? 

Like, seriously - the new Independence Day handles this kind of massive cultural shift better than the Marvel universe does. The DC universe started first and foremost with the question of how the world would handle Superman. You can say that they didn't do a good job of that, and that's a fair criticism - but they certainly didn't try. The marvel universe, meanwhile, didn't even bother to try, not even a little bit. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...