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

[Slurktan]

6 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 

 

6 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I think Mother Boxes can do that (or at least in some limited form, like project a hologram through time or something). I didn't realize they had changed Victor's origin to include a Mother Box.

In the movie

it is a motherbox that actually makes him Cyborg

[Arthmail]

I think the negative reaction is a bit overblown. I liked this better than the second Avengers, and better than Ironman 2 and 3, Thor 2, all of the Spider Man movies (but I don't like Spiderman). It had some serious problems, to be sure. Pacing was an issue, but it looks like bridging scenes were cut out by the studio so I'm curious to what the 3 hours version that Snyder wanted looks like. I would not mind the guy that directed Captain America Winter Soldier taking over.

Personally, I think Affleck was the best Batman I've yet to see on screen. He was older, scarred, and fucking brutal. It's how I would see a normal humans progression after all of the years of doing what he's been doing. And the dude was massive. I mean, I felt like he could beat the shit out of a tank with his fists. That final fight of his in the warehouse was so knock down, brutal that I want to write a script where Batman is stuck in Arkham Asylum or in a city block and just have him fight his way out.

Cavil is good as Superman. The problem with Superman is that he's Superman. Immune to most everything, sort of lame. Hard to get into his character. I liked Snyder's entire version of him. Everyone is complaining that he's not the righteous Superman of old but to hell with that, that Superman is so difficult to watch. I don't mind the Kent's being more protective of their son than other people. It's not unthinkable. In fact, the idea that they would always be pushing him forward to be such a good man presents no story conflict for Superman to try and overcome and makes for a very boring story arc.

WW was fine but she didn't get much to do. I appreciate Jason Mamoa but Aquaman is so lame. Not sure how he's going to work that out of the system.

Lex Luthor. Sigh. Jesse Eisenberg sucks. He's got a weak, uncommanding presence that doesn't put him far from Michael Cera. He played a good Mark Zuckerberg because audiences wanted to see Zuck as a weasel. And Jesse plays one well. But his take on Lex Luthor was off on all points. Like Eisenberg's notion of how to make him new and exciting was to go full on eccentric and edgy and just twist him into a lesser version of the Joker but without any of the fun. Vincent D'Onofrio's Kingpen in the Daredevil tv series is by far the perfect example of how to bring a villain to life. To this point, D'Onofrio's Kingpen  is in the same league as Ledgers Joker. And Eisenberg is not even on the same continent. Terrible, terrible choice that drew me out of the story whenever he was on the screen. 

[Myrddin]

16 hours ago, Slurktan said:

Was that actually Flash though?  

It looked like he was wearing Flash's mask along with some hood or something. To me at least.

ETA: Here's an interview with Snyder. It was Flash.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Arthmail said:

The problem with Superman is that he's Superman. Immune to most everything, sort of lame. Hard to get into his character. I liked Snyder's entire version of him. Everyone is complaining that he's not the righteous Superman of old but to hell with that, that Superman is so difficult to watch. I don't mind the Kent's being more protective of their son than other people. It's not unthinkable. In fact, the idea that they would always be pushing him forward to be such a good man presents no story conflict for Superman to try and overcome and makes for a very boring story arc.

Again, although I see this criticism a lot, the 'traditional', non-Snyder version of Superman is the most successful superhero character in history, and one of the most successful of any fictional characters ever written. However boring some people might find him, clearly the public at large don't have much trouble getting into his character.

[Kindly Old Man]

24 minutes ago, mormont said:

Again, although I see this criticism a lot, the 'traditional', non-Snyder version of Superman is the most successful superhero character in history, and one of the most successful of any fictional characters ever written. However boring some people might find him, clearly the public at large don't have much trouble getting into his character.

Perhaps the bolded is true if you only look at comic book sales, but it seems debatable. Even accepting the premise that Superman is the most successful hero historically, I don't think there's any argument to be made that he is the most popular superhero currently.  Maybe tastes have just changed. Lots of stuff that used to be popular is hard for modern audiences to get into.

[mormont]

No, the bolded is true, full stop. Batman or Spider-Man might give him a run for his money on some fronts - particularly if we only look at comic book sales, in fact - but overall, in terms of comic book sales over time, in terms of cross-media appearances, in terms of merchandising, in terms of his iconic status, of being the founding character on which the superhero genre is based (while acknowledging its other influences), in terms of cultural impact, iconography, instant recognisability, number of imitators, persistent popularity: by any metric you care to name, the 'traditional' version of Superman is the most successful superhero character in history. That version of the character is an industry in his own right and has been for eight decades.

[Kindly Old Man]

I'd be interested to see some numbers on that stuff, a couple of articles I read indicated that Batman is out in front in terms of movies, while Spider-Man blows everything away in terms of merchandising (at least currently). I have a pretty casual interest in this stuff though and don't have a good idea what it's been like historically.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

57 minutes ago, mormont said:

No, the bolded is true, full stop. Batman or Spider-Man might give him a run for his money on some fronts - particularly if we only look at comic book sales, in fact - but overall, in terms of comic book sales over time, in terms of cross-media appearances, in terms of merchandising, in terms of his iconic status, of being the founding character on which the superhero genre is based (while acknowledging its other influences), in terms of cultural impact, iconography, instant recognisability, number of imitators, persistent popularity: by any metric you care to name, the 'traditional' version of Superman is the most successful superhero character in history. That version of the character is an industry in his own right and has been for eight decades.

All that is true, but I think the point still stands. This character is in dire need of an update. The old iteration is fine, and as you mentioned is wildly popular, but it has been done to death. You've even had a fairly recent love letter (The Brandon Roush Superman flick) to that iteration of the character. It's dated. 

[drawkcabi]

I maintain that's it's possible to update the character of Superman, to make him more interesting, to make the world around him more dark, edgy, cynical, and have Clark Kent/Superman adapt himself to fit into that world, but not have his core character ripped away like I feel Snyder did in MOS.

Maybe it's boring to other people that Superman's shtick is that he saves people but if you take MOS, have pretty much the same story but weave into it being able to see Superman go to extremes to save people either from the collateral damage he's a part of causing or people in need in general...heroic moments, not just fighting a machine in the middle of an ocean because the plot has chosen that he needs to be there instead of in a city that is being ground to dust and it would actually feel good to see Superman save some of those people instead of spending what seems like an interminable amount of time watching them get hurt and even die. I'd like that movie.

Sure there are many comic books in which Superman is a dick, maybe I wouldn't like those either, and the stories I've read that do show a contrasting darker version of Superman seem to always (to me at least) be an example of why the inspirational Superman is needed and/or the world is worse without that kind of Superman. Snyder's MOS Superman seems to say this is Superman now, take it or leave it, and it's a depressing (to me) to have that as the prime movie Superman.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

2 hours ago, drawkcabi said:

I maintain that's it's possible to update the character of Superman, to make him more interesting, to make the world around him more dark, edgy, cynical, and have Clark Kent/Superman adapt himself to fit into that world, but not have his core character ripped away like I feel Snyder did in MOS.

Absolutely. That is another viable take on the character, methinks. I like the Dark Night Returns angle on the character, where he is still basically the same guy, but the government he is a lapdog for is corrupt and somewhat sinister. He is still the dyed in the wool good guy, but he is somewhat naive and delusional.  

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

I'll ask again. Is Lex Sr. discussed at all in the film?

[drawkcabi]

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Absolutely. That is another viable take on the character, methinks. I like the Dark Night Returns angle on the character, where he is still basically the same guy, but the government he is a lapdog for is corrupt and somewhat sinister. He is still the dyed in the wool goodguy, but he is somewhat naive and delusional.  

I think that when Smallville was good (50% of the time at best) they accomplished this.

I would have loved to have seen this series tweaked here and there, run maybe half the seasons it did, cut out the Dawson's Creek crap, trim the kryptomite causes everything through-plot, keep most the core mythology and character development, have the other DC characters reinterpreted and not been so small-screenish, and then been the groundwork for the DCMU.

The Tom Welling Superman vs Batfleck I would have been there in the theaters to see!

Smallville finale spoilers:

 

[Calibandar]

19 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'll ask again. Is Lex Sr. discussed at all in the film?

Yes he is.

[Arthmail]

8 hours ago, mormont said:

No, the bolded is true, full stop. Batman or Spider-Man might give him a run for his money on some fronts - particularly if we only look at comic book sales, in fact - but overall, in terms of comic book sales over time, in terms of cross-media appearances, in terms of merchandising, in terms of his iconic status, of being the founding character on which the superhero genre is based (while acknowledging its other influences), in terms of cultural impact, iconography, instant recognisability, number of imitators, persistent popularity: by any metric you care to name, the 'traditional' version of Superman is the most successful superhero character in history. That version of the character is an industry in his own right and has been for eight decades.

In terms of movie sales, which is a metric with huge numbers, no. Unless the numbers I looked at were wrong, Batman has 3 of the top 10 superhero movies. Superman - and the Man of Steel Snyder version at that - just barely cracks the top 15. If you look at cultural impact, sure....but Batman is pretty much hand in hand. I think Superman is a larger brand, but not necessarily a more popular one.

Which brings me back to vanilla superman. It's fine to have him either way. But I like that with super hero movies where you see a character for like 3 movies with one actor, they try to shift the bar around to reflect new attitudes. I mean, Bale's Batman was far different than Keaton's and so on. The new Batman with Affleck is amazing. So let me see some diversity in Superman. Make him interesting. Make his parents a little conflicted about putting their son in front of danger instead of flag waving patriots always looking to do good and eat apple pie. I like the new sense of conflict in Superman.

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

Sitting in the cinema waiting for it to start now. My chair is broken, but I don't think I can blame Snyder for that.

[GeorgeIAF]

I am a huge DC fan and loved the film, all plot-questions can (and were answered) easily.

[The BlackBear]

Why does sticking blood on Zod and putting him through a machine create a Kryptonian hating monster for that matter?

Is that doomsdays comic book origin? Because it's awful.

[GeorgeIAF]

4 minutes ago, Leap said:

Why did Luthor create Doomsday even though he knew he couldn't control it? 

It was his ace in the hole if somehow Batman and Superman came to an agreement, also the work of a desperate mad man. I think that he learned from the knowledge gained in the kryptonian ship how to control him, i think he would have used kryptonite to diminish Doomsday's powers and so on.

[GeorgeIAF]

14 minutes ago, Leap said:

Did he even have any Kryptonite? Batman steals it all, iirc. 

Also, why does Batman kill people?

Why does Luthor call Superman and then throw Lois off a tower even though he could literally be on the other side of the planet? And how does Luthor know that this night is the one in which Batman will fight Superman? How does he know that the bat signal is the reason Superman will fight Batman?

Why does Superman not go after the villains that Batman is chasing when they first meet?

Why does Lois throw the spear in the water?

Why does Superman bust some guy through a wall when Lois is initially captured instead of just...not doing that?

Why does Flash tell Bruce that Lois is the key, when in fact she has very little to do with anything. 

Why doesn't Bruce just check online ship registries for the obviously named 'White Portuguese'?

 

Really easy to answer questions ... and some answers are in the movie if you paid more atenttion.

 

1. Luthor knew Superman's secret identity (and that he loved Lois), so he figured that he would be following her everywhere (to protect her) and that's why he pushed her over the building. He knew that was the night because he saw the symbol and he just kidnapped Martha and Lois, forcing Superman to act (while also slowly feeding Wayne's hatred of him through those letters and so on).

2. Lois threw the spear because she saw how powerful it was when in close proximity to Superman (that's why she goes after it later, when she realizes that it can be used against Doomsday, as it was capable of hurting Superman).

3. Superman doesn't go after those villains because he saw Batman as the bigger threat, and figured that the police will be enough to deal with those. He focused on stopping Batman being a vigilante and to let the legal system work.

4. He busts that guy through the wall because he had a gun pointing at her head, and if he pulled the trigger he didn't have time to save her (no matter how fast he was). Also we don't know if he killed that guy (he might wrapped his cape around him to avoid doing more damage to him). He has a conversation in the bath with Lois where he tells her that he didn't kill anyone during that incident.

5. Flash comes from the future, and tells Bruce that Lois is the key (because she is the only link Superman has to humanity), and if Superman will lose her, he will go evil (that's why he says "You were right about him, you were always right about him, fear him."). It foreshadows the Injustice storyline, where Lois Lane is killed and Superman falls under the control of Darkseid and becomes a dictatorial figure (this is implied also by Bruce's 2nd nightmare where Superman tells him that he took Lois from him, meaning he was the reason he lost her, and then kills him). Flash says also that he needs to find them (the other metahumans) and form the Justice League so they might stand a chance for what is coming.

6. Maybe the White Portuguese wasn't in any online registries as it was used for illegal activities.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

I've just come back from the movie.. 

Its funny how a trailer can tell you all there is to know about a movie. All my worst fears were confirmed about it, it was a spectacular mess, full of some of the most mind bogglingly poor writing decisions I've seen in a movie in a very long time.

The worst part is how I spent the first half hour thinking 'oh wow, I like this!! Everyone was wrong'. But the very second Lex Luthor turns up the entire movie takes a nosedive into the toilet. Its not even that Lex is a bad performance, I mean, it is a tired cliche of a psychotic badguy, its irritating and horrible to watch, but its not the performance thats the bad bit. Its every part of the story that is related to Lex that is the problem with this movie.

Essentially Snyder has taken the greatest hits of Dark Knight Returns ( which I like but do not love as a comic, though the ideas in it are great) and started to make his version of it. However somewhere along the way of the writing process, that adaptation got mutated, much like Zod was turned into a gross looking mutant cave troll, and the end result is that much of what is taken from that comic is warped, until it doesn't make a lick of sense any more. 

I can only assume that there was a great deal of corporate interference in the making, which is Snyders only excuse. It feels like the core of the movie was good. You had the Batman story which was actually great, there was the leftovers of the Man of Steel story, which sort of worked. But then there is the Universe building side of it, which just felt crowbarred in and was blatently obvious from every scene that it was forced into the script. 

I won't go on about it too long, but honestly, it was a travesty. By the end of it I was open mouthed about what a monumental balls-up it was. It went from being an interesting, dark study of two opposite but similar characters, to some odd PS4 baddie fight with cheesy one liners. 

- It also features the most idiotic turn around of motivation I can remember

- A car chase which is very similar to the one in Dark Knight, which highlights that actually Snyder is a hugely inferior director to Nolan.


Weak 


3/10