Batman V. Superman: Dawn Of Justice

[Leo656]

It's because the whole "It's not fashionable and out of date" argument is STUPID. NOBODY ever dressed like that! Even in 1938, Superman's look was in no way "hip" or "contemporary"! It's a super-hero costume, it's supposed to be garish and eye-catching, not "practical" or any other nonsense. People over-think the f*ck out of these things.

Meanwhile, as has already been stated, there's a secondary function in that super-hero costumes look like sh*t without something in the middle to break up all that space. That was the entire reason they were always drawn that way in the first place. Granted, it makes way more sense to anyone who's studied drawing or art theory, but it is A Thing. Also, modesty. Regardless of movie suits being rubberized "armor", in print they've almost always been spandex, ostensibly. And anyone wearing a spandex onesie should definitely wear something like trunks over it before they go outside. :lol: It's not the most flattering look, to be sure.

I'd say, the fact that people Liked the look of super-hero costumes for 80 consecutive years, and it's only very recently that people started in with the whole "Underpants on the outside! How silly!" critique, means that the "classic" looks is fine, but people nowadays will pick any damn thing to nitpick. It's a complaint that says nothing about what's being critiqued but a whole lot about the person saying it.

Also, more personally, a lot of that stuff comes from people who don't even read comics in the first place, and I'm not about to listen to a single thing those people say about MY characters, anyway.

But yeah, multiple reasons that go far beyond "nostalgia". It's just a better look, and ALL the reasoning Against is immature nitpicking from people who don't know anything about comics, color theory, or clothing design. Simple as that.

[Turo602]

It's because the whole "It's not fashionable and out of date" argument is STUPID. NOBODY ever dressed like that! Even in 1938, Superman's look was in no way "hip" or "contemporary"! It's a super-hero costume, it's supposed to be garish and eye-catching, not "practical" or any other nonsense. People over-think the f*ck out of these things.

Meanwhile, as has already been stated, there's a secondary function in that super-hero costumes look like sh*t without something in the middle to break up all that space. That was the entire reason they were always drawn that way in the first place. Granted, it makes way more sense to anyone who's studied drawing or art theory, but it is A Thing. Also, modesty. Regardless of movie suits being rubberized "armor", in print they've almost always been spandex, ostensibly. And anyone wearing a spandex onesie should definitely wear something like trunks over it before they go outside. :lol: It's not the most flattering look, to be sure.

I'd say, the fact that people Liked the look of super-hero costumes for 80 consecutive years, and it's only very recently that people started in with the whole "Underpants on the outside! How silly!" critique, means that the "classic" looks is fine, but people nowadays will pick any damn thing to nitpick. It's a complaint that says nothing about what's being critiqued but a whole lot about the person saying it.

Also, more personally, a lot of that stuff comes from people who don't even read comics in the first place, and I'm not about to listen to a single thing those people say about MY characters, anyway.

But yeah, multiple reasons that go far beyond "nostalgia". It's just a better look, and ALL the reasoning Against is immature nitpicking from people who don't know anything about comics, color theory, or clothing design. Simple as that.

You took the words right out of my mouth and organized them to make sentences I agree with.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

It's because the whole "It's not fashionable and out of date" argument is STUPID. NOBODY ever dressed like that! Even in 1938, Superman's look was in no way "hip" or "contemporary"! It's a super-hero costume, it's supposed to be garish and eye-catching, not "practical" or any other nonsense. People over-think the f*ck out of these things.

Meanwhile, as has already been stated, there's a secondary function in that super-hero costumes look like sh*t without something in the middle to break up all that space. That was the entire reason they were always drawn that way in the first place. Granted, it makes way more sense to anyone who's studied drawing or art theory, but it is A Thing. Also, modesty. Regardless of movie suits being rubberized "armor", in print they've almost always been spandex, ostensibly. And anyone wearing a spandex onesie should definitely wear something like trunks over it before they go outside. :lol: It's not the most flattering look, to be sure.

I'd say, the fact that people Liked the look of super-hero costumes for 80 consecutive years, and it's only very recently that people started in with the whole "Underpants on the outside! How silly!" critique, means that the "classic" looks is fine, but people nowadays will pick any damn thing to nitpick. It's a complaint that says nothing about what's being critiqued but a whole lot about the person saying it.

Also, more personally, a lot of that stuff comes from people who don't even read comics in the first place, and I'm not about to listen to a single thing those people say about MY characters, anyway.

But yeah, multiple reasons that go far beyond "nostalgia". It's just a better look, and ALL the reasoning Against is immature nitpicking from people who don't know anything about comics, color theory, or clothing design. Simple as that.

Eh, whatever floats your boat.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

So many people have mocked the undies on superheroes that it is kind of like "hmm that is dumb..." and also wearing undies over your clothes is like wearing a t-shirt to go swimming, it just looks dumb.

[Candy Kappa]

Pretty sure it's not actually underwear, it's a part of the costume in a different color to break up the monotonousness off otherwise boring and off putting costumes.

Seriously, that joke is just as overused as people joking about wares being free that have bar codes that won't scan in a cash register. Heard it a million times, and it wasn't funny the first time.

[Leo656]

Yep. As earlier stated, it's the one thing that stands between "That guy's a super-hero! Cool!" and "That guy is wearing a cape with his scuba suit. How odd." The sans-trunks look seems incomplete, especially with stuff where they don't even give Superman a belt. Your eye tells you something is "supposed" to be in that dead space.

In MoS, they even shot him almost entirely from the waist up, in a clever attempt to make sure that the change wouldn't be in any way distracting. Which is neat, but it begs the question, why change it at all, then? When you're 9/10s "perfect", just go ahead and be "Perfect". Y'know? Seems silly not to do that last little bit of work when you're already there.

[Slade]

It's because the whole "It's not fashionable and out of date" argument is STUPID. NOBODY ever dressed like that! Even in 1938, Superman's look was in no way "hip" or "contemporary"! It's a super-hero costume, it's supposed to be garish and eye-catching, not "practical" or any other nonsense. People over-think the f*ck out of these things.

Meanwhile, as has already been stated, there's a secondary function in that super-hero costumes look like sh*t without something in the middle to break up all that space. That was the entire reason they were always drawn that way in the first place. Granted, it makes way more sense to anyone who's studied drawing or art theory, but it is A Thing. Also, modesty. Regardless of movie suits being rubberized "armor", in print they've almost always been spandex, ostensibly. And anyone wearing a spandex onesie should definitely wear something like trunks over it before they go outside. :lol: It's not the most flattering look, to be sure.

I'd say, the fact that people Liked the look of super-hero costumes for 80 consecutive years, and it's only very recently that people started in with the whole "Underpants on the outside! How silly!" critique, means that the "classic" looks is fine, but people nowadays will pick any damn thing to nitpick. It's a complaint that says nothing about what's being critiqued but a whole lot about the person saying it.

Also, more personally, a lot of that stuff comes from people who don't even read comics in the first place, and I'm not about to listen to a single thing those people say about MY characters, anyway.

But yeah, multiple reasons that go far beyond "nostalgia". It's just a better look, and ALL the reasoning Against is immature nitpicking from people who don't know anything about comics, color theory, or clothing design. Simple as that.

You took the words right out of my mouth and organized them to make sentences I agree with.

I'll do a third with this here.

[TLP]

This is probably my most anticipated movie for next year, along with Civil War.

[ProactiveMan]

This is probably my most anticipated movie for next year, along with Civil War.

That avatar is pretty awesome.

Anyway, the no trunks thing is indicative of a wider problem with escapist movies of late, and that's an unthinking drive for bogus realism.

They insist that they are making movies that are 'grounded in reality', and so they eliminate elements that they categorise as outdated or silly, but then go on to create something that is just as ludicrous, but in a different way. Like the most recent Batman movies. I like them a lot, but I'm not a huge fan of the Batman design, which is someone's idea of a 'real-world' version of Batman. OK, a wealthy guy in grey spandex isn't going to work in the real world, but neither is a wealthy guy in fake rubber body armour. There is no way he's jumping around in all of that stuff, so why make him ugly for no good reason.

They did the same thing to James Bond, and while I like those movies too, the smug insistence that they are gritty and realistic turns me off a little. So James Bond isn't driving around Venice in a hover converted gondola, fine, but he is still jumping off of construction cranes without breaking his legs, and shooting foreign nationals in-front of a consulate full of diplomats without starting WWIII.

Superman looks good in trunks and that's all the reason you need as far as I'm concerned. In the featurette where they discussed removing the trunks, they said they did it because they wanted to 'update' the design and no one could think of a reason to keep them. Lame! They wanted to 86 the cape at one point too - I wouldn't have watched it if they had done that.

[Slade]

As much as I wish they'd put the trunks back on him, the Man of Steel suit is a millions times better than the t-shirt and jeans look......:x

[Leo656]

You ain't kidding on THAT one, son. More nonsense trying to woo the Marvel fans. Marvel fans ain't getting into Superman, period, on the whole they're way too cynical. They need to stop going for that audience. It's an Elvis/Beatles thing; you simply can't like both equally and you can't "convert" people who like the other one more.

Whenever they interview those costume designers for the Superman movies and TV shows, it's always the same thing as to WHY they start looking to screw with things: "Well, I personally was never a fan of the character..." :roll: SO WHY did you get put on this project? There's not someone out there in the WHOLE world who'd actually give enough of a sh*t about Superman, who can also sew, who would NOT want to put their own grimy little fingerprints all over something millions of people enjoy just the way it is? I mean, I f***ing hate Power Rangers. So if someone offered me the job to do designs for Power Rangers, I'd f***ing turn it down. I wouldn't go trying to turn it into "MY version" just because. I get that work is work, but these people can't help but try and "fix" things that don't need any fixin'.

Goes back forever. When they were developing "Lois & Clark" for TV, they had a bunch of ideas, including: All black, no cape, all black AND no cape, black and silver... and at one point, when someone MADE them actually try and get him to look like the comic book, they decided on the red and blue... with BLACK trunks. :roll: I assume at that point someone actually showed the costume designer what the costume actually looks like, and that's when they gave up and just gave us the real suit. But yeah, people are always trying to screw with it. And it's always someone who doesn't even care, thus their cavalier attitude. You gotta wonder how much money they waste on all those concept sketches and actual physical mock-ups, when nobody at all complains if you just use the regular suit from the comics. Should be simple. Getting the blue and red correct should be the only "problem" you have. Anything else, you're over-thinking it.

Proactive, you're on point, my dude. I like the Nolan flicks, but that suit was garbage. Batman doesn't look like he dipped himself in glue and rolled around in a pile of scrap metal, "realistic" or no. I'm like, "It's a comic book. They always say he wears all that armor UNDER the costume, why couldn't they have just said that?" Instead we get three movies of that hideous junk. In 2015, we shouldn't be super-pumped that a Batman movie is actually using the suit from the comics! But here we are. :lol:

[sdp]

The "underwear" look of Batman/Superman and whatnot is ingrained in our brains since we've been kids so of course it looks really weird to see superheroes without them however as much as I dislike the lack of "underwear" I've slowly come around, it really isn't that bad people just don't want to give it a chance. I'll still take the classic look but I've slowly been able to enjoy their new look.

As far as film, I totally understand the lack of underpants, some things just don't work in live action and while it'll be cool and I'm thinking it'll eventually happen I think it also has a chance of looking as ridiculous as the bat nipples. Remember how awful the "white" eyes looked in The Dark Knight? At first I thought it looked cool but upon repeated viewings it looks bad. Who knows, the trailer for BvS the "white" eyes works but we'll see. That's just an example of how some things from comics just don't translate well to live action. Let's also not forget that Leo will never be happy with anything he enjoys..:lol:

[Amaranthus]

I really like the Arkham Knight costume.
Don't hurt me.

[The Stryker]

Buncha pics so spoilered.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6siOJWcAAsB50.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6wH4eWIAQ6kPp.jpg:large
http://media.comicbook.com/uploads1/2015/07/ben-affleck-bruce-wayne-142342.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6kWjBWIAAANk0.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6kXoeWUAANu5A.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6kWr1WgAA_yPv.jpg

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

Pretty sure it's not actually underwear, it's a part of the costume in a different color to break up the monotonousness off otherwise boring and off putting costumes.

Seriously, that joke is just as overused as people joking about wares being free that have bar codes that won't scan in a cash register. Heard it a million times, and it wasn't funny the first time.

The whole under pants on the outside look is based on Victorian era strong men and classic Greek heroes. It was meant to represent strength.

[plastroncafe]

Anyone else disturbed by the photoshopping of Wondy's neck on the cover image?

[Amaranthus]

Anyone else disturbed by the photoshopping of Wondy's neck on the cover image?

I'm disturbed by how ridiculously huge Batman looks.

[sdp]

I don't know why I'm still so hyped about this movie when I thought I was all superhero'd out. I guess it's only towards Marvel characters or Marvel cookie-cutter movies? Sorry don't mean to bash Marvel in the DC thread but those pics got me hyped.

[plastroncafe]

See, where as I'm just the opposite.

I couldn't stand "Man of Steel" and while I'm morbidly curious to see Affleck as Bats....because I'm curious to see if he can actually pull off a good Bruce and Batman -- A feat, that in my opinion no one who isn't Kevin Conroy has been able to accomplish -- I have absolutely no interest what so ever in this movie.

And that's not even touching the Wonder Woman aspect of it.

[CyberCubed]

See, where as I'm just the opposite.

I couldn't stand "Man of Steel" and while I'm morbidly curious to see Affleck as Bats....because I'm curious to see if he can actually pull off a good Bruce and Batman -- A feat, that in my opinion no one who isn't Kevin Conroy has been able to accomplish -- I have absolutely no interest what so ever in this movie.

And that's not even touching the Wonder Woman aspect of it.

So why not just see the movie since its the first one with Batman and Superman together? If you don't like it, don't watch the sequels. But I feel this will be interesting for novelty sake alone.

[Candy Kappa]

See, where as I'm just the opposite.

I couldn't stand "Man of Steel" and while I'm morbidly curious to see Affleck as Bats....because I'm curious to see if he can actually pull off a good Bruce and Batman -- A feat, that in my opinion no one who isn't Kevin Conroy has been able to accomplish -- I have absolutely no interest what so ever in this movie.

And that's not even touching the Wonder Woman aspect of it.

Adam West did a great Batman and Bruce Wayne, though.

[CyberCubed]

Bale did a good Bruce Wayne, even if his Batman voice sucked.

[plastroncafe]

So why not just see the movie since its the first one with Batman and Superman together? If you don't like it, don't watch the sequels. But I feel this will be interesting for novelty sake alone.

Because I have no interest to sit through another Man of Steel, no matter how enticing the Batman may be.

Adam West did a great Batman and Bruce Wayne, though.

Oooooh, okay. I might have to reconsider my standpoint. I mean, I'm not a huge fan of that style of Batman in general, but....that shouldn't negate West's contribution.

Bale did a good Bruce Wayne, even if his Batman voice sucked.

Where as Keaton was the way better Batman, but he didn't look so much the Bruce Wayne part.

[Cure]

I think Clooney did the best Bruce Wayne. I buy him as a charismatic and suave playboy. He is one, pretty much. I dunno who I'd consider the best Batman.

[CyberCubed]

Because I have no interest to sit through another Man of Steel, no matter how enticing the Batman may be..

I didn't like Man of Steel either, but this looks like it will be much more interesting. Besides what happened in one movie has no bearing on another even if they are sequels, we know that as one sequel can suck but another can be great, etc.

Also Wonder Woman on the big screen, isn't that what females have been clamoring for? I just hope she's not a love interest for Superman like in the New 52 comic. *shudders*

[sdp]

I know MoS gets a lot of hate but while flawed I thought it was a fairly good movie. I think people aren't fair to Snyder though, I also liked Watchmen which got a lot of heat when it was released. I only did watch MoS once so I'm unsure how it holds up on a second viewing but I look forward to watching it early next year.

[B-Man]

I think Clooney did the best Bruce Wayne. I buy him as a charismatic and suave playboy. He is one, pretty much. I dunno who I'd consider the best Batman.

Yeah, Clooney fitted Bruce Wayne like a glove. He'd be a good old grizzled Batman today. I've always thought Keaton was easily the best Batman. Dude knew how to carry the suit the best, walking around like a boss and his voice.... He was the man.

With his tall frame & stubbled chin, Affleck seems born to wear the batsuit. I have no doubt he'll destroy. It's his Wayne I'm more concerned about. He's always come across down to earth & likeable but there's nothing naturally cool or swuave about him & you can always tell when he's trying. Also, it's hard to picture him coming across as 'seasoned', like someone who has seen some sh*t in his time. His part in Hollywoodland gives me hope, though.

[Commenter 42]

Clooney and Affleck have the arrogance of Bruce Wayne, sure. I wonder if Affleck might be too earnest a Batman though.

Watched Gone girl and John Wick this past weekend. Affleck is still as hate-able as ever, while John Wick was every bit as good and refreshing as the internet said it was. I couldn't help but think how many elements of Wick nailed, that other CBM's miss, particularly Batman.

[Leo656]

Shame on absolutely all of you.

[plastroncafe]

Also Wonder Woman on the big screen, isn't that what females have been clamoring for? I just hope she's not a love interest for Superman like in the New 52 comic. *shudders*

I don't know what females have been clamoring for, but I know that women and girls have been angling for more Wondy for ages now.

But...I just don't trust the people behind the wheel enough to be excited for her first foray on the big screen. Sorry. I've been to DC panels. I've heard their creators speak. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

And that's just for what they did to Green Lantern.

As for the rest....
Clooney is almost too pretty to be Bruce, which is why I prefer Bale in that role. He's handsome, but not...prohibitively so. I just...ugh, his Batman voice. That did not work for me.

Keaton was the best cinematic Batman, but much as I love Keaton's work...he's not what I imagine Bruce Wayne to look like.

Maybe with a better Director/Script we could have gotten something better out of Kilmer? Maybe?

[Commenter 42]

Shame on absolutely all of you.

now now,

Don't start! :P

[Slade]

now now,

Don't start! :P

Ha, no I agree with him :lol:

[Commenter 42]

Ha, no I agree with him :lol:

If you encourage him, it's gonna be a three pager minimum. Prepare thyself.

[Slade]

I'm actually aiming for it :P

[Commenter 42]

Well...you asked or it.

I'm still nursing my black eye from the last time..

And the time before that. (http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=52464&page=6)

[Turo602]

On the topic of Man of Steel, I thought it was pretty good. I found a few things questionable which worries me about this movie but overall I liked it very much. As someone who grew up watching the Reeve films and later Superman Returns, Man of Steel really blew me away. It was the first time I felt I was watching Superman in real life. The combination of Henry Cavill, the suit, and the little details like how Superman creates a sonic boom when he's flying at high speed, or how the skin around his eyes glow right before he's about to use his heat vision, and how the gravity around him changes when he flies really brought the character to life.

Henry Cavill's Superman is just so surreal to me as is Ben Affleck's Batman. Which brings me to Lex Luthor and Wonder Woman. Jesse Eisenberg and Gal Gadot just don't convince me they're Lex Luthor and Wonder Woman. Superman and Batman look like they were ripped right out of the comics but I don't really see that when I see Gal Gadot in costume and Jesse Eisenberg is just Jesse Eisenberg. I can only hope they look a lot better on film and give one hell of a performance.

I also mentioned before how Man of Steel had some questionable elements, for example, Krypton, the Codex, Jonathan Kent's death, the set-up for Superman killing Zod, the shifts in genre, and the pacing. I either didn't know how to feel about those things or felt they could have been handled better. Stuff like that is exactly why it's hard for me to hold Man of Steel in high regard and what I kind of expect from Batman v Superman. I really appreciate how much attention to detail Zack Snyder pays when creating this universe but if Man of Steel is anything to go by, I'm not going to be 100% on board with his vision. Which is very disappointing because I want badly for this film to be the greatest thing ever. With that said, even if Dawn of Justice turns out to be a major letdown, I just know it's going to be worth the watch for the fight alone. That much should get any fan excited.

[Commenter 42]

Both men look like padded synthol goofs.
pX1UKEIFICg

[Turo602]

Set videos of the new Ninja Turtles movie goes in the TMNT Movie Discussion forum.

[Amaranthus]

Set videos of the new Ninja Turtles movie goes in the TMNT Movie Discussion forum.

Have my babies, please.

[plastroncafe]

Set videos of the new Ninja Turtles movie goes in the TMNT Movie Discussion forum.

Well done!
Nicely played!

[CyberCubed]

Anyone think Bale looked sort of like Tom Cruise in Batman Begins? His younger look with his pair parted or in front of his face as young Bruce made him look a lot like that.

[Leo656]

Yeah, little bit.

[Leo656]

OKAY. Strap ya'self in. I stumbled across this through Superman Homepage. Apparently, the person who shared this on IMDB has revealed several accurate leaks recently about the movie, including stuff from some of the pics we saw the other day. Like always, still rumors and "grain of salt" and blah blah blah... but everything in here fits closely with everything we already know as Fact. And we DO know a lot if we've been paying attention.

And IF this is true... it's pretty much gonna be the Best Thing Ever. Big, sure. Probably about 3 solid hours. But it's definitely the scope this kind of movie should have. And as I've predicted, it's gonna be the most faithful comic adaptation since Watchmen. Not 100%... but about 96%, and that's close enough for me. IF this is true. Which it very well seems to be...


Long, and spoils the ENTIRE movie IF it's true. SO, proceed with caution.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2975590/board/thread/245196525

"Three years after the Battle of Metropolis, Clark Kent is protecting the world as Superman and working as a reporter for the Daily Planet newspaper. Superman has become a controversial figure, with some blaming him for the destruction caused by General Zod and others believing him to be a hero. Lois Lane is covering the civil war on Khandaq in the Middle East, while Clark is forced to cover minor stories. He befriends Jim Olsen, a photographer who lost his legs in Zod's invasion, but doesn't blame Superman, and applied for the Daily Planet because they defend Superman, and they cover a football game between Metropolis and Gotham City in which Clark meets Victor Stone, a quarterback for the Metropolis team whose father, Dr. Silas Stone, is an robotic engineer at S.T.A.R. Labs who spearheaded a new high-tech prosthesis program which includes Jim's legs.

Bruce Wayne was in Metropolis during Zod's invasion and believes Superman to be a threat, elaborating counter-measures to disable him if necessary. He's also funding an effort to rebuild a vacant area of Gotham with new housing projects for low-income families. As Batman, he's been active for 15 years, but remains a fugitive of justice that many believe to be an urban legend. Clark has been studying the Batman's sightings despite his editor, Perry White, not seeing any potential in that story.

Lex Luthor funded Metropolis' rebuilding after Zod's invasion and has been contracted by the United States government to reverse-engineer leftover Kryptonian technology for them. Luthor believes Superman to be a threat and runs a smear campaign against him through the media vehicles he owns, and is funding the development of anti-Superman weapons, including Kryptonite, which is created through exposure to energy from the World Engine. Luthor also has collected Zod's body and harvested his DNA, using technology based on the Genesis Chamber to craft a biotechnological weapon that could fight Superman.

Senator Veronica Cale is supervising Luthor's experiments, but believes the biotechnological weapon shouldn't be deployed due to potential backlash given many still regard Superman as a hero, something Luthor seeks to rectify.

Luthor has also been monitoring other individuals with super-humans powers umbeknowst to the government, and has captured and experimented on several of them through Cadmus, a LexCorp subsidiary dedicated on genetic research. A paramilitary team under LexCorp's employ, led by his head of security Anatoly Kniazev ambushes Aquaman after luring him into a trap in a LexCorp oil rig and captures him, bringing him to Cadmus for experimentation. Luthor's activities have attracted the attention of Diana, princess of Themyscira, who is on Men's World masquerading as a wealthy humanitarian. She connects Luthor to the string of disappearances she's been been investigating and decides to pursue that lead to Metropolis.

Clark calls Lois in Khandaq, which doesn't allow Superman in their airspace. The camp is attacked by rebels and Superman springs to action to help Lois and the soldiers, in the process causing an international incident. Lois returns to Metropolis, while Cale uses the incident to convince the American Congress that Superman represents a potential political liability if they continue to harbor him. Superman is later informed by General Swanwick, one of his fiercest supporters within the government, that the Congress has ordered him to attend a summit in Washington, D.C. to discuss his place in the world. The aftermath of Superman's actions in the Middle East are observed by Bruce, Diana and Luthor.

Bruce finds out about Luthor's research on anti-Superman weapons and travels to Metropolis with Alfred Pennyworth under the pretext of meeting Luthor to discuss a partnership to rebrand Gotham's impoverished neighborhoods in order to learn more. Bruce doesn't trust Luthor with alien technology as much as he doesn't trust Superman.

Luthor promotes a fundraiser for the Metropolis Museum, the building where Zod was murdered, something which he makes sure to point out. Clark, Lois and Jim are covering the event, with Bruce, Alfred, Diana, Kniazev and Luthor's private assistant Mercy Graves in attendance. Clark interviews Bruce and questions him about the Batman, Bruce dances and flirts with Diana, who also scans Kniazev. Bruce and Luthor have a brief argument in which Bruce plants a device in Luthor's phone, so he can steal the access passwords to LexCorp Tower and infiltrate it, using a signal jammer to evade security.

Batman steals data about Luthor's projects, but an algorithm projected by Luthor adapts to the jammer and alerts security. Batman evades Kniazev and his men, but is then confronted by Superman, who believes him to a criminal. Batman refuses to surrender and, after a brief confrontation, escapes from Superman in the Batmobile. Batman sightings in Metropolis are enough for Lois and Clark to convince Perry to let them go to Gotham for a more extensive investigation. Luthor later reviews footage of Superman and Batman's encounter acquired by the government's satellites and retrieves the signal jammer Batman left behind, which gives Luthor an idea.

Superman arrives at the summit, with the entire world watching. Senator Cale accuses him of being dangerous, and Superman defends himself and explains his ideals. The Congress pushes for Superman to swear allegiance to them, including disclosing secrets of his identity and upbringing, but Superman refuses, claiming he will not become a tool of the government.

Superman hears Batman's signal jammer and feels weak. He loses control of his powers and the building is evacuated just as it explodes, injuring several people and killing General Swanwick. Senator Cale accuses Superman of being the culprint, and he is forced to escape when the military intervene. Superman is declared a public enemy, while Luthor is informed that the Kryptonite has been a success.

Clark returns to the damaged building and locates Batman's signal jammer, and becomes convinced that Batman framed him and is indirectly responsible for General Swanwick's death. Superman returns to Metropolis in search of Batman, but Bruce manages to evade him. He learns about Kryptonite from Luthor's files and steals samples from it from a LexCorp outpost stationed in the Indian Ocean where the World Engine has first activated.

Meanwhile, Diana lures Kniazev and his men into a trap and confronts them. Kniazev escapes, but Diana manages to interrogate one of his soldiers, using the Lasse of Truth to force him into revealing where the super-humans are being taken.


(Cont.)

[Leo656]

Batman attracts Superman to the abandoned neighborhood being rebuilt by Wayne Enterprises and fights him with an armored suit, Kryptonite-based weapons and several buildings and vehicles that have been booby-trapped with Batman's arsenal of anti-Superman weapons. The fight is vicious and ends with Superman victorious. Batman urges Superman to kill him, but Superman refuses. Batman then reveals that the fight was designed to test Superman.

When pressed for the signal jammer, Batman declares innocence, and they join forces to locate the true mastermind behind the conspiracy. Simultaneously, Diana locates the Cadmus facility in the outskirts of Metropolis and observers the experiments being conducted therein, particularly on Aquaman, and the ongoing development of the biotechnological weapon, Doomsday.

Wonder Woman infiltrates the facility and rescues Aquaman, but he leaves her behind and returns to the ocean. Luthor's men, armed with advanced weaponry, spring to action, forcing Wonder Woman to flee. Luthor later informs Cale that the Cadmus facility has been compromised, and that they only have no resort to protect their careers.

Batman leads Superman to the Batcave, where they deduce Luthor is behind everything. Diana arrives and reveals that she knows their secret and exposes Luthor's experiments at Cadmus. Superman is infuriated that Luthor has been weaponizing the technology stolen from Zod, as he still blames himself for all the damage it caused.

Superman introduces Lois to Batman and Wonder Woman and they join forces to expose Luthor. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman attack the Cadmus facility to rescue the remaining prisoners, but are then attacked by Doomsday, who has been deployed by Luthor and Cale. Superman fights Doomsday while Wonder Woman helps the remaining prisoners to flee and Batman retrieves data from the Cadmus' servers and fights Kniazev. Meanwhile, Lois infiltrates LexCorp Tower using the signal jammer while Jimmy creates a distraction to find a way to disable Doomsday.

Doomsday marches to Metropolis, and Cale learns that Luthor has sub-programming in Doomsday to maximime collateral damage to further damage Superman's reputation. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman battle Doomsday in Metropolis, and are joined by Aquaman, who wants to repay his debt to Wonder Woman and get revenge against Luthor. Together, the heroes manage to minimize collateral damage and avoid innocent casualties, but Doomsday is still able to adapt to their abilities and overpower them in combat.

Mercy catches Lois and they have a fight, but Lois manages to locate Doomsday's systems and insert a sub-routine that allows Alfred to disable the servers. Cale attempts to terminate Doomsday, but Luthor reveals that she can't. When she attempts to expose Luthor, he kills them and makes it appear to be suicide.

Without LexCorp satellites uploading battle tactics directly into his mind, Doomsday becomes more vulnerable to attacks, but continues wreaking havoc and causing wanton destruction. Victor is caught in the crossfire while helping innocents and severely injured. With Batman, Wonder Woman and Aquaman all struggling to protect the innocent, Superman realizes what he must do and soars into Space with Doomsday. He flies into the Sun, with Doomsday still trying to kill him, and they disappear in an explosion.

Superman is believed to have sacrificed himself, but emerges from the Sun and returns to Earth as the planet celebrates his victory.

A few days later, Superman speaks to the Congress once again and speaks in favor of his new allies, as Batman is embraced by the public as reality and the police charges against him called into question, Wonder Woman continues helping people in impoverished countries, Aquaman continues fighting for the environment, Victor is transferred to S.T.A.R. Labs' C.Y.B.O.R.G. Program, Senator Cale is framed of having authorized Doomsday's deployment, and, although Luthor covers up his involvement, his role in creating Doomsday and other Kryptonite-based weapons is exposed and his company loses its military contracts as a result. Superman concludes his statement by revealing that "a new age is dawning."

Luthor is drinking in his office when Superman arrives and they discuss recent events separated by a glass window. Luthor accuses Superman of being the end of human achievements, Superman claims that Luthor takes himself as superior to other humans, and is terrified that for all its wealth and power he is still beneath all the heroes that fought in Metropolis and fight everyday for an ideal grander than themselves. The ideal of justice. Luthor vows to destroy Superman. Superman claims he'll be waiting.

The script concludes with Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and Aquaman meeting at Kent Farm to discuss Luthor's actions. Superman points out Luthor won't stop, and there'll be others like him. Aquaman claims to have affairs in his "home", but is willing to assist if necessary, as the heroes have earned his respect. After he departs, Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman decide to find others like them of this new emerging race of meta-humans to form a line of defense against Earth and those who seek to bring it harm. Batman points out to reports of a red blur in Central City stopping bank robbers.

Superman asks what happens next. Wonder Woman says "recruitment"."


SO. I need a f*cking towel. That's even better than what I was expecting. Which was pretty much That, but... Not quite as textured and detailed. They REALLY did the homework for this one. Halfway through I lost track of all the threads from various big comics storylines that were woven into it. And it all fits so well. I REALLY hope it's legit. Because it simply doesn't get any better than that.

[Commenter 42]

And as I've predicted, it's gonna be the most faithful comic adaptation since Watchmen. Not 100%... but about 96%, and that's close enough for me. IF this is true. Which it very well seems to be...

SPOILERY SPOILER SPOIL.........


SO. I need a f*cking towel. That's even better than what I was expecting. Which was pretty much That, but... Not quite as textured and detailed. They REALLY did the homework for this one. Halfway through I lost track of all the threads from various big comics storylines that were woven into it. And it all fits so well. I REALLY hope it's legit. Because it simply doesn't get any better than that.

The 4% missing?

His red briefs.


http://www.operatorchan.org/n/src/142869192570.jpg

But seriously - I don't want to spoil it for myself, so I didn't read.

BUT do me a favour, and save a copy somewhere, so in 12 months we can see how close they were.

But if this is out already...going to be a long 12 months.

[Leo656]

I don't care if things are spoiled for me so long as they turn out good. :tgrin: It's always neat to see how close reality matches my mental picture, or doesn't.

Lotta story for a 3-hour movie... but WHAT a story. And if true, it brings every lingering thread from MoS to a natural, logical conclusion, as promised. And it's so the opposite of the "cram everything we can in there" approach of the TMNT flicks. There's stuff that was very carefully and delicately extracted from dozens of the greatest books and sewn into a larger tapestry, and it all fits very organically. A perfect streamlining of the larger DC canon in a way that fits a movie-style universe. If legit, it does a terrific job in quite literally making this movie a grand evolution from MoS into the larger cinematic DCU. AND, as I predicted, Superman ultimately and fully earns the mantle of "Earth's Greatest Hero". No more "shades of gray" or confusion by the end of this joint... the Good Guys and Bad Guys are fully established, and we head full-throttle into Justice League. Awesome.

Seems like the "dark and bleak" stuff was all part of the slow build, to have (for a change) the super-heroes have to earn society's trust. Which is different for this kind of movie, it makes sense, story-wise, and I love it. It's very apparent to me that there really was a larger vision in place from the beginning that most people couldn't envision because certain things hadn't been revealed yet, or were being saved for this and future movies. But it all pays off a lot of "questionable" things from MoS, by way of things like "character evolution" and "plot development"... Who'da thunk it? :lol: And again, it's all SO straight from the canon, which matters to me, because movies never just do the books, and it seems like that's the FIRST approach they should be taking. Simply put, this is the kind of movie the hardest of hardcore DC comics fans have been hoping and dreaming of for just f*cking forever. IF it's legit. I really hope it is.

Long wait, sure, but I expect it'll be worth it. If the rumors are true about Capt. Kirk getting the Hal Jordan gig for Justice League, they can go ahead and sign me up in advance for that flick, too. :lol:

Oh god, I just realized that with all this stuff about the JLA interacting with the US gov't, that they're almost definitely gonna introduce Max Lord as their government-appointed liason at the beginning of the JLA movie... and then you have your NEXT 2 or 3 movies already in the can, what with Checkmate, Brother Eye, OMAC... and all the associated Batman stuff... and with Cadmus, I see Clone Superboy becoming a reality in the Superman series at some point. I see lots of things. And I'm very pleased with what I see.

Let's hope this dude ain't jackin' us off. :lol:

[Turo602]

I couldn't resist but if true, I think most of my doubts can be put to rest, at least story wise. Hopefully it doesn't turn out to be one of those things that sounds great on paper but comes up short everywhere else. It's definitely reassuring but I'm more interested in seeing how all these events play out on film, that is, if any of it is true. So I'm not gonna get too excited just yet, but it does sound great.

[Commenter 42]

I don't know dude, I have a really hard time trusting Snyder.
I remember reading a fantastic script in 2008, where they tied the events of TF1 into Generation 1, a 140 page script of pure awesome. Took a long cold shower after reading that sh-t.

It looked 100% legit. I was really excited, thinking finally, we'll see the real TF in a live action movie! The first was just a mulligan! Prime was back as a peterbuilt, bumblebee was a VW Bug. There were scenes on the arc, scenes on cybertron...

I thought, "everyone's gonna be so thrilled with Transformers 2!"

So, yeah...

I mean, who takes the time to write a140 page hoax? A script of such elaborate design, a script that sounds incredible!

To go to all that trouble...

Yeah...

[Leo656]

Reason I think it's legit is I've been following the entire thing pretty obsessively, as I do with all Superman movie projects, and the "leak" fits almost exactly with things that are already Fact, things that have already been spoiled. The broad strokes of the plot have already been spoiled. There's only so many ways they can take A, B, C, and tie it all together into a narrative. What surprises me, is not the story/sequence of events - that's literally the exact plot I expected the movie to have for months now - but rather how DEEP and how well put together it is. Just like with MoS, you have someone in Snyder who actually READ the books - not just cherry-picked cover images, like Singer or Liebsman do with their super-hero movies, and sat down with someone and said, "How do we make a story that is quite literally a love letter to the comic books?" And it's perfect. The story is Perfect, with all of its nuances and Easter Eggs and payoffs from the first movie and planting seeds for the next. Now it just has to look good. And I know Snyder's visual style is largely a matter of taste, but I think the Story will win over those who think his color palette is too drab.

I'm inclined to think it's real. It reminds me a lot of the leaks I found of Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith back in the day. I can't remember where but I'd already read the entire plot for both of those about 6 months in advance, too, and it was all legit. Stuff gets out, somehow.

In this case, since the reaction to the "leak" has been universally Positive, I'm inclined to think WB simply doesn't care. Or even allowed it, to assuage people's fears. I mean so much of the buzz has been mixed, this kind of thing can easily win over a lot of people who were on the fence expecting it to be something it's not.

OR I'm just being hopeful because it's exactly the story as it SHOULD be. :lol: But I think it's legit. Apparently most of this dude's leaks in the past were accurate. We'll see. Can't wait.

[Commenter 42]

Now it just has to look good. And I know Snyder's visual style is largely a matter of taste, but I think the Story will win over those who think his color palette is too drab.

You know what I think, but yeah, enough with the hyper contrasted bleach bypass monocromatic high pass off-set. It's ugly.


Apparently most of this dude's leaks in the past were accurate. We'll see. Can't wait.

I'm glad you're excited. I'm glad because I know that if you've nit picked stuff as much as I have, and you are thinking this is awesome, then good. I'm happy you're possibly getting a movie that speaks like that to you. It's rare, but when it happens, feels like Christmas in you brain.

Wish I could join you on that ride.

[Leo656]

I think it's going to look a lot different than MoS. Probably paced better, too. It's easy to forget but a lot of MoS was made in a panic, because they had to have a certain amount of it finished by a certain date or it would affect the Siegel lawsuit. Meanwhile, I think this one is all pretty much in the can already and they're spending the next 9 months polishing the visuals and such. I also don't expect a ton of annoying randomly-placed flashback scenes. Pretty sure this movie is much more linear, other than the fact that we know they have a brief flashback to the Waynes' murder.

Point being, I think they paid attention to a lot of what people were saying. :) I expect a similar but very different experience this time out.

[Xiewin]

Batman attracts Superman to the abandoned neighborhood being rebuilt by Wayne Enterprises and fights him with an armored suit, Kryptonite-based weapons and several buildings and vehicles that have been booby-trapped with Batman's arsenal of anti-Superman weapons. The fight is vicious and ends with Superman victorious. Batman urges Superman to kill him, but Superman refuses. Batman then reveals that the fight was designed to test Superman.

When pressed for the signal jammer, Batman declares innocence, and they join forces to locate the true mastermind behind the conspiracy. Simultaneously, Diana locates the Cadmus facility in the outskirts of Metropolis and observers the experiments being conducted therein, particularly on Aquaman, and the ongoing development of the biotechnological weapon, Doomsday.

Wonder Woman infiltrates the facility and rescues Aquaman, but he leaves her behind and returns to the ocean. Luthor's men, armed with advanced weaponry, spring to action, forcing Wonder Woman to flee. Luthor later informs Cale that the Cadmus facility has been compromised, and that they only have no resort to protect their careers.

Batman leads Superman to the Batcave, where they deduce Luthor is behind everything. Diana arrives and reveals that she knows their secret and exposes Luthor's experiments at Cadmus. Superman is infuriated that Luthor has been weaponizing the technology stolen from Zod, as he still blames himself for all the damage it caused.

Superman introduces Lois to Batman and Wonder Woman and they join forces to expose Luthor. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman attack the Cadmus facility to rescue the remaining prisoners, but are then attacked by Doomsday, who has been deployed by Luthor and Cale. Superman fights Doomsday while Wonder Woman helps the remaining prisoners to flee and Batman retrieves data from the Cadmus' servers and fights Kniazev. Meanwhile, Lois infiltrates LexCorp Tower using the signal jammer while Jimmy creates a distraction to find a way to disable Doomsday.

Doomsday marches to Metropolis, and Cale learns that Luthor has sub-programming in Doomsday to maximime collateral damage to further damage Superman's reputation. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman battle Doomsday in Metropolis, and are joined by Aquaman, who wants to repay his debt to Wonder Woman and get revenge against Luthor. Together, the heroes manage to minimize collateral damage and avoid innocent casualties, but Doomsday is still able to adapt to their abilities and overpower them in combat.

Mercy catches Lois and they have a fight, but Lois manages to locate Doomsday's systems and insert a sub-routine that allows Alfred to disable the servers. Cale attempts to terminate Doomsday, but Luthor reveals that she can't. When she attempts to expose Luthor, he kills them and makes it appear to be suicide.

Without LexCorp satellites uploading battle tactics directly into his mind, Doomsday becomes more vulnerable to attacks, but continues wreaking havoc and causing wanton destruction. Victor is caught in the crossfire while helping innocents and severely injured. With Batman, Wonder Woman and Aquaman all struggling to protect the innocent, Superman realizes what he must do and soars into Space with Doomsday. He flies into the Sun, with Doomsday still trying to kill him, and they disappear in an explosion.

Superman is believed to have sacrificed himself, but emerges from the Sun and returns to Earth as the planet celebrates his victory.

A few days later, Superman speaks to the Congress once again and speaks in favor of his new allies, as Batman is embraced by the public as reality and the police charges against him called into question, Wonder Woman continues helping people in impoverished countries, Aquaman continues fighting for the environment, Victor is transferred to S.T.A.R. Labs' C.Y.B.O.R.G. Program, Senator Cale is framed of having authorized Doomsday's deployment, and, although Luthor covers up his involvement, his role in creating Doomsday and other Kryptonite-based weapons is exposed and his company loses its military contracts as a result. Superman concludes his statement by revealing that "a new age is dawning."

Luthor is drinking in his office when Superman arrives and they discuss recent events separated by a glass window. Luthor accuses Superman of being the end of human achievements, Superman claims that Luthor takes himself as superior to other humans, and is terrified that for all its wealth and power he is still beneath all the heroes that fought in Metropolis and fight everyday for an ideal grander than themselves. The ideal of justice. Luthor vows to destroy Superman. Superman claims he'll be waiting.

The script concludes with Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and Aquaman meeting at Kent Farm to discuss Luthor's actions. Superman points out Luthor won't stop, and there'll be others like him. Aquaman claims to have affairs in his "home", but is willing to assist if necessary, as the heroes have earned his respect. After he departs, Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman decide to find others like them of this new emerging race of meta-humans to form a line of defense against Earth and those who seek to bring it harm. Batman points out to reports of a red blur in Central City stopping bank robbers.

Superman asks what happens next. Wonder Woman says "recruitment"."



Well that just made my entire day.

[Leo656]

http://supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=16636

In the special Entertainment Weekly Comic-Con Preview magazine, director Zack Snyder talks about how "Man of Steel" will lead in to "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice", and speaks directly about the damage seen in the final battle between Superman and Zod, and the criticism the movie received because of that death and destruction.

"I was surprised because that's the thesis of Superman for me, that you can't just have superheroes knock around and have there be no consequences," says Snyder. The director says he had always intended for the dead to be counted. Indeed, Batman v Superman addresses these concerns head-on - Superman's victims serve as Batman's impetus to take him down. "One of the things I liked was Zack's idea of showing accountability and the consequences of violence and seeing that there are real people in those buildings," says Ben Affleck, who plays Batman. "And in fact, one of those buildings was Bruce Wayne's building so he knew people who died in that Black Zero event."

"There are other superhero movies where they joke about how basically no one's getting hurt," Snyder says. "That's not us. What is that message? That's it's okay that there's this massive destruction with zero consequence for anyone? That's what Watchmen was about in a lot of ways too. There was a scene, that scene where Dan and Laurie get mugged. They beat up the criminals. I was like the first guy, I want to show his arm get broken. I want a compound fracture. I don't want it to be clean. I want you to go, 'Oh my God, I guess you're right. If you just beat up a guy in an alley he's not going to just be lying on the ground. It's going to be messy."
Source: EW.com

[Turo602]

Yeah, I never understood the problem with the destruction in Man of Steel. It's awesome that they're addressing it in Dawn of Justice, but even if they didn't, so what? Most of the destruction came from Zod's world engine. Too many people act like Superman was doing the chaos when it was mostly just Zod throwing him from building to building. And it's not like the buildings even had people in them. It was made clear that people were evacuating the area. Not to mention, most of the city looked fine during Superman and Zod's aerial battle. It was mainly the area affected by the world engine that was destroyed. Also, it's a kryptonian invasion. What else do you expect? Zod's goal was genocide. Superman had no other choice but to stop Zod right there and then. But most importantly, it's fictional. Destruction is cool to see in an epic fight every once in a while. I've seen worse in the Justice League cartoon and everybody seems to be okay with it. So what's the difference now?

[Leo656]

Well, in fairness, I get the complaints because I made them myself. On the drive home from MoS, I said to my wife, "It's gonna be really tough to set him up as Earth's Greatest Hero after that fiasco. If there's any logic to it, then he's gotta be looked at as just as big a menace as Zod. All those people in Smallville and Metropolis saw was guys knocking over buildings and shooting laser beams at each other. Nobody's gonna notice or care that the guy in the cape is supposed to be the 'Good Guy'. They got a lot of work to do in the next one if they wanna put this guy over."

I didn't really have a lot of faith at the time, and was a little annoyed at a ton of things in the movie as I was leaving the theater, but it's grown on me since and I have a much clearer view of the big picture, and the larger story they're trying to tell. It's not just a movie or series about Superman being revealed and taking his place in the world; it's about a world in need of saviors, the emergence of gods among mortal men, and what separates the gods who would save us from the gods who would hurt us, and how humanity reacts to this new age. A lot of that stuff is traditionally kind of glossed over in traditional super-hero fare. Like the Hulk will wreck a city, but other than a little background blurb about how public opinion may be turning against the Avengers, there's no real follow-through or consequence. Clearly, these movies are taking a different approach.
For example, if the bit about Doomsday turns out to be true, with LexCorp implanting a protocol in him that maximizes collateral damage during his fight with Superman, to make Superman to be even more dangerous and out of control, capitalizing on people's fears after Metropolis and trying to turn public opinion against Superman even more... that's brilliant. That's extremely well thought out and it's exactly what Luthor would do. And it links the movies together in a way that shows both consequences and follow-through, which is neat.

[sdp]

Am I the only one that thinks that there's an anti-DC bias on the internet? Marvel is clearly more popular and while I'd like to think we're all objective adults I know otherwise and DC vs Marvel is really no different than Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft where you have fanboys on all sides, but DC is clearly the underdog. No matter what DC does it gets criticized, they really are in a similar situation PR wise like Nintendo. "Why doesn't DC have a cinematic universe?" they decide to go that route and "Why is DC copying MCU?". "Why doesn't DC release non Batman films?", they announce non-Batman films "Why is DC releasing so many superhero movies?". "Why are there no consequences to the battle in MoS?", they address it and now we have "DC is only doing it because fans were complaining". "I don't want DC movies to copy Marvel", "Why aren't DC movies more like Marvel". When you have comments like "Superman is boring" which is the comic industry equivalent to "Nintendo is kiddy", I do think there's an anti-DC bias.

I do think there's starting to be superhero movie fatigue after we saw the B.O. of JW, I think DC's darker direction might be a breath of fresh air in superhero movies. Then again I could be wrong, I predicted the peak of SH movies back in 2012 after Avengers/Watchmen/TDKR since I didn't think the hype of those movies could be topped and it was able to so we'll see.

[plastroncafe]

I think DC's history in the wider market is what's earned DC that bias, rather than it just appearing out of no where fully formed.

But please, keep up the spoilers and leaks, so then I really won't have to pay for a ticket.

[CyberCubed]

This movie will probably be better than a good chunk of the Marvel films.

[Commenter 42]

This movie will probably be better than a good chunk of the Marvel films.

Says the die hard batman fan.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

Am I the only one that thinks that there's an anti-DC bias on the internet? Marvel is clearly more popular and while I'd like to think we're all objective adults I know otherwise and DC vs Marvel is really no different than Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft where you have fanboys on all sides, but DC is clearly the underdog. No matter what DC does it gets criticized, they really are in a similar situation PR wise like Nintendo. "Why doesn't DC have a cinematic universe?" they decide to go that route and "Why is DC copying MCU?". "Why doesn't DC release non Batman films?", they announce non-Batman films "Why is DC releasing so many superhero movies?". "Why are there no consequences to the battle in MoS?", they address it and now we have "DC is only doing it because fans were complaining". "I don't want DC movies to copy Marvel", "Why aren't DC movies more like Marvel". When you have comments like "Superman is boring" which is the comic industry equivalent to "Nintendo is kiddy", I do think there's an anti-DC bias.

I do think there's starting to be superhero movie fatigue after we saw the B.O. of JW, I think DC's darker direction might be a breath of fresh air in superhero movies. Then again I could be wrong, I predicted the peak of SH movies back in 2012 after Avengers/Watchmen/TDKR since I didn't think the hype of those movies could be topped and it was able to so we'll see.

People are weird, basically.

[Leo656]

No, it will be better. Easily. If that script is legit it will easily be the best super-hero film ever made. No question. As long as they didn't somehow leave the lens cap on, or some other disaster on the actual filming side. The story is Golden.

I like the Marvel films, but I'm burned out on super-hero movies that constantly wink at the audience, where the characters sit around having the same "geek" conversations that nerds in comic stores do. Sure, it's "Fun", but I can't take this "We're saving the world!" sh*t seriously when everyone's stopping to crack jokes every two minutes DURING the climactic battle scene.

I know it's "Just Comic Books". And sometimes it's fine. DC/WB shouldn't do those "silly" kinds of super-hero movies right now. For one thing, they're not good at it. For another, there's room for super-hero movies that are actually About Something. Every Marvel movie has almost the exact same story and execution. They make the same movie every time like AC/DC makes the same record every time. Don't get me wrong, I like that movie and that record, but I want More. There's a lot of room to tell much Bigger Stories.

It's a little mind-boggling to me how anyone can claim they're a fan of super-heroes, but not be excited by the fact that That Story Up There might be what we're getting. I mean, if it's real... come on, that's the best script any super-hero movie ever had. IF it's legit, and even if it's Not, then Some Nerd With Too Much Free Time wrote the best super-hero script ever and WB needs to hire the guy immediately. It literally doesn't get any better than that. Unless you're REALLY into "Comic book movies are goofy kids stuff full of jokes and zingers," in which case, I can't help you.

EDIT: Still possibly just rumors... but every other "Major Spoiler" that turned out to be fake was debunked almost immediately. DC/WB are apparently trying to ignore this one completely, and saying Nothing. That's interesting.

[Turo602]

Something I find interesting about the leak regarding the length of Batman's career is that it says

he's been at it for 15 years whereas the reports coming from Entertainment Weekly say 20 years.
I don't know what to make of that but just thought I'd point that out.

[Leo656]

I've also heard the number 10 tossed around. I'm betting in the movie it's "a while", but purposefully vague. You never want to go sticking definitive ages on people or stick too hard to the passage of time in a fictional universe. It's bad enough they specifically said Clark became Superman at 33 in MoS; his "Year One" is always either "vague" or early/mid-20s in the books, and the "present day" always has him be "About 30" but also explaining that he's been Superman for at least 5 years by then. That was one Jesus Metaphor too many, and I'm fine with that stuff normally, but it was pointless, here. It puts his Rookie Year way too late in the game. But it's easy enough to ignore.

Those are little things, though. And EW doesn't really care how accurate they are. People buy it for the pictures.

[Commenter 42]

That was one Jesus Metaphor too many... But it's easy enough to ignore.


Any Jesus/Superman metaphor (beyond his origin story) is one too many.
It's a huge turn off to us secular folks. It doesn't need to be there, at all.

I know I'm belabouring that point, but it was a real piss-off.

[plastroncafe]

Man of Steel: No one has daddy issues like Jesus...er...we mean Superman. Yes. Totally Superman. In conclusion: Superman.

[Commenter 42]

Man of Steel: No one has daddy issues like Jesus...er...we mean Superman. Yes. Totally Superman. In conclusion: Superman.

Except maybe Madonna?

[plastroncafe]

Except maybe Madonna?

Her daddy issues are inversely proportional to Superman's.
The older she gets the less they exist, where as older Superman gets, the more writers like to pile his on.

And in Man of Steel, Kal had not one...but two self-important douchecanoe dads.

[Leo656]

I'm hardly a person of faith, but people think Singer or Snyder invented the whole "Superman Is American Jesus" thing? Or that actually shining a light on it somehow betrays the source? Seriously? And they're getting annoyed with it NOW? It's always been there and it's always been various degrees of explicit.

I mean, it was more literally a Moses allegory at first, but by the time he morphed into the Savior From Above version of the character everyone knows... yeah... American Jesus. I mean yeah, the movies push it a little harder than the TV shows or cartoons do, but come ON, even in the Reeve movies (especially the Donner Cut of II) there's some seriously intense Biblical allegory that was in no way by accident.

If it takes someone framing Routh or Cavill in a literal Crucifix Pose for people to finally see stuff that's been VERY present in the source material for about 50+ years... I don't know. Laying it on thick? Perhaps. But That's The Character. He literally came from Above to Save Us. His Father sent him to us, "from the Heavens", to Save Us. He died and rose from the dead to Save Us Some More!

And there's a reason for this: Not everyone believes in Jesus. But Everyone can believe in Superman. He's actually MORE of a symbol for people who DON'T believe in Christian symbols or religious symbols of any kind. At least, that's the idea behind it. Two Jewish guys created a secular symbol of Hope and Faith for people who don't buy into religion but still want to believe in the basic concepts of Goodness and Decency.

....There's a PROBLEM with that? I seriously don't think so. THAT, I think is people looking specifically for things to be Mad At.

[Commenter 42]

I mean yeah, the movies push it a little harder than the TV shows or cartoons do, but come ON, even in the Reeve movies (especially the Donner Cut of II) there's some seriously intense Biblical allegory that was in no way by accident.

Where? Point it out? There's one line, as I've said, after he saves the kid at Niagra falls. Saying he's Jewish. A throw away line, and off hand joke.

There are no overt Christian themes in the Donner films.


If it takes someone framing Routh or Cavill in a literal Crucifix Pose for people to finally see stuff that's been VERY present in the source material for about 50+ years... I don't know. Laying it on thick?

You know as well as I, Superman wasn't conceived as a Moses allegory in the very beginning. That was added later.

Superman's identity and characterization has always been a moving target. Like so many modern myths, they adapt with the times, mirroring the values of the people telling it. Maybe that's my real beef with Snyders version, I don't know.

The heavy handed Jesus allegory is relatively recent, but again, Superman goes with the flow, I guess. It's the only way anyone can explain the mullet.

Singer's thesis could be read as, "a world without Jesus" sure, but It may also be an meditation on faith in a post 911 society, and if there is still a place for it. The question was have we become too cynical? It's a tough idea, and maybe a little self sabotaging in the end.

Snyder's Storey was on the other hand, straight Christian myth, no chaser. It hammered us with a black and white world, (literally and figuratively). Two messages; First - Zod=Science and Science is bad. Krypton was destroyed by Science. Evolution is evil!
Secondly, the world revolves around you. Supercavil had to learn to shut everyone out, and make the world small. He was taught to exclude everything, and only focus on his own needs, by his Mother. He was told to let the kids on the bus drown, even though he could easily save them, by his Father. Contrast this to Reeve's Parents, and the contrast is as stark as Snyders 300.

Then the rest of the movie happens, where he completes his arc, and becomes the bad-ass city-wrecking murderer fanboys have been screaming for.

This is an Old Testament/Christian Warrior/fundamentalist Superman. Vengeful, egocentric, moody.

These are not the traits of a good person. They're hardly even the traits of a Man, least of all a super one.

Snyders Superman is a mental midget. He can't problem solve, or even think for himself. He's full of incredible power, but can't reason out his dilemmas.

Snyder is shaming the thinking man, and arguing might is right. WTF? When did society turn this corner?

And that's what I find so repulsive. He's not the do onto others Jesus, he's the love me and do what I say or I'll whoop your ass Jesus.

[sdp]

I don't understand the people who say the Nolan universe was "too realistic" for other superheroes to exist in it. It's far from realistic and you can totally have other superheroes in that "universe". Heck Arrow was inspired by the Nolan trilogy and was arguably even more realistic and yet and they introduced superheroes in that universe.

[Bry]

Batman armour on display at Comic-Con:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/53dd1afbe4b0b84c71f80ab2/t/559dc8f9e4b0d1c3984b406c/1436403961615/?format=750w

A bunch more images are here: http://heroichollywood.com/home-1/2015/7/8/batman-v-superman-display-spotted-at-sdcc

Okay. I really didn't like Man of Steel, and I'm really sick of the overwhelming Dark Knight Returns influence on basically everything Batman-related these days... but I've gotta admit, that looks pretty damn cool. It's a bit more "basic" in design than I would have expected, which is refreshing these days, and bonus points for it being an actual, physical costume.

[Leo656]

Siegel and Shuster both said more than once that Moses being sent down the river in a basket was the exact parallel they were making when they decided the specifics of Kal-El's origin. They created the guy, I defer to them. I'm not going to skim every single book, article and interview I have on the subject of Superman, his creators, and what their influences were. Rest assured, it was every bit intentional on their part.

The rest of it, you're not exactly off base but you're looking at it from about one step left of the center.

- For starters, as we've gone over before, this is Superman who doesn't have it all figured out yet. You don't particularly like or want to see that version. That's fine. But other than the films, which always glossed over it, those "early years" Superman stories where he ISN'T perfect, where he DOES have to learn as he goes, and DOES have to make mistakes, have been consistently among the most popular Superman stories. I was among the first to rail against how over-the-top the destruction and violence and city-wrecking was in MoS. But then I considered, this guy just found out most of his powers, like, ten minutes ago, he's had a lifetime of practicing restraint, and now he's getting gang-punched by a bunch of bad guys with All of his Power and None of his restraint, and I calmed down about that. Were I he, in that situation, I don't know how much of that I could've avoided, either. Now, you don't love the idea of Year One Superman, and I get that. Meanwhile, that's no longer relevant going forward, as in BvS he's been Superman for a few years and by all accounts has grown as a character.

- Nobody can forgive or explain how badly Jon Kent was written in MoS and I won't even try. All I can say is, "Birthright" sold a ton so they most likely felt obligated to borrow at least something from it, in this case, the awful portrayal of Jon Kent (Thanks, Mark Waid... NEVER write Superman again, ok?). Ignoring that, though, the broader theme of, "should I keep my powers a secret or reveal them to the world?" has been long accepted as one of the early struggles of Clark. And they're not wrong to go there. Because again, if this DID really happen, if suddenly the world knew there was a guy who could fly and shoot lasers out his eyes, we would be terrified. So they're Right to explore that. I have no problem with a Superman who's self-aware.
And by the end of BvS, he's left that all behind and been embraced by the whole world which no longer hates OR fears him. So again, it's all just part of the backstory, which means it's pretty silly to stay mad about it NOW. It was all part of the Journey and finding his place in the world, and getting them to trust him.
I've always had a huge problem how in most versions of the story, he just shows up with his cape, pulls a cat out of a tree, and the whole world bends over to kiss his ass. That wouldn't happen.

- As for the more "angry", imperfect version of Clark, again, what you're missing or ignoring is, they are doing a very literal, broad-strokes translation of his evolution in the comic books. In his literal earliest days, from 1938-1940, Superman WAS "an eye for an eye", "punch first ask questions later", cocky, arrogant, a show-off, not too concerned about all the damage he caused in his wake... that thing at the end where he trashes the satellite and laughs about it? That is SO much a thing he does, like, allll the time... it was just VERY poorly wedged into the movie (seriously, I do like the movie but the pacing and editing were WAY off) so it was really quite jarring. Regardless, even whenever they revamp him in the comics, though, they make it a POINT to show that Year One Superman is always kind of a dick, until he gets a little more mature and figures out his real place in the Big Picture. He ALWAYS goes through his "wrapping trucks around phone poles because he's annoyed" phase, and then gradually grows out of it. EXCEPT in the Reeve films, which again, are Entirely Their Own Thing. And they are a Good Thing. But they are NOT the Definitive Superman by a long shot.
Other, more subtle touches from the film(s) which illustrate how Snyder is trying to make Superman's movie evolution parallel his comic book version:
- The 1940 version of the S-Shield.
- The police, military and gov't don't trust him, viewing him as a loose cannon or a public menace.
- Superman originally could not fly, he could leap about 1/8th of a mile at first, then as far as necessary to suit the story, until finally he flew to match the Fleischer cartoons. The scene in MoS where he's learning to fly was a very blatant and deliberate reference to this. Not quite as on-the-nose as Superman pressing a green car in Returns, but same basic idea.
- This one, I think is kind of silly, but it's apparently on purpose, so I'll note it. A lot of people pointed out how Cavill didn't have the spit-curl in MoS, and Snyder and Co. countered with how he didn't have it in the early comics, either. Meanwhile, more than a few people have pointed out that he doesn't have it in BvS, either... UNTIL the fight scene with Batman, where he suddenly has a smaller than usual but Very Much On Purpose S-shaped lock of hair. Real-Life Reason? Because it was around the time Superman and Batman started appearing together on the cover of World's Finest in the '40s that Superman finally had the S-curl permanently. You can't make this stuff up. But it's actually a thing and there's actually a reason they're doing it. :lol:
My point being, they're using the movies to be a direct parallel to the comics, in a much broader sense. He is STARTING as the Superman from 1938, and BECOMING the Superman we know now. me? I think that's neat.

- It's MISUSE of science and technology that the movies are railing against. Clunky dialog aside, I think you're reading too much into that one thing. It's NOT literally "all science is bad" or "all technology is bad", or "thinking and reason is Bad". I can definitely see how you can get that from it but I'm positive that was Not their intention. It's the misuse or perversion of technology that was demonized. Which is also the Why behind Krypton exploding, like, 75% of the time when they tell the origin story. Sometimes it's civil war. This time it was squandering their natural resources and ruining their own environment. But it's almost always, "Oops, we done f*cked up," and it's always part of the reason why Kal-El is here, to prevent the same folly on Earth that happened on Krypton.
And that idea, that the PERVERSION of science and technology is Bad, is more fully explored in BvS, through Luthor's manipulation of the gov't, his experiments with Kryptonian weapons and tech, and harvesting the DNA from Zod's corpse to create the abomination known as Doomsday. Literally, the ghosts of Superman's past coming back to haunt him, and it's up to him to see that Earth doesn't see the same fate as Krypton. Again... that's swell.

- Again, I don't have the time to reference all the Biblical allegories in the Donner films. But dude, you're wrong on this one. It's in there, and it was done on purpose, and I genuinely think you're letting your distaste for Christianity or religion color your view of it. It has nothing to do with that line about being Jewish. It has everything to do with the fact that a Father sent his Only Son from the Heavens to lead by example and Save Us from ourselves. Someone who has the powers of a God but lives as a meek and humble mortal man. And don't even get me started on all the "Son becomes the Father and the Father the Son" stuff. Again, don't get me wrong, it's *mostly* Just A Super-Hero movie, but in countless interviews I've read with the people who made the movies, every bit of Biblical allegory was entirely on purpose. They just didn't feel the need to beat anyone over the head with it as Singer and Snyder did. It was done broadly on purpose, as was the style of the time. But to say it's not in there at all is plainly false.

I'm not sure why it's worth getting so hung up on, anyway. I'm not a fan of religion, but we're talking about symbols. And as far as what they represent, Superman and Jesus may as WELL be the same guy. What's the prob? It's about the Message, not about taking things Too Literally.

Either way, it definitely seems, to me - and correct me if I'm wrong - that more than anything, your view of Superman is colored by the Reeve movies. And you're not alone in that. But as much as they got right, they ain't perfect, either, and other than Reeve's face, costume, and flying pose, they're in no way "definitive".

It's a rather unique phenomenon, that's frustrating to me, because it ONLY happens with Superman. With other comics characters, it's ALWAYS, "They screwed up by deviating from the comic books. If only they stayed true to the source, the movie would be great." Meanwhile, the newer Superman films ARE being very literally adapted from the comic books - which nobody f*cking reads because he's not Batman - and everyone complains that they're not taking more from a movie series that went out of its way to disregard the source material on everything but the costume? That's... something. This is the ONLY time I've ever seen a movie series be told they're "getting it all wrong" by FOLLOWING the comics instead of ignoring 'em. I don't get that, like, at all. I'm personally overjoyed they're doing the books. But whatever, I'll gladly be the only one on the island. Only further reinforces my long-held opinion that most people don't really "get" the character, or that they cherry-pick the little bit they like from one or two movies and disregard the rest. I'unno.

The fact that it ONLY happens with my favorite character, though, is insanely frustrating.

[Leo656]

Meanwhile:
Bry: Yeah, I just caught that myself. I like it. I'm fine with it being inspired by DKR because it's only a VISUAL inspiration. The movie is NOT anything like DKR.
In fact, if sources are to believed, in this one it's BATMAN who's the "villain" of the two of them, in his paranoid over-reaction to Superman's very existence. Meanwhile, early in the film Superman makes enemies inside the U.S. gov't by stating plain and in public that he will NOT be their puppet. COMPLETELY contradictory to DKR, where he was literally a pawn of the President.
They're using visuals people remember and react to in an effort to maximize attention. Pretty smart move.

If they were literally adapting DKR I'd be pissed. I do not like that story. And as a Superman fan I REALLY do not like that story. I am not a fan of "Batman automatically wins because he's Batman", generally.

[Commenter 42]

Meanwhile:
Bry: Yeah, I just caught that myself. I like it. I'm fine with it being inspired by DKR because it's only a VISUAL inspiration. The movie is NOT anything like DKR.
In fact, if sources are to believed, in this one it's BATMAN who's the "villain" of the two of them, in his paranoid over-reaction to Superman's very existence. Meanwhile, early in the film Superman makes enemies inside the U.S. gov't by stating plain and in public that he will NOT be their puppet. COMPLETELY contradictory to DKR, where he was literally a pawn of the President.
They're using visuals people remember and react to in an effort to maximize attention. Pretty smart move.

If they were literally adapting DKR I'd be pissed. I do not like that story. And as a Superman fan I REALLY do not like that story. I am not a fan of "Batman automatically wins because he's Batman", generally.

You're right that the Superman I want is Reeve, no question.
But Reeve's Sup had all sorts of issues as well. I suppose what I missed the most in MOS was heart. It had none. You're also dead on that I prefer Superman learn how to Superman off screen, because that's just not interesting. I don't care to watch teams practice, or actors rehearse. I don't much love watching a film leaked with missing vfx and green screen.
Guess I'm funny that way.

Yes, I am fully aware of all the info you've laid out. I've watched all the Fleischer cartoons, read many of the early comics, and a smattering of stuff from the 80's, 90's etc. I'm not as well versed as you, as far as I can tell, so you have me at a bit of a disadvantage.
No, I didn't read Hush, or much of the late 2000's stuff...and no new 52...

And for all of my rage, I sort of thought the smashing of the drone was funny, and in character.

I'm going to brush up on my John Bryne, because while I'd love to think Snyder has been as thorough as you say, and it's some mis-understood masterwork we've all some how missed, I gotta say, you're stepping over all kinds of garbage to admire some supposed gems.

That said, the comics you think I must read to get the character are?

Oh yeah, and you're quite correct in reading me as a very left of center thinker. Some people don't get it, but that's fine. It's entertaining me at the moment.

[Leo656]

To be fair, Byrne's version was much more light-hearted than Cavill, but he still was rather reckless and smug for a while. Cavill is like an amalgam of Jerry Siegel's Superman with the Byrne/Jurgens version.

As to your question... that's complicated. My entire perspective on Superman is complicated. So I understand why few people can see it from the same angle. Few people, if anyone, see the character the way I do for the simple reason of, few people CAN. I've seen, heard, listened to, watched, and read, literally EVERYTHING, in some form or fashion. Every movie, every episode of every cartoon show, every storybook record album, the novels, to the earliest or most obscure stories in the comics... I've in some form or fashion absorbed every bit of Superman that's ever been created. I am Most Familiar with the comics, owning several thousand issues from the most recent to reprints of the earliest volumes, and have over a lifetime managed to read versions of every story from 1938 through 2010 through either originals, trades, or reprints. I am Least Familiar with the radio show and newspaper strips, although I have heard/read a few episodes of each, but I'm more familiar with the making of and history behind them than I am their specific content. I haven't managed to get my hands on much from those, sadly, but I hope to. But as far as Superman goes, I've Experienced all of it, and beyond that, I've studied it, every bit of lore, every "behind the scenes", every "Why did they do that?", every creators' "unique interpretation" and the reasoning behind.

Put simply... Superman is, for all intents and purposes, my Religion. I study it the way some people study Scripture. And I genuinely do not expect anyone to be able to approach it the same way, nor to apply literally thousands of stories and oft-contradictory interpretations into one's own unique, personalized Ideal of the character, based on a little piece of Everything that's ever been done. I genuinely Don't Know if anyone even Can see the character from the same angle I do. Because when I see any version of the character, I'm processing ALL of that information when I'm deciding how I feel about it. And it's seriously complicated.

In a way I kind of envy people who have a "cleaner", less cluttered, "smaller" picture of the character in their heads. But they're usually missing a lot of small, but vital information. Like, I love Reeve's Superman... mostly. But Superman would never WILLINGLY sacrifice his powers for poontang. If he had to make the best of a situation that ended that way... that's different. "I want to hump, Earth can take care of itself" is not an accurate portrayal of Superman, and thus, even the Donner Cut of Superman II is pretty far off.

Now, Singer's movie had a lot of the same problems, insofar as, Superman would never abandon Earth for 5 years to go look for a planet he knew full well was DEAD, either... BUT, there was a whole subplot cut for time that explained Luthor had faked evidence of Krypton's existence that justified that otherwise silly reason for Kal-El's absence, and secondly, Singer's Superman was based on Donner's Superman, who was already a somewhat-flawed version. Broad point being, in a lot of the Superman movies, which are most people's Preferred Version, they have Superman acting, at times, wildly out of character... but it makes sense, to them, being it's the version they're Most Familiar With. Meanwhile, Snyder's version acts in ways that fans of the older movies find questionable, yet is consistent with most other versions of Superman, from the comics to the George Reeve show to Dean Cain's portrayal, etc. etc. So... in what way have they sinned? By deviating from One Version most people lean on despite it not being, itself, "The True Version", simply the Most Familiar? Or have they simply taken and applied material from More Than Just Those Movies in an attempt to provide a portrayal that's ultimately more accurate to the source? And why is THAT a bad thing?

Again... it's complicated. When I look at MoS... no, I do not see the Reeve movies. I DO see things from Every Other Version of Superman that's ever been important, and to me, that's terrific. My mental Superman is not Chris Reeve, nor George Reeve, nor Brandon Routh, nor Dean Cain, etc. etc. No ONE version trumps all, to me. But All have merit. And "a little dark" it may be, THIS version of Superman, quite simply, has it All. There are pieces of Every Bit of the mythology sewn into it. It's so much, I didn't see it all at first. There's more to it every time I watch it, I'm serious. "That was from that one story where...", and, "That's the guy from that Phantom Zone mini-series back in...", and so on. I'm not married to Reeve, so I'm not hurt they aren't bowing to Reeve. I'm awe-struck at how they've crafted a literal Valentine to the entire Superman mythos, even if it's not quite as upbeat and breezy as I'd have done it.

Again, I can't expect anyone to share that perspective, it's just always been the thing I was most into and have put a frankly unreasonable amount of my life into. So my perspective on it is... complicated.

Thus, as far as which comics, specifically... I'll think on it and get back to you. I definitely have my personal favorites and there are a few self-contained stories I think are "close enough" to a perfect portrayal as any single story can be. But again, it's not like the comics always get it right either, in fact a lot of times they're horribly wrong like the present time. But just as Reeve is Your Version as it is your most familiar, the comics are My Version in equal measure. Anyways, I'll get back to you.

I will tell you, if only one person were to write Superman forever, it should be Dan Jurgens. No one in any media have ever gotten the character more Right, more consistently. Works in Cavill's favor that he strongly resembles the way Jurgens draws him, as well. So if you wanted a specific place to start, I'd say start with anything Jurgens ever wrote between 1989 through 2010. MoS leans very heavily on the Byrne/Jurgens era, which was incidentally my favorite era of the books as well. It's not just personal bias, though, that era is widely recognized as being the single most popular run on the books of the entire modern age. Everything they did from '86 to '93 with the character was just terrific and hasn't ever been as good since, and definitely never was before that.

[Slade]

Leo..damnit, you always beat me to everything. So, now I don't really have much else to say.

Except, ehh, I thought Waid did really good with Kingdom Come, though Ross helped write it too.

[Leo656]

Yeah, I think Ross's stuff kind of helped keep it on track. Waid's entire idea of, "The world called Superman an old fuddy-duddy, so he went to go cry about it on his Holodeck Farm for like 10 years" thing... that's terrible. That is absolutely awful. He wouldn't do that. I completely understand that they needed to have a world where there was no Superman, the "new breed" of super-humans have wrecked everything, and thus Superman makes a triumphant return to try and set things right. I get that. But the way they took him off the board for Act 1 was awful. "People don't like me anymore? Okay, forget Truth & Justice, the Never-Ending Battle... I'm gonna go sulk." I never bought that. They could have come up with an angle where everyone thought he was dead, or somethin'.

I mean, I guess you could argue his tether to the world was severed, when Lois and everyone else he knew was killed, so it would be more easy to abandon his mission. :ohwell: It makes sense, but I still think his obligation and sense of duty would win out over depression and hurt feelings. I'unno. Kingdom Come is really good but you can tell Waid and Ross were each kind of playing tug-of-war with "their" version of Superman. Neither of them fully agreed on a lot of things that story was trying to say. That was shown further when Waid went ahead and wrote "The Kingdom" series even after Ross refused to have anything to do with it, and it was a very different piece of work.

An interesting collaboration, to be sure. But Ross has always "gotten" Superman much better than Waid. Now, you wanna talk Flash, then that's different. NOBODY writes Flash like Mark Waid and nobody ever will. That's "His" super-hero and I love it. I don't want him anywhere near Superman, he's not good at it.

[Commenter 42]

Yeah, I think Ross's stuff kind of helped keep it on track. Waid's entire idea of, "The world called Superman an old fuddy-duddy, so he went to go cry about it on his Holodeck Farm for like 10 years" thing... that's terrible. That is absolutely awful. He wouldn't do that. I completely understand that they needed to have a world where there was no Superman, the "new breed" of super-humans have wrecked everything, and thus Superman makes a triumphant return to try and set things right. I get that. But the way they took him off the board for Act 1 was awful. "People don't like me anymore? Okay, forget Truth & Justice, the Never-Ending Battle... I'm gonna go sulk." I never bought that. They could have come up with an angle where everyone thought he was dead, or somethin'.

I mean, I guess you could argue his tether to the world was severed, when Lois and everyone else he knew was killed, so it would be more easy to abandon his mission. :ohwell: It makes sense, but I still think his obligation and sense of duty would win out over depression and hurt feelings. I'unno. Kingdom Come is really good but you can tell Waid and Ross were each kind of playing tug-of-war with "their" version of Superman. Neither of them fully agreed on a lot of things that story was trying to say. That was shown further when Waid went ahead and wrote "The Kingdom" series even after Ross refused to have anything to do with it, and it was a very different piece of work.

An interesting collaboration, to be sure. But Ross has always "gotten" Superman much better than Waid. Now, you wanna talk Flash, then that's different. NOBODY writes Flash like Mark Waid and nobody ever will. That's "His" super-hero and I love it. I don't want him anywhere near Superman, he's not good at it.

Ok, now I know you're picking and choosing. Look, I'll concede that you have likely read far more comics than I, but man, you can't decide to have it both ways, and deam your constructed head cannon as the only version possible, where you eschew some stories over others, simply because you think the idea is stupid. I mean, you can, as an opinion, but to try and state it as fact, hmmmm, seriously.

"He wouldn't do that" is essentially the same argument as I've made, only, your asserting that you are the suprem all knowing arbiter of all things Super.

The superman who wraps a truck around a telephone pole, or engages in super dickey, is the same superman who gives up on Humanity, and rides the pine for a while.

Personally, Kingdom Come is one of the better stories, if your interested in a cinematic Superman.

[TigerClaw]

Here are some of Batman's Gadgets in Batman v Superman from SDCC 2015.
http://www.slashfilm.com/comic-con-2015-first-look-at-the-dark-knights-gadgets-from-batman-v-superman/

http://i2.wp.com/bitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com/slashfilm/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets1.jpg

http://i1.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets-frontpage.jpg?resize=736%2C315

http://i0.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets2.jpg?resize=264%2C468

http://i0.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets3.jpg?resize=447%2C251

http://i2.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets4.jpg?resize=447%2C252

http://i1.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets5.jpg?resize=285%2C507

http://i1.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets6.jpg?resize=366%2C206

http://i0.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets7.jpg?resize=366%2C206

http://i1.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets8.jpg?resize=200%2C300

http://i1.wp.com/www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/bvs-comiccon-gadgets9.jpg?resize=532%2C300

[NinjaPug]

Ben Affleck To Team With DC’s Geoff Johns On Standalone ‘Batman’ Film: Comic Con

Here’s one for the Comic Con crowd to gnaw on. I’m told that Ben Affleck is teaming up with Geoff Johnsto co-write a standalone Batman movie that Affleck will direct and star in after he completes his longstanding plan to helm his scripted adaptation of the Dennis Lehane novel Live By Night. Johns has about as much comic cred as anybody around. He’s DC Comics’ chief creative officer and has written some of its best remembered comic book series including Green Lantern, Aquaman, Batman, Justice League Unlimited, The Flashand Superman. He has also written TV series superhero transfers Smallville, Arrowand The Flash, as well as the Supergirl project with Greg Berlanti for CBS.

My studio sources tell me that Affleck and Johns are well in synch and have more than found their rhythm. In fact, they are likely to turn in a script before the end of the summer, prior to Affleck going off to direct Live By Night in November. Affleck postponed that pic to star in Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. The Batman movie would shoot after he finishes Live By Night, and the plot would reflect the Batman character that emerges after Batman V Superman andJustice League, the latter of which comes out November 17, 2017. DC and Warner Bros have set a long list of superhero movies that take the Marvel formula of interspersing characters from one film to the next, so it’s unclear when Affleck’s Batfilm will be slotted.

But it will clearly take priority and other movies might have to move to get out of its way. While Marvel’s Kevin Feige has defied the odds and turned one Marvel character after another into hit films, I have been somewhat skeptical about the DC films that Warner Bros has made a top priority. This is a confidence booster. The bestBatman blockbusters had a real sense of visual authorship, originated by Tim Burton, with the latest arc by Christopher Nolan. Now it falls to Affleck, who’ll creatively steer the Batman franchise after directing the Best Picture-winnerArgo, and co-scripting and directing the gems The Town and Gone Baby Gone. Helped by the collaboration with DC savvy Johns, this might be the most exciting news to hit the Con this weekend.

http://deadline.com/2015/07/ben-affleck-geoff-johns-batman-dc-entertainment-warner-bros-comic-con-1201472921/

[TurtleTitan97]

http://deadline.com/2015/07/ben-affleck-geoff-johns-batman-dc-entertainment-warner-bros-comic-con-1201472921/

Sweet! Looking forward to it.

[Leo656]

That's possibly the best news I've heard all week. Comic writers writing comic movies, in tandem with the star, who's a huge comic book nerd.

People will find something to cry about. But this is terrific news.

It's not at all what I thought they would do, but it makes sense. And it's no secret that WB brought him in specifically to give some extra direction and cohesion to the franchise, as it was rumored that he was very vocal and involved during production of BvS. There were rumors he was kind of "backseat directing" Snyder, but I don't know how much truth there is to any of that.

I'm gonna have to come back to the rest of the conversation another time. It's late.

[TurtleTitan97]

The 2nd trailer has been classified: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=122655

[Commenter 42]

The 2nd trailer has been classified: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=122655

Well, looks like I'm opting out of the entire DC cinematic universe for the foreseeable future.

bet ya $20 he'll cast Kevin Smith as the Penguin. oh. joy.


And now a Batman/TMNT cross over (http://comicbook.com/2015/07/10/batman-and-teenage-mutant-ninja-turtles-crossover-announced/)? I hope this isn't shades of things to come. An acquisition would be.... ugh.

Not loving that art.

[Leo656]

:lol: If this is how you react to great news I'd hate to see your reaction if we were actually getting something horrible.

Things are fiiiiiine, buddy.

[Commenter 42]

:lol: If this is how you react to great news I'd hate to see your reaction if we were actually getting something horrible.

Things are fiiiiiine, buddy.

This isn't great.. you know you're arguing the opposing argument in every other thread man...every other thread you're against rehashing rebooting and retooling...
but for some reason, this one is okay?
http://i.imgur.com/gEG3L9M.jpg
:) someone's drunk the koolaid...
BUT, like I said...If you're digging it, that's cool, I'm way over it. I care very little. My blinders are on full. I can imagine this isn't happening. i'll just stay in the bubble and sing myself softly to sleep.

BUT...

THIS IS HAPPENING (http://news.toyark.com/2015/07/10/sdcc-2015-mattel-motu-friday-updates-167747) and I'm kinda stoked :)

http://news.toyark.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/07/SDCC2015-Mattel-MOTU-Friday-Pics-012.jpg

Nevermind the HUGE braingasm the new Star Wars BTS teaser gave me. I had a good feeling about Fury Road, and I was right...SW7 looks to be off the charts awesome.

I'm sure you are against it, but that's the only Remake/reboot/redo? (after Fury Road) that so far has me genuinely excited.

The 2nd trailer has been classified: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=122655

http://ih1.redbubble.net/image.15182139.8169/fc,550x550,asphalt.u2.jpg

[Leo656]

I'm fine with Star Wars.

Again, as a comic book fan, I have zero problem with people like Johns and Affleck, who are obsessive about both comics AND movies, getting together to do a comic book movie. This is quite literally the Best News any comic book film production has ever gotten in the history of Ever, because people who actually know and care about the material are adapting it for a wider audience. And that NEVER happens.

So, yeah, I'm more than a little excited about actually getting what everyone swears they actually want, for a change, yes. I get that people don't like Affleck. A lot of that is silly nonsense. Every bit of news around this project has been great. Unless a person has an irrational hatred of Ben Affleck, and unless you're Jennifer Garner, I don't understand that at all.

Nobody knows what they want.

[Commenter 42]

I'm fine with Star Wars.

Again, as a comic book fan, I have zero problem with people like Johns and Affleck, who are obsessive about both comics AND movies, getting together to do a comic book movie. This is quite literally the Best News any comic book film production has ever gotten in the history of Ever, because people who actually know and care about the material are adapting it for a wider audience. And that NEVER happens.

So, yeah, I'm more than a little excited about actually getting what everyone swears they actually want, for a change, yes. I get that people don't like Affleck. A lot of that is silly nonsense. Every bit of news around this project has been great. Unless a person has an irrational hatred of Ben Affleck, and unless you're Jennifer Garner, I don't understand that at all.

Nobody knows what they want.

Hmmm. Okay. Johns track record is questionable at best. This is the guy who helped shape Smallvile, and the upcoming train wreck Supergirl.
Affleck isn't an actor I care for, much less a Batman I wanted to see.
If he's good, I'll eat crow...If this trumps MOS. I'll buy 3 tickets to TMNT2, and force myself to watch it all 3 times...but my gut is telling me this is more of the same, and I'll be safe.

But whatever you say man. I guess we can talk it over in a years time, when it doesn't live up to the hype. 8)

I just read that the Jurassic World director landed Starwars 8. Total buzz kill.

And what, you're not jazzed about the He-man stuff?

[Cure]

What is even the precedence behind the Kevin Smith "joke"? He has had zero to do with any joints written or directed by Ben Affleck. If anything, the joke would be that Gotham is gonna somehow resemble Boston.

[Commenter 42]

What is even the precedence behind the Kevin Smith "joke"? He has had zero to do with any joints written or directed by Ben Affleck. If anything, the joke would be that Gotham is gonna somehow resemble Boston.

Any joints? Way to stay current with the lingo gramps. :lol:

Smith has been whoring himself to DC for the last 2 years, looking for any piece he can get of the reboot, and his ongoing open ask, after Affleck was cast, was that DC offer him Penguin.

Smith and Affleck are old friends.
Smith put him in three of his movies.
Smith thinks he helped make Afflecks career.
Smith thinks Affleck owes him.
Smith writes a lot of dick jokes.

The joke here, is that Affleck is so pompous, that he'd cast some one like Smith, because Affleck is infallible, and gods gift to directing. But he's also that guy, the one that feeds his own ego through magnanimous gestures of retribution. He wants to make sure everyone knows what a great guy Ben Affleck is.

We all know he's not going to, but he's 100% the kind of dick head who would.

Yeah, haha though, Boston. Funny.

[NinjaPug]

0WWzgGyAH6Y

[TurtleTitan97]

Awesome trailer, but am I the only one bothered by how Ma Kent says Clark "doesn't owe this world anything"? It's Pa Kent all over again...

[ZariusTwo]

Hey, Marvel

vZ4fllJTG-w

[sdp]

I don't know how this movie will deal with all the things it wants to tackle but hope it does a good job. The trailer is awesome but WW kind of sticks out, hopefully she's rightfully introduced..Pretty hyped but preferred the previous traielr.

[ObiWanFan4life]

Looks cool, although would it kill DC to ad a smidgen of color?

[Candy Kappa]

Wait, Superman's costume is not dark grey and maroon?

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

This is going to be the greatest comic book movie ever made.

[NinjaPug]

My favorite shot from the trailer

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJqGB3EWUAAa1jc.png

[Raph's Girl]

"20 years in Gotham. Only the good guys are left.."... Soooo Batman has defeated ALL his enemies?!?!?! :o

But WOW...I can see why Bruce is pissed. All those employees of his killed... :cry: Also, Killing Joke happened! :o Aaand it looks like we get to see the Wayne's die...again. :roll:

Wonder Woman looks awesome tho! :D

[TigerClaw]

Great trailer, Some of the action scenes with Batman reminds of of the Arkham games. :)

[Vicky82]

Wow looks great and even though i'm not into DC I will go see this movie.

I'm a bit confused, is this a complete reboot for Batman and Superman are they ignoring the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.

[Jester]

So...Jesse Eisenberg is totally playing Lex like Hackman did. Good to know.

[Autbot_Benz]

Wow looks great and even though i'm not into DC I will go see this movie.

I'm a bit confused, is this a complete reboot for Batman and Superman are they ignoring the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.

No Man Of Steel is a part of this movie. The whole destruction of Metropolis and They even Show Zod in a body bag.

[TurtleTitan97]

I'm a bit confused, is this a complete reboot for Batman and Superman are they ignoring the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.

The Dark Knight Trilogy doesn't take place in this universe. They aren't going to ignore Man of Steel since that was the movie that kick started the DC Cinematic Universe.

[Raph's Girl]

Wow looks great and even though i'm not into DC I will go see this movie.

I'm a bit confused, is this a complete reboot for Batman and Superman are they ignoring the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.

MOS started a new timeline. Bruce has been Batman for 20 years now.

[NinjaPug]

Wow looks great and even though i'm not into DC I will go see this movie.

I'm a bit confused, is this a complete reboot for Batman and Superman are they ignoring the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.

I don't see how someone could watch the trailer and ask if they are ignoring Man of Steel

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Giant block of Kryptonite...Zod's dead body...I really hope it's Metallo and not Doomsday. Doomsday would be good for a Justice League movie or a Superman Sequel.

"20 years in Gotham. Only the good guys are left.."... Soooo Batman has defeated ALL his enemies?!?!?! :o

But WOW...I can see why Bruce is pissed. All those employees of his killed... :cry: Also, Killing Joke happened! :o Aaand it looks like we get to see the Wayne's die...again. :roll:

Wonder Woman looks awesome tho! :D

It's "20 years in Gotham, how many good guys are left? How many stayed that way?"

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I don't see how someone could watch the trailer and ask if they are ignoring Man of Steel

Is Superman in this?

[Vicky82]

I only asked because some people said Man of Steel was a terrible movie.

I will have to watch Man of Steel at some point.

[TigerClaw]

I only asked because some people said Man of Steel was a terrible movie.

I will have to watch Man of Steel at some point.
I liked Man of Steel, I think they just don't like it because, of all the destruction that happens during the 3rd act.

[sdp]

MoS is a decent movie however it came out after the Avengers hype was in fullswing and a few hokey scenes like the Pa' Kent one were posted all over the internet were made out to be like the whole movie was like that. Plotwise the biggest problem was Metropolis being destroyed and it not being addressed but now we have a whole movie based on that exact thing which is an interesting move.

TDK Trilogy isn't in continuity but I'll consider it in my headcanon until major contradictions arise. The whole "Nolan's Batman universe is too realistic to have Superman" is a bunch of BS, most Batman stories are somewhat realistic and they all have a Superman, heck the Arrowverse started inspired and more realistic than Nolan's Batverse and now has superheroes. I've mentioned both those things in this thread a few pages back. I mean TDK Trilogy tells us the beginning of Batman's career while this Batman is a veteran.

[ZariusTwo]

So...Jesse Eisenberg is totally playing Lex like Hackman did. Good to know.

#Beachfrontproperty

[Turo602]

Holy ****, that was the greatest thing ever! Still not fond of Eisenberg playing Luthor.

[Xiewin]

Wow what an incredible trailer.

[Autbot_Benz]

http://i57.tinypic.com/2mxq54.gif

http://i57.tinypic.com/2rxtwlc.gif

http://i59.tinypic.com/2bwob4.gif

The Holy Trinity

[Slade]

Yes to everything


So...Jesse Eisenberg is totally playing Lex like Hackman did. Good to know.

But this

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Wonder Woman looks perfect.

Joker's done some damage and... does he know Bruce Wayne is Batman? That note about "You let your family die" looked like he knows Bruce Wayne is Batman...

A Robin costume, meaning the "Death in the Family" happened.

Lex Luther has a creepy manipulative personality.

Ben Affleck didn't suck as Batman.

I'm sold. Again, where can I preorder my opening-day tickets?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

"20 years in Gotham. Only the good guys are left.."... Soooo Batman has defeated ALL his enemies?!?!?! :o

But WOW...I can see why Bruce is pissed. All those employees of his killed... :cry: Also, Killing Joke happened! :o Aaand it looks like we get to see the Wayne's die...again. :roll:

Wonder Woman looks awesome tho! :D

You mean "Death in the Family", not "Killing Joke", don't you?

[MikeandRaph87]

So how is General Zod or his corpse rather going to play a plot point? Genetic readings by Lex Luthor to construct a DNA code to create Doomsday so he can play "hero" for all the wrong reasons. Just a theory.

[chrisdude]

So how is General Zod or his corpse rather going to play a plot point? Genetic readings by Lex Luthor to construct a DNA code to create Doomsday so he can play "hero" for all the wrong reasons. Just a theory.Or Nuclear Man. You don't know. ;)

Trailer was awesome.

[TigerClaw]

So how is General Zod or his corpse rather going to play a plot point? Genetic readings by Lex Luthor to construct a DNA code to create Doomsday so he can play "hero" for all the wrong reasons. Just a theory.
I think Zod's body will be used by Lex Luthor to create Doomsday.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I can't stop watching this trailer...saw the leaked Suicide Squad trailer too...it's tough to find now because it gets removed quickly...but I believe the tides are turning to DC now. I know I'm not alone in wanting more adult themed comic book movies. If this stuff happened in real life it would not be filled with jokes, and bright colors. I like the Marvel movies for what they are, but I prefer more realism.

Only thing this day needs now is the Deadpool trailer.

[Autbot_Benz]

I can't stop watching this trailer...saw the leaked Suicide Squad trailer too...it's tough to find now because it gets removed quickly...but I believe the tides are turning to DC now. I know I'm not alone in wanting more adult themed comic book movies. If this stuff happened in real life it would not be filled with jokes, and bright colors. I like the Marvel movies for what they are, but I prefer more realism.

Only thing this day needs now is the Deadpool trailer.

I agree with you 100 percent. I love the marvel movies but they are too family friendly. Its nice to have DC do the darker grittier movies.

[LincolnHawk]

I can't stop watching this trailer...saw the leaked Suicide Squad trailer too...it's tough to find now because it gets removed quickly...but I believe the tides are turning to DC now. I know I'm not alone in wanting more adult themed comic book movies. If this stuff happened in real life it would not be filled with jokes, and bright colors. I like the Marvel movies for what they are, but I prefer more realism.

Only thing this day needs now is the Deadpool trailer.

I heard Ryan Reynolds was going to be at SDCC, hopefully they show something. But also, Marvel isn't there so maybe we won't....who knows.

[NinjaPug]

I heard Ryan Reynolds was going to be at SDCC, hopefully they show something. But also, Marvel isn't there so maybe we won't....who knows.

Deadpool isn't Marvel Studios. There is a panel for Deadpool. No clue if they'll share anything online. I'm sure it'll leak though.

[CyberCubed]

Anyone find it weird the trailer focused on Superman so much over the other two? Wonder Woman only got like two small scenes and Batman only got a little more.

I was hoping this movie would give the 3 of them equal screentime, but it feels mostly like a Superman movie with Batman guest starring and Wonder Woman in a supporting role.

[MikeandRaph87]

Anyone find it weird the trailer focused on Superman so much over the other two? Wonder Woman only got like two small scenes and Batman only got a little more.

I was hoping this movie would give the 3 of them equal screentime, but it feels mostly like a Superman movie with Batman guest starring and Wonder Woman in a supporting role.

It should be that way because it is.Its the sequel to Man of Steel,a Superman fiel and Superman is being forced to take some focus on Batman and others as he helps introduce a cinematic universe.

[Leo656]

They're showing Superman more because we've already seen him. There's less excitement and mystery. Batman and especially Wonder Woman are the big teasers because we haven't seen them in full in this universe yet; Wonder Woman, we haven't seen in live action in almost 40 years and on the big screen, never. They're going to show enough to get us excited, but not show ALL of what they have until we pay to see it.

I've already seen enough. That was PERFECT. Seeing Affleck really move and emote as Bruce/Batman, he really nailed it, man, my hat's off to the guy. He's like 50/50 with me, there's stuff I like him in and stuff I hate him in, but damn, this is gonna be great. And the way the scenes are framed and shot, even... they're literally comic book panels. It's amazing. They're literally putting the books on screen, more projecting them than "adapting" them. It's terrific, and I can see why they're taking so long to make it.

Also, everything in the trailer was in the leaked plot summary. That is AWESOME news. Now that I'm 99% sure what we're getting, and seeing how it's all gonna look... this will be a hard one to beat. This could literally be a game-changer. I'm glad they took their time with it, I'm really excited about it, and I can't wait for March. I'm a little iffy on Suicide Squad yet but we'll see. It looks like as far as the "Big Guns" are concerned, DC's film future is in terrific hands.

[Commenter 42]

I never doubted Gadot, but DAMN she looks good. Holy dream girl Batman!

The rest of the movie looks just as retarded as I thought it would.

HEY SNYDER! ARE YOU COLOR BLIND? FOR F*CKS SAKE! STOP WITH THE INSTAGRAM FILTERS.

gah....


http://i.imgur.com/lYZcJ65.png
Derpy Derp Bats

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Commenter 42 doesn't like something....yawn.

[Slade]

I freaking loved that trailer. Felt all warm inside. It was great. I can't wait to see the movie. Look how positive I'm being. I don't do that sh*t.

I'm also drunk. :lol:

[CyberCubed]

Wait a minute, that guy with the hair making those fruity comments was Lex Luthor? Good god. :lol:

[Slade]

You slow yo. Everybody knew that already. Where you been at

[CyberCubed]

I'm not used to hippie Luthor.

[Leo656]

Luthor's the only thing I wasn't 100% on but I'm not going for a final judgment based on 8 seconds of footage. Meanwhile, I still kind of wish they had a different Wonder Woman, but I'm impressed with what we've got. I know nothing at all about Gal but I'm a lot more excited now than I was before.

I really like how Cavill isn't afraid to emote. A lot of people have played Superman too stoic; Cavill's great at acting with his face. That look of pure contempt he gives Luthor when he's kneeling in front of him is just great.

I can't stop marking out for that spot here Batman does the Dark Knight Returns pose right before he dodges Superman's heat vision. :lol:

I figure inside about 6 months we'll finally have SOME idea of what Doomsday looks like in this. I can't even imagine. :tgrin::tgrin::tgrin:

[Jester]

So....how the heck old is Alfred Pennyworth? He raised Bruce, then adult Brucy has been Batman for 20 years....and may even be retired...BUT Alfred's still kickin' and looks pretty good I might add.

[Commenter 42]

Going to be hard to beat this masterpiece
http://www.smallvilleph.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/8x22-Doomsday-229.jpeg

I bet however it looks, it will have Zod's face and very distinct lips...

I get that Gadot looks nothing like the classic WW, but I think she looks great. Too many times they turn WW into a man with long hair and boobs. (not that there's anything wrong with that).
http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/injusticegodsamongus/images/b/b1/WONDER_WOMAN.png/revision/latest?cb=20130130003010

http://k40.kn3.net/B/8/9/1/2/E/9B7.jpg
http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090104200914/marvel_dc/images/f/f0/Wonder_Woman_v.2_178.jpg

Yes, it's because she's amazonian, yes because the creator, yes blah blah, yadda yadda,...

I think Gadot looks good. Who knows if she can act, but she looks good in the costume.


The rest looks really stupid. Too solemn, strange dialogue, and the 911 references ... not sure how I feel about it. Very on the nose.

[Electric]

Just came over from the Suicide Squad thread to share my thoughts.

I'll start with the only negative: Luthor.

The hair is whatever, I'm guessing he is really bald based on the earlier picture.
But he just seems to young. In this universe where everyone's is being acknowledged as having been around, Luthor seems way too young. Everything from look to the way he dresses just screams early twenties to me. Maybe there's some transition, where he then shaves his head/pulls off wig, and dons a business suit, but I don't know.

Now everything else: wow don't know where to start.

Batman looks great. The suit which I wasn't sold on at first has grown on me, this is my favorite batmobile yet, and affleck looks like Wayne to me.

LOVED the supposed reference to the dead Jason Todd, the robin suit,and I have a feeling we will be seeing his new persona Red Hood, as well as increasing the chance for first robins Nightwing, in the solo batman movie. ( beginning to wonder if that joker Scene revealed in suicide squad where's he's torturing someone is actually a flashback to him with Jason).

LOVED how joker is there, even though he's not. The interconnection between the two movies is really making this exciting. If rumors are true that joker already killed Jason and Harley felt guilty that's why they're estranged are true, I think it'll be a fantastic plot

Wonder Woman looks good, and really curious how she gets tied in

Batman using his grapple away from I believe superman was an incredible scene on its own, plus him gettin out of the batmobile was epic

[Leo656]

Going to be hard to beat this masterpiece
http://www.smallvilleph.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/8x22-Doomsday-229.jpeg


:lol: Oh, you.

Boy, do I hate Smallville! :tgrin: Forever may it reign as the sh*ttiest Superman adaptation in the history of ever! Except that 1970s stage musical that we don't talk about, because I will cut you. :lol:

Electric: Yeah, all that. And I'm not quite sure what the Luthor angle is either, but based on everything else I'm gonna be patient. They made a big deal in the press how he's actually bald so clearly there's more going on than we've seen yet. Not my favorite thing from what we've seen, but everything else is spot-on so I'm willing to see a little more before I make a final decision. Definitely a little young, but eh.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

So....how the heck old is Alfred Pennyworth? He raised Bruce, then adult Brucy has been Batman for 20 years....and may even be retired...BUT Alfred's still kickin' and looks pretty good I might add.

Jeremy Irons is 66, and Batman is supposed to be 50 from what I've heard. But I mean guys like Irons, and Stallone, and Schwarzenegger are all nearly 70 and still action stars...I hope Batman isn't 50 in this, and maybe somewhere around 42-45.

Electric, I like to think Joker's teeth are like that because Batman knocked all his teeth out years ago...so I'm hoping it's not what you are guessing.

I don't have a problem with Luthor, because I haven't seen enough yet, and that could just be a nod to the original Superman movies and only last a few scenes. As long as he's not only about property in this, and is actually about death and destruction, and power...I'm good with it. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to watching this trailer then the Deadpool trailer over and over and over...two best trailers I've ever seen.

[Commenter 42]

:lol: Oh, you.

Boy, do I hate Smallville! :tgrin: Forever may it reign as the sh*ttiest Superman adaptation in the history of ever! Except that 1970s stage musical that we don't talk about, because I will cut you. :lol:



You love it -

ciSyf3cGAvE

[Leo656]

I deserve that for even bringing it up. :ohwell:

Sorry, everybody! I'm sorry.

[Commenter 42]

the condensed version is so much better -
Edited the previous post for our sanity. i'm contenplating a super cut of the musical soundtrack and the BVS trailer...Or Vice Versa...not sure which would be more awesome.

[Leo656]

It really is unbelievable that, in the grand scheme of things... THAT thing and the first Reeve movie existed within an eyelash of each other. It's just... wow.

Looks like Lesley Ann Warren is giving Kidder some competition for the "Most Coked-Up Scarecrow Version Of Lois Lane Ever" Award. :lol:

[Commenter 42]

It really is unbelievable that, in the grand scheme of things... THAT thing and the first Reeve movie existed within an eyelash of each other. It's just... wow.

Looks like Lesley Ann Warren is giving Kidder some competition for the "Most Coked-Up Scarecrow Version Of Lois Lane Ever" Award. :lol:

I knew of it's existence, but until tonight, hadn't had the pleasure.
Took me a bit to post, cause I was looking for the most obnoxious part.

I started at the beginning....and well...let's say that's the high point - or maybe the point by which you should already be high....

[blindturtle02]

So....how the heck old is Alfred Pennyworth? He raised Bruce, then adult Brucy has been Batman for 20 years....and may even be retired...BUT Alfred's still kickin' and looks pretty good I might add.

Clone? Robot? Suspended animation after being frozen in a block of ice? hehe

[Leo656]

Thus why character ages should be kept vague. So you can get the best actor for a role instead of who's the "Right Age" for it.

Now I get what Irons said in an interview a while ago where he said that his role was small, but super important. We probably won't see a ton of him in the film, but his role as Bruce's conscience will be hugely important to how events play out.

[Turo602]

Okay, so I don't think this has been mentioned yet, but is Batman a killer in this universe? In the original trailer we see Batman mow down some bad guys with the Batwing and after a million viewings of this trailer, I just noticed that in the scene where he's fighting those Superman soldiers he just straight up snaps a guy's neck. Are they ignoring the never kill code completely in this universe? First Superman with Zod and now Batman with everyone? I don't see how they can form a partnership if Batman is a merciless killer unless Superman is the same with his enemies. Not sure how I feel about this...

[The Stryker]

I think the desert/superman army stuff is a dream sequence. Atleast that's the vibe I get from it. Could easily be Lex using Zod's dream machine thing on Batman.

[Commenter 42]

Killing; It's what Heroes do.

Also I've never been a fan of dream sequences, sort of the same way i never actually want to hear about your dream last night.

[CyberCubed]

I worry this movie looks to be rushing too much in one film. You have the population learning to accept Superman, the introduction of Batman and his backstory, Batman and Superman meeting and fighting, the introduction of Wonder Woman and hopefully some backstory, a new Lex...and whatever else goes on in the film.

I feel like Wonder Woman should have been cut from this one and saved for a future film. Adding her into this one just feels odd.

[Krutch]

My random thoughts:

-Affleck will be the only good thing about this movie. Well, maybe Hans Zimmers score and Doomsday, if he happens to be in it.

-Happy to see Zack has found a style between Man of Steels bleak desaturated handheld look and Watchmens high contrast rich steadicam style. This should have been the aesthetic in the first film.

-Jesse Eisenberg as Lex was exactly what I pictured it to be. And that's not a good thing.

-Martha's "You don't owe these people a damn thing" speech. Great. So now both his parents are nuts. Based on what we've seen of each of their parenting skills, how is it possible Clark grew up to be who he was? "Or don't. You don't owe these people anything" is the new "I don't know. Maybe". These parents suck. They offer no guidance, and when your son has the powers of a god, you may want to consider nudging him in the direction that benefits mankind. Ugh.

-Wonder Woman looked cool, I guess. She had zero dialogue though. Makes ya wonder *rimshot*

-Yeah, did Batman straight up snap that guys neck? The hell??

-The way the trailer was cut together left the impression that Bruce had a wife or something that was in the building that was destroyed during MoS. And this brought Batman outof retirement (the training sequence) to fight Batman. Am I wrong to think that?

-I really want to geek out and get all excited about this as I'm far greater a fan of DCs characters than Marvels, but these people im seeing on screen are all strangers. It's just an angry, bleak world. I wouldn't want to live in a world where this is my Superman. And with that centrepiece misplaced the whole universe doesn't fit. Lex Luthor is a compelling character because his whole viewpoint on Superman is that we can't trust him. We can't trust anyone with that kind of power or appears to be that innocent and good. But the dichotomy is that we know Superman really IS that good and that we CAN trust him. But this guy? This Superman? We can't trust him. He's made questionable choices and was raised by parents who give him zero guidance when he needs it most. And we've seen that he's willing to place himself above the law and play judge, jury, and executioner when he feels fit to. Lex may seem like a bratty little bitch in this universe but ultimately he's right. And that doesn't make him a good villain; it means you screwed up on your hero.

[Turo602]

I think the desert/superman army stuff is a dream sequence. Atleast that's the vibe I get from it. Could easily be Lex using Zod's dream machine thing on Batman.

Really? What gave you that vibe?

-Martha's "You don't owe these people a damn thing" speech. Great. So now both his parents are nuts. Based on what we've seen of each of their parenting skills, how is it possible Clark grew up to be who he was? "Or don't. You don't owe these people anything" is the new "I don't know. Maybe". These parents suck. They offer no guidance, and when your son has the powers of a god, you may want to consider nudging him in the direction that benefits mankind. Ugh.

Um, what kind of a parent would Martha Kent be if she put the wieght of the world on her son's shoulders? Especially when he's probably feeling really sh*tty and guilty because of the way people are treating him. What's she supposed to say, "f*ck your life and save the world?" She's just reassuring her son by letting him know that she'd support his choice if he didn't want to deal with being a hero because ultimately, he didn't ask for it nor is he obligated to. He doesn't owe the world a thing and that's what makes him better. Superman doesn't save lives to payback Earth or humankind, he does it because he's a good person. If anything, that line makes Martha Kent feel more real. She's just a mother who loves her son and doesn't want to make him feel bad about saving lives when the rest of the world is crucifying him for it.

-The way the trailer was cut together left the impression that Bruce had a wife or something that was in the building that was destroyed during MoS. And this brought Batman outof retirement (the training sequence) to fight Batman. Am I wrong to think that?

Well for one, you're definitely wrong about Batman coming out of retirement to fight himself. It's called Batman v Superman. :P I also doubt he had a wife or that he lost anyone significant in that building. I'm sure it was just a natural reaction to seeing people die and buildings fall. Especially when the building belongs to him. That's what the letter meant when it said "you let your family die." His family being the company and also more than likely a parallel to Robin which means it was probably Red Hood who sent him that letter to begin with.

[The Stryker]

Really? What gave you that vibe?


It just looks really out of place compared to the other stuff shown and the color pallette is very similar to the Zod and Superman Skeleton floor scene from MoS.

The Ma Kent line I take more as a mom that's defending her son. "You saved the entire world from certain doom and they treat you like garbage?"

[Turo602]

It just looks really out of place compared to the other stuff shown and the color pallette is very similar to the Zod and Superman Skeleton floor scene from MoS.

The Ma Kent line I take more as a mom that's defending her son. "You saved the entire world from certain doom and they treat you like garbage?"

It definitely did look strange compared to the rest of the trailer. But we'll see.

Exactly, she's acting the way a mother would. I honestly don't see what's wrong with that. It just makes her more human as well as Jonathan Kent in Man of Steel. It's not like everyone in the world has advice prepared for their alien kid. Jonathan Kent just knew that he loved his son and didn't want to see him get taken away.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

To me, the desert scene appears to be the same setting where Superman is walking down a hall and the soldiers are kneeling. Supes looks all kinds of pissed off, and I'll throw a guess out here, maybe this is a point in the movie where he and Bats are on the same page, and maybe Superman is about to turn on them. I have a feeling something happens where Lex is put in charge of Superman, and maybe it's kryptonite or something else but he holds some sort of control over him. And this might be a point in the movie where he is freed of this with the help of Batman.

[Leo656]

I read somewhere in one of the leaks that the S-Shield Soldiers and the desert stuff is very likely a cut-away, like a dream sequence or "What If" type thing.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

That's very possible. I couldn't help but notice Superman's hair style changing from scene to scene so that could be one of the clues of real vs "what if".

[Bry]

You love it -

ciSyf3cGAvE

Oh my god, the revenge song... I'm dying... :lol:

[Krutch]

I'll agree to disagree. The Kents in this movie are this universe's biggest problem. Superman is the product of perfect parenting; we could all be Superman if we had the Kents. In this universe we haven't seen anything from them that proves these two are anything close to that. And while yes, in this universe Clark isn't the perfect boyscout and he's still figuring out who he is, I'm not interested in that interpretation. Superman shouldn't have to cross the line to figure out where it is as he did in Man of Steel.

This movie just seems like the studio's way of saving face for all the destruction and Superman's actions while saying "Look! It was our plan all along! This WHOLE NEXT MOVIE is about how all the stuff that you didn't like was done on purpose!" while also shoving in Batman to guarantee sales.

Just bleh. I really want to be excited. Its Batman and Superman on screen together for the first time!! And I love those characters. But this isn't Superman to me. This is a weird untrustworthy alien stranger wearing his cape.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I'll agree to disagree. The Kents in this movie are this universe's biggest problem. Superman is the product of perfect parenting; we could all be Superman if we had the Kents. In this universe we haven't seen anything from them that proves these two are anything close to that. And while yes, in this universe Clark isn't the perfect boyscout and he's still figuring out who he is, I'm not interested in that interpretation. Superman shouldn't have to cross the line to figure out where it is as he did in Man of Steel.

This movie just seems like the studio's way of saving face for all the destruction and Superman's actions while saying "Look! It was our plan all along! This WHOLE NEXT MOVIE is about how all the stuff that you didn't like was done on purpose!" while also shoving in Batman to guarantee sales.

Just bleh. I really want to be excited. Its Batman and Superman on screen together for the first time!! And I love those characters. But this isn't Superman to me. This is a weird untrustworthy alien stranger wearing his cape.

It really blows my mind that people just throw out the reality that up until Zod, Superman had never been in a fight. He was always told by Pa Kent to not fight back. So it's like in Iron Man. When Jeff Bridges character gets in that suit for the first time, and even though we watched Tony Stark go through a period of trial and error and learning how to use the suit, Bridges' character pops in there and he's a pro in the suit. In Man of Steel we see the evolution of Zod overcoming new powers and abilities on Earth, and we see Superman learning to fight, and save the world at the same time. Too much stock is put in the fact Metropolis was destroyed, and Zod was killed. In reality there is no way Superman was going to be able to avoid the destruction. Zod is equal to him. They BOTH just recently learned to fly. Zod most likely had been in some fights. Superman had not. Also, Zod was going to kill an innocent family. So you'd rather Superman let an innocent family die instead of kill Zod?

I listened to a Zack Snyder interview he did before the movie was released, but they released the interview the weekend of the release. He talked about how if they get a sequel it will be based around the destruction, and his killing of Zod. So it's not some thing they just made up after the movie came out and there was concern about people's reactions. They are building a universe. All these stories, like in Marvel's must run together.

Batman is introduced because of Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, they even say in the Suicide Squad trailer, these people with power were inspired by Superman. So you couldn't be more wrong.

[Bry]

Also, Zod was going to kill an innocent family. So you'd rather Superman let an innocent family die instead of kill Zod?

There were plenty of other things he could have done, and that scene being written as if he had no other choice was clumsy as hell. He had him by the neck. Why didn't he cover Zod's eyes? Or just... fly up? Or even fall backward with him to change the direction of his heat vision and yell at the family to run? I mean, Superman has super-speed. And they're equally strong, but it really shouldn't be that hard to move someone's head, especially in the position they were in. Zod seemed basically defeated already - there are plenty of ways he could have diverted his heat-vision attack and pummelled him into submission.

But Snyder just really wanted to make a movie where Superman killed a guy, even if he had to defy all logic to do it. That moment was incredibly forced, and the impact on the character just doesn't sit well with a lot of people. That part comes down to preference, but it's a perfectly reasonable one.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

There were plenty of other things he could have done, and that scene being written as if he had no other choice was clumsy as hell. He had him by the neck. Why didn't he cover Zod's eyes? Or just... fly up? Or even fall backward with him to change the direction of his heat vision? Superman has super-speed. They're equally strong, but it's really not that hard to move someone's head, especially in the position they were in. Zod seemed basically defeated already - there are plenty of ways he could have diverted his heat-vision attack and pummelled him into submission.

But Snyder just really wanted to make a movie where Superman killed a guy, even if he had to defy all logic to do it. That moment was incredibly forced.

Fun fact, Christopher Nolan advised against killing Zod.

[Bry]

Fun fact, Christopher Nolan advised against killing Zod.

Too bad he was outvoted. It wouldn't have saved the movie, IMO -- I know a lot of people like it, but it was just way too dour and dull for my tastes -- but it would have helped many people recognize this as Superman. It's the same trap a lot of people who don't "get" Superman fall into: they focus so much on the powers, on the Super, that they forget or disregard the Man. And that's the far more important part.

Nothing against Snyder personally, but he seems like someone who doesn't "get" Superman and is trying desperately to turn Superman into something he does get. Totally backwards.

Even then... what he was going for there fell way short. I'd actually be up for this kind of thing done well - forcing Superman to do something against his principles for the greater good. They were trying to make something challenging and interesting, but their scenario was just badly written, forced and lazy. They didn't do the work. And putting it as the climax of a Superman origin story just... is not a good idea, IMO. They didn't establish Superman as Superman, as a version of the Superman that's been an icon for 75+ years, and that's automatically put them in a defensive position - now they have to "prove" something in the sequels that they never should've had to in the first place.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Too bad he was outvoted. It wouldn't have saved the movie, IMO -- I know a lot of people like it, but it was just way too dour and dull for my tastes -- but it would have helped many people recognize this as Superman. It's the same trap a lot of people who don't "get" Superman fall into: they focus so much on the powers, on the Super, that they forget or disregard the Man. And that's the far more important part.

Nothing against Snyder personally, but he seems like someone who doesn't "get" Superman and is trying desperately to turn Superman into something he does get. Totally backwards.

Even then... what he was going for there fell way short. I'd actually be up for this kind of thing done well - forcing Superman to do something against his principles for the greater good. They were trying to make something challenging and interesting, but their scenario was just badly written, forced and lazy. They didn't do the work. And putting it as the climax of a Superman origin story just... is not a good idea, IMO. They didn't establish Superman as Superman, as a version of the Superman that's been an icon for 75+ years, and that's automatically put them in a defensive position - now they have to "prove" something in the sequels that they never should've had to in the first place.

My main problem with MoS is that the entire third act is just destruction porn after a point. So much CGI, so much smashing, so incomprehensible and numbing... I had to fast forward so much of it.

And Pa Kent is a moron to die over a freaking dog. Any high-school amateur writer could come up with a better way to kill off Pa Kent, a way that doesn't insult everyone's intelligence.

Bay-level of poor writing right there.

[plastroncafe]

Didn't even try to make this panel at SDCC, so I'm only seeing the trailer now.
Wow...much overwrought. So gritty. Wow.

Also, no where near enough Wondy.

[MikeandRaph87]

I was about to chime in about Pa Kent's foolish reason for sacrificing himself. That was dumb. That and Superman murdering Zod went it was not neccessary. Those wsre tbe two problems I had with Man of Steel. Its not like non-killer Catwoman being a situation where she had to kill Bane to sa e Batman. If the result waz supposed to be Superman killing him make jt so there js no other choice.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I was about to chime in about Pa Kent's foolish reason for sacrificing himself. That was dumb. That and Superman murdering Zod went it was not neccessary. Those wsre tbe two problems I had with Man of Steel. Its not like non-killer Catwoman being a situation where she had to kill Bane to sa e Batman. If the result waz supposed to be Superman killing him make jt so there js no other choice.

Agreed.

Also, no where near enough Wondy.

ABSOLUTELY agreed. What do you think of the Wonder Woman movie being set around WW2?

[plastroncafe]

Supes taking out Zod was the least objectionable thing in that movie. If anything, that made Kal more human. MoS lost me when Jor'El left his wife to labor on her own so he could testify before congress, and then didn't even have the decency to upload her consciousness into the ship as well. That's pretty much when I knew I was all aboard the Man Pain Train.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Supes taking out Zod was the least objectionable thing in that movie. If anything, that made Kal more human. MoS lost me when Jor'El left his wife to labor on her own so he could testify before congress, and then didn't even have the decency to upload her consciousness into the ship as well. That's pretty much when I knew I was all aboard the Man Pain Train.

It's conceivable (see what I did there?) that Jor-El was legally required to appear before the Kryptonian Council or whatever, his wife and child be damned. Subpoenaed or whatever.

But yeah, if he can go to the trouble to provide his consciousness to his kid (and we see that this was all planned out before Krypton's core blew), you'd think a guy would provide the same for his wife.

We've all seen what happens when kids are raised by only a father with no female influence. You get an angsty angry Raphael, that's what. :tlol:

[Krutch]

It really blows my mind that people just throw out the reality that up until Zod, Superman had never been in a fight. He was always told by Pa Kent to not fight back. So it's like in Iron Man. When Jeff Bridges character gets in that suit for the first time, and even though we watched Tony Stark go through a period of trial and error and learning how to use the suit, Bridges' character pops in there and he's a pro in the suit. In Man of Steel we see the evolution of Zod overcoming new powers and abilities on Earth, and we see Superman learning to fight, and save the world at the same time. Too much stock is put in the fact Metropolis was destroyed, and Zod was killed. In reality there is no way Superman was going to be able to avoid the destruction. Zod is equal to him. They BOTH just recently learned to fly. Zod most likely had been in some fights. Superman had not. Also, Zod was going to kill an innocent family. So you'd rather Superman let an innocent family die instead of kill Zod?


I'm getting a little tired of the excuse that he doesn't know the limit of his powers. Flight, sure, maybe but considering he's already flown IN SPACE at that point, I'd wager he's got it down pretty good. As far as the rest of the powers go, you're telling me he's NEVER tried to figure out his limits? Go to an empty country and try to lift mountains, test out his heat vision, etc... C'mon. The FIRST thing you'd do when you have a power is find a private place to figure that out. And since Clark has access to the ENTIRE PLANET I'd wager he'd be able to find some privacy.

Yes, as far as we know Clark had never been in a fight before. That might effect his fighting prowess but it shouldn't change his character. Even if he sucks at fighting he should have been thinking of ways to get the fight out of Metropolis or stopping to save people even if he knew it'd give Zod the upper hand in the fight.

I mean... COME ON. (http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/2/23309/4465041-2556498156-super.gif) With a gust of his breath he could have stopped that. OR held up his hands. Or lifted it up and flown it away. ANYTHING but just stand there and let it slowly slide and blow up the building behind you.

The funny thing is I'm not even against Superman having to kill(read Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow). It's just this was handled so hilariously poor that it rang false.

I listened to a Zack Snyder interview he did before the movie was released, but they released the interview the weekend of the release. He talked about how if they get a sequel it will be based around the destruction, and his killing of Zod. So it's not some thing they just made up after the movie came out and there was concern about people's reactions.

Can you post a link to the interview with Zack that happened before the movie prescreened where he discussed spoilers and the sequel he had planned all along? Because I call BS. Especially when Zack's stated several times that Batman was decided well after Man of Steel's release during possible villain brainstorming.

Batman is introduced because of Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, they even say in the Suicide Squad trailer, these people with power were inspired by Superman. So you couldn't be more wrong.

That doesn't make any sense. I'm not even sure what you're getting at.

[Commenter 42]

This guy get's it. (http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-gets-superman-anymore-2015-7)

Purse Grabber doesn't. He wan't's Bruce Wayne with Kryptonian powers. It comes down to taste, and what you want to see.

Superman, this is not. Sorry Leo, I really don't agree with your vision of who Superman is.

[sdp]

Maybe I need to see the movie again, haven't seen it since I saw it in theaters but I really liked the scene were Superman kills Zod. You can tell he doesn't want to but he's got no choice. His hand is forced and he feels absolutely terrible about having done it.

[ZariusTwo]

VA5Swc-iEug

Here's my hybrid edit of both trailers

[TheSkeletonMan939]

And Pa Kent is a moron to die over a freaking dog. Any high-school amateur writer could come up with a better way to kill off Pa Kent, a way that doesn't insult everyone's intelligence.

Agreed. And would it have been so unbelievable for Clark to have run to the tornado and back with his dad? I mean... his dad was doing pretty well until he just stopped everything to hold his hand up.

Know what I think would have been better? A mugging. Pa and Clark are in town one night and they get mugged. Clark could easily choose to punch their brains out, but Pa won't let him, since he doesn't want Clark to use his powers for such violence. So Pa gets stabbed or something and dies.

Sure, that's exactly how Batman's parents died, but it makes more sense than the tornado and it gives Batman and Superman a way to relate to each other in the sequel.

Speaking of which, Batman and Superman shouldn't have much to fight about since they're kind of the same person. Both have them have dead parents, both of them are angst-ridden and feel guilt for something that wasn't really their fault, and both of them don't like themselves. There's something wrong with that.

[Jester]

I honestly didn't realize that the woman popping up in the nicely tailored suit throughout the trailer WAS Wondie. It took me a couple viewings to finally realize that this woman they kept flashing to was Diana.

[CyberCubed]

I honestly wonder if anything of Wonder Woman's past will be revealed at all. There's probably no time for anything about the Amazon island or Wonder Woman's history...they'll probably largely ignore it and just portray her as a strong woman.

[ToTheNines]

You get on my nerves.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I honestly wonder if anything of Wonder Woman's past will be revealed at all. There's probably no time for anything about the Amazon island or Wonder Woman's history...they'll probably largely ignore it and just portray her as a strong woman.

Well, the word is that the Wonder Woman solo film will be set circa World War II. And I hear that the Comic-Con concept art had her standing over a bunch of downed Nazis...

[Commenter 42]

I honestly didn't realize that the woman popping up in the nicely tailored suit throughout the trailer WAS Wondie. It took me a couple viewings to finally realize that this woman they kept flashing to was Diana.

And people say Clark's glasses are a terrible disguise. This is exactly why they're brilliant - we see what we want to see.

[Jester]

And people say Clark's glasses are a terrible disguise. This is exactly why they're brilliant - we see what we want to see.
It's gotta be the fact that superhero costumes are so form fitting...a well tailored suit can hide a lot, I guess.

[Leo656]

This guy get's it. (http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-gets-superman-anymore-2015-7)

Purse Grabber doesn't. He wan't's Bruce Wayne with Kryptonian powers. It comes down to taste, and what you want to see.

Superman, this is not. Sorry Leo, I really don't agree with your vision of who Superman is.

Again. Chris Reeve is NOT Superman either. He happened to wear the suit well and have a charming delivery, with the benefit of a bombastic soundtrack. That's about it.

The Superman in these films is the character as he's been portrayed to some degree in EVERY version EXCEPT the Reeve movies. ONLY THEN did he come out of the box fully-formed and Perfect and Flawless the second he put on the cape. That's the version you like. That's Not Superman. Superman always struggles, learns, and grows as he goes along. That's what we're seeing this time. Not the perfect, infallible Godlike character some prefer, BUT, infinitely more faithful to the source.

The movies are doing the books. And that's fine. That's what they SHOULD do. Not cling desperately to the corpse of a series from 40 years ago that really hasn't aged all that well to begin with. When literally everything in these newer films is from the source material, then it's the people who don't appreciate it who have the problem, which is simply, they're staring at it from the wrong angle.

"I don't like what I'm seeing." Those are the characters. Those are the stories. The REAL ones, not the simple caricatures of the Reeve films. If you don't like the films, then you also simply do not much like the characters or the stories as presented in the source material. And that's pretty wacky. It's from the canon, I don't see why people are even arguing about it. All they did, was compress the sequence of events a little bit so the Zod stuff happened early on and not over a period of years. They didn't "change" or "misinterpret" anything, they just did what was in the comics. I can't believe people are mad about them actually following the script for a change.

But I get it. Most people who claim to be fans of Superman are really Just fans of the Reeve movies. And that's whatever. I just wouldn't go insisting that's the Be All and End All that trumps every other version when those movies have less than nothing to do with the stuff they were inspired by in the first place. Killer soundtrack, don't get me wrong. No resemblance at all to their own source material, however. But regardless, people are way too nostalgic and clingy about all of it. Reeve's movies are not the Definitive Superman interpretation any more than Keaton/Burton or Nolan/Bale's versions of Batman were. They were just One Version, and each version missed the mark as often as they hit.

The fact that they're making it a point to be faithful to the material they're adapting SHOULD be good enough, considering how much some people complain about other movies doing anything BUT. Everything they're doing is Fine! Jesus.
------------------------

Except the Pa Kent stuff, which was downright ludicrous. But people ARE misinterpreting what Martha's trying to tell Clark. The ENTIRE point of this Superman is that he's a hero BY CHOICE, not by birth or "destiny" or genetics, but because it's what HE wants to do. She's reminding him that the only obligation he has is to himself, to live his own life and be happy. And that's nothing new! That's there in the comics, in Lois & Clark, in just about every version where Ma Kent isn't dead, she gives him the occasional "Maybe you don't need to keep being Superman" speech. And he ALWAYS decides to just keep going, because it's what HE wants to do with his gifts.

It's just a Mom being protective of her son. People read way too much into things sometimes. Costner on the other hand was written terribly, no argument here. Everything about that was awful. He could'a been great in the role, but they made a huge mistake. See, with MoS they were trying to condense bits of both the Byrne origin from the "Man of Steel" comics, and other bits of the Byrne run, with stuff from Mark Waid's "Birthright" story. And some of it worked really well, but they directly took Pa Kent from Waid's story, which was a horrible choice, as that is the ONE and only time he's ever been written as such a douchebag in the comics. It was SO out of character that it ruins a lot of what it touches, absolutely. I'm not sure WHY they chose to use Waid's version of Pa over Byrne's, I honestly cannot say. What I assume, is that they took SO much from Byrne's version they felt obligated to take something more of Waid's than just the alien invasion angle, so they picked Pa and figured it wouldn't matter.

That was a big mistake. It would be terrific if another movie had at least one flashback with Pa being more even-handed and supportive than we saw him in MoS. That could retroactively fix a lot.

[plastroncafe]

What do you think of the Wonder Woman movie being set around WW2?

I think it could be cool, if for no other reason than the costuming, but...it'll have to do quite a bit to keep from being compared to DC's Peggy Carter.

And people say Clark's glasses are a terrible disguise. This is exactly why they're brilliant - we see what we want to see.

I used to make a whole lot of fun of Clark's disguise...until people stopped recognizing me when I didn't happen to be wearing my glasses.

[Commenter 42]

I used to make a whole lot of fun of Clark's disguise...until people stopped recognizing me when I didn't happen to be wearing my glasses.

It's happened to me more than once. Same when I've gotten a hair cut. Unless you're looking for it, you'd be blind to it.

My boy Trey looks a hell of a lot like Obama. It's super cray-cray. I've known him half my life. They're even close in age, though Trey is younger and looks older. My man even has a mole near his nose.

Guess what I've never thought? Trey is Obama's secret identity. I've never thought it because, I don't assume Obama has a secret identity.

[Commenter 42]

Again. Chris Reeve is NOT Superman either. He happened to wear the suit well and have a charming delivery, with the benefit of a bombastic soundtrack. That's about it.

The Superman in these films is the character as he's been portrayed to some degree in EVERY version EXCEPT the Reeve movies. ONLY THEN did he come out of the box fully-formed and Perfect and Flawless the second he put on the cape. That's the version you like. That's Not Superman.

...........

tRVUOGUmxJI

Did you read the article I put up? Also, what? And again, hunh?

Reeve wasn't perfect, but MOS, and BVS aren't even close. He's bending the story to fit a narrative he wants to tell, which is a what if story. It's Snyder trying to turn Superman into an alien invasion film. It's all about fear, and mistrust, and darkness. I watched the SDCC Pannel, and Snyder himself said if you look hard enough you can "justify anything". (https://youtu.be/pXP-uvc7DZs?t=4m4s)

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I cannot believe the streak of agreeing with Leo is still alive.

Someone said something like don't you think Kal went somewhere private to test his powers. Yes, he did, we saw it in the movie, he tried to fly and fell into a mountain. We saw him learning. The only flying we then see him do after that are basically straight lines. He fights FOUR people of equal strength on a street in a small town. I am seriously doubting anyone who has been in an actual fight in real life can honestly think Superman would have the ability to fight Zod who can do the EXACT things he can, and also save buildings and people while not allowing Zod to go somewhere else and cause destruction or killing him. Superman saves as many people as he can. Someone posted a link to the tanker being thrown at him, and he jumps over it. He's been "Superman" for about 24 hours at this point. In retrospect, I'm sure he'll use his powers to stop it. He does not become the smartest, and safest fighter just because he puts on the suit. There is a learning curve. Superman can't do EVERYTHING. If you think he can, then you don't like Superman.

Regarding Pa Kent. I'm not married to the source material, so I don't mind when they make their own path. Pa was telling Clark as a kid...the world isn't ready yet. And Pa wasn't sure if Clark was going to use his powers for good or evil at that point. He was also being protective of Clark, knowing if he was exposed, people would try and kill him or use him as a test subject. Now...he did NOT die to save a dog. Way to miss the point. There is a theme in the movie of "A good death is it's own reward". Meaning a noble death. Pa is teaching Clark to be selfless. He runs into the tornado to save people. He saves a small child. He then hands the child to Clark and tells him to make sure every one is safe. He would rather risk his life than risk Clark being exposed. In Pa's mind Clark isn't ready as evidence of that argument they had just minutes prior. No it's not the greatest path that could have been taken, but it was an interesting one in my opinion. And certainly not stupid.

I just don't see anyway Superman could have stopped Zod in that situation. Yeah you can take it all the way back and say they shouldn't have written them into that position, but too bad. It happened. He was not proud of doing it.

And about the podcast, I'll try and find it. It was 2 years ago that I listened to it, and I randomly found it while in a Youtube vortex the weekend the movie was released.

[Turo602]

Again. Chris Reeve is NOT Superman either. He happened to wear the suit well and have a charming delivery, with the benefit of a bombastic soundtrack. That's about it.

The Superman in these films is the character as he's been portrayed to some degree in EVERY version EXCEPT the Reeve movies. ONLY THEN did he come out of the box fully-formed and Perfect and Flawless the second he put on the cape. That's the version you like. That's Not Superman. Superman always struggles, learns, and grows as he goes along. That's what we're seeing this time. Not the perfect, infallible Godlike character some prefer, BUT, infinitely more faithful to the source.

The movies are doing the books. And that's fine. That's what they SHOULD do. Not cling desperately to the corpse of a series from 40 years ago that really hasn't aged all that well to begin with. When literally everything in these newer films is from the source material, then it's the people who don't appreciate it who have the problem, which is simply, they're staring at it from the wrong angle.

"I don't like what I'm seeing." Those are the characters. Those are the stories. The REAL ones, not the simple caricatures of the Reeve films. If you don't like the films, then you also simply do not much like the characters or the stories as presented in the source material. And that's pretty wacky. It's from the canon, I don't see why people are even arguing about it. All they did, was compress the sequence of events a little bit so the Zod stuff happened early on and not over a period of years. They didn't "change" or "misinterpret" anything, they just did what was in the comics. I can't believe people are mad about them actually following the script for a change.

But I get it. Most people who claim to be fans of Superman are really Just fans of the Reeve movies. And that's whatever. I just wouldn't go insisting that's the Be All and End All that trumps every other version when those movies have less than nothing to do with the stuff they were inspired by in the first place. Killer soundtrack, don't get me wrong. No resemblance at all to their own source material, however. But regardless, people are way too nostalgic and clingy about all of it. Reeve's movies are not the Definitive Superman interpretation any more than Keaton/Burton or Nolan/Bale's versions of Batman were. They were just One Version, and each version missed the mark as often as they hit.

The fact that they're making it a point to be faithful to the material they're adapting SHOULD be good enough, considering how much some people complain about other movies doing anything BUT. Everything they're doing is Fine! Jesus.

Exactly! I mean, I get where the hate is coming from. I myself would have preferred a Superman in a less bleak world where he spends as much time saving people as Superman as he does fighting and doing his whole Clark Kent dance at the Daily Planet but what a lot of people forget is that Man of Steel was just an origin story. He's not in that point in his life yet but despite not being "recognizable" as the Superman we all know and love, he was still true to his character. A lot of people don't realize it but Man of Steel really did justice to his character. Because of Man of Steel, more people know who Superman really is and no longer see him as that boring overpowered superhero who never struggles. Sure, plenty of those people still exist, but not as many since the release of Man of Steel.


I just don't see anyway Superman could have stopped Zod in that situation. Yeah you can take it all the way back and say they shouldn't have written them into that position, but too bad. It happened. He was not proud of doing it.

Not to mention Zod's goal was genocide. The situation may have been a dumb one, especially because the family was just standing there instead of running because they were certainly not cornered. But in the long run, how is Superman going to stop Zod? Is he going to throw him in jail? He's too powerful to be contained and the more they go on fighting the more people are going to die. Taking the fight elsewhere isn't going to stop Zod from trying to take lives. There was no choice but to kill Zod.

[Slade]

Not to mention Zod's goal was genocide. The situation may have been a dumb one, especially because the family was just standing there instead of running because they were certainly not cornered. But in the long run, how is Superman going to stop Zod? Is he going to throw him in jail? He's too powerful to be contained and the more they go on fighting the more people are going to die. Taking the fight elsewhere isn't going to stop Zod from trying to take lives. There was no choice but to kill Zod.

I've been saying this since I saw the movie. What are all these options he actually had that people are saying? Cover his eyes? Okay, and then what? The heat vision just burns through Kal's hand, or maybe it goes off into different directions, could still hit the family. Far as I can tell, there was nothing else.

I know it was written that way as well, which is some people's problem with the it and that makes total sense. I think it should have been written differently as well, but it wasn't.

[Candy Kappa]

Well, depending on which cut off Superman 2, Reeve Superman also kills Zod, a depowered Zod. At least MoS Superman had a good reason to end him.

[Autbot_Benz]

though I do like Man Of Steel Superman I found this pic and it made me snicker a bit

http://i62.tinypic.com/2133nns.jpg

[ZariusTwo]

Marvel's Tom Brevroot on the trailer (aka "Hey, look, it's Marvel being idiots again")

It’s a Superman film in which Superman is impotent, and needs to be told by other people to do something, anything (or even nothing) while being depressed and upset that he’s stronger than anybody, can fly and is bulletproof. This is so not Superman that if you put a different letter on his chest, nobody would recognize him.

I don’t have any great interest in this particular iteration of SUICIDE SQUAD, but I felt like that trailer at least captured the tone and the flavor of the property well–it felt like a SUICIDE SQUAD film to me. Not so with BvS.

Cynical, joyless, dark, pseudo-serious twaddle.

And don’t even get me started on Bruce Wayne running into the 9-11 footage. That played not as a moment of heroism so much as him being crabby that Superman dinged his personal building.

http://brevoortformspring.tumblr.com/post/124152899333/tom-what-exactly-did-you-not-like-about-the-bvs#notes

[Leo656]

Well, depending on which cut off Superman 2, Reeve Superman also kills Zod, a depowered Zod. At least MoS Superman had a good reason to end him.

Exactly! :lol: What a crock of sh*t that was. I KNOW, in the TV version and in the script he just chucked him in a hole and then "sometime later" pulled him out, to be taken away by the "Arctic Police". Like, 5 people know about or ever saw that. To everyone else, "the real, iconic, never-to-be-surpassed One True Superman" just chucked a human being down a crevasse and laughed about it. THAT's the guy everyone is mentally married to. :roll: Same guy who throws cellophane S shields at people who shoot laser beams outta their face. "That'll learn 'em!" :lol:

Zod always has to die. That's the only way Zod's story can end, as he is quite literally Superman's opposite number. The details change in each telling, but at least since the 80s, it always ends with Zod dead by Clark's hand. Once again, they just smushed a few versions of the story into One. It's why I wasn't 100% on board with Zod being the first villain; I wasn't and am not a huge fan of having Superman's "first" movie end with him killing someone, and as soon as I heard "Zod" I knew how it was going to end. But, it's part of the larger story they're telling and I've made peace with it. It wasn't a choice I would've made but it is one that makes sense in the grand scheme of things, and they're not the first ones to tell that story.

I'll agree, though, the editing of the whole thing and the build-up did not completely sell the moment (and cutting away to a Joke Moment immediately after was plain awful). The story of the movie is fine, but I'll agree that the editing was not very good, and I assume that's why they wanted to have all the footage for BvS in the can a year in advance, so they can finsih it "properly" this time. People often forget, a huge amount of MoS was done in a rush because of the Siegel lawsuit. They didn't have a choice, they had to have X amount done by a certain date. On the whole, the visuals of the new film look much, much better than what we saw last time.

Zarius: Sounds like he's describing Every Marvel "Hero" instead, right? :lol: At least the comic book versions, which are infinitely more navel-gazing and less proactive than their MCU counterparts. :lol:

Nah, it's just the character. He does NOT always somehow "just know" the right thing to do, or decide to constantly impose his will on others. Tons of stuff in the books where he'll confer with Ma or Pa or Lois or Bruce or Diana or whoever, just to be sure, "Am I really doing the right thing?" It's not called "impotent", it's called Getting Perspective. When you can hear a pin drop from space, you need to surround yourself with people you trust who can make sure you're not getting too wrapped up in yourself and the Big Picture. That's one of my favorite things about the character; "Just because I can punch out the sun, doesn't mean I'm always right." Sometimes you just need a second opinion. Nothing new there.

[Commenter 42]

So, when Snyder admits, flat out that he's just drawing by himself and trying to come up with stuff that's "cool" - you assign that to some omnipotent understanding of all things Super?

Get over it folks - this isn't a larger story. They were going to go a whole different direction, and then pivoted when Affleck was brought on. The back slapping going on here is f*cking hilarious. The writer they credited at the SDCC pannel was Chris Terrio, not Goyer, and Terrio wasn't involved with MOS... SHM.

100% Shoe-horned idea. "Golly gee - they didn't like all that distruction in MOS, better figure out how to justify that....I know let's take everyones favorite character, and give him the vantage point of our fanboy detractors! Then, We'll just have them fight! I smell the Billions!"

And Leo, Your justifications just don't hold water dude. You make too many allowances. Either it is or it isn't ripped from the comics - and while they are borrowing numerous elements - the Horse himself spate "It's a new story we came up with"

It's Batman in a red cape. Just bloody admit it. MOS made zero sense, so if this is a continuation now, of a story that went no-****ing where...why should we be interested? To see expensive cosplay? To watch more after effects work? ****** muddy color and heavy grain filter passes? 300 starring DC characters?

Snyder is a HACK. Simple as that. They don't understand Superman, and I'm starting to think neither do you.

Mark my words. They'll make huge bank, no question. It might be the biggest movie opening ever.

The film itself though, will be the equivalent of Bay's Transformers, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.

[Leo656]

It is an original story. In the sense that it's comprised of elements of dozens of pre-existing stories, that were trimmed and streamlined to make something that works better in the condensed storytelling format of film rather than the decompressed format of print. It's not a 1:1 adaption, but it's in no way "original", either. It's a "new" story that uses tons of old stories, without the clutter. In that, it's not so different from what most comic movies claim they attempt to do. This is simply a more literal translation than most, right down to the framing and sequencing of the scenes as comic book panels. Again, maybe you don't like comics. I do. And I like what I see in this more than what I usually see from these movies. You say they're not doing the work and don't get the material. Well, lots of people don't agree.

I hear what he says. To me, it sounds like he's simplifying the way it actually works, and maybe trying to give himself a little extra credit at the same time. But the fact is, you can NOT get SO close to the comics completely by accident. Clearly, he IS doing a lot of homework, or at least listening to people who are. It's probably as "original" as, "What if I take this, and put it together with that, but instead of this I do that?" Saying it's all his own ideas makes better copy, but... c'mon, that ain't serious. That's for attention, that is.

I also don't agree they had a completely different direction planned. I can't remember the exact interview either, but they were very explicit early on that MoS was going to have repercussions that would spill over into several other movies. They probably didn't have the exact BvS idea nailed down yet, but they were definitely thinking of a larger universe that used MoS as its launching point, and dealing with the consequences of everything that happened. And if they had something else planned... this is probably better, so whatever.

Personal insults, meanwhile, I don't have to respond to. You don't get to watch One Movie and tell me I don't "get" the character. I will absolutely pull the elitist card when it comes to Superman. I promise you, I've seen those movies more than you have. I've read more of the books than any sane person has. Not a day have I lived, where I haven't immersed myself in the mythology in some way. There are Christians who don't know their Bible the way I know the Superman mythology backwards and forwards. You don't get to say, "Well, I like the movie better," and imply that I "don't get" Superman. The character is far greater than and far beyond those silly movies. Or this silly movie, for that matter.

That's literally the second most insulting thing I've ever had said to me, and definitely the most irrational. No, sir, I don't like that at all.

[Turo602]

So, when Snyder admits, flat out that he's just drawing by himself and trying to come up with stuff that's "cool" - you assign that to some omnipotent understanding of all things Super?

Get over it folks - this isn't a larger story. They were going to go a whole different direction, and then pivoted when Affleck was brought on. The back slapping going on here is f*cking hilarious. The writer they credited at the SDCC pannel was Chris Terrio, not Goyer, and Terrio wasn't involved with MOS... SHM.

100% Shoe-horned idea. "Golly gee - they didn't like all that distruction in MOS, better figure out how to justify that....I know let's take everyones favorite character, and give him the vantage point of our fanboy detractors! Then, We'll just have them fight! I smell the Billions!"

And Leo, Your justifications just don't hold water dude. You make too many allowances. Either it is or it isn't ripped from the comics - and while they are borrowing numerous elements - the Horse himself spate "It's a new story we came up with"

It's Batman in a red cape. Just bloody admit it. MOS made zero sense, so if this is a continuation now, of a story that went no-****ing where...why should we be interested? To see expensive cosplay? To watch more after effects work? ****** muddy color and heavy grain filter passes? 300 starring DC characters?

Snyder is a HACK. Simple as that. They don't understand Superman, and I'm starting to think neither do you.

Mark my words. They'll make huge bank, no question. It might be the biggest movie opening ever.

The film itself though, will be the equivalent of Bay's Transformers, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.

What a bunch of crap... Duh, it's an original story that he made up. That doesn't mean it isn't influenced or even borrowing from the comics.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

So, when Snyder admits, flat out that he's just drawing by himself and trying to come up with stuff that's "cool" - you assign that to some omnipotent understanding of all things Super?

Get over it folks - this isn't a larger story. They were going to go a whole different direction, and then pivoted when Affleck was brought on. The back slapping going on here is f*cking hilarious. The writer they credited at the SDCC pannel was Chris Terrio, not Goyer, and Terrio wasn't involved with MOS... SHM.

100% Shoe-horned idea. "Golly gee - they didn't like all that distruction in MOS, better figure out how to justify that....I know let's take everyones favorite character, and give him the vantage point of our fanboy detractors! Then, We'll just have them fight! I smell the Billions!"

And Leo, Your justifications just don't hold water dude. You make too many allowances. Either it is or it isn't ripped from the comics - and while they are borrowing numerous elements - the Horse himself spate "It's a new story we came up with"

It's Batman in a red cape. Just bloody admit it. MOS made zero sense, so if this is a continuation now, of a story that went no-****ing where...why should we be interested? To see expensive cosplay? To watch more after effects work? ****** muddy color and heavy grain filter passes? 300 starring DC characters?

Snyder is a HACK. Simple as that. They don't understand Superman, and I'm starting to think neither do you.

Mark my words. They'll make huge bank, no question. It might be the biggest movie opening ever.

The film itself though, will be the equivalent of Bay's Transformers, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.

Please produce a quote where Snyder says he's just trying to make stuff that's "cool". BvS has an Academy Award winning writer. They're making Batman v Superman, not Dinner with Andre. There has to be action.

Batman was announced weeks before Affleck was announced, not sure how the "plans changed". Snyder has talked about the consequences of the end of MoS the same week the movie was released. He talked about the consequences of Kal killing Zod. This is days after the release of the movie. He talked about it all while saying he isn't sure they're getting a sequel. There wasn't ever a time where he ignored it. Or just wanted destruction porn in MoS. I think some of you are just blinded by action movies, and as soon as you see a few CGI shots you roll your eyes and think it's a crappy movie.

Goyer was the writer of MoS, not BvS. Why on earth would he praise Goyer at a BvS panel?!

"100% shoehorned idea" You just make stuff up. You have NO factual evidence. You don't like something so you create fantasy.

The story didn't makes sense you say...well that's your fault. Plenty of people had no problem following along. And you're mad about effects work...in a Superman movie...Maybe they should have went the Superman Lives route, and had him not fly, and not wear the suit. I personally see pictures of Reeves, or Routh, and the light blue and bright red just doesn't look good on a real person. I prefer the darker. It makes it more realistic.

I swear if I read that one more movie is a Bay rip off, I am going to vomit. Can we just censor "Michael Bay" and "Transformers" like they censor curse words?

[Commenter 42]

Personal insults, meanwhile, I don't have to respond to. You don't get to watch One Movie and tell me I don't "get" the character. I will absolutely pull the elitist card when it comes to Superman. I promise you, I've seen those movies more than you have. I've read more of the books than any sane person has. Not a day have I lived, where I haven't immersed myself in the mythology in some way. There are Christians who don't know their Bible the way I know the Superman mythology backwards and forwards. You don't get to say, "Well, I like the movie better," and imply that I "don't get" Superman. The character is far greater than and far beyond those silly movies. Or this silly movie, for that matter.

That's literally the second most insulting thing I've ever had said to me, and definitely the most irrational. No, sir, I don't like that at all.

I'm not "insulting you" anymore than you've insulted me. You've claimed the same, assuming you know me, and I was more than irritated, but that's fine.

I wrote my thesis on Superman dude. I've studied Nietzsche. I know my **** as well. I said before that my main source of fandom stems from the Donner films, not my only. Yes, Reeve embodied 80% of who I think the character is, but wasn't the perfect version.
I cherry pick a little as well - I don't consider Superman red/blue or Dean Cain cannon. I ignored much of Justice League Unlimited. I like the idea of the eradicator. I loved the stupid big key to the fortress no matter how stupid it was. I also love his menagerie of aliens, his robot clones, Lex as billionaire mogule over mad scientist or career criminal, the new Supergirl is terrible, but The 80's Supergirl was only passable. I'd really like to see the Michael turner Supergirl ... i really liked her rebellious nature. I don't think of Kryptonians as robotic - or Vulcan might be a better word - but simply enlightened, possibly more passive. I imagine a group of philosophers debating a topic, while the world around them crumbles - but I know THAT is just my take.
I'm just as selective with my head cannon, in a way. I havn't yet, but plan on visiting Metropolis for the annual festival. Superman for all seasons is one of my fave's for it's charming art, Kingdom Come for it's epic battle, and the interesting inclusion of Wormwood, while Superman V Mohammed Ali was my very first comic book ever at the age of 4. Of all the artists, I think José Luis García-López is my touchstone, though I appreciate Frank Quietly, and Jurgens. Jerome K Moore is pretty damned talented too.
http://img15.deviantart.net/a7ca/i/2006/299/0/5/man_of_steel_by_jerome_k_moore.jpg

Random facts - The Daily Planet was based on The Toronto Star in Canada, Siegel and Shuster detested Gingers in their highschool, but still put them in their comics...
Seriously, I could go on man. I'm not sure what proof your looking for :p

This Supergirl would be great...
http://www.zonanegativa.com/2008/3553.jpg

BUT! I hate how Snyder is aligning and re-arranging the material. It's backwards and awkward, and plain wrong tonally.

I'm not the sort of purist who argues if Superman has killed in the past. That's frankly irrelevant. I don't view that as a line that should not be crossed.

I do care that Superman, the thing I wanted to be when I grew up, not be retooled into something unrecognizable.

I'm not looking to get into a full on pissing match, BUT you've been acting as though you are the only person on this board with any claim on the character, and telling the rest of us we're wrong. Buddy, you a'int the only fanatic here. We just didn't get down on the lore at the same exact place and time, meaning you keep reaching into a specific time frame of the comics as justification, and I look at the larger picture of almost 80 years, and call that view into question.

Long story short - I'm just as fanatical - believe it. We have very different interpretations, obviously, but something you should be agreeing with me on, is that Superman is not a DARK character. He's supposed to be living perfection, not a regular joe with super powers - at least as far as I'm concerned.

Snyder treats him like that. A guy with problems. An outsider who can't relate with parents who don't care if he ever does. He's this ultimate loner struggling to figure out if he should bother with humanity at all.

I don't care if Snyder is pulling events from the comics, or making them up. I honestly don't care if there's a shred of cannon from the timeline. The timelines are so overwrought, that it's almost pointless to care. I care that the central idea remain intact, and I think that's where we disagree, fundamentally on who Superman is, and why it feels like you don't get the character, at least the way I do. I'm okay with that, but man, I'll be honest, the way you denounce other interpretations as though you're the only one smart enough to divine the essence of a comic book ... dude. I like you and all, but you're sounding like the bay apologists in the PDMT thread. I just didn't expect that from you.

Snyder pissed me off long ago. It started with the ****ing trunks. "we don't need these".

WHO THE **** ARE YOU BRO? Step off! you don't tug on Superman's cape, and you sure as F don't take the undies.

That's like saying TMNT don't need bandanas. Sure, it's rational, but some things are sacred.

Then the rest of the suit, with F'ing chain mail. Hell no.
Everything since that moment has been Snyder playing in his sandbox with his action figures, coming up with childish ideas, and destroying Superman.

Some people see Jesus in a burnt piece of toast ... and while, you can argue a case for it, the toast is just toast, and not a miracle. I say again, you're giving Snyder et al. credit for happy accidents.

Not looking to make an enemy - just giving a slap to the face of a friend. Wake up man! :lol:

[Commenter 42]

What a bunch of crap... Duh, it's an original story that he made up. That doesn't mean it isn't influenced or even borrowing from the comics.

Bunch of crap? Yep BvS is a POS just like MOS.

Also, that's my point. Leo was arguing that it was faithful to the comics. I'm saying, not so much.

I've also said that an exact translation of the comics events aren't my concern - my problem is that the movie is not a Superman movie in essence - kind of like how PDMT isn't actually a Turtles movie. It's an elseworlds tale, at best.

Please produce a quote where Snyder says he's just trying to make stuff that's "cool".

I did, already.

Try reading. It's a fun thing we do here.

...........

Reeve wasn't perfect, but MOS, and BVS aren't even close. He's bending the story to fit a narrative he wants to tell, which is a what if story. It's Snyder trying to turn Superman into an alien invasion film. It's all about fear, and mistrust, and darkness. I watched the SDCC Pannel, and Snyder himself said if you look hard enough you can "justify anything". (https://youtu.be/pXP-uvc7DZs?t=4m4s)

Also, no offense, but, you're not the brightest guy. I can't take you seriously with that sig.

1. "100% shoehorned idea". That was a hyperbolic statement. It would be utterly impossible to prove, for any of us, how and when they came up with anything. I was clearly stating an opinion. I might be 100% right or 0% right, and considering no one here is actually Nolan Or Goyer, we'll never know. Based on what i've read, this is my educated guess.

2. I understood what the story was; however, the story they attempted to tell was inconsistent. I won't go over it here, as most of us have tread that path before.

3. I LOVE action movies. I even adore most of Bay's action movies. Yep I admit, he knows how to shoot action. I LOVED Fury road. Loved. BIG HEART! Yep. Snyder, did not handle the action well in MOS. He turned to vomit cam.

[Turo602]

Bunch of crap? Yep BvS is a POS just like MOS.

Also, that's my point. Leo was arguing that it was faithful to the comics. I'm saying, not so much.

I've also said that an exact translation of the comics events aren't my concern - my problem is that the movie is not a Superman movie in essence - kind of like how PDMT isn't actually a Turtles movie. It's an elseworlds tale, at best.

You must think very low of your opinions.

But that's exactly what he meant by "faithful to the comics." He's elaborated that point several times.

Well, that's sort of the point. Man of Steel is an origin story. He's not really Superman yet but that doesn't mean he's not true to character. I can see what you mean by it not feeling like a Superman movie, it was a darker film and very much all over the place but in the bigger picture, I can really appreciate it. It's hard to say that Snyder didn't have a grander picture in mind with what we know about both Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice and while Batman may have not been part of the plan from the start, I think he knew what he was doing with Superman.

[Commenter 42]

You must think very low of your opinions.

But that's exactly what he meant by "faithful to the comics." He's elaborated that point several times.

Well, that's sort of the point. Man of Steel is an origin story. He's not really Superman yet but that doesn't mean he's not true to character. I can see what you mean by it not feeling like a Superman movie, it was a darker film and very much all over the place but in the bigger picture, I can really appreciate it. It's hard to say that Snyder didn't have a grander picture in mind with what we know about both Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice and while Batman may have not been part of the plan from the start, I think he knew what he was doing with Superman.

I completely disagree. Snyder Isn't that smart.

That's like suggesting the sequel to 300 would have apologized for the existence of the 300. Maybe Sucker Punch 2 was planned to explain the events of SP 1.

No, bloody way. You buy that, I got swamp land you might be interested in.

And seriously, I don't need MOS explained to me. FFS, I understand exactly what Snyder wanted to say, but he didn't say it well, and what he did say, was idiotic.

My dad died slowly saving a dog.
My other dad is a living hologram who forgot to invite mom.
Don't think of others, just do you.
You can always punch your way out of a problem, especially laser problems.
Let's all terraform the planet, that way nobody will be super, including us!
My planet exploded, and all I got was this lousy Codex.
I'm inexplicably carrying all the genes of all the krypts, but there are 0 girl krypts left to get freaky with.
Now that I made a big mess, I'ma gonna go and hide out with my new GF, and act like nothing happened.
When the military follows me, I bust their sh*t up fast son!
I'm exactly like Jesus, because I'm nothing like Jesus.
I'm not very good at anything yet, but I'm learning! Oh WELL!
Was it helpful, me coming to Earth? Did things get better?
I have emotional issues. When I kill, I cry.


Superman should learn to Superman off screen. He isn't Spider-man. This isn't television. A film should have 3 acts, not be one giant first act with lazy flashbacks inserted throughout.

It was a terrible film folks. It doesn't get a pass because it needs a sequel to tell the rest of the story.

And if Zod is DD, that's ultra crap.

[Turo602]

I completely disagree. Snyder Isn't that smart.

That's like suggesting the sequel to 300 would have apologized for the existence of the 300. Maybe Sucker Punch 2 was planned to explain the events of SP 1.

No, bloody way. You buy that, I got swamp land you might be interested in.

And seriously, I don't need MOS explained to me. FFS, I understand exactly what Snyder wanted to say, but he didn't say it well, and what he did say, was idiotic.

My dad died slowly saving a dog.
My other dad is a living hologram who forgot to invite mom.
Don't think of others, just do you.
You can always punch your way out of a problem, especially laser problems.
Let's all terraform the planet, that way nobody will be super, including us!
My planet exploded, and all I got was this lousy Codex.
I'm inexplicably carrying all the genes of all the krypts, but there are 0 girl krypts left to get freaky with.
Now that I made a big mess, I'ma gonna go and hide out with my new GF, and act like nothing happened.
When the military follows me, I bust their sh*t up fast son!
I'm exactly like Jesus, because I'm nothing like Jesus.
I'm not very good at anything yet, but I'm learning! Oh WELL!
Was it helpful, me coming to Earth? Did things get better?
I have emotional issues. When I kill, I cry.


Superman should learn to Superman off screen. He isn't Spider-man. This isn't television. A film should have 3 acts, not be one giant first act with lazy flashbacks inserted throughout.

It was a terrible film folks. It doesn't get a pass because it needs a sequel to tell the rest of the story.

And if Zod is DD, that's ultra crap.

Oh, and Donner's Superman is genius? Lol

Most of Man of Steel was spent questioning whether or not the world will accept Superman which is a pretty huge plot point in Dawn of Justice. You'd have to be dumb to think that was accidental. Snyder clearly knew where he was taking Superman post Man of Steel.

I don't think you do. Ironic considering you told that guy earlier that he wasn't the brightest. A 5 year old could probably sum up the movie better than you.

There's more to Superman than your limited perspective of him. I for one am glad they're exploring him more deeply because honestly, it's about damn time.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

I completely disagree. Snyder Isn't that smart.

That's like suggesting the sequel to 300 would have apologized for the existence of the 300. Maybe Sucker Punch 2 was planned to explain the events of SP 1.

No, bloody way. You buy that, I got swamp land you might be interested in.

And seriously, I don't need MOS explained to me. FFS, I understand exactly what Snyder wanted to say, but he didn't say it well, and what he did say, was idiotic.

My dad died slowly saving a dog.
My other dad is a living hologram who forgot to invite mom.
Don't think of others, just do you.
You can always punch your way out of a problem, especially laser problems.
Let's all terraform the planet, that way nobody will be super, including us!
My planet exploded, and all I got was this lousy Codex.
I'm inexplicably carrying all the genes of all the krypts, but there are 0 girl krypts left to get freaky with.
Now that I made a big mess, I'ma gonna go and hide out with my new GF, and act like nothing happened.
When the military follows me, I bust their sh*t up fast son!
I'm exactly like Jesus, because I'm nothing like Jesus.
I'm not very good at anything yet, but I'm learning! Oh WELL!
Was it helpful, me coming to Earth? Did things get better?
I have emotional issues. When I kill, I cry.


Superman should learn to Superman off screen. He isn't Spider-man. This isn't television. A film should have 3 acts, not be one giant first act with lazy flashbacks inserted throughout.

It was a terrible film folks. It doesn't get a pass because it needs a sequel to tell the rest of the story.

And if Zod is DD, that's ultra crap.

Wow and you called me "not the brightest". You are lazy. And you're probably a douche bag...well if you're anything like the person you are here, you're definitely a douche bag.

Equating a new Superman movie to 300 and Sucker Punch...wow...Snyder wasn't making 300 with the plans to create a multi-movie universe. Same for Sucker Punch.

You are just making outlandish claims, then when you get called on them, claim they're hyperbolic. That's a good way to have people respect your opinions...

Jonathan Kent didn't die "slowly saving a dog" you missed the reasoning completely, most likely due to your inability to think.

Now, I haven't seen the original in a long time, but I'm pretty sure Lara El did not join Jor to explain to Kal what happened to Krypton. So why is it a bad thing she isn't in MoS, but it's not a bad thing in the Reeves movie?

I could go on and on, but you are boring, and you just don't get it, or you don't want to get it.

[Bry]

So much anger! Come on, you guys, let's take a step back and try to get along. After all, what would Superman do?

http://images.techtimes.com/data/images/full/83015/man-of-steel-neck-break-gif

Uh... well, maybe not that version of Superman...

[Candy Kappa]

Uh... well, maybe not that version of Superman...

well what about this Superman?

https://iwanticewater.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/zods-painful-lesson-04.gif

or.... Not, he's terrifying. what about batman, he never kills...

http://0.media.dorkly.cvcdn.com/48/63/91c609d1756a15d05f874b70ba747e88.gif

damn...

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Jonathan Kent didn't die "slowly saving a dog" you missed the reasoning completely, most likely due to your inability to think.

Uh, jumping back in here to say:

Pa Kent TOTALLY died saving a fvcking dog. That was the reason he went out into the tornado. To save. A. Fvcking. Dog.

I hope PETA at least paid for some sort of memorial to the senile old guy.

[Bry]

well what about this Superman?

https://iwanticewater.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/zods-painful-lesson-04.gif

Hey, that Krypton Crystal Slide looks fun as hell! And he didn't even charge Zod admission. He's generous! :lol:

Now, what I'd really like is to see this Superman on screen:

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/9/96875/2062220-sroof.jpg

Uh, jumping back in here to say:

Pa Kent TOTALLY died saving a fvcking dog. That was the reason he went out into the tornado. To save. A. Fvcking. Dog.

I hope PETA at least paid for some sort of memorial to the senile old guy.

See... Pa Kent should be the kind of guy who saves a dog. That's compassion and heroism, and he's one of the people Clark's supposed to learn that from. I don't want a Pa Kent who would just let that dog die if he could do something to save him.

But... him choosing to die and putting his family through emotional hell because he's afraid of Clark's powers being exposed? That's garbage.

How about instead, Clark saves his father and the people of Smallville, and then they all vow to keep his secret out of respect and kindness? Further influencing the hero he'd become, and where his values stemmed from? Giving the character and the story a core of hope and optimism?

...nah, I guess that's just not "real" enough for a Superman movie. :P

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Uh, jumping back in here to say:

Pa Kent TOTALLY died saving a fvcking dog. That was the reason he went out into the tornado. To save. A. Fvcking. Dog.

I hope PETA at least paid for some sort of memorial to the senile old guy.

No he didn't. He ran towards the tornado to save PEOPLE. Then when Martha tells Clark the dog is still in the car Jonathan tells Clark to take the child. He SAVED the dog, and then made a decision to be sacrificed. He was teaching Clark. But hey, yeah a random heart attack, or ancient fruit, is way better story telling.

See... Pa Kent should be the kind of guy who saves a dog. That's compassion and heroism, and he's one of the people Clark's supposed to learn that from. I don't want a Pa Kent who would just let that dog die if he could do something to save him.

But... him choosing to die and putting his family through emotional hell because he's afraid of Clark's powers being exposed? That's garbage.

How about instead, Clark saves his father and the people of Smallville, and then they all vow to keep his secret out of respect and kindness? Further influencing the hero he'd become, and where his values stemmed from? Giving the character and the story a core of hope and optimism?

...nah, I guess that's just not "real" enough for a Superman movie. :P

Or maybe he could have lived, and everyone would complain that he didn't die.

[Krutch]

Wow. Guys, considering this is a Ninja Turtles forum, a franchise where the fandom couldn't be more divided over who they are, I'm surprised we've resorted to name calling and cheap shots in a Superman thread. Relax.

It's clear there's not going to be victorious side in the debate of who he is since we all have very firm ideas over what he stands for. Personally, I'd say Dean Cain's Superman was probably the closest live action interpretation to what I believe Superman is. But I'm well aware thats not going to be everyones cup of tea. So, I'm not going to shove that down peoples throats. Agree to disagree ;)

What we can argue is facts.

I've still yet to hear this pre-release Man of Steel Snyder interview where he spoils the movie and addresses sequel plans but I refuse to believe it until I've heard it. And for those saying it's along the lines of "The sequel will deal with what happened in the first one" ...well, duh. That's what sequels do. If he's being that vague he may have well said "And trust me, this story will definitely continue in the sequel." Obviously.

The debate comes from whether or not Batman was intended to be in the sequel, to which I don't think there's enough proof to believe that was the case. Do you think they would have passed up on an easter egg for teasing Batman in Man Of Steel? From the same writer who wrote the Joker Card scene at the end of Batman Begins? No way. They thought they had a winner, it screened, they brainstormed how they were going to spin it, and thus we got BvS.

I don't see why people are reading so much into this. I mean if you're happy that Batman is in the sequel, great, but why defend with such vigour that this must have been the plan all along? Because Marvel is doing it so well, this must be DC's masterstroke? Let it go :tgrin:

[Krutch]

But hey, yeah a random heart attack, or ancient fruit, is way better story telling.

If you're looking for an action scene, then yeah, the tornado thing was the way to go. I mean, it was laughably set up, but for adrenaline purposes, a tornado trumps heart attack in an action flick.

But for dramatic purposes, a heart attack is actually a very important lesson Clark learns in humility. That with all his powers theres some people he can't save.

I prefer the latter, but to each their own.

[Commenter 42]

Hey, that Krypton Crystal Slide looks fun as hell! And he didn't even charge Zod admission. He's generous! :lol:

Now, what I'd really like is to see this Superman on screen:

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/9/96875/2062220-sroof.jpg



See... Pa Kent should be the kind of guy who saves a dog. That's compassion and heroism, and he's one of the people Clark's supposed to learn that from. I don't want a Pa Kent who would just let that dog die if he could do something to save him.

But... him choosing to die and putting his family through emotional hell because he's afraid of Clark's powers being exposed? That's garbage.

How about instead, Clark saves his father and the people of Smallville, and then they all vow to keep his secret out of respect and kindness? Further influencing the hero he'd become, and where his values stemmed from? Giving the character and the story a core of hope and optimism?

...nah, I guess that's just not "real" enough for a Superman movie. :P

LOL!

Exactly. I love it. I'm forced to argue why a Superman movie should have Superman act like Superman, and being called a douche in the process. I also love Candy harping on a point that I've already conceded. Yes man, both movies have examples of them potentially killing. It's just not as focused and intentional as MOS. And it's not the biggest sin as far as I'm concerned.

Everybody's just a bag of fun.

Was Donners Superman Genius? Yes, it was, considering there wasn't a single, big budget superhero movie prior to that, and it set the stage for everything afterwards. Considering there wasn't a single studio who wanted to finance it, and that he had some of the worst producers possible to contend with. Considering he had to deal with Brando. Considering it broke ground in practical and optical effects. Considering they did plan both films to be shot at once.

Yeah it is F*cking genius. Wow, kids today!

And what? What deeper? How are they exploring the character? Everything in that POS was surface. Yes, you're right a 5 year old could explain it.

If you're trying to insult me, I'm flattered, but really, y'all need to try harder.

At least Puke went with Lazy and douchebag. That's something. It was stupid, because his follow up was nonsense, but he get's an E for effort.

[Candy Kappa]

I personally think that scene would have been better if Pa realized Clark can do some good with his powers and lets him save people, and we'd have a Superman with both parents alive.

I also love Candy harping on a point that I've already conceded. Yes man, both movies have examples of them potentially killing. It's just not as focused and intentional as MOS. And it's not the biggest sin as far as I'm concerned.

one post mentioning it and a post showing a gif off it is "harping"? M'kay?

[Commenter 42]

No he didn't. He ran towards the tornado to save PEOPLE. Then when Martha tells Clark the dog is still in the car Jonathan tells Clark to take the child. He SAVED the dog, and then made a decision to be sacrificed. He was teaching Clark. But hey, yeah a random heart attack, or ancient fruit, is way better story telling.



Or maybe he could have lived, and everyone would complain that he didn't die.

HOLY F*CK!

This cements it. YES you dolt! YES A HEART ATTACK IS BETTER STORY TELLING! YES! YES! YES!

Kent should have taught his son to solve problems. THAT is what a father should do. How to think, the difference between right and wrong. PROBLEM SOLVING.

The Heart attack was a FINAL lesson. "All of these powers, and I couldn't even save him"

Superman was powerless in the face of something as simple as a heart attack. he can't fix that. His powers have limits in the face of life and death.

I love animals, I would totally like to see the dog survive - which is why, sending Pa Kent in, a slow old man, to get the dog is a choice. A STUPID CHOICE. An UNNECESSARY CHOICE. Clark could have done it, and no one would have been the wiser. Stupid movie is Stupid.



one post mentioning it and a post showing a gif off it is "harping"? M'kay?

Fine. Fair enough.

[plastroncafe]

I personally think that scene would have been better if Pa realized Clark can do some good with his powers and lets him save people, and we'd have a Superman with both parents alive.


But then the movie would have to acknowledge the importance of both parents, and not just the fathers, which this movie had no real interest in exploring.

[Turo602]

Was Donners Superman Genius? Yes, it was...

That's not what I asked. I don't care about what it was because today it's trash. But thumbs up there, dinosaur. You probably couldn't comprehend that without your reading glasses on.

And what? What deeper? How are they exploring the character? Everything in that POS was surface. Yes, you're right a 5 year old could explain it.

I won't bother because it would just be a waste of time trying to explain why the sky is blue to a blind fool.

If you're trying to insult me, I'm flattered, but really, y'all need to try harder.

At least Puke went with Lazy and douchebag. That's something. It was stupid, because his follow up was nonsense, but he get's an E for effort.

I'm not trying to insult you. I'm simply speaking truths.

[Commenter 42]

That's not what I asked. I don't care about what it was because today it's trash. But thumbs up there, dinosaur. You probably couldn't comprehend that without your reading glasses on.


Again with the awkward insults. Lol. Keep 'em coming child. This is entertaining. You get a gold star.



I won't bother because it would just be a waste of time trying to explain why the sky is blue to a blind fool.

WTF?


I'm not trying to insult you. I'm simply speaking truths.

You might be speaking, but you're not saying anything.

[Turo602]

Again with the awkward insults. Lol. Keep 'em coming child. This is entertaining. You get a gold star.

And you're just fantastic at the insults. I'm so deeply hurt by your stupidity.

WTF?

My point exactly. There's no use in explaining anything to someone so damn ignorant and foolish. I've seen my fair share of stupid, but you take the cake, dude. Wow.

You might be speaking, but you're not saying anything.

Maybe because you're covering your ears and saying "la la la" like the manchild you are.

[Leo656]

I'm surprised we've resorted to name calling and cheap shots in a Superman thread. Relax.

Yeah man. Talk about having zero self-awareness. :lol: C'mon.

Personally, I'd say Dean Cain's Superman was probably the closest live action interpretation to what I believe Superman is.

You too, huh? I'm not the only one who noticed how strongly that show took from the Byrne run! :lol: His Clark was so great as the George Reeves "Take No Sh*t" kind of reporter. Even when the show went in the toilet after Season 2, him and Teri are just SO much fun to watch regardless of whatever dreck was going on around them, it makes it all watchable. When people say they can't identify with or understand the more "human" side of Superman, I know they've never watched Season 1 and 2 of that show. Can't blame them for avoiding the rest, it was bad. :lol:

I'll chip in that Gerard Christopher from Season 3 and 4 of Adventures of Superboy deserves a nod. Season 2 was still awful and thus he was awful by association, but he was the LEAST awful thing about it, at least, and then for the second half the show was actually really good and he got really, really good in the role. I count it. I mean the guy was older in 1990 than Reeve was when he did the first movie; I don't care what the show was called, I say he was playing Superman. :lol: He also got hired for the Lois & Clark gig before the producers found out he did Superboy; for some reason they didn't want him, despite absolutely loving him 5 minutes before that. Stuff like that makes no sense and it always bothered me.

[plastroncafe]

I've always been curious how well Lois and Clark has held up, because I LOVED that show as a kid. It got me during a preview when Clark leaned down and told a kid that his mom made his costume.

[Leo656]

Pilot absolutely holds up. Almost all of Season 1 and about 2/3s of Season 2 are still pretty good. Season 3 was kind of all over the place and Season 4 was pretty much the sh*ts. The finale was one of the WORST last episodes any show ever had and definitely the worst in the entire series.

I can't blame anyone for just watching Season 1 and ignoring the rest if they wanted. The tweaks they kept having to make to the costume for the first 5 episodes are a little distracting - "Watch Superman's cape and neckline drastically change 2 or 3 times in the same scene!" :lol: - but once that's all out of the way the rest is some pretty good storytelling. The episodes where he's exposed to Kryptonite and discovers his heritage are some of the best in the entire series.

[Bry]

Thing is, there's a whole wide spectrum between Superman as a flawless do-gooder and Superman as a brooding, neck-snapping vigilante. The key to Superman, for me, is bringing across his humanity and his relentless optimism. He's as human as anyone - he's capable of the same anger, despair, and violence as anyone. He's capable of the same mistakes. But he chooses to try for a better option. He chooses kindness and hope, and to be the best possible version of himself. Which means finding a way to avoid the brutal, easy option. That struggle is the best way to humanize him. He could solve almost any option through sheer force and strength, but he always tries to find the harder, better way.

Can he ever give in? Yeah, but the writing has really gotta earn that moment. It needs to be airtight. And to me, MoS fell very short of that.

Was Donners Superman Genius? Yes, it was, considering there wasn't a single, big budget superhero movie prior to that, and it set the stage for everything afterwards. Considering there wasn't a single studio who wanted to finance it, and that he had some of the worst producers possible to contend with. Considering he had to deal with Brando. Considering it broke ground in practical and optical effects. Considering they did plan both films to be shot at once.

Totally with you on this one. Is it dated in some ways? Sure! Does it have flaws? You bet. But it's a 37 year old movie that holds up remarkably well, and plenty of modern superhero movies are still cribbing from its playbook.

The "it's trash now" modern snobbery is hilarious, too. Does anyone think Man of Steel will have aged anywhere near as well by 2050?

I'll chip in that Gerard Christopher from Season 3 and 4 of Adventures of Superboy deserves a nod. Season 2 was still awful and thus he was awful by association, but he was the LEAST awful thing about it, at least, and then for the second half the show was actually really good and he got really, really good in the role. I count it. I mean the guy was older in 1990 than Reeve was when he did the first movie; I don't care what the show was called, I say he was playing Superman. :lol: He also got hired for the Lois & Clark gig before the producers found out he did Superboy; for some reason they didn't want him, despite absolutely loving him 5 minutes before that. Stuff like that makes no sense and it always bothered me.

That kind of thing is always frustrating. If someone's right for the role, they're right for the role. Ryan Reynolds returning as Deadpool seems like a freakish anomaly, as it's a reboot, and not completely scrapping the previous cast almost never happens in those cases.

If you're looking for an action scene, then yeah, the tornado thing was the way to go. I mean, it was laughably set up, but for adrenaline purposes, a tornado trumps heart attack in an action flick.

But for dramatic purposes, a heart attack is actually a very important lesson Clark learns in humility. That with all his powers theres some people he can't save.

I prefer the latter, but to each their own.

Absolutely nailed it. That little scene has so much more impact because it hits you hard with Superman's limitations - it was out of everyone's control and there's nothing he or anyone could do about it. Superman can save people from all kinds of disasters, but he can't stop someone's own body from failing.

[Leo656]

I prefer it when his parents are alive. :ohwell:

I'm a sucker for all that sh*t where after he punches out Metallo, he goes home to pick up a new cape from Ma, who always has a bunch already made... him and Pa fix a fence and throw some new tires on the old truck, and then they go have a slice of Ma's apple pie while they talk about what a rat bastard that Lex Luthor fella is, and boy how he's gonna get it one'a these days.

They used to do that stuff all the time, and it was always so great seeing him just decompress and relax. "Hey, Dad... nothing's blowing up right now, why don't we sit on the porch and watch the sunset. Y'know I was on the moon this morning? True story!" That stuff is so great, and they don't do it as much when one or both of his parents are dead. He gets all "alone" and angsty and I don't like it.

I like that he at least hangs out with his Mom a lot in the new movies, apparently. It's nice.
-------------

And calling the Reeve film trash is totally wrong (the first one, anyway... it's arguable about the rest). It's fine as its own thing and it's probably the best singular and self-contained Superman movie that ever will be made. I just don't like that aside from Him, everything else is light years away from the comic it's supposedly based on (which I'm easily forgiving of, by the way... they wanted to do the comics, and they tried to very early on in the scripting of it, it just would've cost a billion dollars back then, so they made the movie they made, and That's Fine). It's a really great movie and if you just ignore the sequels and the fact it's a total departure from the source - kinda like Keaton's Batman - then it's really good and (clothes aside) it's not that dated. It's not my personal favorite overall, but it works far better as its own complete film, way more than anything they've done since. There's no arguing that. I mean, I'll defend MoS all day long, but the fact is that a movie that's overly-reliant on its sequels to tell its story did NOT do ALL of its job.

[Bry]

I prefer it when his parents are alive. :ohwell:

Oh god, me too. It grounds him. The loss of Krypton is enough tragedy already, and keeping that connection to his folks and Smallville helps humanize him a ton. I like a Superman that can fit in as a global superhero, a big-city reporter and a humble farmboy.

But if you have to do the "Pa dies" thing, it should be meaningful and have purpose. And I think the point made with the heart attack is easily the best way that's been done.

[Leo656]

Aww... Not when he heroically rescues Ma from Brainiac? :tgrin:

Sometimes comics accidentally make certain moments "bigger" than they ought to be. :lol:

[Turo602]

The "it's trash now" modern snobbery is hilarious, too. Does anyone think Man of Steel will have aged anywhere near as well by 2050?

Probably not but who knows? What's hilarious is how blinded people are by nostalgia.

[Bry]

Aww... Not when he heroically rescues Ma from Brainiac? :tgrin:

Sometimes comics accidentally make certain moments "bigger" than they ought to be. :lol:

Or certain movies. :P

That's kind of my major preference there -- if Pa has to die, then make it in as "human" a way as possible. "All those things I can do. All those powers. And I couldn't even save him" holds up for a reason. And compared to him being killed by a freaking tornado, it's downright subtle.

We definitely disagree on Man of Steel. That's okay! I pretty much hated it, but I can see how it could have turned out more to my tastes if certain creative decisions went a different way. I felt like it was way too dour (in tone and colour palette) and there were those key sequences that just didn't jive with "my" Superman. But... fix the Pa Kent stuff, brighten the colour scheme, inject a little more lightheartedness overall and tone down the disaster porn, and I'm all in.

Superman Returns had its share of problems, but if Snyder showed some restraint with the mass destruction and injected some more of this kind of stuff to balance things...

HIMbqMmkZCI

...that would have gone a long way for me.

(Or, hell, even further back -- Superman II had Superman stop his fight with Zod to save civilians from falling debris!)

And maybe find a way to not have Superman straight-up murder a dude. He can still die -- but they could have been more clever than a neck-snap. Just my opinion. ;)

Probably not but who knows? What's hilarious is how blinded people are by nostalgia.

And others can be just as blinded by a need to reject all "nostalgia". Times change, styles and tastes change, but there are some things just always work. IMO, Snyder's need to be as tonally distinct as possible from previous Superman movies was throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

[Turo602]

And others can be just as blinded by a need to reject all "nostalgia". Times change, styles and tastes change, but there are some things just always work. IMO, Snyder's need to be as tonally distinct as possible from previous Superman movies was throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

And that's fair. I get that. Superman doesn't need to change but the way I see it, he didn't. Sure, the film itself was darker and that's a huge turn off but in terms of character, I thought they nailed it. They captured a side to him that most people don't see and personally, I think it's for the best. Just like the misconception that Aquaman is useless, there's many out there who see Superman as this overpowered boring guy who never struggles and that's just not true. I agree that Man of Steel is nowhere near the definitive Superman film, but it's still good to know that many people out there have given him a chance and can now appreciate his character because of Man of Steel.

Also, there's nothing blinding about ignoring nostalgia. It just means your judgment isn't clouded by personal feelings towards something.

[CyberCubed]

I'm mostly watching this movie for Batman anyway, and I imagine most are. Whatever they do with Superman is secondary to me.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

He was Superman for about 24 hours when he fights Zod. In Superman Returns he'd been Superman for years. Why is this ignored?

Also why isn't anyone upset about the rumored Doomsday introduction? The way he was brought into the Death of Superman in my opinion is way better than having Luthor create him...

[Turo602]

He was Superman for about 24 hours when he fights Zod. In Superman Returns he'd been Superman for years. Why is this ignored?

Also why isn't anyone upset about the rumored Doomsday introduction? The way he was brought into the Death of Superman in my opinion is way better than having Luthor create him...

Because people don't care for change. They want the same old Superman with no build up or challenge.

As for the spoiler, I don't mind the change. It's fine for a different take. That is, if it's even true.

[MikeandRaph87]

It would actually be taking a cue from Justice League because Star Labs created Doomsday. Before he could be controlled rouge scientist Professor Milo unleashed him as revenge due to being fired for ineptitude. So Doomsday being created in a lab using krytonian DNA to fight Superman is not an entirely new concept. I do welcome it as it looks like an interesting angle.

[Commenter 42]

He was Superman for about 24 hours when he fights Zod. In Superman Returns he'd been Superman for years. Why is this ignored?

Also why isn't anyone upset about the rumored Doomsday introduction? The way he was brought into the Death of Superman in my opinion is way better than having Luthor create him...

It's ignored because few people think Superman returns when they Think Superman.

I agree with your opinion in the spoiler.
The countless deaths that evolved Doomsday is a rather unique idea. I also liked that he just kind of showed up out of nowhere, this mysterious unstoppable force. Luthor getting involved waters it down.

Because people don't care for change. They want the same old Superman with no build up or challenge.

Some people want Superman to be a regular joe, someone they totally relate to. I've never looked at it that way. When i read him in the comics, I don't read him that way. Superman should be better, in every way, than we are. It's his perfection that drives the conflict in his life. He is constantly chanllenged by the fact the the world isn't built with him in mind. He's too strong, so he needs to be gentle - he's to fast, so he must slow down. you get the jist.

A good writer doesn't need to de-power him, or use Kryptonite, or alter the character to fit the story; they should instead write the story that fits the character.

But It's symptomatic of your generation - everything needs to be about you, a representation of you, how you feel, what you want who you are. If you can't identify with the character then it's wrong. if you don't see a 100% inclusive cast of all ethnicities, it sucks. Every thing must be a representation of everyone all the time.

It's sad actually. With so many restrictions to the type of story's that meet the criteria of the moral police, it's no wonder every film is exactly the same.

You might be happy they changed Superman - and that's fine, but recognize that they are changing him, and tweaking it to mirror Gen Z's hopeless narcissism.

[Leo656]

Doomsday's origin is kind of screwed up, anyway. Me, I like the whole "he was an ancient Kryptonian experiment gone awry" angle... and actually, that would fit really easily with all that stuff they talked about in the first movie, all the genetic manipulation stuff. Huh. Ah, well, they probably just wanted to simplify and streamline things, same as they've done with most of what they've borrowed. Plus, one of the most consistent complaints about Doomsday's origin and his defeat of Superman, among fans, has always been that Luthor had nothing to do with it, when Luthor always has something to do with it, and the general feeling that if Superman was ever to "die", it would be just the poetic thing to do to have Lex involved. So this was probably one of those, "Hey, why don't we 'fix' that here?" kind of things. I have always had a feeling that if DC had a do-over, they actually would have had Lex be responsible for Doomsday. This way of doing it in the movie actually makes perfect sense, so it's a change I can live with. I prefer the comic book origin, but the fact is, most people were never really satisfied with it to begin with, so it's open for tinkering.

Bry: Returns has the best-shot and most dramatically exciting action scenes of any Superman film. People don't like to admit that, but it's true. Visually, there's very little wrong with the movie. It's my personal favorite film in the franchise for a lot of reasons; although it mostly squeaks by over the first one on points. It definitely had the best visual use of all his powers without flat-out breaking the rules and making up new ones, like all the earlier movies did.

One thing I don't think enough people are factoring in, that's almost assuredly deliberate, is that the visual tone of this series is "dark" for a reason. They're doing the same thing they did in Nolan's trilogy where each film gradually gets lighter and brighter as the hero "rises" from the darkness. In this universe, it's being used to help put over that this world, pre-Superman and pre-super-heroes, is a dark and uncertain place. Gradually, as we can see right away in this film, the color scale starts to change and get brighter, until the point where the JLA will eventually stand before humanity as its protectors. The heroes themselves are the "light" in this universe; as we get deeper into the films, the lighting and colors gradually change. The whole "It's Darkest before Dawn" thing. I don't have a link, but I definitely read something on it; the general feeling in doing it was, "it worked in the last trilogy, let's do it again". It may not be to everyone's taste but at least there's a reason for it. It's the entire idea behind calling the film "Dawn of Justice". They're not exactly subtle about that kind of thing.

Meanwhile, I *did* stumble upon a Spoiler that makes me a little bummed out. There's finally something I'm 100% against in this thing. It's related to the Robin costume, to give you a hint before you decide to click the tab or not...
So I saw a photo someone was able to grab from the trailer, that shows a large gravestone that reads "Richard John Grayson". So the Robin memorial in the Batcave isn't Jason Todd's, it's apparently Dick Grayson's. So in this universe, apparently there was only ONE Robin, Grayson, and he was the one killed by the Joker. Which means we won't be getting any Nightwing in this DC film universe. :ohwell:

I get it, I totally get it... "keep it simple" and all that, plus the fact they never ever want to even use any of the Robin stuff at all anyway... and it's not gonna kill things for me... but it would've been nice. :ohwell: Ah well, can't have everything.

[MikeandRaph87]

Wait....James Gordon AND Dick Grayson are dead? Barbara Gordon is Commissioner? Why can we not just have Dick Grayson as an effective Robin and Barbara Gordon as an effective Batgirl on their own and still a team? *sigh* I am not happy they are my two favorite DC heroes!

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Meanwhile, I *did* stumble upon a Spoiler that makes me a little bummed out. There's finally something I'm 100% against in this thing. It's related to the Robin costume, to give you a hint before you decide to click the tab or not...
So I saw a photo someone was able to grab from the trailer, that shows a large gravestone that reads "Richard John Grayson". So the Robin memorial in the Batcave isn't Jason Todd's, it's apparently Dick Grayson's. So in this universe, apparently there was only ONE Robin, Grayson, and he was the one killed by the Joker. Which means we won't be getting any Nightwing in this DC film universe. :ohwell:

I get it, I totally get it... "keep it simple" and all that, plus the fact they never ever want to even use any of the Robin stuff at all anyway... and it's not gonna kill things for me... but it would've been nice. :ohwell: Ah well, can't have everything.

I despise that as well. I want there to be a legacy of Robins, so we can see all four of the boys. But no...

[Leo656]

Did we get confirmation on Jim Gordon being dead? And Babs being the commissioner? I remember the rumor, but I wasn't sure if it was confirmed.

Only reason I could see for them doing that, is if they want to keep the Bale trilogy as "Loose backstory". They were so popular, DC/WB may be nervous about outright contradicting any of it, so they may be saying these new movies are "a few years later" and hand-waving it away for the people who just won't let go of the Nolan films.

Eh. It's a way to go. Not sure that's what they're doing but I couldn't blame them.

[MikeandRaph87]

The headstone in that case could be John Robin Blake if that is the case. He is expendable.:tgrumble:

[Commenter 42]

Did we get confirmation on Jim Gordon being dead?



I read another story today...

Lots of people are thinking this, if Facebook is any indication.
WARNING could be a massive spoiler of all the Spoliers to spoil! The ultimate Spoiler of spoilering spoil.
Possibly not true at all...but it has a certain logic to it.

Jason Todd is the Robin who died - not Dick - only he didn't die. He became red hood, and then, the Joker in Suicide Squad. It's why he has the tats and the ****ed up teeth, as an homage to the original Joker that killed him.
One of the many sources that popped up on FB today (http://www.dorkly.com/post/75333/this-fan-theory-about-jared-letos-joker-is-kind-of-brilliant)

[Leo656]

I read that too but I don't buy it. I was wondering how many other people heard that one. I'unno, just don't feel it in my gut.

[CyberCubed]

I seriously doubt that is going to be the case. I can definitely see them want to use Nightwing eventually. He's never been exposed in movies and I can see him being handled better than a young kid Robin in serious movies like these.

[Turo602]

Meanwhile, I *did* stumble upon a Spoiler that makes me a little bummed out. There's finally something I'm 100% against in this thing. It's related to the Robin costume, to give you a hint before you decide to click the tab or not...
So I saw a photo someone was able to grab from the trailer, that shows a large gravestone that reads "Richard John Grayson". So the Robin memorial in the Batcave isn't Jason Todd's, it's apparently Dick Grayson's. So in this universe, apparently there was only ONE Robin, Grayson, and he was the one killed by the Joker. Which means we won't be getting any Nightwing in this DC film universe. :ohwell:

I get it, I totally get it... "keep it simple" and all that, plus the fact they never ever want to even use any of the Robin stuff at all anyway... and it's not gonna kill things for me... but it would've been nice. :ohwell: Ah well, can't have everything.

That image has been floating around for months now. I didn't know how legit it was but the latest trailer pretty much confirms it.


I don't know how to feel about it but it does kind of make sense to simplify it. I mean, I've always thought it was weird for Batman to adopt so many young sidekicks. I forgot where it was, but it was one of the Batman cartoons where Gordon sees Robin, probably Tim Drake, and says something along the lines of "they keep getting younger." In the comics and cartoons it's all fine and dandy but in real life, shouldn't people be concerned? Batman can say whatever bullsh*t he wants but it's bad parenting. He essentially makes child soldiers. So sticking to just one Robin seems fine, especially if he's a little older but what bothers me is that Dick Grayson is likely going to take the mantle of Red Hood. At the same time though, I don't think that rules him out as Nightwing either. He could become Red Hood but what if down the road, after Batman has "saves" him he becomes Nightwing?

I read another story today...

Lots of people are thinking this, if Facebook is any indication.
WARNING could be a massive spoiler of all the Spoliers to spoil! The ultimate Spoiler of spoilering spoil.
Possibly not true at all...but it has a certain logic to it.

Jason Todd is the Robin who died - not Dick - only he didn't die. He became red hood, and then, the Joker in Suicide Squad. It's why he has the tats and the ****ed up teeth, as an homage to the original Joker that killed him.
One of the many sources that popped up on FB today


Yeah, my sister showed me that yesterday and I don't buy it either. Would be lame if it's true though.

[Slade]

I remember reading that "spoiler" a while back. It didn't sit well with me then. I'm not sure I actually buy it though. I feel like there's going to be a twist to it. Which, is probably nothing more than he's alive, but they faked his death. Idk.


As far as that FB rumor. Nah, doubt that.


Though, sounds interesting.

[MikeandRaph87]

They did that already in Batman The Dark Knight so its hard to think WB would do that again with Jim Gordon.

[CyberCubed]

Didn't they originally try to get Christian Bale back for this film before he turned it down? Seems like they were trying to make it have a loose continuity with the Nolan trilogy at first.

[Slade]

They did that already in Batman The Dark Knight so its hard to think WB would do that again with Jim Gordon.


They didn't go as far as having an actual grave for Gordon though.

Didn't they originally try to get Christian Bale back for this film before he turned it down? Seems like they were trying to make it have a loose continuity with the Nolan trilogy at first.

From everything I've ever read. No. The Nolan trilogy is done. It's it's own thing. Nothing to do with the DCCU.

[Leo656]

There was some loose talk way back when that they offered Bale somewhere between (rumored) $40-$50 million to play Batman again in A movie, not specifically this one. But he completely didn't want to do it and WB really can't make any money at all on a deal like that, so they all figured it would be a colossal waste of time to spend 1/4 of a movie's budget on a guy who didn't even wanna be in the damn thing.

So there was talk he might be Batman again but that was all pretty much given up before this specific movie was confirmed, I believe.

[Turo602]

They didn't go as far as having an actual grave for Gordon though.

I've been seeing this idea pop up lately but Bryan Cranston would have totally made a great Commissioner Gordon.

From everything I've ever read. No. The Nolan trilogy is done. It's it's own thing. Nothing to do with the DCCU.

It is now but before I totally read that they offered Bale tons of money to return and that he'd only do it if the story made sense of him being Batman again.

[CyberCubed]

I don't get why Bale turned it down, its not like he hated playing Batman either. All he would have to do was a few months of filming and he'd be done. I mean you're offered damn near $50 million dollars for a single movie and you turn that down?

That's more money than any of us will see in a lifetime.

[Commenter 42]

I don't get why Bale turned it down, its not like he hated playing Batman either. All he would have to do was a few months of filming and he'd be done. I mean you're offered damn near $50 million dollars for a single movie and you turn that down?

That's more money than any of us will see in a lifetime.

As far as I've read, it never happened. I think there is an article where he (Bale) shoots it down as gossip. But then again, he's a psycho, so who knows.

There was a ton of scuttlebutt around Ben getting the part. Some, er, interesting things were happening at Warners prior to him "landing" the Role. If you ask me, he simply took it.

This article makes it clear that Affleck has been in the background at Warners for years

He owes everything to Robinov.

http://deadline.com/2013/06/yet-another-warner-bros-shake-up-jeff-robinov-quitting-movie-studio-after-no-new-contract-offered-and-kevin-tsujiharas-war-of-silence-sue-kroll-dan-fellman-greg-silverman-may-lead-as-triumvira-521215/

[Leo656]

I, for one, had no interest in watching Bale sleepwalk through the part again after his heart clearly wasn't in it anymore. He was barely in the last one. He had his day and he was great for a while; those movies still had a bunch wrong with 'em, give someone else a turn.

[ToTheNines]

I've been seeing this idea pop up lately but Bryan Cranston would have totally made a great Commissioner Gordon.



It is now but before I totally read that they offered Bale tons of money to return and that he'd only do it if the story made sense of him being Batman again.

You know he was Gordon in Year One, right?