Batman V. Superman: Dawn Of Justice

[Leo656]

Hmm....

Something I saw today on Supermanhomepage.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BadAssDigest.com claims to have received plot details about "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice", specifically in regards to a major Batman character who won't be seen in the movie. The "scoop" also outlines possible locations for fights scenes in the film.

Spoiler:

James Gordon has, at some point in the past, bitten the dust. How and at whose hands I cannot tell you - all that's noted in the script is that there's a memorial plaque to James Gordon. This explains why the role wasn't cast for the film, at least.

What does a dead Jim Gordon mean for BvS? Not much technically - most of the story takes place in Metropolis although there are two major fight scenes in Gotham (one where Superman comes looking for Batman and a climactic fight scene) - but it could have big consequences for the new DC Movieverse. While pre-Terrio drafts of the script mentioned a deceased Robin, later iterations closer to the start of shooting don't - perhaps in this continuity The Joker killed Jim Gordon instead of Robin? That would be an interesting spin, and something that could feed into future Batman movies.

The writer of the article, Devin Faraci has a track record for being on the money with his scoops, however, I'm not sure if he's speculating or giving his own personal opinion when he further states, "Batman is the lead of Justice League - he's the guy who puts the team together". Isn't Batman usually the one reluctant to join the other superheroes?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HMMM... Now, as far as Batman being the one who assembles the League in this version, I can totally understand what they're going for this time. It's pretty obvious that, in this universe, Batman as a character has been observing, with quite a bit of unease, the rise of super-powered beings like Superman, Zod, Wonder Woman, etc., and is concerned with what will happen to Earth if they're left unchecked. Something is obviously going to happen, plot-wise, in this movie that not only brings Batman and Superman briefly into conflict with each other, but by the end of the film provides Batman with the impetus to unite other super-humans under the JLA banner. Partly for the cause of "Justice", but probably just as important, so Batman can keep an eye on them and, to some degree, control them. It makes perfect sense from the "paranoid Batman" perspective, so while in many interpretations he is portrayed as being reluctant to join the League, I can totally buy him being the one who starts it. He has his reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if they tackle Brother Eye and the OMAC Project in a future film based on this.

As for the other thing...

Spoiler:

Mixed feelings on Gordon being dead. BUT, I will say, this gives a LOT of credence to my theory that the upcoming Batman solo films will be set in the "past", before the Affleck/JLA-related movies. Because I have a hard time seeing them doing a "proper" Batman movie with no Gordon. I definitely think they're going for two parallel Batman film narratives, with the solo movies providing a backstory that shapes him into the character we will be seeing in the JLA movies. And I can get behind that, I think it's a good idea.

[CyberCubed]

I haven't been following, was that rumor of Nightwing or Robin appearing in this movie ever confirmed?

[Leo656]

Just a rumor. Apparently there were a ton of false leads planted about many things, and the script itself has had some things added or moved around. Pretty sure Nightwing came and went as just a rumor. Although we'll probably see him eventually, I find it hard to believe we won't.

[Leo656]

So, apparently, Badass Digest says they got their hands on a copy of the pre-shooting script that was floating around a few months ago, and... Holy F*ck. If this is legit...

So anyways, from http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/b...ory-details/2/

MAJOR F*cking Potential Spoilers (That BETTER Damn Well be Legit)...

Spoiler:

First and foremost, BAD assures us that the Big Blue Boyscout is front-and-center in the film, making it the Man of Steel sequel that we were always promised. This news isn’t likely to silence those who believe BVS is nothing more than a Justice League prequel or a new Batman movie, but it’s still great to hear that the film will “turn its attention to Superman heavily” and “examine the implications of Superman in the real world.”

We saw a bit of those implications in Man of Steel, but BVS will go even deeper down that rabbit hole. Superman has been rather busy in the two years since Zod’s attack on Metropolis, “becoming the hero we know and love.” Clark and Lois now live together, and Clark is still donning a pair of glasses and working for the Daily Planet (though he’d rather cover stories about the Caped Crusader than the Metropolis/Gotham football game that he’s been assigned).

Citizens of Metropolis won’t be the only ones wary of the powerful, flying alien in their midst, however, as BVS will also explore how other countries view Superman. China is especially nervous and won’t allow the Man of Steel in their air space, as they view him as a tool of the United States (another great nod to his depiction in Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns).
BVS will also take a more on-the-nose approach to talking about Man of Steel‘s more controversial moments, namely Zod’s death and the destruction that the two Kryptonians caused in Metropolis. At one point, Superman confronts a villain and tells him, “I won’t snap your neck, I’m going to take you to prison,” and when Supes faces off against

Spoiler:

Doomsday

, General Swanwick (Harry Lennix) tells the military that because he’s a hero, Superman will take the battle away from populated areas.

Again, until these details are officially confirmed, we’ll have to put them in the rumor pile. However, if true, they’re reassuring developments that show us Snyder and screenwriter Chris Terrio not only understand, but are not afraid to face Man of Steel‘s controversies.

I... I didn't think they'd actually do it... I mean, there were a LOT of rumors even a few months ago, and stuff was kind of hinting at it, but... Holy Sh*t.

Spoiler:

DOOMSDAY.

...Maybe that armor Batman's packing isn't for fighting Superman after all.

I mean yeah, rumors. But this actually fits stuff that we already know thanks to some loose-lipped extras. And it just so NEEDS to be legit. So, so much.

And to think... people were wondering how they were gonna escalate things after Zod. Hooooo-BOY.

[Slade]

If that's true....HOLY SH*T is right!

[B-Man]

That could be amazing if done right. That characters inclusion is inevitable at some point anyway.

[Leo656]

We know Superman and Batman are going to be at odds at some point. We also know that they're going to end up on the same page, and there needs to be a major threat to not just bring the two of them together, but to prove there is a genuine need for a team of super-humans to protect the entire planet from disasters of near-Biblical proportions. I mean, we NEED a Bad Guy that can convince the ENTIRE WORLD after what happened in "Man of Steel" that Superman and these other "gods" are the undisputed Good Guys.

There ya go. It's almost too easy. F*ck me runnin', it's goddamn brilliant.

EDIT: I had another thought.

Spoiler:

There were rumors at several points that either Superman or "Clark Kent" would be "killed" in this movie. I suddenly have a strong feeling that Superman will die saving Earth from Doomsday, and that his sacrifice will be the impetus that causes Batman to fully come out of semi-retirement and form the Justice League to fill the void. The film will end with Superman "dead", setting up a cliffhanger and a chance for him to make a triumphant return in the Justice League film, as the only one who can save Earth - and the League - from Brainiac.

That's suddenly how I think things are gonna go, and I gotta say, I think that sounds pretty damn great.

[B-Man]

Dude, I f*ckin HOPE it turns out that way. It'd be a cream-dream. You're gonna look like a genius if you've predicted it lol

[Leo656]

Well, to be fair, some of that stuff has existed in scripts to some degree for years, so it's not like I'm just pulling ideas out of thin air. Nothing ever gets thrown away completely, and even though the last two movies only used little bits and pieces of some of the older, awful-er scripts, they DID recycle stuff that's been floating around on paper for over a decade, so I can see them doing that again.

It's just that those earlier scripts, on the whole, were awful with a few good moments sprinkled in them. It's more like, in "Returns" and "MoS", they cribbed the parts of the other scripts that DID "get it right", and put them in movies that weren't awful. Like, the plane-catching scene from "Returns" and the "first flight" scene and even the Battle of Metropolis with Zod from MoS were all lifted from earlier scripts and shot almost exactly as written.

I'm just predicting it based on 1. assuming these rumors are true, and 2. putting it together in a way that fits what we know and what they've done before. We shall see.

What makes me a little nervous is that Superman Homepage hasn't mentioned any of it yet, but then again, they jumped in early on some of the rumors that have since been dismissed, so maybe they're waiting this one out to be safe.

[Sumac]

I wonder how Snyder will be able to get it right.
After watching Man of Steel, I had quite a lot of doubts about his abilities. Like Bay, he is too much in love with his own visual style to properly do anything else. It was the case with Watchmen and Sucker Punch. And MOS. At least Nolan is seemingly out of the picture, so no matter how actors will perform in this movie it wouldn't be similar to a bunch of wooden mannequin spouting mono- and dialogues which could make Captain Obvious green from jealousy.

Also, the whole idea of "Superman grounded in reality" movie is sort of ridiculous. If failed in MOS and since BvS will introduce even more comic book elements, it will be completely impossible to sell this idea.

[TheCanadiandrome]

can't wait to see this movie

[ZariusTwo]

Warner may have possibly split this one in two as well, with the first installment coming this October (are they looking to pit Bat up against Bond?)

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/01/1...-into-2-movies

[CyberCubed]

That's actually a pretty good idea. I said it was getting too cramped for a 2 hour movie to have Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, etc. all be introduced and meet for the first time.

Having two movies would work a lot better. And the icing on the cake is getting the first part this year.

[NinjaPug]

That rumor isn't true

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by NinjaPug

That rumor isn't true

Yeah, I just found out....which doesn't quite relief me as we could still end up with something bloated

[Leo656]

Almost definitely fake.

An article I read made a lot of good points as to why that would actually be much, much worse. Firstly, the whole "Split One Big Story into Two Movies" approach is still kind of new and nobody knows for sure if it's "hitting" with people. A LOT of the reviews for the last Hunger Games movie, for example, were of the "Nothing happens, just wait for the next one" variety. Secondly, with Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter, etc., the film series were all on the way out, and the studios had no Big Franchises set up to take over, so it only made sense for the studios to milk it and gouge audiences as much as possible on their way out the door. It was literally their last chance to make a buck on the thing.

But that's NOT at all how you want to START a franchise like the DC film universe, with a two hour Batman-centric "prequel" and then make people wait another year for the "Real" movie. There's just a million reasons why it would be a terrible idea.

People thinking this movie are "bloated" are going solely by rumored cast and character sheets. If that's your criteria, then EVERY movie is "bloated", because even movies with all of two "main characters" are usually full of dozens and dozens of characters whose names you can't even remember because they had no lines or were only there to take up space. I mean what about "Inception"? That's a great movie. Tell me a character's name besides Leonardo DiCaprio (Don't even pretend his characters have names, either ). I'd argue that movie had more characters than SvB probably will, and was rather a mind-bender, but nobody complains that it's "Bloated", although the case could be made. It's just a really good movie that has a lot going on.

Just making a point. A movie can have a lot going on but that doesn't mean it's automatically smashed together. I'm almost positive most of the "bit players" like Aquaman are going to be exactly that, they'll be in the movie to establish that they exist but not taking up any major real estate.

And I doubt BvS will be two hours. Movies like this usually hover around the three-hour mark nowadays, which may or may not be too much depending on your bladder control, but I feel that it actually works pretty well for super-heroes, fantasy, and sci-fi films in general. It'll probably be around two and a half hours, maybe a little bit more. "Returns" was three hours and people said it was too long, but only because nobody punched anyone. In movies like "Lord of the Rings" people have proven they'll sit still for any damn sh*t plus a dozen false finishes, as long as there was a ton of violent sh*t before that. This movie's going to have action and fight scenes galore, so even if it's long, it won't be boring.

So... relax, I guess? I'unno, my radar as for what's gonna be good and what's gonna be bad is usually pretty solid and I've gotten nothing but good vibes from this one. I've pretty much accepted that if ever they do a Batman movie without Bale, or another Superman movie period, people will sh*t on it no matter what. It's... kind of annoying honestly.

[ObiWanFan4life]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Almost definitely fake.

An article I read made a lot of good points as to why that would actually be much, much worse. Firstly, the whole "Split One Big Story into Two Movies" approach is still kind of new and nobody knows for sure if it's "hitting" with people. A LOT of the reviews for the last Hunger Games movie, for example, were of the "Nothing happens, just wait for the next one" variety. Secondly, with Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter, etc., the film series were all on the way out, and the studios had no Big Franchises set up to take over, so it only made sense for the studios to milk it and gouge audiences as much as possible on their way out the door. It was literally their last chance to make a buck on the thing.

But that's NOT at all how you want to START a franchise like the DC film universe, with a two hour Batman-centric "prequel" and then make people wait another year for the "Real" movie. There's just a million reasons why it would be a terrible idea.

People thinking this movie are "bloated" are going solely by rumored cast and character sheets. If that's your criteria, then EVERY movie is "bloated", because even movies with all of two "main characters" are usually full of dozens and dozens of characters whose names you can't even remember because they had no lines or were only there to take up space. I mean what about "Inception"? That's a great movie. Tell me a character's name besides Leonardo DiCaprio (Don't even pretend his characters have names, either ). I'd argue that movie had more characters than SvB probably will, and was rather a mind-bender, but nobody complains that it's "Bloated", although the case could be made. It's just a really good movie that has a lot going on.

Just making a point. A movie can have a lot going on but that doesn't mean it's automatically smashed together. I'm almost positive most of the "bit players" like Aquaman are going to be exactly that, they'll be in the movie to establish that they exist but not taking up any major real estate.

And I doubt BvS will be two hours. Movies like this usually hover around the three-hour mark nowadays, which may or may not be too much depending on your bladder control, but I feel that it actually works pretty well for super-heroes, fantasy, and sci-fi films in general. It'll probably be around two and a half hours, maybe a little bit more. "Returns" was three hours and people said it was too long, but only because nobody punched anyone. In movies like "Lord of the Rings" people have proven they'll sit still for any damn sh*t plus a dozen false finishes, as long as there was a ton of violent sh*t before that. This movie's going to have action and fight scenes galore, so even if it's long, it won't be boring.

So... relax, I guess? I'unno, my radar as for what's gonna be good and what's gonna be bad is usually pretty solid and I've gotten nothing but good vibes from this one. I've pretty much accepted that if ever they do a Batman movie without Bale, or another Superman movie period, people will sh*t on it no matter what. It's... kind of annoying honestly.

2 and a Half Hours might be suitable for a movie like this, so long as the filmmakers don't pull an Amazing Spider-Man 2 and rush everything.

[TigerClaw]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Warner may have possibly split this one in two as well, with the first installment coming this October (are they looking to pit Bat up against Bond?)

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/01/1...-into-2-movies

I believe its been debunked. Henry Cavill says it's not being split into 2.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansit...news/?a=113439

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

Well this film, if what Leo said in post #344 is true, then this film is shaping up to one lanmark film.

Can't wait.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

I believe its been debunked. Henry Cavill says it's not being split into 2.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansit...news/?a=113439

This is a sigh of relief, the more I hear and read about this movie the more excited I get. Splitting this film in half could work, but seems pointless. Leo named off the great points why it doesn't and thats pretty much how I feel.