Batman V Superman

[Tiny Poster]

Sorry, I was indulging in a bit of NoSleep-style obtuse pedantry in respomse to your "50 years" comment. I'm well-versed in the varied takes on Luthor over the decades, thanks very much.


My Bush josh was a dig at the shallow allusions/pretences in the Goyer films (Drones! Space Jesus! Ooh, it's a bit like the Occupy movement this, innit etc), so I was amused at how you took it at face value, like a teenage goth annoyed that his parents don't "get" the deep feelings he has and the music he listens to. I'm going to my room! *SLAMS DOOR*

[Kelvin]

I've already stated I have mixed feeling about the trailer, and I thought Man of Steel was okay/good, but deeply flawed, so I hardly fit your desciption of a stroppy teen sulking because people don't get his favourite band. I just thought you were being serious with your Bush reference and I disagreed. I apologise for not getting your hilarious jokes.

[Delete Delete Delete]

[Replies From View]

This happens to be one of my very very favourite depictions of Capeman 2 since 1955.

[Default to the negative]

I prefer this.



Seriously though, I will probably go and see Batman vs. Superman when it comes out. Just because.

[Replies From View]

I prefer this.

[popcorn]

I continue to think that the complaints about the DC films being too serious stems from a kind of snobbery that persuades us that blockbuster films, and more specifically comic book films, ought to be inherently light and fun, and that a film like this, which seems to take itself more seriously, is therefore either pompous or misjudged.

There's definitely a weird elastic band snapping back and forth here.

Nerds have traditionally demanded their entertainment be dark, mature, edgy and so on. When you think of classically terrible nerd works - awful fanfiction, fan movies and so on - they tend towards the violent and gritty, even when it's patently inappropriate; take that recent Power Rangers thing, for example. As a general rule, nerds love Darth Vader and Boba Fett and hate Ewoks and Jar Jar Binks.

But in recent years there's been a pushback about this from other nerds, who now think everything should be all rainbows and sunshine, possibly out of embarrassment following all the terrible fan films. I dunno.

I think the Nolan Batman films are the obvious case study here. Batman Begins was completely thrilling in its morbidity, and The Dark Knight even moreso, but by the time of Dark Knight Rises I really thought it was pushing its luck. Take Catwoman - no one could bring themselves in the movie to actually call her Catwoman, and they only gave her cat ears very grudgingly, with the lift-up goggle things. It smacked to me of Nolan and Co feeling a bit embarrassed by the material they were dealing with. There's only seriously you can take a guy who dresses up as a bat, and The Dark Knight Rises made no concession to its own mounting ridiculousness, and ends up feeling weird and uncanny and... well, embarrassed.

[Kelvin]

I think another big problem, certainly in terms of audience perception, is that they really didn't have any humour at all in Man of Steel, and what there was either wasn't very funny, or was very low key. The Dark Knight, by comparison, is filled with genuinely funny moments, albeit mostly black humour, so feels fun to watch, while still retaining its dark tone and "realistic" setting. The upcoming DC films need to recapture that balance of heavier themes, intense characters and a dark tone, paired with a half decent sense of humour.

Marvel's films increasingly border on outright comedies, more in line with something like the Indiana Jones films, and I don't want that the DC/Warner Bros. Nor do I think it's how these films have to be made. But I do think they need to find a way to keep the overall tone of a film like Man of steel, while also occasionally lightening the script with more genuinely entertaining lines and characters. One does not preclude the other.

[DukeDeMondo]

I'm surprised some are saying they loved Man Of Steel. I mean, I thought parts were sort of alright, maybe, sort of. But overall it was quite the disappointment for me. Not a crushing, almost offensive one, like The Matrix Reloaded, or Prometheus, but still.

I thought the last hour or so was genuinely brilliant. Proper visceral stuff. When Evil-Lyn or whoever the hell was smashin folk into the street I was near shittin myself.

I'm not hugely invested in the mythos or what have you, I''m not a Superman fan as such, but I have loved most of the films. I'd put Man of Steel just behind Superman II and Superman Returns.

[Replies From View]

whoever the hell was smashin folk into the street

The problem in a nutshell.  "Whoever the hell was doing whatever the hell in some grey murky CGI bollocks that went on for about seven hours in extreme closeup."  YOUR WORDS NOT MINE YES THEY ARE.

[DukeDeMondo]

The problem in a nutshell.  "Whoever the hell was doing whatever the hell in some grey murky CGI bollocks that went on for about seven hours in extreme closeup."  YOUR WORDS NOT MINE YES THEY ARE.

Ha! I dunno, I don't care that the drama wasn't especially compelling because I don't think it was really trying to be. It was doin something else, and that's fine. Especially when the something else is as good as that was.

I will say I didn't like the Krypton stuff at the start at all.

[Kelvin]

The problem in a nutshell.  "Whoever the hell was doing whatever the hell in some grey murky CGI bollocks that went on for about seven hours in extreme closeup."  YOUR WORDS NOT MINE YES THEY ARE.

I do like the film, but I absolutely agree with this. The way they used digital camera work, CGI and obvious composite images for shots that could quite feasable have been done with real actors and practical effects is one of it's greatest failing, I think - and one which this BvS trailer already has hints of. That shot of him holding up a rocket/satellite looks terrible and could surely have been achieved with some clever practical effects. 

Ha! I dunno, I don't care that the drama wasn't especially compelling because I don't think it was really trying to be. It was doin something else, and that's fine. Especially when the something else is as good as that was.

I disagree. I think Man of Steel has some really nice character stuff and fairly interesting themes bubbling away alongside the action scenes. Certainly not all of them work, and there are mis-steps throughout, but I'm glad that they're trying for something interesting and ambitious in their films. Scenes like Clark locked in the school cupboard, themes of destiny versus choice, purpose and responsibility. I love that they tried to make that stuff a big part of the story, even if it doesn't always work. 

[DukeDeMondo]

I disagree. I think Man of Steel has some really nice character stuff, and fairly interesting themes bubbling away alongside the action scenes, and although not all of them work, I'm glad that they're trying for something interesting and ambitious in their films. Scenes like Clark locked in THE cupboard, themes of destiny versus choice, purpose and responsibility. I love that they tried to make that stuff a big part of the story, even if it doesn't always work.

No you're right, I wasn't explaining myself very well there. As a huge fan of Jesus films, I also very much appreciated all the Christ stuff, although I think that was done better in SR.

Maybe what I mean is that regardless of whether or not the drama worked for folk, there's a lot to be said for something so intensely visceral, and that's worth applauding even if the other stuff doesn't always click.

Saying that I hated his Watchmen adaptation, which I thought was hateful obnoxious shit, but certain of the sequences in that worked in a very similar way to how the best stuff in MOS worked, so I'm probably a terrible hypocrite.

[Replies From View]

Has there ever been an iteration of Capeman 2 in which Albert the Butler turns bad?

I would really like that to happen.

[MuteBanana]

Just so I know I thought Superman was the bad guy in this.

That Hell line is said over Affleck looking at his costume like he's worried he might not fit into it. I thought that was Jeremy Irons voice at first but I read its Luthor.

So yeh then Superman has people kneeling before him? Surely only a Bad Superman would do that? Yet people seem to think Batman is the bad guy out of them.

Edit - The other day I saw a book where the story is Kal-El actually lands in the Waynes back yard and is raised as Bruce. Then becomes Batman but with all of Superman's powers. I got a boner just reading that. And again just reading it there.

[checkoutgirl]

I wonder if it is bad Superman will he sit at the bar all moody and flick peanuts which break the glasses and scare the barman. I hope so.

[checkoutgirl]

So yeh then Superman has people kneeling before him? Surely only a Bad Superman would do that? Yet people seem to think Batman is the bad guy out of them.

All this could be cleared up by reading that comic book...what's it called? The Dark Knight Returns? Obviously I'm not going to because I'm not 10 years old. We'll have to wait for the film.

[Delete Delete Delete]

If he were a bad Superman he'd get an Emo haircut and do a song and dance routine.

[Replies From View]

I've seen a bad Superman before flicking peanuts at a pub mirror.  I liked it.

[Urinal Cake]

Powerlesnessnesssses

[Talulah, really!]

Who's the big baddie supposed to be in this one?

Superbat.[nb]An evil megalomaniac ultra villain, he started out as an ordinary nobody called Hank Domby until one day he was bitten by a radioactive fast food restaurant supervisor at which point he developed incredible powers to oversee, orchestrate and control work during anything up to a 16 hour shift, he does this by wielding an enormous baseball bat hence the name.[/nb] 

[Rev]

Oh fuck me that trailer's laughably shit, and confirms the suspicion that they didn't know what sort of tone to take with this one.  So it'll be light and poppy but visually dark in a way that doesn't square with that, then.  Glorious.  We're looking at something that should be treated in the same way a late-period Friday the 13th sequel should be, but without the expectation of it being entertaining.

[Ant Farm Keyboard]

Snyder's best film is still his debut, the remake of Dawn of the Dead. It's lean, it benefits from a smart script by James Gunn, isn't an insult to the Romero original because it explores a different path. And the opening sequence is ace.

Man of Steel takes the worst elements from The Dark Knight trilogy (the serious, modern update that tries to find the myth beneath the superhero) and mixes them with a fast, overcrowded visual style that totally lacks lighter moments, something that even Nolan is able to bring to his material.
There are two scenes that sum up everything wrong with the movie. First, there's the laughable church scene where Kal-El asks a priest for advice, and his face is shown near a stained-glass Christ, with his own age being 33. And, if you remember when the scene comes into the film, it's just after the dramatic reveal to every human living on Earth, that aliens do exist, that they're angry, and that they make a big threat if another alien guy doesn't turn himself to them. That's traumatic stuff, the kind of thing that means imminent death, and yet, on the very next day, nobody goes to church to pray...
Then, there's the fight in Metropolis. Huge buildings collapse, there's at least ten of thousands of deaths. But the film doesn't care about them, as long as it follows the crew from the Daily Planet with their guy under the rubble.
And why is Kal-El actually attracted to Lois Lane? Of course, he's supposed to, but the film gives so little character development that we never get any sense of connection or complicity between them.

Actually, there's an embryo of a great film beneath this terrible mess. The film is the story of Kal-El from confusion (his childhood POV shots) to focus and sharpness, as he learns to channel his powers to give them efficiency and meaning. This arc alone could be the base for a visually terrific film. But no, the script and the director assume that dark means depth.

[Custard]

Agreed with all that (though I love Nolan's Batman films)

I'm trying to think of any light moments, and the only two I can think of is Supes mangling the bar twat's truck, and the lady soldier swooning over our hero at the end. "Well, he is pretty hot". Or something

The Reeve films were much more fun. And the animated ones. And SuperGirl. And Threads

[Custard]

It was a bit of a rubs idea to have the honourable and forgiving SuperMan snap Zod's neck, too

Minutes before, they were knocking each other for miles with absolute ease, yet in the big final moment Supes can't shift Zod an inch, and needs to crack the poor lad's neck in to stop him shooting up the shitty family that suddenly appeared

A hero for all seasons

[madhair60]

I didn't see Man of Steel. This might be alright I suppose. Might be a good spectacle. Too soon to call.

[Ant Farm Keyboard]

Agreed with all that (though I love Nolan's Batman films)

I do love the trilogy (with a few caveats on The Dark Knight Rises), but Nolan's approach worked for a tormented vigilante. Superman, by definition, is lighter, sillier stuff, an alien with magical powers who just wears glasses and becomes Clark Kent. The dark, gritty mood is actually at odds with what the character means.

The stuff that works in MoS is the prologue, that successfully conveys the feeling of an advanced civilization on the verge of extinction, and introduces the hi-tech with the levitating terminals and robots with holographic powers. And the main theme by Hans Zimmer is clever. It's an unfinished melody that begs for completion, the same way Kal-El has to find a proper path in his life.

[Kelvin]

A lot of people think that Superman behaved out of character in Man of Steel[nb]Which I don't entirely agree with, since his character was starting out in that story and not the fully formed hero most people know from the films and comics.[/nb], but I'm wondering if this film will have Batman behaving pretty out of character at the start, as well. Alfred talking about good men becoming cruel, the thing that looks like a Batwing seemingly gunning down and blowing up the man shooting up at it, even that final line about bleeding. Everyone's assumed that Batman is going to keep Superman in check, but I wonder if it isn't going to be the other way around by the end of the film.

[Kelvin]

Superman, by definition, is lighter, sillier stuff, an alien with magical powers who just wears glasses and becomes Clark Kent. The dark, gritty mood is actually at odds with what the character means.

Isn't that just selective memory, though? I mean, Superman has been around 75 years, so it's no surprise that he's been portrayed in many darker stories and interpretations throughout that time. He's been tormented, made dubious moral choices, been portrayed in a more "realistic" style, even been a flat out cunt. Why must the film makers only tell the most well known - and increasingly unpopular - interpretation, when they could be telling a story based off the plentiful, but less well known sources which we haven't seen on film before. This superman is only just starting out, and could still become the idealistic icon that those people want. He's entirely in keeping with many existing interpretations. Just not the "classic" version that so many people are attached to.   

[Custard]

Gah, this thread is making me want to rewatch Man Of Steel now!

I sat through it twice at the cinema, though not seen it since then. Maybe it improves on the third viewing?

I didn't haaaaate it, just found it overly serious, a bit nonsensical (even for a film featuring a flying bloke in spandex), and worst of all, pretty dull. Which Superman should never be! Its bleedin' Superman!

And I don't even mind Snyder's stuff. Dawn Of The Dead, Watchmen and 300 are all decent I think, though Sucker Punch was balls.

I just wish he'd made a more fun Superman film. And a shorter one, cos fuck did that drag. I only went twice cos I fancied a lady who wanted to go. I don't think my poor bum has ever forgiven me