Batman vs Superman

[River]

FWIW, I think that the Batman/Superman crossover film is a bad idea from the start.

But it will make lots of money. I'm pretty sure that's the entire point.

[yovargas]

FWIW, I think that the Batman/Superman crossover film is a bad idea from the start.

I never much liked their encounters in the cartoons or comics I've encountered. I don't like Batman in a world with too much magical stuff. He's a crime fighter, not an alien hunter.

[Túrin Turambar]

Pretty much.

My take on Batman is that his popularity comes not only from the fact that he is dark and conflicted but that he is, in a sense, aspirational. A lot of people who know that they will never have superpowers can still have fun believing that, if they were extremely rich, carefully trained and educated and motivated by some sort of driving obsession, that they could be Batman. He has many aspects of realism, from his motivations to his methods to his equipment. Likewise, there’s an element of realism to his rogues gallery. He has by far the best villains for that reason. You can write theses on the Joker or Bane that you can’t on Lex Luthor or General Zod.

I don't particularly like Superman, in case you can't tell .

[halplm]

Kyle Baker (@KyleJBaker) tweeted
THEY'RE MAKING A MOCKERY OF THE STORY OF A BILLIONAIRE WHO DRESSES AS A BAT TO FIGHT EVIL CLOWNS! THEY'RE RUINING IT!
(https://twitter.com/KyleJBaker/status/3 ... 3414815744

Of course, I don't expect that you'd complain if anyone tried to ruin a story about midgets running around with a magic ring accompanied by fairytale creatures...

FWIW, I think that the Batman/Superman crossover film is a bad idea from the start.

There have been stories about the two of them together that have been exceptional. I hope something similar will be chosen for this film.

Usually they revolve around the fact that Superman can simply do too much damage if he's not kept in check (which was evident in this most recent film). Batman becomes the only one that Superman trusts with the ability to take him down (an extremely rare kryptonite ring in the comics).

Outside of this, the comics have shown that Batman can defeat Superman without this advantage, because of superior planning and execution. The reboot of the Justice League several years ago was built around the drama of a group that favored Superman as the leader and a group that favored Batman as the leader. It was an amazing bit of writing.

On the other hand... there have been stories that were atrocious... the Batman/Superman comic that was around several years ago started with a storyline that should have been excellent... the bad guy was the Toyman... who built robots that were a threat to whatever.... but in the end it resulted in Batman using some equipment that made him "godlike" and had him punching a super bad guy in the face with cheesy one-liners when he had no business doing so.... he just couldn't do that.

Anyway... they could make an excellent film... but it could be terrible as well... The recent Batman films have been awesome... while the recent Superman films have sucked big time ... (I'm sure it has nothing to do with the characters involved)... So it could go either way.

We shall see.

[Alatar]

They should get Telltale Games to make it!

http://youtu.be/SoOmSrrUsz8

[yovargas]

When the Affleck decision was announced, many people defended him by saying he was good in Argo. So I decided to see Argo. Asides from thinking the movie itself was fairly ordinary, I still stand by my assessment that Affleck is a bad actor. The only times he seems like an adequate actor are times when he barely has to act (like most of Argo) or when he's essentially playing an ordinary joe schmoe (Good Will Hunting). He will be an awful Batman.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Well, it could be worse. They could have Justin Bieber play Robin. But of course they would never do that. Would they?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... ostpopular

[yovargas]

I am not amused.

[yovargas]

Anyone planning to see it? I'm not, was just curious to hear from people here if they did.

[Alatar]

I will eventually, but not this week.

[Túrin Turambar]

It's getting hammered by critics, 30% on Rotten Tomatoes. I wasn't planning on seeing it but this pretty much seals it for me.

[Jude]

Maybe when my local library gets the DVD...

[yovargas]

Jeez, not even the bluray??

[Primula Baggins]

From the trailers, it just looks bad. I feel no trace of interest. I know, I know, I'm not the demographic—but I often enjoy a good, entertaining comic-book movie. The humor, the operatic plot and villains, the science fiction elements. This one? Nothing.

[yovargas]

This is from the director of 300 and Watchmen, both of which I thought were pretty lame. And his Man of Steel, which I didn't see, wasn't well liked. Plus I've never, ever cared for Superman. Plus I think Affleck is a terrible actor. Plus Eisenberg looks super awkward as Luther. Plus the trailer looked sooo dreary. So that was a lot of strikes against this one for me even before the brutal reviews.

Still, I consider myself a fan of Batman (from the great cartoon and movies, mostly), and from reading the reviews, I actually think the premise sounds awesome, so it's a disappointment to see someone who's style I dislike be given the reigns for this one....

[Frelga]

It looks like something I'll eventually watch on cable. Can't see spending hours in the theater for this.

I keep wanting to give DC a chance, but they just don't deliver for me.

[Alatar]

The weird thing is that this is the definition of a blockbuster. The only reason to see it is the big screen experience, cause the plot and acting aren't gonna carry it on the small screen with no "Super Duper Dolby IMAX" effect. But you're essentially rewarding crap movies by seeing them in the cinema and watching nice character pieces like Brooklyn on TV. Its counter productive to getting better movies made

[Frelga]

Well, it depends on what kind of better movie. Take The Fury Road. A great story that is visually magnificent and definitely worth a big screen experience.

[Alatar]

Yeah, but that doesn't apply here? What I'm saying is that if a movie is BAD, and its only worth watching on Big Screen, then its counterproductive. If a movie is GOOD and worth watching on big screen it works for both platforms, so its win-win. You get me?

[Primula Baggins]

But not everyone will go see a movie on the big screen, particularly paying Imax prices, if they know it's lousy in every way but visually. I would rather just skip the whole thing.