DC Comics on Film

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#201 Post by captveg » Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:52 am

I do love that man's prose. Obviously I disagree with his viewpoint on BvS and the genre in general (I don't need every film to just be a comedy), but who doesn't enjoy lines like the ones you quoted?

User avatar
jbeall
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Atlanta-ish

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#202 Post by jbeall » Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:30 pm

Indeed. Morris is a talented writer, and I'm glad he emerged from the death of Grantland with an even better gig.

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#203 Post by Trees » Tue Apr 12, 2016 9:51 pm

You want to commend this movie’s stabs at thoughtfulness. But it’s stabbing with a spork. At some point you have to laugh.
Snyder better put some ice on that burn.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#204 Post by movielocke » Wed Apr 13, 2016 2:09 am

matrixschmatrix wrote:I think DC does not fully understand why the Marvel moves are so popular, and just assumed that well known characters plus shared universe equals automatic success (and it's worth reiterating that Universal is planning a series like this too- and that Disney is turning Star Wars into one, so DC making this assumption is understandable.) I genuinely hope that the Marvel series is relatively unique, and that this idea turns out to be a fad instead of the new norm, because as frustrating as the world of endless sequels and remakes is, one where all franchises turn essentially into TV shows with ongoing plots that never fully resolve is much scarier.
that basically describes the theatrical serial tradition prior to the widespread adoption of television, it was not scary back then and it is not scary today. Theatrical is a rather robust market with three hundred films per annum in wide release in North America alone. Any implied "scary" result such as the shrinking of theatrical choice is not supported by the aggregate data on the industry.

Edit, read some more of the thread. I agree that the 250 million per entry "serial" is a worrisome trend, any two flops could be a studio killer like the combo of doctor Doolittle and cleopatra that killed fox, more or less. But studios are more diversified in financing films now than ever and international markets have grown sufficiently enormous that the costs are less of a risk on any one movie than they were ten years ago. although the overall load could be catastrophic to a studio if it fails.

User avatar
RossyG
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:50 pm

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#205 Post by RossyG » Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:38 am

I watched the three hour cut last night and thought it was very good. We got great interpretations of Batman, Wonder Woman and Alfred and some terrific action sequences. I like that Batman kills people. It's what I expect of a dark angel of nemesis.

Oddly enough, I thought the Tiny Tim interpretation of Lex Luthor was atrocious in the trailers but found that the character worked very well in the film itself. He comes across as someone so indulged by inherited wealth and power that he's never become socialised and is a narcissistic, neurotic freak.

Some of the CGI was a bit ropey, but not as bad as some bits of Indpendence Day 2. And oddly, I found it less of a huge spectacle than Man of Steel, although the opening of the MoS finale as seen through Bruce Wayne's eyes is amazing.

As far as modern Hollywood blockbusters go, I'd give it a B-minus.

User avatar
barryconvex
billy..biff..scooter....tommy
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:08 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#206 Post by barryconvex » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:25 am

now that the movie's had its run and is out on dvd i was wondering; how well did this movie perform? i know it wasn't critically well received and that myself and many others didn't really care for it but did it reach the numbers WB was projecting for it? was it judged successful monetarily or did it under perform? normally i couldn't care less about financials but i'm kinda curious about this one as so much seemed to be riding on it.

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#207 Post by dda1996a » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:36 am

I'm fairly sure that not including merchandise and the current DVD sales, the film was a disappointment as much as a film grossing 872 million dollars can. But considering how much they spent on it, how much each avengers film makes and that this was supposed to be the film that truly starts the universe with two of their most known heroes in the title and with all marketing I'm fairly sure it's a disappointment.

BTW people who watched both versions, considering I hate Snyder and Mos, how much better is the three hour cut? If it's only slightly better I'll skip it, I have better 3 hour films waiting to be watched

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#208 Post by captveg » Sun Jul 10, 2016 11:58 am

If you don't like the premise of the movie or the characterizations it won't change your mind. The three hour cut solves the odd editing / pacing issues of the theatrical cut and makes some character motivations more clear. But it's the same film at its core.

For what it's worth, as a big fan of Man of Steel (10/10) and Snyder's take/exploration of these characters, it went from a 8/10 to a 9/10 for me.

As for box office - it underperformed but was still profitable. The problem is that when you expect another $300m it is meant to cover not just itself but the studio as a whole. But now that word of mouth online about the Ultimate Cut is so positive I'm sure it'll make a ton off of video/streaming sales and rentals.

I do think the critical reaction was much too interested in judging what the film wasn't rather than evaluating what it actually is. At the very least it's a far more interesting film to discuss than the similarly (IMO) over criticized X-Men: Apocalypse.

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#209 Post by dda1996a » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:01 pm

I just really hate Snyder. For me man of Steel was shit. X-men apocalypse was bad, but at least it didn't make me angry. I hated Mos so much, with its plot holes, boring storyline stupid character decisions and boring final third. Watching people fly through windows for 30 minutes isn't my kind of fun. But that's me, and I'll watch the film due to my love of batman and because this is a film you need to see, at least at home.

User avatar
carmilla mircalla
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 9:47 pm

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

#210 Post by carmilla mircalla » Sun Jul 10, 2016 5:05 pm

dda1996a wrote:I just really hate Snyder. For me man of Steel was shit. X-men apocalypse was bad, but at least it didn't make me angry. I hated Mos so much, with its plot holes, boring storyline stupid character decisions and boring final third. Watching people fly through windows for 30 minutes isn't my kind of fun. But that's me, and I'll watch the film due to my love of batman and because this is a film you need to see, at least at home.
I used to hate Snyder as well but I realized just what he's really doing and he wants to make fancy images. It's the reason why I feel Watchmen is a very empty movie because the fact that he was so focused on lifting the panels and most of the dialogue right off the page he skipped over how to effectively establish any sort of atmosphere/mood since there are obviously heavy themes throughout the source matetial.

To stay relevant here I think the DC of BvS is an exponentially better movie. I didn't dislike the theatrical version, I thought it was good and in context of being a Snyder movie it's actually very good. It is one of semi rare moments for me where a huge chunk of footage being put back into a movie and spread throughout showed a noticeablely and positive boost in quality.

The Luthor arc is more impactful and I thank God that the fight scenes were either added to in just a couple of small added hits or not at all. The only thing that still lacks is a good buildup of the antagonizing batman/superman relationship. I know the opening was supposed to establish thay but oddly enough, the titular conflict of the movie still feels shoehorned.


User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#212 Post by domino harvey » Mon Jan 30, 2017 10:11 pm

Sources say this decision was solely made based on what’s best for the project and had nothing to do with the recent disappointment of Affleck’s recent directing job “Live by Night.”
Alternative facts strike again

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#213 Post by captveg » Mon Jan 30, 2017 10:31 pm

If they get Matt Reeves to direct as mentioned in the article I'd consider that an actual upgrade. I'm a huge Dawn of the Planet of the Apes fan.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#214 Post by captveg » Mon Jan 30, 2017 10:55 pm

This Affleck comment from a couple weeks back has new significance and echoes part of the statement today:,

“I know what’s it’s like to be in the suit. We’ll have to modify the suit to make it a little bit easier to put on and take off. When you are in it, you can be sweating, crazy and exhausted, do your part and walk away. But when you’re a director, you can’t walk away. You have to be there for everybody. Chief among the challenges of doing Batman, will be finding a suit that’s more comfortable.”

http://www.darkhorizons.com/affleck-tal ... ng-batman/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So the logistics was clearly on his mind over the last month. Obviously it's not the only factor - I doubt Live by Night's performance has absolutely nothing to do with this change.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#215 Post by Ribs » Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:24 pm

Forbes hears rumblings that Affleck might leave the project as the star as well, but maintain his writing/producing credits (?!?)

Werewolf by Night

Re: Comic Books on Film

#216 Post by Werewolf by Night » Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:51 pm

If I were a guy who just wrote, produced, directed, and starred in a movie that I felt the studio, for whom I had just won a Best Picture Oscar, did not support enthusiastically enough, why would I feel compelled to do them the favor of spending at least a year directing and starring in their big, polarizing franchise? And of course he’ll maintain his producing and writing credits. He probably already did a ton of work on the film. WGA and PGA rules means he gets that credit now no matter what.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#217 Post by Ribs » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:01 pm

Just sort of seems to me like, if they were to scrap him altogether from starring in it, they'd just delay it another year or two and start over from scratch with a whole-new team behind it.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#218 Post by captveg » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:52 pm

Yeah, I can't see that happening (Affleck leaving the role as actor). For one, we know that he's contracted to be in the eventual Justice Leaue 2 down the road, which Hughes doesn't even mention.

The weirdest thing to me would be him not being able to crack the screenplay. I mean, I get there's a lot of pressure on it as a project, but don't over think this - there's only so many Batman stories out there.

To me, this makes the most sense as straight up concerns about exhaustion. There's only so much a single person can do. I can't think of an action-adventure film with such a prominent lead role played by the director.


flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Comic Books on Film

#220 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:26 pm

No surprise. I can't imagine this will mend whatever bridges at WB that might have at least started smoky with the failure of his last film.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#221 Post by captveg » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:45 pm

I'll say a few things about this latest report:

1. It comes from the most "internet" of sources. Campea cites a few people he knows who claim to know Affleck wants out. Now, Campea says he's not a scooper, and that he doesn't want to have this picked up - and then proceeds to tell his audience as though he's speaking to a buddy in private, as though he doesn't know how the internet is gonna handle what he says. Then when it's inevitably picked up and spread as gospel against his preamble to not do that very thing he complains that other websites did that. Come on, John, you knew *exactly* how this was gonna get spread around, and if you didn't you're exceptionally naive.

2. Affleck, if you want out then just get out. Don't dawdle about it, or leave in piecemeal.

3. Internet fandom is a weird thing. First Affleck was the worst thing to ever happen to Batman. Now fandom freaks out of he has a hangnail and might not play the role. Just gotta laugh at that.

beamish13
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:31 am

Re: Comic Books on Film

#222 Post by beamish13 » Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:01 pm

captveg wrote:I'll say a few things about this latest report:


3. Internet fandom is a weird thing. First Affleck was the worst thing to ever happen to Batman. Now fandom freaks out of he has a hangnail and might not play the role. Just gotta laugh at that.
Exactly. He was a wooden mess adrift in a terrible vortex of ill-conceived ideas.

User avatar
dx23
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico

Re: Comic Books on Film

#223 Post by dx23 » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:35 am

I have talked with some of my friends who work for DC comics and WB and apparently there's a huge power struggle between the people that brought Geoff Johns to the fold and Zack Snyder's team. In big part, it has to do with the whole DC Comics Rebirth in the comic books, which Geoff Johns basically created and championed. Rebirth celebrates the history of DC Comics as well as the lighter (and more well known side) of the company characters. Snyder and his group are still using the New52 as well as cherry picking from DC's most important (well-known) stories without thinking about fluidity, pacing and when those stories were released. Apparently, Ben Affleck is in the middle of the whole thing. Warner wants to keep all of the actors involved in the DC Cinematic Universe instead of rebooting since Wonder Woman and Justice League are still coming out as scheduled. Geoff Johns and his team feel that they can do a soft reboot and make story changes that would make sense and go from there with actors, stories and characters that he would prefer using. This is one of the reasons the Ryan Reynolds name has been floating around to come back as Hal Jordan for the Green Lantern Corps movie.

The big thing is that WB and DC know that they have fallen way behind to Marvel/Disney in the superhero movie business. They are trying to catch up but want to do it now in a very different manner than what Snyder did. Internally, they know that the two only properties that are truly working for DC are the shows on CW (Arrow, Flash, Supergirl, Legends of Tomorrow, iZombie) and their straight to DVD animated film releases ( one per quarter, usually Batman or Justice League related films). DC is now working on more Arrowverse TV shows like Black Lightning. If Affleck leaves the DCCU projects, that would give Warner a good enough reason to follow Johns vision.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#224 Post by captveg » Wed Feb 15, 2017 1:24 pm

Well, if true, that's just stupid. It's like each side has half of the right idea, but also half of the stupid ideas. Post-Justice League is the right time to do a "soft reboot", but there's no reason to alienate the actors you've cast, who have been generally well received. And bringing back Reynolds is a terrible idea because it brings the baggage of the 2011 GL movie that was never meant to be part of this continuity.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Comic Books on Film

#225 Post by captveg » Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:35 pm

Now Reeves is stepping away from the current negotiations over Batman

If this falls apart it's truly unfortunate. This bums me out more than Affleck not directing it.

This just makes me wonder WTF is up with this script vs. WTF is up with what the execs want out of the film.

In other news, Lights Out director David F. Sandberg in talks to direct Shazam

Makes sense considering his connection to James Wan.

Post Reply