Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice movie thread for your reading pleasure 2 2

[Comicopolis]

it's amazing how much attention this thread gets

 

Car crashes and train wrecks always garner much attention.

-Terry

And so does the greatest Superhero movie ever made...

 

This is the Winter Soldier thread?

[Bosco685]

it's amazing how much attention this thread gets

 

Car crashes and train wrecks always garner much attention.

-Terry

And so does the greatest Superhero movie ever made...

 

This is the Winter Soldier thread?

 

I love the Winter Soldier movie. Even with some of its flaws (Nick Fury has a laser in his jacket so powerful, he cuts through the roof of his SUV and the street below to escape - but doesn't use it on Winter Soldier).

 

But even that received a 7.8/10.0 on IMDb from 462,640 user votes. So I guess not everyone liked it consistently enough. Which surprised me.

[Doktor]

it's amazing how much attention this thread gets

 

Car crashes and train wrecks always garner much attention.

-Terry

And so does the greatest Superhero movie ever made...

 

This is the Winter Soldier thread?

 

I love the Winter Soldier movie. Even with some of its flaws (Nick Fury has a laser in his jacket so powerful, he cuts through the roof of his SUV and the street below to escape - but doesn't use it on Winter Soldier).

 

But even that received a 7.8/10.0 on IMDb from 462,640 user votes. So I guess not everyone liked it consistently enough. Which surprised me.

 

It wasn't a laser. It was essentially a very compact & short-lasting cutting torch. It "melted" thru those things (physics be damned) virtually instantly but also only had a flame/cutting area of a few inches long. It would have essentially been like trying to fight Winter Soldier (with a busted arm & a bunch of internal injuries) with a pocket knife. Think of it as a pocket sized light saber with a "blade" of only a few inches long.

 

They used a prototype version of it on AoS right around the same time & we got a better look at it in-use/being worked on.

[kimik]

it's amazing how much attention this thread gets

 

Car crashes and train wrecks always garner much attention.

-Terry

And so does the greatest Superhero movie ever made...

 

This is the Winter Soldier thread?

 

I love the Winter Soldier movie. Even with some of its flaws (Nick Fury has a laser in his jacket so powerful, he cuts through the roof of his SUV and the street below to escape - but doesn't use it on Winter Soldier).

 

But even that received a 7.8/10.0 on IMDb from 462,640 user votes. So I guess not everyone liked it consistently enough. Which surprised me.

 

It was a good movie, but a half an hour too long and too childish in the Bucky vs. Cap relationship.

Edited April 15, 2016 by kimik

[revat]

it's amazing how much attention this thread gets

 

Car crashes and train wrecks always garner much attention.

-Terry

And so does the greatest Superhero movie ever made...

 

This is the Winter Soldier thread?

 

I love the Winter Soldier movie. Even with some of its flaws (Nick Fury has a laser in his jacket so powerful, he cuts through the roof of his SUV and the street below to escape - but doesn't use it on Winter Soldier).

 

But even that received a 7.8/10.0 on IMDb from 462,640 user votes. So I guess not everyone liked it consistently enough. Which surprised me.

 

It was a good movie, but a half an hour too long and too childish in the Bucky vs. Cap relationship.

 

if winter soldier was an hour too long, then BVS was 4 hours too long.

[kimik]

it's amazing how much attention this thread gets

 

Car crashes and train wrecks always garner much attention.

-Terry

And so does the greatest Superhero movie ever made...

 

This is the Winter Soldier thread?

 

I love the Winter Soldier movie. Even with some of its flaws (Nick Fury has a laser in his jacket so powerful, he cuts through the roof of his SUV and the street below to escape - but doesn't use it on Winter Soldier).

 

But even that received a 7.8/10.0 on IMDb from 462,640 user votes. So I guess not everyone liked it consistently enough. Which surprised me.

 

It was a good movie, but a half an hour too long and too childish in the Bucky vs. Cap relationship.

 

if winter soldier was an hour too long, then BVS was 4 hours too long.

 

 

Winter Soldier is a movie I like less every time I watch it. It drags on in too many parts and the whole simplistic/childish Cap and Bucky relationship gets weaker with every viewing. "Buck, I am going to let you beat on me and say "I'm with you to the end of the line" and then you will become a good guy".

 

GoTG and the first Avengers are still great movies to watch every time.

Edited April 15, 2016 by kimik

[Bosco685]

It wasn't a laser. It was essentially a very compact & short-lasting cutting torch. It "melted" thru those things (physics be damned) virtually instantly but also only had a flame/cutting area of a few inches long. It would have essentially been like trying to fight Winter Soldier (with a busted arm & a bunch of internal injuries) with a pocket knife. Think of it as a pocket sized light saber with a "blade" of only a few inches long.

 

They used a prototype version of it on AoS right around the same time & we got a better look at it in-use/being worked on.

 

Don't get me wrong. This is my #1/#2 Marvel Studios film.

 

But if that cutting torch was so low-power, how did it cut through car metal, street tar, gravel underneath and then the ground below to allow Nick Fury a tunnel to escape? Oh, and he did that in under two minutes with that low-power torch.

 

 

See, even the great movies have something that comes across odd. So why carp all over the Batman v Superman movie? Because it is easy with Zack Snyder and plenty of content squeezed into 2.3 hours?

[thunsicker]

It wasn't a laser. It was essentially a very compact & short-lasting cutting torch. It "melted" thru those things (physics be damned) virtually instantly but also only had a flame/cutting area of a few inches long. It would have essentially been like trying to fight Winter Soldier (with a busted arm & a bunch of internal injuries) with a pocket knife. Think of it as a pocket sized light saber with a "blade" of only a few inches long.

 

They used a prototype version of it on AoS right around the same time & we got a better look at it in-use/being worked on.

 

Don't get me wrong. This is my #1/#2 Marvel Studios film.

 

But if that cutting torch was so low-power, how did it cut through car metal, street tar, gravel underneath and then the ground below to allow Nick Fury a tunnel to escape?

 

 

See, even the great movies have something that comes across odd. So why carp all over the Batman v Superman movie? Because it is easy with Zack Snyder and plenty of content squeezed into 2.3 hours?

 

For me it wasn't that it had some odd things in it. It was because it was a mess. The story telling didn't get me interested in any of the characters. The constant use of dream sequences/flashbacks/etc was awful. And most of all it was boring. If I hadn't been there with three friends it was the first superhero movie I would have walked out of.

 

And I'm not an enemy of Zack Snyder. I am one of the few who actually liked Watchmen. I even felt Sucker Punch was fun. But I don't like his Man of Steel or Batman vs. Superman.

[revat]

It wasn't a laser. It was essentially a very compact & short-lasting cutting torch. It "melted" thru those things (physics be damned) virtually instantly but also only had a flame/cutting area of a few inches long. It would have essentially been like trying to fight Winter Soldier (with a busted arm & a bunch of internal injuries) with a pocket knife. Think of it as a pocket sized light saber with a "blade" of only a few inches long.

 

They used a prototype version of it on AoS right around the same time & we got a better look at it in-use/being worked on.

 

Don't get me wrong. This is my #1/#2 Marvel Studios film.

 

But if that cutting torch was so low-power, how did it cut through car metal, street tar, gravel underneath and then the ground below to allow Nick Fury a tunnel to escape?

 

 

See, even the great movies have something that comes across odd. So why carp all over the Batman v Superman movie? Because it is easy with Zack Snyder and plenty of content squeezed into 2.3 hours?

 

For me it wasn't that it had some odd things in it. It was because it was a mess. The story telling didn't get me interested in any of the characters. The constant use of dream sequences/flashbacks/etc was awful. And most of all it was boring. If I hadn't been there with three friends it was the first superhero movie I would have walked out of.

 

And I'm not an enemy of Zack Snyder. I am one of the few who actually liked Watchmen. I even felt Sucker Punch was fun. But I don't like his Man of Steel or Batman vs. Superman.

 

Samsies.

 

LOVED 300. LOVED Watchmen (though less than 300), and its not rewatchable for me even though I loved it in the theater. Liked Suckerpunch. Give MOS and BVS passing grades, but they just didn't engage me completely, and a lot of that seemed like directorial stuff

[Batman]

All things Marvel are

[Gatsby77]

I thought Watchmen was about as good a film adaptation of the story as could have been done. Esp. given all the prior directors who had tried to do the material justice & failed.

 

I also really liked Man of Steel.

 

But Batman v. Superman was just a misfire. Unevenly paced, boring at times, needlessly confusing with the dream sequences, and -- greatest sin of all -- boring in spots.

 

It was a disappointing 2.5/4 for me, where The Dark Knight was a 4/4 and Dark Knight Rises was a 3.5/4.

 

And I'm glad that audiences are abandoning it, as Warner Bros. can't ignore their dissatisfaction and thus be forced to go in a different (better) direction.

 

An Affleck-directed Batman solo is a solid step.

[Doktor]

It wasn't a laser. It was essentially a very compact & short-lasting cutting torch. It "melted" thru those things (physics be damned) virtually instantly but also only had a flame/cutting area of a few inches long. It would have essentially been like trying to fight Winter Soldier (with a busted arm & a bunch of internal injuries) with a pocket knife. Think of it as a pocket sized light saber with a "blade" of only a few inches long.

 

They used a prototype version of it on AoS right around the same time & we got a better look at it in-use/being worked on.

 

Don't get me wrong. This is my #1/#2 Marvel Studios film.

 

But if that cutting torch was so low-power, how did it cut through car metal, street tar, gravel underneath and then the ground below to allow Nick Fury a tunnel to escape? Oh, and he did that in under two minutes with that low-power torch.

 

 

See, even the great movies have something that comes across odd. So why carp all over the Batman v Superman movie? Because it is easy with Zack Snyder and plenty of content squeezed into 2.3 hours?

 

I didn't say low-powered. I said "short-lasting". As in, "it runs out of power/accelerant quickly". It might be super powerful but just doesn't last very long (since it would run out of whatever is powering it quickly based on its size vs the amount of energy it was releasing)

[Bosco685]

I thought Watchmen was about as good a film adaptation of the story as could have been done. Esp. given all the prior directors who had tried to do the material justice & failed.

 

Anything after this I just couldn't read.

 

 

Target had a Blu-Ray sale last week. Older movies for $5 (may still have it going). I walked up and saw they had the two-disc Watchmen Director's Cut. Mine!

 

If you watch the enhanced version of the film, Zack Snyder and the actors appear during certain scenes to share what went into making parts of the movie. It's very entertaining, and also demonstrates how much goes into making a movie.

 

Jeffrey Dean Morgan appears during the riot scene to share the rehearsals leading up to final shooting. It's worth a watch.

[Cat-Man_America]

It wasn't a laser. It was essentially a very compact & short-lasting cutting torch. It "melted" thru those things (physics be damned) virtually instantly but also only had a flame/cutting area of a few inches long. It would have essentially been like trying to fight Winter Soldier (with a busted arm & a bunch of internal injuries) with a pocket knife. Think of it as a pocket sized light saber with a "blade" of only a few inches long.

 

They used a prototype version of it on AoS right around the same time & we got a better look at it in-use/being worked on.

 

Don't get me wrong. This is my #1/#2 Marvel Studios film.

 

But if that cutting torch was so low-power, how did it cut through car metal, street tar, gravel underneath and then the ground below to allow Nick Fury a tunnel to escape? Oh, and he did that in under two minutes with that low-power torch.

 

 

See, even the great movies have something that comes across odd. So why carp all over the Batman v Superman movie? Because it is easy with Zack Snyder and plenty of content squeezed into 2.3 hours?

 

You're talking about the minutia. Packing content into 2.3 hours isn't justification for a favorable review unless the content serves a cohesive story revolving around characters we care about. When discussing superheroes and science it's always a stretch of the imagination. We are asked to suspend disbelief. That goes for Marvel product and DC, ...and all things in between.

 

The problem with Zack's take on Superman has nothing to do with the pseudo-scientific aspects of his Kryptonian power. This is all about subtext and the message Zack's BvS film sends. It goes back to the first film, MoS, where Mr. Snyder established his controversial take on the character. Most of the criticism of MoS was driven by the cynical albeit successful marketing strategy to approach ministers and show them pre-release versions that played up Christian friendly aspects of the film. Then they were asked to endorse it and recommend it to their congregations. Heavy handed religious metaphors we're woven into the story making the character into a depressingly serious, angst-driven seeker of redemption. Along with lame death scene of Pa Kent and the uncomfortably misogynistic portrayal of women (Lois.especially) MoS pushed all the wrong buttons.

 

I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed.

 

Since I refuse to support films that offend my deeply held view that superheroes should embody positive attributes and be an entertaining fantasy without any preconceived or cynically motivated studio agenda I've chosen to forego the "pleasure" of paying to see BvS. I'm relying on the consensus of highly qualified reviews to assess whether Zack's vision of the character has evolved or remained uncomfortably dystopian and angst-driven. I won't review the picture (that would be disingenuous), but it's entirely fair and reasonable to express shared disappointment with those who've been treated to more of the same jumbled mess and convoluted apocryphal messaging that permitted the first film.

 

You're right, great movies aren't perfect either, but when it comes to cynical film-making you have to draw the line somewhere.

[thunsicker]

You're talking about the minutia. Packing content into 2.3 hours isn't justification for a favorable review unless the content serves a cohesive story revolving around characters we care about. When discussing superheroes and science it's always a stretch of the imagination. We are asked to suspend disbelief. That goes for Marvel product and DC, ...and all things in between.

 

The problem with Zack's take on Superman has nothing to do with the pseudo-scientific aspects of his Kryptonian power. This is all about subtext and the message Zack's BvS film sends. It goes back to the first film, MoS, where Mr. Snyder established his controversial take on the character. Most of the criticism of MoS was driven by the cynical albeit successful marketing strategy to approach ministers and show them pre-release versions that played up Christian friendly aspects of the film. Then they were asked to endorse it and recommend it to their congregations. Heavy handed religious metaphors we're woven into the story making the character into a depressingly serious, angst-driven seeker of redemption. Along with lame death scene of Pa Kent and the uncomfortably misogynistic portrayal of women (Lois.especially) MoS

 

I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed.

 

Since I refuse to pay to see any film that offends my deeply held view that superheroes should embody positive attributes and be an entertaining fantasy without any preconceived or cynically motivated studio agenda I've chosen to forego the "pleasure" of paying to see BvS. Relying on the consensus of highly qualified reviews to assess whether Zack's vision of the character has evolved or remained uncomfortably dystopian and angst-driven. I won't review the picture (that would be disingenuous), but it's entirely fair and reasonable to express shared disappointment with those who've been treated to more of the same jumbled mess and convoluted apocryphal messaging that permitted the first film.

 

You're right, great movies aren't perfect either, but when it comes to cynical film-making you have to draw the line somewhere.

 

My criticism of MoS and BvS is actually along other lines. MoS I thought Superman was totally NOT Christlike. Instead of sacrificing himself for the sake of others (both not saving his father or doing more to save the people of Metropolis or even doing more to save Zod) he let others do the sacrificing for him. It wasn't about someone who was better than us. Just someone who was more powerful than us.

 

BvS was just poorly written and directed.

[Bosco685]

It is kind of odd to be so against a movie you have not even viewed yourself. But that doesn't mean you have to force yourself to go see it.

 

I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed.

 

But to put this in perspective, 244,318 other individuals gave their take on this movie. And I would say a 7.2/10.0 is far from a train wreck.

 

 

It's cool to give your opinion. But if you are going to give one that is far from reality, then it's going to come across as fueled by a bias versus reality. Not that I am calling you 'crazy'. Maybe 'beer crazy'. But not 'crazy'.

 

[kagenish]

mostly all of my coworkers that saw the movie said they love the movie with only one like the movie but was confuse about the knightmare scene and i had to explain what it could mean for future films.

[Cat-Man_America]

You're talking about the minutia. Packing content into 2.3 hours isn't justification for a favorable review unless the content serves a cohesive story revolving around characters we care about. When discussing superheroes and science it's always a stretch of the imagination. We are asked to suspend disbelief. That goes for Marvel product and DC, ...and all things in between.

 

The problem with Zack's take on Superman has nothing to do with the pseudo-scientific aspects of his Kryptonian power. This is all about subtext and the message Zack's BvS film sends. It goes back to the first film, MoS, where Mr. Snyder established his controversial take on the character. Most of the criticism of MoS was driven by the cynical albeit successful marketing strategy to approach ministers and show them pre-release versions that played up Christian friendly aspects of the film. Then they were asked to endorse it and recommend it to their congregations. Heavy handed religious metaphors we're woven into the story making the character into a depressingly serious, angst-driven seeker of redemption. Along with lame death scene of Pa Kent and the uncomfortably misogynistic portrayal of women (Lois.especially) MoS

 

I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed.

 

Since I refuse to pay to see any film that offends my deeply held view that superheroes should embody positive attributes and be an entertaining fantasy without any preconceived or cynically motivated studio agenda I've chosen to forego the "pleasure" of paying to see BvS. Relying on the consensus of highly qualified reviews to assess whether Zack's vision of the character has evolved or remained uncomfortably dystopian and angst-driven. I won't review the picture (that would be disingenuous), but it's entirely fair and reasonable to express shared disappointment with those who've been treated to more of the same jumbled mess and convoluted apocryphal messaging that permitted the first film.

 

You're right, great movies aren't perfect either, but when it comes to cynical film-making you have to draw the line somewhere.

 

My criticism of MoS and BvS is actually along other lines. MoS I thought Superman was totally NOT Christlike. Instead of sacrificing himself for the sake of others (both not saving his father or doing more to save the people of Metropolis or even doing more to save Zod) he let others do the sacrificing for him. It wasn't about someone who was better than us. Just someone who was more powerful than us.

 

BvS was just poorly written and directed.

 

I hear you, but many of those who paid to see the first film were drawn in by the pitch made to leaders in the faith community. When I caught the first film I immediately felt pummeled by the heavy handed messaging.

 

But you're absolutely right, there were other aspects of the confusing -script that actually seemed in conflict with scripture. My take on MoS was that he was supposed to represent the second coming of christ in an apocryphal world. Again, not an image of Superman that I cared to see. The entire film was a downer, the -script a jumbled mess and the acting sub-par.

 

BvS 2.0 apparently doesn't stray too far from the tree.

[Bosco685]

mostly all of my coworkers that saw the movie said they love the movie with only one like the movie but was confuse about the knightmare scene and i had to explain what it could mean for future films.

 

They just didn't realize Snyder had hypnotized them in advance.

 

 

 

Those poor people.

[Cat-Man_America]

It is kind of odd to be so against a movie you have not even viewed yourself. But that doesn't mean you have to force yourself to go see it.

 

I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed.

 

But to put this in perspective, 244,318 other individuals gave their take on this movie. And I would say a 7.2/10.0 is far from a train wreck.

 

 

It's cool to give your opinion. But if you are going to give one that is far from reality, then it's going to come across as fueled by a bias versus reality. Not that I am calling you 'crazy'. Maybe 'beer crazy'. But not 'crazy'.

 

 

Of course, you are entitled to this POV and I respect it. It's good to remember though that millions (like myself) haven't seen BvS, but would've probably gone if not forewarned. We can't know what their reviews would've been, but it's reasonable to assume the percentages would've dropped well below 7.2 for many of them. This isn't beer-crazy, much less crazy-crazy, it's just down to earth common sense.