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

[NewEnglandGothic]

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.

Interesting tidbit that I had never heard. I am a man of faith, deeply Christian, and yet I never had anyone at our church or denomination recommend MoS. However, I would contend that the Christ like similarities of Superman were first heavily stressed in Superman Returns. In fact, I used sections of the movie in bible study lessons. While I think MoS continues some of those same ideals, they were not near as obvious as in the previous movie.

From my perspective, there are no Christ-like similarities in MoS or BvS. As for Superman Returns, I'd have to re-watch it...

 

There is confusion between "Christ-like" and "godlike" - note the lowercase "g". Superman being perceived as godlike is an established part of the mythos.

 

Looking at the words in bold type above, I find it hard to believe with all the violence in MoS, it would be seen as "Christian friendly". The only time in the movie Superman turned the other cheek, it happened to be Zod's...

 

Here is a screen shot from Superman Returns. No doubt certain imagery was used within that movie to relate Superman with Christ, not just a god. As to MoS and BvS, I think you are correct that the more obvious similarity is with Supes being a god-like figure, however, as a Christian I do see some more similarities with Jesus than other religious figures. (Except of course with some specific actions like, as you said, turning Zod's cheek. Btw, good one!)

In Man of Steel, after Jor-EL tells him "You can save her Kal, you can save them all", Superman floats out of the Kryptonian ship with his arms outstretched and his legs together. I got this reference immediately, but was too afraid to bring it up here. I look foward to my one week suspension now.

[Batman]

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.

Interesting tidbit that I had never heard. I am a man of faith, deeply Christian, and yet I never had anyone at our church or denomination recommend MoS. However, I would contend that the Christ like similarities of Superman were first heavily stressed in Superman Returns. In fact, I used sections of the movie in bible study lessons. While I think MoS continues some of those same ideals, they were not near as obvious as in the previous movie.

From my perspective, there are no Christ-like similarities in MoS or BvS. As for Superman Returns, I'd have to re-watch it...

 

There is confusion between "Christ-like" and "godlike" - note the lowercase "g". Superman being perceived as godlike is an established part of the mythos.

 

Looking at the words in bold type above, I find it hard to believe with all the violence in MoS, it would be seen as "Christian friendly". The only time in the movie Superman turned the other cheek, it happened to be Zod's...

 

Here is a screen shot from Superman Returns. No doubt certain imagery was used within that movie to relate Superman with Christ, not just a god. As to MoS and BvS, I think you are correct that the more obvious similarity is with Supes being a god-like figure, however, as a Christian I do see some more similarities with Jesus than other religious figures. (Except of course with some specific actions like, as you said, turning Zod's cheek. Btw, good one!)

In Man of Steel, after Jor-EL tells him "You can save her Kal, you can save them all", Superman floats out of the Kryptonian ship with his arms outstretched and his legs together. I got this reference immediately, but was too afraid to bring it up here. I look foward to my one week suspension now (can you guess my current pose?)

I can see what you're referring to my friend, however I never thought "Christ-like pose" when I saw it. If I were a man who could fly - or float in space - the first thing I'd do would be to outstretch my arms, as I would if were floating in the sea Suspension averted

[40sJohn]

As David pointed out earlier, Zack was most definitely aware of the spiritual connotations of Supes in MoS. Again, I don't think Zack is as obvious as Bryan Singer was, but nonetheless the parallels are there.

 

First the short Bryan Singer article that helps explain the screen shot above.

Bryan Singer explains failure of Superman Returns

 

And a short article about Zack's take on Man of Steel

Zack interview

[rjrjr]

The day and age when a $200MIL budget movie does $800MIL worldwide and considered 'underperforming'....

 

And all those other costs... This movie did so much product placement, it easily covered that.

 

This movie is a win for WB

 

I know. Some people are crazy obsessed with wanting this movie to be seen as a failure when it was anything but a failure.

[NewEnglandGothic]

Suspension averted

#foiledagain

[bababooey]

This thread is like the bizarro version of the ASM2 movie threads.

 

[TeddieMercede]

The day and age when a $200MIL budget movie does $800MIL worldwide and considered 'underperforming'....

 

And all those other costs... This movie did so much product placement, it easily covered that.

 

This movie is a win for WB

 

I know. Some people are crazy obsessed with wanting this movie to be seen as a failure when it was anything but a failure.

 

Cause Marvel fanboy-ism still runs strong especially for people with "no dog in the fight" whether they choose to admit it or not. It seriously seems like grown men on these boards are doing high fives because this movie may not have lived up to the expectations that some placed on it.

[revat]

The day and age when a $200MIL budget movie does $800MIL worldwide and considered 'underperforming'....

 

And all those other costs... This movie did so much product placement, it easily covered that.

 

This movie is a win for WB

 

I know. Some people are crazy obsessed with wanting this movie to be seen as a failure when it was anything but a failure.

 

Cause Marvel fanboy-ism still runs strong especially for people with "no dog in the fight" whether they choose to admit it or not. It seriously seems like grown men on these boards are doing high fives because this movie may not have lived up to the expectations that some placed on it.

 

And some people realize there's a difference between making a profit and meeting expectations.

[Cat-Man_America]

The day and age when a $200MIL budget movie does $800MIL worldwide and considered 'underperforming'....

 

And all those other costs... This movie did so much product placement, it easily covered that.

 

This movie is a win for WB

 

I know. Some people are crazy obsessed with wanting this movie to be seen as a failure when it was anything but a failure.

 

Failure? No, but Chuck's budget numbers are on the low side by about a third. Also, even in a perfect world product placement won't balance out the P&A, much less Affleck's cut and points and undisclosed non-production expenses. Some estimates have the total studio outlay at over $500 million (nearly 2/3 of which is production). Also, keep in mind profits must be split with the distribution chain, including theater owners.

 

Bottom line, BvS is underperforming given the projections. In Hollywood, success or failure is measured by expectations. Perception can make or break a franchise. WB was hoping for several big weekends at number one with a fall off of under 50% per week to help extend the run (projections: well over a billion worldwide). The overwhelmingly critical reviews apparently made the difference. Unfortunately, BvS hasn't performed as expected domestically or internationally.

 

I'm not knocking the film, just stating cold hard facts. Read any press you like on the BO. Most insiders who've analyzed the known and theoretical expenditures reached similar conclusions.

 

Full disclosure: I'm not enamored of Zack's take on Superman, but was unaware that it's now considered a crazy obsession to rationally discuss a film's box office performance.

[Cat-Man_America]

The day and age when a $200MIL budget movie does $800MIL worldwide and considered 'underperforming'....

 

And all those other costs... This movie did so much product placement, it easily covered that.

 

This movie is a win for WB

 

I know. Some people are crazy obsessed with wanting this movie to be seen as a failure when it was anything but a failure.

 

Cause Marvel fanboy-ism still runs strong especially for people with "no dog in the fight" whether they choose to admit it or not. It seriously seems like grown men on these boards are doing high fives because this movie may not have lived up to the expectations that some placed on it.

 

I have no god in this fight either.

 

http://www.kpopstarz.com/articles/31379/20130614/superman-man-steel-jesus-christianity-bible.htm

 

Siegel & Shuster's Superman is a winner, ..it's Zack Snyder who's Kryptonite.

[Bosco685]

Some estimates have the total studio outlay at over $500 million (nearly 2/3 of which is production). Also, keep in mind profits must be split with the distribution chain, including theater owners.

 

Can you please post that credible reference where Warner spent $500 MM to create and distribute Batman v Superman? Even the more extreme sites noted $400 as the top-end. So I'd like to read the details how $500 MM was estimated.

 

[Gatsby77]

Following a quick Google source, the consensus seems to be about $410 million all in.

 

$250 mill. for the film (source: BoxOfficeMojo), plus $160-$170 million for marketing.

 

(source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/batman-v-superman-inside-warner-878208)

 

And everyone on the first two pages of Google is quoting $410 million, but the original source for that quote is Latino Review, which hasn't always been the most accurate.

 

Either way, the consensus from a panoply of sources is $410-$420 million all in.

 

At $350 million domestic and $850-$900 million worldwide it'll be profitable, but nowhere near expectations.

 

Recall that Amazing Spider-Man 2's $700-plus million take led to scrapping the next two movies & a total reboot.

[Bosco685]

Recall that Amazing Spider-Man 2's $700-plus million take led to scrapping the next two movies & a total reboot.

 

ASM 2 was meant to ramp up a Spider-Man Universe with Venom and the Sinister Six films (along with Agent May: The Early Years). It hardly even got the message across.

 

Meanwhile, Warner is continuing on with all its movies, and added two dates.

[Cat-Man_America]

Some estimates have the total studio outlay at over $500 million (nearly 2/3 of which is production). Also, keep in mind profits must be split with the distribution chain, including theater owners.

 

Can you please post that credible reference where Warner spent $500 MM to create and distribute Batman v Superman? Even the more extreme sites noted $400 as the top-end. So I'd like to read the details how $500 MM was estimated.

 

 

Here's one with the production budget exceeding $400 million (precluding non-production costs)...

 

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Batman-V-Superman-May-End-Up-Being-Hollywood-Most-Expensive-Movie-89397.html

 

Is it credible? Perhaps, but in lieu of evidence to the contrary it's just one estimate among many. Only the Hollywood number crunchers know for sure. That said, it is an estimate. Most estimates have the production budget (including reshot footage based on previews) at between $250 and $350 million, not including P&A and non-production related expenditures.

 

Do you want to see more or does this satisfy your curiosity?

 

 

[Bosco685]

(source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/batman-v-superman-inside-warner-878208)

 

It looks like Latino Review pulled at least that article. But the production budget has been noted as $250 MM by a few tracking sites, including Box Office Mojo as you pointed out. I could see marketing being another $125-$150 MM based on all the markets they wanted to open quickly in.

 

[Bosco685]

Do you want to see more or does this satisfy your curiosity?

 

Did you read the reference where the figures are coming from?

 

According to Latino-Review, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice’s budget has risen to $410 million.

 

All the sites are quoting Latino Review. Just like Gatsby77 pointed out. I think your quest for hate over a movie you haven't even seen is clouding your judgment.

[40sJohn]

Just because some of us are predicting that it will not hit expected box office targets doesn't mean we want it to fail. Even though I don't like the track this movie took with my favorite comic character and was disappointed walking out of the theater, I want this movie to succeed. I want to be the only one that didn't love the movie.

 

This movie was very, very well done from a production standpoint, and casting and several other perspectives. However, I did not enjoy part of the plot and it nearly ruined the movie for me. There is a remaining disappointment of what could have been, but I am hopeful and convinced that WB will fix some things and this franchise will do much better in the upcoming movies.

 

 

[Bosco685]

Just because some of us are predicting that it will not hit expected box office targets doesn't mean we want it to fail. Even though I don't like the track this movie took with my favorite comic character and was disappointed walking out of the theater, I want this movie to succeed. I want to be the only one that didn't love the movie.

 

This movie was very, very well done from a production standpoint, and casting and several other perspectives. However, I did not enjoy part of the plot and it nearly ruined the movie for me. There is a remaining disappointment of what could have been, but I am hopeful and convinced that WB will fix some things and this franchise will do much better in the upcoming movies.

 

You may be reading into this a little. What I find odd is DavidMerryweather bashing on a movie he hasn't even seen. Then going with any negative news just to disrupt any good discussion in the thread. Nobody is saying this was a perfect movie.

 

But trying to make up an imaginary budget to support some negativity is silly. A professional site like Box Office Mojo puts a lot into its analysis. And if they cannot confirm a budget figure, they won't even post it. To this day, Amazing Spider-Man 2 is still listed as 'N/A' because Sony never admitted what the final cost was.

 

 

So if it is posting $250 MM, they received this from someone in the studio that was credible.

 

 

Looking for bad news just to have bad news to post is not the best use of time with these movies.

[Gatsby77]

Some estimates have the total studio outlay at over $500 million (nearly 2/3 of which is production). Also, keep in mind profits must be split with the distribution chain, including theater owners.

 

Can you please post that credible reference where Warner spent $500 MM to create and distribute Batman v Superman? Even the more extreme sites noted $400 as the top-end. So I'd like to read the details how $500 MM was estimated.

 

 

Here's one with the production budget exceeding $400 million (precluding non-production costs)...

 

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Batman-V-Superman-May-End-Up-Being-Hollywood-Most-Expensive-Movie-89397.html

 

Is it credible? Perhaps, but in lieu of evidence to the contrary it's just one estimate among many. Only the Hollywood number crunchers know for sure. That said, it is an estimate. Most estimates have the production budget (including reshot footage based on previews) at between $250 and $350 million, not including P&A and non-production related expenditures.

 

Do you want to see more or does this satisfy your curiosity?

 

 

FYI -- if you read the Hollywood Reporter article I read, it notes the movie cost the studio ~ $325 million external of marketing, but that tax credits bumped it down to a production cost of $250 million.

 

(Plus $160-$170 million in marketing) gives us the $410-$420 million total.

 

So we're not actually in disagreement...

[Cat-Man_America]

I think your quest for hate over a movie you haven't even seen is clouding your judgment.

 

Really? That's news to me. My only quest is for entertainment that respects the original material.

 

Having checked the forecast, the projected outlook for my judgment is fair and sunny, with only a slight chance of rain.

 

Full disclosure: I'm not a Zack Snyder fanboy.