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

[Cat-Man_America]

Your location appears to be stuck in a long line at the cinema. It must be a Marvel film. May I suggest BvS, that line is shorter.

 

Again, from a fellow that has not even seen this movie. All you are doing is working to deliver a negative message about a production of which you are listening to others.

 

What's that like to be a sheep? Are the pastures greener?

 

 

You got it backspoonwards. The sheep would say "bah!" and go anyway. I say, why make WB's pastures greener?

 

Again, is your sense of humor stuck in dystopia?

[Bosco685]

You got it backspoonwards. The sheep would say "bah!" and go anyway. I say, why make WB's pastures greener?

 

Again, is your sense of humor stuck in dystopia?

 

You've been acting like a negative ninny in this thread to the point you killed the humor like that dark DC/Warner you so fear.

 

You don't have to love the movie. But for Pete's sake, take it somewhere else if you hate the thing and want to do nothing but carp on it. Your comments lost the 'constructive criticism' and 'contrasting opinion' pages ago and now is a negative opinion just because you dislike Zack Snyder's current movies - but you haven't even seen this one.

 

What is the value in that?

[Cat-Man_America]

You got it backspoonwards. The sheep would say "bah!" and go anyway. I say, why make WB's pastures greener?

 

Again, is your sense of humor stuck in dystopia?

 

You've been acting like a negative ninny in this thread to the point you killed the humor like that dark DC/Warner you so fear.

 

You don't have to love the movie. But for Pete's sake, take it somewhere else if you hate the thing and want to do nothing but carp on it. Your comments lost the 'constructive criticism' and 'contrasting opinion' pages ago and now is a negative opinion just because you dislike Zack Snyder's current movies - but you haven't even seen this one.

 

What is the value in that?

 

Wow, you're apparently taking page 666 quite literally.

 

As a thread focused on BvS, there should b room for all views. If you feel the humor has been killed maybe you should send a forensics team to Zack Snyder's residence. (Just teasing).

 

The value of anything is the eye if the beholder. Obviously you see no merit to my contributions and I see no humor in your's. Others mileage may vary.

 

My suggestion to those who haven't seen the film, but want to, is to go ahead and catch it while it's still in theaters. Otherwise, I'd say wait for DVD or downloads. Me, I'm waiting for Godot.

[rjrjr]

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.

 

Who's expectations? Warner Bros made it clear upfront they were looking at $800 million world wide. And it looks like they hit that number.

 

If you believe that, I've gotta a bridge in Brooklyn going up for sale. Do you want time shares?

 

Do people here really thing Warner Bros didn't know there movie was dark and aimed at a different demography than Marvel's movies? They are coming off a very successful series with Batman which was dark. It only makes sense they would try what worked for them in the recent past.

 

And, whatever mistakes they feel they made, it is pretty clear they are adjusting and going forward. B vs S didn't sink the DCU. It is more akin to Marvel's early movies in their cinematic universe in box office take (more actually) than Marvel's later movies.

 

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers. There are fans of comic characters and mainstream audiences who like action adventure films. That pretty much covers the demographic, and I doubt anyone goes to the cinema thinking "I just wanna be bummed-out." Batman works as a dark character because he was conceived in that vein.

 

Superman wasn't envisioned as a dark character, and unlike Batman, is out of place in a dystopian world. WB executives apparently haven't gotten the memo (yet). The folks in charge need to go back and soberly reexamine Siegel and Shuster's original vision and then trace the histories of both characters. The only way Superman and Batman work in the same universe is through incorporating ideas that worked in the original comics.

 

IMO, making the entire DC universe dark and dystopian is doomed to failure. WB is trying to play catch-up with Disney/Marvel Studios, but their vision stubbornly ignores those things that have worked for the competition. No amount of handicapping will improve their score against Kevin Feige's more structured fan-friendly system until they respect the material and fans.

 

My

 

Siegel and Shuster's original version of Superman was definitely darker than what Superman evolved into over the years. It is this original version that DC went back to with the new 52. He fought dirty politicians and wife abusers:

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/05/supermans-dark-days/393998/

 

You really do hate this movie, which you have not even seen, for some reason. I get it. DC ruined something for you. But to say this movie was anything but a success for DC is false. Just like Marvel, DC will find out what works and does not work for them. Just like Marvel, DC will have mistakes. But this movie was nowhere the mistake the original Hulk movies were and is more inline with the original Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America, except it made more money.

 

The biggest problem this movie had was Marvel was first and everyone is going to compare these movies to those movies. I'm glad DC didn't follow Marvel's kiddie verse style. I like more meat to my movies than we saw in Ant Man. And they were going to lose no matter what with Superman and Batman because some people like you think these characters somehow are the best DC has to offer. This is the highest grossing Superman movie so far. And I suspect, just like Marvel, we are seeing the tip of the iceberg on how well DC's movies will do in the future as they build up their cinematic universe.

 

 

[rjrjr]

My

...and I want to sincerely mention that I appreciate all your counter-points to this discussion so far.

I hope that sounded right.

 

If you are lost in the woods of New Hamphire, I'm sure someone could see your point.

 

Your location appears to be stuck in a long line at the cinema. It must be a Marvel film. May I suggest BvS, that line is shorter.

 

At least we now know where you are coming from. A Marvel zombie. We get it now.

 

Personally, I have no preference with one superhero line of comics over another. I've said repeatedly, I appreciate both what Marvel is doing and what DC is doing. I don't want to see the same movie year after year with a different costume on the main character. I want to be entertained and challenged (GOTG and BvS.)

[rjrjr]

IMO, making the entire DC universe dark and dystopian is doomed to failure. WB is trying to play catch-up with Disney/Marvel Studios, but their vision stubbornly ignores those things that have worked for the competition. No amount of handicapping will improve their score against Kevin Feige's more structured fan-friendly system until they respect the material and fans.

 

My

 

There is no question at all Warner realized it missed a huge opportunity over the years to create a well-planned and executed comic book universe. Looking back at movies like Steel, Catwoman and even Supergirl without any rhyme or reason why they existed (other than $$) is a shame.

 

But now Warner is trying to go down the right path, but in a different way. Does it need to exactly copy Marvel Studios? Not really. And with this Multiverse model that has been coming out slowly, it could be quite interesting the stories we could see delivered in a live or animated production (let's not forget Batman: The Killing Joke).

 

Marvel Studios is killing it right now. But when you go back to some of its hiccups like The Incredible Hulk (only delivered 1.8X budget) and Captain America: The First Avenger (only delivered 2.5X budget), Marvel had to learn a few lessons as well. Now since the Avengers the box office results have been rock solid.

 

DC is not allowed to make mistakes, didn't you know? They have to be perfect and follow Marvel's plan exactly. We don't want diversity in our movies, we want the same movie over and over again, just with the main character wearing a different costume.

[rjrjr]

Your location appears to be stuck in a long line at the cinema. It must be a Marvel film. May I suggest BvS, that line is shorter.

 

Again, from a fellow that has not even seen this movie. All you are doing is working to deliver a negative message about a production of which you are listening to others.

 

What's that like to be a sheep? Are the pastures greener?

 

 

[kimik]

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers.

 

Yes. The people who like Marvel films still believe that the FF is the greatest comic book.

[revat]

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers.

 

Yes. The people who like Marvel films still believe that the FF is the greatest comic book.

 

Yah that's like 8 people

[kimik]

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.

 

And how much did they rake in with product placement? If MOS could bring in ~$140M from product placement before release, then this film would likely hit the $200M mark. At that rate, their production + marketing cost would have been half covered already. This is where both Warner/DC and Disney/Marvel make hay. I would expect Civil War to do $200M in product placement as well.

 

Besides, in the end it is not the studios that have the most at risk, it would be the investors that finance the big films.

[rjrjr]

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers.

 

Yes. The people who like Marvel films still believe that the FF is the greatest comic book.

 

Did Marvel still publish that on the cover with the last series? I never understood how they were able to make that claim by the time the 70s rolled around.

 

I do think Marvel and DC are aiming at different audiences. Marvel is skewing to a younger crowd wanting to capture merchandising dollars for their heroes that are not necessarily well known. DC seems to be shooting for an older audience, knowing the merchandise is going to sell regardless because it is Batman and Superman, both well known properties. I think DC has been hugely influenced by the success of the Dark Knight movies which were not aimed at a young crowd. I'm sure DC looks at the revenue they are still generating from that trilogy of movies and want their new movies to be similar.

 

I think DC's slate of movies will lighten up after Suicide Squad. They are not stupid and will have seen the backlash against the BvS movie for the dark tone. Plus, like Marvel, they have characters that are not as well known as the trinity and they will want to sell toys, so they will have to go more kid friendly. I just hope they are not afraid to put story ahead of formula like Marvel has been doing. There are a few exceptions like GOTG and Captain America: Winter Soldier, but many of the Marvel movies have been very formulaic, so much so, I couldn't even tell you what happened in the last Thor movie or the last 2 Iron Man movies. Ant Man, for me, was the worst pandering to kids yet and that movie was a Disney, not a Marvel, movie through and through.

 

Just for the record, I think it is great we have many types of superhero movies. If they all started looking the same (something Marvel's movies are in danger of doing), that won't be good long term. GOTG gives me hope that Marvel sees the wisdom in experimenting.

Edited April 17, 2016 by rjrjr

[Bosco685]

As a thread focused on BvS, there should b room for all views. If you feel the humor has been killed maybe you should send a forensics team to Zack Snyder's residence. (Just teasing).

 

The value of anything is the eye if the beholder. Obviously you see no merit to my contributions and I see no humor in your's. Others mileage may vary.

 

Sure, have a contrasting opinion if the other person has seen the movie they are tearing into. And even those that say certain scenes didn't work for them - they have every right to post that opinion about the film, positive or negative. They saw the movie they are making a criticism about, so they know what they are talking about.

 

You proudly point out you didn't even see the movie - yet go out and search for negative things to post to prove it is a failure - really doesn't help have a conversation about the actual film.

 

Here - try this.

 

1) Bruce Wayne sending that message with Luthor's metahuman videos was really interesting. But what do you think of the other character's response in reviewing them? Do you think it actually leads to more interest in teaming up with these characters?

 

2) Can you believe that scene with Cyborg? What did you think about the thing that makes him into the character he becomes?

 

3) When Diana shares with Bruce her experiences with man, where do you think that will lead to as a story?

 

4) I'm a little concerned the general audience won't get the time travel thing that was shown. You know what scene I am referring to? Yeah, that one. But I still think it was really cool nonetheless. What's your thoughts after seeing it?

 

5) So that desert scene in the beginning with Lois Lane - that guy that shot all those characters. Wow! Especially that one he took out right in front of her. Who do you think that was that Lois was so moved by what happened?

 

See, by seeing the film we can have a conversation about it - positive and negative. You didn't even take time out to see the film so we can go deeper on these topics. It will just be you searching up the different items, and then responding based on what other people have published. Not your personal views on the actual scenes.

 

Fun, right?

[Prince Namor]

These movies aren't being made to re-create anyone's favorite comic book... they're being made to create movie FRANCHISE'S that will include multiple movies that can be sold and then sold again and then sold as two packs and three packs and collections, and TOYS, and pajama's, and heck, maybe even comic books.

You meant to use the plural but instead used the possessive.

 

I never see anything I disagree with in your posts so thank you for giving me this opportunity to FINALLY point out something incorrect.

 

[Prince Namor]

Truth is, I haven't gone out of my way to bash this movie, ...it stepped out in front of my steamroller like a crazed lunatic.

 

Zack Snyder directed MoS and the BvS follow-up. He's responsible for the dystopian take on Superman, so if you liked the first one you'll probably like the second.

You haven't gone out of your way to bash a movie you also have not seen yet?

 

 

I'm a steamroller, baby...

 

...but I really wish Zack's dysto-fanboys would grow a sense of humor.

 

Actually.... there is SOME humor...

 

In particular the Granny's Peach Tea... you really should SEE the movie...

 

The Dark Knight movies didn't have much of a sense of humor.... they did ok...

[gaz2810i]

As a thread focused on BvS, there should b room for all views. If you feel the humor has been killed maybe you should send a forensics team to Zack Snyder's residence. (Just teasing).

 

The value of anything is the eye if the beholder. Obviously you see no merit to my contributions and I see no humor in your's. Others mileage may vary.

 

Sure, have a contrasting opinion if the other person has seen the movie they are tearing into. And even those that say certain scenes didn't work for them - they have every right to post that opinion about the film, positive or negative. They saw the movie they are making a criticism about, so they know what they are talking about.

 

You proudly point out you didn't even see the movie - yet go out and search for negative things to post to prove it is a failure - really doesn't help have a conversation about the actual film.

 

Here - try this.

 

1) Bruce Wayne sending that message with Luthor's metahuman videos was really interesting. But what do you think of the other character's response in reviewing them? Do you think it actually leads to more interest in teaming up with these characters?

 

2) Can you believe that scene with Cyborg? What did you think about the thing that makes him into the character he becomes?

 

3) When Diana shares with Bruce her experiences with man, where do you think that will lead to as a story?

 

4) I'm a little concerned the general audience won't get the time travel thing that was shown. You know what scene I am referring to? Yeah, that one. But I still think it was really cool nonetheless. What's your thoughts after seeing it?

 

5) So that desert scene in the beginning with Lois Lane - that guy that shot all those characters. Wow! Especially that one he took out right in front of her. Who do you think that was that Lois was so moved by what happened?

 

See, by seeing the film we can have a conversation about it - positive and negative. You didn't even take time out to see the film so we can go deeper on these topics. It will just be you searching up the different items, and then responding based on what other people have published. Not your personal views on the actual scenes.

 

Fun, right?

 

This

[Cat-Man_America]

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.

 

Who's expectations? Warner Bros made it clear upfront they were looking at $800 million world wide. And it looks like they hit that number.

 

If you believe that, I've gotta a bridge in Brooklyn going up for sale. Do you want time shares?

 

Do people here really thing Warner Bros didn't know there movie was dark and aimed at a different demography than Marvel's movies? They are coming off a very successful series with Batman which was dark. It only makes sense they would try what worked for them in the recent past.

 

And, whatever mistakes they feel they made, it is pretty clear they are adjusting and going forward. B vs S didn't sink the DCU. It is more akin to Marvel's early movies in their cinematic universe in box office take (more actually) than Marvel's later movies.

 

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers. There are fans of comic characters and mainstream audiences who like action adventure films. That pretty much covers the demographic, and I doubt anyone goes to the cinema thinking "I just wanna be bummed-out." Batman works as a dark character because he was conceived in that vein.

 

Superman wasn't envisioned as a dark character, and unlike Batman, is out of place in a dystopian world. WB executives apparently haven't gotten the memo (yet). The folks in charge need to go back and soberly reexamine Siegel and Shuster's original vision and then trace the histories of both characters. The only way Superman and Batman work in the same universe is through incorporating ideas that worked in the original comics.

 

IMO, making the entire DC universe dark and dystopian is doomed to failure. WB is trying to play catch-up with Disney/Marvel Studios, but their vision stubbornly ignores those things that have worked for the competition. No amount of handicapping will improve their score against Kevin Feige's more structured fan-friendly system until they respect the material and fans.

 

My

 

Siegel and Shuster's original version of Superman was definitely darker than what Superman evolved into over the years. It is this original version that DC went back to with the new 52. He fought dirty politicians and wife abusers:

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/05/supermans-dark-days/393998/

 

You really do hate this movie, which you have not even seen, for some reason. I get it. DC ruined something for you. But to say this movie was anything but a success for DC is false. Just like Marvel, DC will find out what works and does not work for them. Just like Marvel, DC will have mistakes. But this movie was nowhere the mistake the original Hulk movies were and is more inline with the original Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America, except it made more money.

 

The biggest problem this movie had was Marvel was first and everyone is going to compare these movies to those movies. I'm glad DC didn't follow Marvel's kiddie verse style. I like more meat to my movies than we saw in Ant Man. And they were going to lose no matter what with Superman and Batman because some people like you think these characters somehow are the best DC has to offer. This is the highest grossing Superman movie so far. And I suspect, just like Marvel, we are seeing the tip of the iceberg on how well DC's movies will do in the future as they build up their cinematic universe.

 

 

You are certainly welcome to ownership of this viewpoint although I'd argue that suggesting the new 52 bear any resemblance to the original characters is a real stretch. BTW, I'll read the Atlantic article and provide my thoughts on it later.

 

Kiddie verse? ...Really?. What makes Marvel films come across as juvenile in your mind? Is it because Marvel Studios films are more entertaining (fun) or what?

 

The dystopian DC universe that WB has hitched their wagon to Is looking a lot like a dead horse. Suicide on a Schlick. It may be meaty, but I can see why audiences might choose to go vegan.

 

When you suggest the BvS is the highest grossing of all Superman films I'd ask if you've adjusted all of the statistical data for inflation and taken into account the growth of international markets? ...Not to mention adjustments for inflated production costs, P&A, bonuses, backend points, and miscellaneous non-production costs.

 

I'm not going to knock the BvS film's content as I haven't seen it, but DC has a huge gap to catch up with Marvel. Personally, I think it's unlikely. The superhero genre will play out long before that occurs.

 

Since Batfleck has successfully lobbied to direct and star in the next Batman film I'll make a point of seeing it (Ben Affleck is a very capable director).

[Cat-Man_America]

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers.

 

Yes. The people who like Marvel films still believe that the FF is the greatest comic book.

 

Not me, I'm more Timely than Marvelous.

[Cat-Man_America]

IMO, making the entire DC universe dark and dystopian is doomed to failure. WB is trying to play catch-up with Disney/Marvel Studios, but their vision stubbornly ignores those things that have worked for the competition. No amount of handicapping will improve their score against Kevin Feige's more structured fan-friendly system until they respect the material and fans.

 

My

 

There is no question at all Warner realized it missed a huge opportunity over the years to create a well-planned and executed comic book universe. Looking back at movies like Steel, Catwoman and even Supergirl without any rhyme or reason why they existed (other than $$) is a shame.

 

But now Warner is trying to go down the right path, but in a different way. Does it need to exactly copy Marvel Studios? Not really. And with this Multiverse model that has been coming out slowly, it could be quite interesting the stories we could see delivered in a live or animated production (let's not forget Batman: The Killing Joke).

 

Marvel Studios is killing it right now. But when you go back to some of its hiccups like The Incredible Hulk (only delivered 1.8X budget) and Captain America: The First Avenger (only delivered 2.5X budget), Marvel had to learn a few lessons as well. Now since the Avengers the box office results have been rock solid.

 

DC is not allowed to make mistakes, didn't you know? They have to be perfect and follow Marvel's plan exactly. We don't want diversity in our movies, we want the same movie over and over again, just with the main character wearing a different costume.

 

Diversity might even be Zack Snyder's middle name, ...if he changed it.

[rjrjr]

Kiddie verse? ...Really?. What makes Marvel films come across as juvenile in your mind? Is it because Marvel Studios films are more entertaining (fun) or what?

 

 

* In GOTG, Ronan was challenged to a dance off by Starlord.

* In Ant Man, the family had a pet giant ant at the end of that movie.

* Iron Man's costume is falling apart in Iron Man III and played for laughs.

* It's been a while, but didn't Iron Man III also end with Tony using his extra suits to make fireworks or something silly like that? Maybe that was Iron Man II...

 

I'm sure I can find other examples, but those are 4 just off the top of my head.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2016 by rjrjr

[Prince Namor]

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.

 

Who's expectations? Warner Bros made it clear upfront they were looking at $800 million world wide. And it looks like they hit that number.

 

If you believe that, I've gotta a bridge in Brooklyn going up for sale. Do you want time shares?

 

Do people here really thing Warner Bros didn't know there movie was dark and aimed at a different demography than Marvel's movies? They are coming off a very successful series with Batman which was dark. It only makes sense they would try what worked for them in the recent past.

 

And, whatever mistakes they feel they made, it is pretty clear they are adjusting and going forward. B vs S didn't sink the DCU. It is more akin to Marvel's early movies in their cinematic universe in box office take (more actually) than Marvel's later movies.

 

Really? Do you actually think there's a distinctly separate demography of Marvel and DC filmgoers. There are fans of comic characters and mainstream audiences who like action adventure films. That pretty much covers the demographic, and I doubt anyone goes to the cinema thinking "I just wanna be bummed-out." Batman works as a dark character because he was conceived in that vein.

 

Superman wasn't envisioned as a dark character, and unlike Batman, is out of place in a dystopian world. WB executives apparently haven't gotten the memo (yet). The folks in charge need to go back and soberly reexamine Siegel and Shuster's original vision and then trace the histories of both characters. The only way Superman and Batman work in the same universe is through incorporating ideas that worked in the original comics.

 

IMO, making the entire DC universe dark and dystopian is doomed to failure. WB is trying to play catch-up with Disney/Marvel Studios, but their vision stubbornly ignores those things that have worked for the competition. No amount of handicapping will improve their score against Kevin Feige's more structured fan-friendly system until they respect the material and fans.

 

My

 

Siegel and Shuster's original version of Superman was definitely darker than what Superman evolved into over the years. It is this original version that DC went back to with the new 52. He fought dirty politicians and wife abusers:

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/05/supermans-dark-days/393998/

 

You really do hate this movie, which you have not even seen, for some reason. I get it. DC ruined something for you. But to say this movie was anything but a success for DC is false. Just like Marvel, DC will find out what works and does not work for them. Just like Marvel, DC will have mistakes. But this movie was nowhere the mistake the original Hulk movies were and is more inline with the original Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America, except it made more money.

 

The biggest problem this movie had was Marvel was first and everyone is going to compare these movies to those movies. I'm glad DC didn't follow Marvel's kiddie verse style. I like more meat to my movies than we saw in Ant Man. And they were going to lose no matter what with Superman and Batman because some people like you think these characters somehow are the best DC has to offer. This is the highest grossing Superman movie so far. And I suspect, just like Marvel, we are seeing the tip of the iceberg on how well DC's movies will do in the future as they build up their cinematic universe.

 

 

You are certainly welcome to ownership of this viewpoint although I'd argue that suggesting the new 52 bear any resemblance to the original characters is a real stretch. BTW, I'll read the Atlantic article and provide my thoughts on it later.

 

Kiddie verse? ...Really?. What makes Marvel films come across as juvenile in your mind? Is it because Marvel Studios films are more entertaining (fun) or what?

 

The dystopian DC universe that WB has hitched their wagon to Is looking a lot like a dead horse. Suicide on a Schlick. It may be meaty, but I can see why audiences might choose to go vegan.

 

When you suggest the BvS is the highest grossing of all Superman films I'd ask if you've adjusted all of the statistical data for inflation and taken into account the growth of international markets? ...Not to mention adjustments for inflated production costs, P&A, bonuses, backend points, and miscellaneous non-production costs.

 

I'm not going to knock the BvS film's content as I haven't seen it, but DC has a huge gap to catch up with Marvel. Personally, I think it's unlikely. The superhero genre will play out long before that occurs.

 

Since Batfleck has successfully lobbied to direct and star in the next Batman film I'll make a point of seeing it (Ben Affleck is a very capable director).

 

They've been a successful publisher as #2 all these years, they can still be successful even at #2 in superhero movies....