BATMAN VS SUPERMAN MOVIE A DOG 0

[woowoo]

 

HULK SMASH

Edited April 9, 2016 by woowoo

[woowoo]

True, we live in a dystopian society, but why pander to it? If our heroes are incapable of rising above the nastiness they simply become a sad reflection of it. One of the things I absolutely loathe about Zack Snyder's first of two Superman fiascos is how he turned the Superman mythos into a modern form of camp, ...an unfunny camp pastiche of the most iconic of American heroes. Superman as a jumble of confused emotions and angst. He's been turned into an apologist for American violence while reflecting it's worst excesses.

 

The heavy handed religious iconography not only turned me off, it was offensive and manipulative propaganda that had no place in an uplifting movie about comic book heroism. I'll never forgive Zack Snyder for deconstructing Siegel and Shuster's greatest triumph. BTW, I don't agree with those who feel a character must be completely reconstructed for each new generation of movie goers. While the first Captain America film had it's faults, it brilliantly bridged the WWII era patriotic mind-set and successfully brought the character into an alien future with his character intact.

 

DC's franchise holders apparently see Superman more like Gumby, moldable into whatever era he can be dropped into with no homage to past greatness. One simple solution would've been to make him ageless as a part of his immortality. That'd add greater depth to his character and complicate his emotional involvements and interactions with people. Of course, this is too complicated and risky for Zack Snyder. He wanted a Transformers audience, so he dumbed down MoS with lots of FX, tossed in strong Christian religious references packaged and sold to ministers who recommended it to their congregations and sold tons of tickets. It was a cynical approach to creating a blockbuster, but it worked.

 

Those who like MoS have their reasons, but obviously they saw a different film than I did or have set the bar so low for DC's dystopian black hole that they've come to the conclusion that any film is better than nothing. The tornado death scene of Pa Kent may be the single worst scene I've ever witnessed in a movie. I mentally gagged and should have walked out. The heavy handed religious symbolism reached the level of product placement, ...like performance cars in a Bond flick. The treatment of women in MoS as weak, weak-minded, vapid and inferior was offensive. The dialog was moronic and stereotypes pervasive. Those who liked Snyder's first Superman film are beyond my understanding, but he has his defenders.

 

As I haven't seen Supe & Batfleck 2.0 my assessments are based on second and third hand appraisals, but there's strong enough critical consensus to know what to expect. I'd only ask my friends here to try and look at this honestly from a comic book fans standpoint. Would you buy Zack's reenvisioned dystopian take on Siegel & Shuster's character if it was a comic instead of a movie or would you pass and buy something more fun to read? Food for thought.

 

I dont like the new Superman Zack did but We had our time now thats over. I love Hard rock but my kids like all that Rap is cr_p . We are outnumbered to the new age. Dave wait intill you lose your hair :

Edited April 9, 2016 by woowoo

[Cat-Man_America]

I respect your opinion but you make it very hard to.

 

I feel like your just browbeating everyone with "your" opinion because it's the right and only one.

 

Merely visualizing my thoughts. Everyone has opinions they consider correct and some have been voiced rather loudly. I don't think my views are unreasonable and they're certainly not personal attacks.

 

You can't browbeat folks who are determined to spend their money. I've just struggled to understand the mindset of Zack's fans.

 

Of course, I don't understand the passion of Trump supporters either, so what do I know.

[Cat-Man_America]

 

HULK SMASH

 

 

 

I dont like the new Superman Zack did but We had our time now thats over. I love Hard rock but my kids like all that Rap is cr_p . We are outnumbered to the new age. Dave wait intill you lose your hair

 

[Randall Ries]

I can't help thinking about how many times since "Crisis On Infinite Earth's" has Superman been "reenvisioned" by the actual owners of the character? Some have been terrible, some passable, but NONE are like the Superman pre Crisis. It seems DC's whole stable is up for interpretational grabs by any writer, artist or director of a given film. I think it is DC itself that is unstable and seemingly without a rudder. Aren't they even now reinventing their universe? Again? Methinks they are insecure.

 

I for one wouldn't mind if they would just stick with one universe and give each character some reasonable direction to develop in. Snyder's vision is just as valid as Speilberg's or Richard Donner's at this point. Just as long as Superman is sort of up for grabs.

 

So far as pandering to a dystopian society, I don't see it so much as pandering as affirmation. If we are in a dystopian society, the idea of unicorns and rainbows as a paragon of virtue isn't going to sell tickets. Have you notice once an attitude is established in society, there is no going back? I don't think a dystopian movie or set of dystopian ideals is all of a sudden going to make everyone recoil in horror and repent, turning back the clock to 1961 or something.

 

We are what we are now, possibly in part to the media we are exposed to, but certainly because of a lack of moral restraint and a common religious compass. I think one begets the other. In fact, our media reflects our mindsets, if the truth be known. With a little propaganda thrown in, of course. If we have no one greater we must answer to (at least in our own minds) then the sky is the limit. But, given our predilection for bumbling and selfishness, we will only realize dystopia, not utopia. For everyone's Utopia differs from everyone else's. As long as that difference exist, you will have dystopia.

Edited April 9, 2016 by Randall Ries

[tabcom]

. . .

Of course, I don't understand the passion of Trump supporters either, so what do I know.

would you be surprised I like this movie AND I get Trump?

[woowoo]

. . .

Of course, I don't understand the passion of Trump supporters either, so what do I know.

would you be surprised I like this movie AND I get Trump?

 

 

I think David been drinking COKE ZERO HUGE POSTS.

[Cat-Man_America]

. . .

Of course, I don't understand the passion of Trump supporters either, so what do I know.

would you be surprised I like this movie AND I get Trump?

 

Not at all, as entertainment they share similar values.

 

I've played both contract and duplicate bridge. The best hand to bid and play is usually no trump.

 

 

[Cat-Man_America]

. . .

Of course, I don't understand the passion of Trump supporters either, so what do I know.

would you be surprised I like this movie AND I get Trump?

 

 

I think David been drinking COKE ZERO HUGE POSTS.

 

[Aman619]

True, we live in a dystopian society, but why pander to it? If our heroes are incapable of rising above the nastiness they simply become a sad reflection of it. One of the things I absolutely loathe about Zack Snyder's first of two Superman fiascos is how he turned the Superman mythos into a modern form of camp, ...an unfunny camp pastiche of the most iconic of American heroes. Superman as a jumble of confused emotions and angst. He's been turned into an apologist for American violence while reflecting it's worst excesses.

 

The heavy handed religious iconography not only turned me off, it was offensive and manipulative propaganda that had no place in an uplifting movie about comic book heroism. I'll never forgive Zack Snyder for deconstructing Siegel and Shuster's greatest triumph. BTW, I don't agree with those who feel a character must be completely reconstructed for each new generation of movie goers. While the first Captain America film had it's faults, it brilliantly bridged the WWII era patriotic mind-set and successfully brought the character into an alien future with his character intact.

 

DC's franchise holders apparently see Superman more like Gumby, moldable into whatever era he can be dropped into with no homage to past greatness. One simple solution would've been to make him ageless as a part of his immortality. That'd add greater depth to his character and complicate his emotional involvements and interactions with people. Of course, this is too complicated and risky for Zack Snyder. He wanted a Transformers audience, so he dumbed down MoS with lots of FX, tossed in strong Christian religious references packaged and sold to ministers who recommended it to their congregations and sold tons of tickets. It was a cynical approach to creating a blockbuster, but it worked.

 

Those who like MoS have their reasons, but obviously they saw a different film than I did or have set the bar so low for DC's dystopian black hole that they've come to the conclusion that any film is better than nothing. The tornado death scene of Pa Kent may be the single worst scene I've ever witnessed in a movie. I mentally gagged and should have walked out. The heavy handed religious symbolism reached the level of product placement, ...like performance cars in a Bond flick. The treatment of women in MoS as weak, weak-minded, vapid and inferior was offensive. The dialog was moronic and stereotypes pervasive. Those who liked Snyder's first Superman film are beyond my understanding, but he has his defenders.

 

As I haven't seen Supe & Batfleck 2.0 my assessments are based on second and third hand appraisals, but there's strong enough critical consensus to know what to expect. I'd only ask my friends here to try and look at this honestly from a comic book fans standpoint. Would you buy Zack's reenvisioned dystopian take on Siegel & Shuster's character if it was a comic instead of a movie or would you pass and buy something more fun to read? Food for thought.

 

I don't get your total disdain for this movie. Because critics panned it? You are a life long comic book collector, who knows 1000 times more about the genre than they do. They watch a superhero movie grading it on how much it rises above what they expect, which is a high bar, that it has to not only be technically top notch, but also explore the human condition on a par with the Oscar worthy fils they'd rather be reviewing. But a superhero movie isn't built for that. So why would you or anyone give so much credence to what they say?

 

Better to listen to your fellow comics lovers. Yes some like Mitch hated it, but take that with a chunk of salt, he's got his own view of everything. Not everyone loved it here, but few say it's not worth your time or your ten bucks to judge for yourself..

 

I could rebut a lot of what you said here too. "Deconstructing Siegel and Shusters greatest triumph?" You mean the one two high school kids came up with jamming together pulp heroes, strongmen and their Jewish backgrounds and got incredibly lucky ever saw the light of day?

 

Well, within the first year Superman was deconstructed by DC into a hit magazine selling machine... And every decade since they added onto it, and changed it, especially in the past few decades. Every time it got stale. Why shouldn't Hollywood get to pick and choose which Superman they want to show?

[Aman619]

Snyder may have made some miscalculations you will not like, but cheez, it wasn't for lack of effort. Who's to say your idea of a Superman movie would do half as well?

 

It's just a movie... Of a character you love and ought to just see for yourself. Don't worry, you won't be enriching Snyder by doing so, or voting for him. Refusing to see it is really cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

At least it sounds like it to me!

[jimjum12]

True, we live in a dystopian society, but why pander to it? If our heroes are incapable of rising above the nastiness they simply become a sad reflection of it. One of the things I absolutely loathe about Zack Snyder's first of two Superman fiascos is how he turned the Superman mythos into a modern form of camp, ...an unfunny camp pastiche of the most iconic of American heroes. Superman as a jumble of confused emotions and angst. He's been turned into an apologist for American violence while reflecting it's worst excesses.

 

The heavy handed religious iconography not only turned me off, it was offensive and manipulative propaganda that had no place in an uplifting movie about comic book heroism. I'll never forgive Zack Snyder for deconstructing Siegel and Shuster's greatest triumph. BTW, I don't agree with those who feel a character must be completely reconstructed for each new generation of movie goers. While the first Captain America film had it's faults, it brilliantly bridged the WWII era patriotic mind-set and successfully brought the character into an alien future with his character intact.

 

DC's franchise holders apparently see Superman more like Gumby, moldable into whatever era he can be dropped into with no homage to past greatness. One simple solution would've been to make him ageless as a part of his immortality. That'd add greater depth to his character and complicate his emotional involvements and interactions with people. Of course, this is too complicated and risky for Zack Snyder. He wanted a Transformers audience, so he dumbed down MoS with lots of FX, tossed in strong Christian religious references packaged and sold to ministers who recommended it to their congregations and sold tons of tickets. It was a cynical approach to creating a blockbuster, but it worked.

 

Those who like MoS have their reasons, but obviously they saw a different film than I did or have set the bar so low for DC's dystopian black hole that they've come to the conclusion that any film is better than nothing. The tornado death scene of Pa Kent may be the single worst scene I've ever witnessed in a movie. I mentally gagged and should have walked out. The heavy handed religious symbolism reached the level of product placement, ...like performance cars in a Bond flick. The treatment of women in MoS as weak, weak-minded, vapid and inferior was offensive. The dialog was moronic and stereotypes pervasive. Those who liked Snyder's first Superman film are beyond my understanding, but he has his defenders.

 

As I haven't seen Supe & Batfleck 2.0 my assessments are based on second and third hand appraisals, but there's strong enough critical consensus to know what to expect. I'd only ask my friends here to try and look at this honestly from a comic book fans standpoint. Would you buy Zack's reenvisioned dystopian take on Siegel & Shuster's character if it was a comic instead of a movie or would you pass and buy something more fun to read? Food for thought.

 

I don't get your total disdain for this movie. Because critics panned it? You are a life long comic book collector, who knows 1000 times more about the genre than they do. They watch a superhero movie grading it on how much it rises above what they expect, which is a high bar, that it has to not only be technically top notch, but also explore the human condition on a par with the Oscar worthy fils they'd rather be reviewing. But a superhero movie isn't built for that. So why would you or anyone give so much credence to what they say?

 

Better to listen to your fellow comics lovers. Yes some like Mitch hated it, but take that with a chunk of salt, he's got his own view of everything. Not everyone loved it here, but few say it's not worth your time or your ten bucks to judge for yourself..

 

I could rebut a lot of what you said here too. "Deconstructing Siegel and Shusters greatest triumph?" You mean the one two high school kids came up with jamming together pulp heroes, strongmen and their Jewish backgrounds and got incredibly lucky ever saw the light of day?

 

Well, within the first year Superman was deconstructed by DC into a hit magazine selling machine... And every decade since they added onto it, and changed it, especially in the past few decades. Every time it got stale. Why shouldn't Hollywood get to pick and choose which Superman they want to show?

 

... as much as I loved Superman (1978) at the time, that movie wouldn't get off the ground today..... likely straight to DVD. Personally, I miss the days when a purer and more symbolic Superman was viable.... but I didn't think MOS was that much of a departure..... I'm one of the one's who loved it..... but I'm a "glass half full" kind of chap who also enjoyed both Hulk movies and thought Batman Begins was easily the best of the Nolan trilogy..... I just chalk it up to 1970's brain damage and remain blissfully ignorant. I suppose when Mitch was buying Action 1, I was just trying to buy some action....GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[MrBedrock]

I gotta say I was not very impressed with the movie.

The good...

1) There are some killer visuals.

2) I liked Affleck as Batman very much.

3) The way the film ties into the end of Man of Steel was great.

4) And above all, Wonder Woman! Perfect.

 

The problem was that the bad so out-weighed the good for me.

The bad...

 

I don't know how to do one of those Spoiler Alerts, so SPOILER ALERT!

1) There were plot holes that were just too ridiculous to over come, at least for me.

2) "Martha". All of the animosity between Batman and Superman was resolved simply because their mothers share the same first name?!?!

3) How can Superman hear Lois when she's underwater, when she's on the other side of the world, etc. etc. etc., but he can't hear his mother when she's a couple of blocks away?

4) Luther is scared of Superman's uncontrollable power, so he creates something more powerful and less controllable?

5) It was pretty impressive how quickly the Metropolis legal system worked. The day after the climactic battle scene the paper had news of not only the outcome but also Lex's conviction and imprisonment.

 

 

 

[woowoo]

I gotta say I was not very impressed with the movie.

The good...

1) There are some killer visuals.

2) I liked Affleck as Batman very much.

3) The way the film ties into the end of Man of Steel was great.

4) And above all, Wonder Woman! Perfect.

 

The problem was that the bad so out-weighed the good for me.

The bad...

 

I don't know how to do one of those Spoiler Alerts, so SPOILER ALERT!

1) There were plot holes that were just too ridiculous to over come, at least for me.

2) "Martha". All of the animosity between Batman and Superman was resolved simply because their mothers share the same first name?!?!

3) How can Superman hear Lois when she's underwater, when she's on the other side of the world, etc. etc. etc., but he can't hear his mother when she's a couple of blocks away?4) Luther is scared of Superman's uncontrollable power, so he creates something more powerful and less controllable?

5) It was pretty impressive how quickly the Metropolis legal system worked. The day after the climactic battle scene the paper had news of not only the outcome but also Lex's conviction and imprisonment.

 

 

 

I know number 3

 

[

[TheWatcher]

3) How can Superman hear Lois when she's underwater, when she's on the other side of the world, etc. etc. etc., but he can't hear his mother when she's a couple of blocks away?

 

http://screenrant.com/batman-v-superman-zack-snyder-cut-dark-scene/

[Cat-Man_America]

I don't get your total disdain for this movie. Because critics panned it? You are a life long comic book collector, who knows 1000 times more about the genre than they do. They watch a superhero movie grading it on how much it rises above what they expect, which is a high bar, that it has to not only be technically top notch, but also explore the human condition on a par with the Oscar worthy fils they'd rather be reviewing. But a superhero movie isn't built for that. So why would you or anyone give so much credence to what they say?

 

Those of us who are collectors and concerned about the future of the hobby should care even more than the general public given how much media attention may impact comic values. If interest wains due to mishandling a franchise, the character's popularity and book values might plummet as well. It's not an unreasonable prospect.

 

Better to listen to your fellow comics lovers. Yes some like Mitch hated it, but take that with a chunk of salt, he's got his own view of everything. Not everyone loved it here, but few say it's not worth your time or your ten bucks to judge for yourself..

 

I listen, but I'm not passive. Trust me, I didn't jump into this discussion to defend Mitch's POV. He's a big boy and can make his own mistakes.

When I talk about spending money on films, try to think of it in a broader context. If a movie is good, maybe we should see it several times and recommend it to our friends and vice versa.

 

The reason bad movies get made and remade is because sheep keep flocking to 'em and getting sheared.

 

I could rebut a lot of what you said here too. "Deconstructing Siegel and Shusters greatest triumph?" You mean the one two high school kids came up with jamming together pulp heroes, strongmen and their Jewish backgrounds and got incredibly lucky ever saw the light of day?

 

Yeah, that's the one. It was their vision. They had a dream and the determination to keep after it. The irony is just how little they received for it and how much their concept has been maligned by others. But you're probably right, why should it matter? They're long gone.

 

Well, within the first year Superman was deconstructed by DC into a hit magazine selling machine... And every decade since they added onto it, and changed it, especially in the past few decades. Every time it got stale. Why shouldn't Hollywood get to pick and choose which Superman they want to show?

 

Not really. It became a hit due to their first year stories. Action's sales went through the roof and DC had difficulty keeping a lid on it. Yes, the character was tweaked and story lines expanded to include other key characters, but Superman was fairly consistent even when drawn by other artists.

 

Snyder may have made some miscalculations you will not like, but cheez, it wasn't for lack of effort. Who's to say your idea of a Superman movie would do half as well?

 

My super-ego says so (and better than that).

 

It's just a movie... Of a character you love and ought to just see for yourself. Don't worry, you won't be enriching Snyder by doing so, or voting for him. Refusing to see it is really cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

At least it sounds like it to me!

 

True, it's just a movie. Alas, my principles don't align with Zack's interests. If I see it later I'll review it, but I won't be contributing any up-front money (like I said, on principle).

 

Nevertheless, I do respect your opinion and that of others with whom I may or may not agree.

[Cat-Man_America]

If anyone's interested, I've linked another discussion forum below. The thread has a variety of pro/con opinions expressed about Superman vs Batman and superhero movies in general. A number of movie industry folks contribute views on this forum, so the discussions are often lively with interesting observations. Heck, the GA Marvel Mystery comic in this thread oughta be worth a look...

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice.356063/page-33

 

We were debating the aerodynamic capabilities of the wings on Subbies feet. Don't ask!

[woowoo]

If anyone's interested, I've linked another discussion forum below. The thread has a variety of pro/con opinions expressed about Superman vs Batman and superhero movies in general. A number of movie industry folks contribute views on this forum, so the discussions are often lively with interesting observations. Heck, the GA Marvel Mystery comic in this thread oughta be worth a look...

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice.356063/page-33

 

We were debating the aerodynamic capabilities of the wings on Subbies feet. Don't ask!

 

DavidMerryweather please put away the

 

[Cat-Man_America]

If anyone's interested, I've linked another discussion forum below. The thread has a variety of pro/con opinions expressed about Superman vs Batman and superhero movies in general. A number of movie industry folks contribute views on this forum, so the discussions are often lively with interesting observations. Heck, the GA Marvel Mystery comic in this thread oughta be worth a look...

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice.356063/page-33

 

We were debating the aerodynamic capabilities of the wings on Subbies feet. Don't ask!

 

DavidMerryweather please put away the

 

 

I'm restricted to ale, but dark ale in honor of this thread! ...Gator has monopolized all the Coke Zero east of the Rockies.

 

BTW, there's a kewl HT cover posted one page earlier...

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice.356063/page-32

[Aman619]

"The reason bad movies get made and remade is because sheep keep flocking to 'em and getting sheared."

 

well, my take on why bad movies get made boils down to he simple fact that making a GREAT movie is extremely hard to do. Even little indie films take hundreds of people. These studio monsters involve 1000s of artists and craftsmen on many continents.. And a lot of decision makers, talented people as well as egocentric geniuses who get their way (because their last pic was a hit, and worried execs with opinions and final sayso etc etc affecting the final product. And ALL films mutate at each step in the process: a perfect -script can be undone by casting and performances. A mediocre -script can be miraculous by same, plus chemistry on set, or setback that turn out to be lucky breaks (Jaws shark was bad so they used it as little as they could, affecting the suspense)

 

its just a miracle when it all comes together. And it doesn't happen often, even on the high minded Artsy films where they've got the best people collaborating... but 9 times out of 10 it wasn't for lack of effort.

 

but to your point about "sheep" ? people just want to pay their ten bucks and be entertained... and get out of the house too!