• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

BATMAN VS SUPERMAN MOVIE A DOG
0

Started by Mmehdy,

765 posts in this topic

tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
How about the origin of Super horse? [i had no idea DC went that far but I just saw Action #294 :facepalm: ] Oh and look Lex Luthor is on the cover, again!

 

This is why Supes sucks!

Different era, different sensibilities.

 

To our modern jaded perspective, they're hopelessly campy and hokey. But I love those covers and stories from the 1950s and 1960s, as reflecting a simpler, more innocent time when comics were clearly aimed towards young kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
I'm not condemning those who are enamored of the film's message, but please allow those of us who appreciate the simple beauty of the character's original mythos our measured cynicism.

I have no problem with everyone having their own opinion of the movie. If people were just discussing the movie on its own merits, that'd be cool.

 

I simply don't understand those people who are focused only on the financial aspect of the movie and more bizarrely seem to be taking some kind of delight in the movie doing badly at the box office (particularly when it's not, actually).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
50YrsCollctngCmcs

50YrsCollctngCmcs

Posted
Posted
I'm not condemning those who are enamored of the film's message, but please allow those of us who appreciate the simple beauty of the character's original mythos our measured cynicism.

I have no problem with everyone having their own opinion of the movie. If people were just discussing the movie on its own merits, that'd be cool.

 

I simply don't understand those people who are focused only on the financial aspect of the movie and more bizarrely seem to be taking some kind of delight in the movie doing badly at the box office (particularly when it's not, actually).

 

Sometime around ten to fifteen years ago (probably as a result of wide spread data availability) the phenomenon of reporting movie revenues like sports scores began to occur. Think back to twenty years ago; did you ever hear how movies did on the weekend on a newscast or in your local paper? Nope, you might have read about how good a movie was but the financials were left to the folks in the business. No more.

 

It's an odd indicator and truly removed from the merits of any individual movie in most cases.

 

Another case of more data not really telling anyone much of anything. Unless you are a stockholder in one of these entertainment companies I don't know what meaning you should ascribe to the weekend performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat-Man_America

Cat-Man_America

Posted
Posted
I'm not condemning those who are enamored of the film's message, but please allow those of us who appreciate the simple beauty of the character's original mythos our measured cynicism.

I have no problem with everyone having their own opinion of the movie. If people were just discussing the movie on its own merits, that'd be cool.

 

I simply don't understand those people who are focused only on the financial aspect of the movie and more bizarrely seem to be taking some kind of delight in the movie doing badly at the box office (particularly when it's not, actually).

 

The money matters from the perspective that if you want better movies to be made there has to be some benchmark for success or failure. When bad movies make good BO returns it only encourages more of the same.

 

Here's one of the best reviews I've read of Zack Snyder's debacle from a prominent critic (major kudos to Ken Levine)...

 

http://kenlevine.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-worst-movie-of-year-batman-v.html

 

It's obvious to me that this guy is passionate about the original comics. He also nailed the differences between Marvel Studio productions and DC productions. My 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I'm not condemning those who are enamored of the film's message, but please allow those of us who appreciate the simple beauty of the character's original mythos our measured cynicism.

I have no problem with everyone having their own opinion of the movie. If people were just discussing the movie on its own merits, that'd be cool.

 

I simply don't understand those people who are focused only on the financial aspect of the movie and more bizarrely seem to be taking some kind of delight in the movie doing badly at the box office (particularly when it's not, actually).

 

The money matters from the perspective that if you want better movies to be made there has to be some benchmark for success or failure. When bad movies make good BO returns it only encourages more of the same.

 

Here's one of the best reviews I've read of Zack Snyder's debacle from a prominent critic (major kudos to Ken Levine)...

 

 

http://kenlevine.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-worst-movie-of-year-batman-v.html

 

It's obvious to me that this guy is passionate about the original comics. He also nailed the differences between Marvel Studio productions and DC productions. My 2c

 

 

THIS REVIEWER NAILED IT,,,,,250 MILLION BUCKS FOR WHAT.....

Edited by Mmehdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Just finished rewatching superman 1978..the first 40 mins of that movie can go toe to toe with ANY superhero movie today.....and that was almost 40 years ago....Chris reeve was the man, check out not only the first scene but when he was in lois's apartment and almost told her he was superman...NOW THAT is acting. We forget what is great when we are flooded with DC wanna be marvel movies.

Edited by Mmehdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
Watched it this past weekend. Was it great? No. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Did I enjoy it more than Avengers II? Definitely.

I've had root canals I've enjoyed more than Avengers II. :insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
The money matters from the perspective that if you want better movies to be made there has to be some benchmark for success or failure. When bad movies make good BO returns it only encourages more of the same.

There is no correlation between size of budget and quality of movie, either in superhero movies or other movies.

 

There are plenty of movies with massive budgets that stink, including big budget sequels that were made because the original movies did fantastically at the box office (Iron Man 2 and 3, anyone?), and plenty of movies with small budgets that are great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
The money matters from the perspective that if you want better movies to be made there has to be some benchmark for success or failure. When bad movies make good BO returns it only encourages more of the same.

There is no correlation between size of budget and quality of movie, either in superhero movies or other movies.

 

There are plenty of movies with massive budgets that stink, including big budget sequels that were made because the original movies did fantastically at the box office (Iron Man 2 and 3, anyone?), and plenty of movies with small budgets that are great.

 

I agree but even the avengers was say 170 mil or even 200...but at 250 million plus for B v S you can do just about what you want to....the major budget does give you an advantage over the smaller budget...but look at this waste here...and it is a waste...for the price...it has to be a factor...now I am gonna give it a chance with a R rating and at least 20% more footage...and I am gonna hope it is gonna get a lot better..but anything is better than this mess as it stands now...you have seen it tank week 2..week 3 is not gonna be any prettier and I did like, not love iron man 3 much better than 2....and did not feel that I made a mistake paying for a ticket on 3..this Dog...it cost me absolutely nothing but wasted my time and crapped on the dc universe...

Edited by Mmehdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat-Man_America

Cat-Man_America

Posted
Posted
The money matters from the perspective that if you want better movies to be made there has to be some benchmark for success or failure. When bad movies make good BO returns it only encourages more of the same.

There is no correlation between size of budget and quality of movie, either in superhero movies or other movies.

 

There are plenty of movies with massive budgets that stink, including big budget sequels that were made because the original movies did fantastically at the box office (Iron Man 2 and 3, anyone?), and plenty of movies with small budgets that are great.

 

I didn't say there was a direct correlation between budget and quality. What I'm talking about is generating profit. Money talks. The more income a film brings in over budget the likelier sequels will be green lit regardless of whether the movie stinks. So, even if Zack Snyder's fish stinks from the head Warner Bro's probably won't change it's tuna. ;)

 

If anyone's wondering or cares, I like Iron Man 1 & 3 (2, not so much), Avengers 1 & 2, both Caps, Thors and Ant-Man. Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the best sci-fi actioners since the original Star Wars, arguably better. Heck, I liked Deadpool and that's not a flick to everyone's tastes. Granted, there are some Marvel Studio productions that are better than others, but even their Netflix TV adaptations are well made. Overall Marvel's track record stands mightily against any current DC product.

 

Marvel has it's act together and knows how to make movies that are fun. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tabcom

tabcom

Posted
Posted

. . . As a symbol, Superman was an all powerful Golem-like entity who could be called on to wage war against the tyrannical forces of greed, crime, political corruption and prejudice. . . .

 

IMHO, the Jewish Golem evolved rather quickly into Americian Idealism that still exist today (albeit by tender threads).

 

superman14_zps10eeaac6.jpg

 

That idealism, well represented in the movie by Superman's alien, otherness nature. I didn't see him as a messianic figure.

. . . The metamorphosis of the character into a Christian icon . . .
I don't know, I still think of Superman as being secular.

 

As I've stated before, Make Mine Marvel. ...Excelsior!
This is well established. (thumbs u
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tabcom

tabcom

Posted
Posted

Here's one of the best reviews I've read of Zack Snyder's debacle from a prominent critic (major kudos to Ken Levine)...

 

http://kenlevine.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-worst-movie-of-year-batman-v.html

 

It's obvious to me that this guy is passionate about the original comics. He also nailed the differences between Marvel Studio productions and DC productions. My 2c

 

The reviewer is too cynical. He reminds me why I don't watch self-absorbed, snarky network television anymore. However, I too was puzzled by "And since when were Metropolis and Gotham next to each other like Detroit and Windsor? "

Link to comment
Share on other sites
piper

piper

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here's one of the best reviews I've read of Zack Snyder's debacle from a prominent critic (major kudos to Ken Levine)...

 

http://kenlevine.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-worst-movie-of-year-batman-v.html

 

It's obvious to me that this guy is passionate about the original comics. He also nailed the differences between Marvel Studio productions and DC productions. My 2c

 

The reviewer is too cynical. He reminds me why I don't watch self-absorbed, snarky network television anymore. However, I too was puzzled by "And since when were Metropolis and Gotham next to each other like Detroit and Windsor? "

 

Detroit - Windsor? Those were my old stomping grounds....

 

The location of the cities in the film was odd. I always thought of Metropolis as DCs Chicago ( i.e. A City in the mid west).

Edited by piper
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
That review is hilarious.

 

 

I believe if we board members were given 250 million we could come up with a much better movie.. as a rookie director...the review should be the worst "250 million dollar" movie of the year...now its better than an home 50K film..but WB got burned big time...."ZACK IS A HACK" on this version...but again he probably did not get final cut. so whatever executive made the final cut is responsible....hence I will await judgement till the "real uncensored version " is released on blu-ray

Edited by Mmehdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0
Go to topic listing