The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice > Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-19-2014, 12:14 PM   #1
Thread Manager
SHH! Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 0
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - Part 36

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

Thread Manager is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:15 PM   #2
Thread Manager
SHH! Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 0
Default All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - Part 36

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here

Thread Manager is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:15 PM   #3
Llama_Shepherd
Banned User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,713
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - Part 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Marvelous View Post
See, that's a great concept for a live action GL.


Their civilian outfits are shadowed and blackened, and LED-like Green lights form a grid pattern around their bodies to show the ring's power.


That's how they should have done GL.
It doesn't look like that is how it works.

Llama_Shepherd is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:32 PM   #4
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 19,612
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
It's not even that. This is the only genre I know where people are down right dogmatic about how these films are suppose to be...which I don't get.

There's no room for difference in this genre, as presently constructed in Hollywood right.

No matter where you turn, you get the same arguments about how one is doing it the right, "fun" and how one is doing it the wrong, "somber" way. My thing is this, why would anyone want these films, spread over four studios, to be exactly the same and exactly as they read them. What's the point of interpretation and adaptation if it's exactly the same across the ****ing board?

Maybe it's because I didn't read this stuff growing up and I didn't form concrete, "can't bend" opinions on how these characters are suppose to be but just based on the level on discussion about this film in comparison to other films in this genre, the DCU has no shot. None in the eyes of fans and the media. It's done.
Pretty much mostly pertains to WB and Sony's ASM(and a few others) and this is mainly because the fans have a heavy point of reference of what they want based on recent material. More importantly, the GA takes on that fanboy persona in that the GA is as heavily invested in the original films as the fans would traditionally be the source material.
One of the reasons marvel studios films avoid this sort of criticism is that their properties are mostly 'original' in that they aren't really remaking stuff from recent public conscious and if they do, it's coming from poorly received films such as Hulk or even Cap.

You don't get the 'Ironman is supposed to be...That's not what Thor would do, where is the yellow on thors boots, where is thors alter ego...etc' This new Guardians movie is free to be what ever the hell it wants to be but unlike say, Constantine, it has heavy relevance due to that shinny marvel symbol in the credits. A great opportunity for the studio.

Nolan got lucky cause he jumped into something(an origin on less) with a bad history as far as the GA was concerned so all he made were 'improvements'. Snyder is really asking for it to touch on batman at this point in time...

Any CBM given that Xmen 2000 circumstance(new, new new) would flourish

__________________
"I care because filmmakers now make films under crippling security because of parasitic gossip. makes movies worse"
-James Mangold.
Marvin is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:41 PM   #5
J.Howlett
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Pretty much mostly pertains to WB and Sony's ASM(and a few others) and this is mainly because the fans have a heavy point of reference of what they want based on recent material. More importantly, the GA takes on that fanboy persona in that the GA is as heavily invested in the original films as the fans would traditionally be the source material.
One of the reasons marvel studios films avoid this sort of criticism is that their properties are mostly 'original' in that they aren't really remaking stuff from recent public conscious and if they do, it's coming from poorly received films such as Hulk or even Cap.

You don't get the 'Ironman is supposed to be...That's not what Thor would do, where is the yellow on thors boots, where is thors alter ego...etc' This new Guardians movie is free to be what ever the hell it wants to be but unlike say, Constantine, it has heavy relevance due to that shinny marvel symbol in the credits. A great opportunity for the studio.

Nolan got lucky cause he jumped into something(an origin on less) with a bad history as far as the GA was concerned so all he made were 'improvements'. Snyder is really asking for it to touch on batman at this point in time...

Any CBM given that Xmen 2000 circumstance(new, new new) would flourish
Which again, shows that this film isn't going to get a fair shake no matter what Snyder puts on the screen.

Meanwhile, the Mouse House continues to put out filler episodes until the Whedon movies hit and their labeled "great films." What?

I swear, sometimes I feel like I'm in an alternate reality with the way this genre turned since 2008.

 
Old 02-19-2014, 12:51 PM   #6
Crimson King
Superhero Novelista
 
Crimson King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,918
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
Which again, shows that this film isn't going to get a fair shake no matter what Snyder puts on the screen.

Meanwhile, the Mouse House continues to put out filler episodes until the Whedon movies hit and their labeled "great films." What?

I swear, sometimes I feel like I'm in an alternate reality with the way this genre turned since 2008.
Filler episodes? Come on, now. I get that you lean DC, but belittling the solo MS movies as filler is just not true.

Snyder's film will get a fair shake because very few people outside of SHH give two ***** about what company makes a movie. The movie will succeed or fail on its own.

__________________
kingwrites.com // @kingmatte
Crimson King is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:56 PM   #7
J.Howlett
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimson King View Post
Filler episodes? Come on, now. I get that you lean DC, but belittling the solo MS movies as filler is just not true.

Snyder's film will get a fair shake because very few people outside of SHH give two ***** about what company makes a movie. The movie will succeed or fail on its own.
Dude, I dug the living hell out of THE DARK WORLD but that's a filler episode if I ever saw one. That film didn't care two bits about Thor until the big scene between Loki-Odin and Thor, which was basically letting Hemsworth spell out his entire arc of the picture, since they forgot most of it through out the entire picture.

That picture was constructed (haphazardly, I might add) to achieve one damn thing; to get Loki in that chair at the end. That's it. Everything else in the film is almost irrelevant.

I won't say anything about Iron Man 3. No point getting into that film.

 
Old 02-19-2014, 01:01 PM   #8
Crimson King
Superhero Novelista
 
Crimson King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,918
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
Dude, I dug the living hell out of THE DARK WORLD but that's a filler episode if I ever saw one. That film didn't care two bits about Thor until the big scene between Loki-Odin and Thor, which was basically letting Hemsworth spell out his entire arc of the picture, since they forgot most of it through out the entire picture.

That picture was constructed (haphazardly, I might add) to achieve one damn thing; to get Loki in that chair at the end. That's it. Everything else in the film is almost irrelevant.

I won't say anything about Iron Man 3. No point getting into that film.
You'll believe what you want, I guess. But filler? No. A connection established between films =/= filler.

And you generalized every solo movie with that tag, not just TDW. One look at TWS trailer should tell you they're not just doing this to tread water until Age of Ultron.

__________________
kingwrites.com // @kingmatte
Crimson King is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:12 PM   #9
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 19,612
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
Which again, shows that this film isn't going to get a fair shake no matter what Snyder puts on the screen.

Meanwhile, the Mouse House continues to put out filler episodes until the Whedon movies hit and their labeled "great films." What?

I swear, sometimes I feel like I'm in an alternate reality with the way this genre turned since 2008.
Meh, DC films and relevance tend to better in the sequels.

As supposedly loved as Begins was(retroactively imo), the presses didn't stop till the sequel. MOS has so much misplaced expectations it's really skewed things in this regard. When the sequel's press get's rolling we'll see the real impact the film made. Marvel had a good amount of solo's not stop the presses as MOS has before Avengers and when DC get's to their JLA thing, more even keeled comparisons will be made as to how everything is going.

imo.

__________________
"I care because filmmakers now make films under crippling security because of parasitic gossip. makes movies worse"
-James Mangold.
Marvin is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:41 PM   #10
BatLobsterRises
Lobsterized
 
BatLobsterRises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 11,231
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

The complaint that the tone of the trailers was different from the movie is a pretty common one. I don't think people should be blamed for "misinterpreting" the marketing when that marketing accomplished its goal: to get people excited about the fact that there was a new Superman movie and that this was going to be a "post-TDKT" take on Superman. People bought what the trailers were selling. I wouldn't go as far to say that it was "false advertising", and they probably were representative of the movie that Zack and co. honestly felt they were making. But at the end of the day, a LOT of people came away feeling that the movie didn't achieve the grandeur that was presented in the trailers.

I never expected the film to be 2 hours of introspective Clark wandering the world like the teaser, but I do think Trailer 3, especially through the use of Zimmer's theme (which isn't used in full until the end of the film), painted the picture of something more rousing, inspiring and triumphant. I thought it would feel more earned when Superman takes his first flight, but it just didn't to me in the film. A lot of the emotional beats in the film just fell flat to me, despite the fact that I found all 3 first trailers very emotionally engaging.

Trailer 4 counterbalanced that by focusing on the sci-fi/action/Bayhem aspects of the movie, but I think it was the most honest of all the trailers. By that point though, the effects of the first 3 trailers had already set in and people were already expecting something a little different.

It is what it is. I'm happy for those who felt they got the movie they wanted based on the trailers. I'm not here to go through yet another tedious lists of complaints against MoS. I just think the trailer thing is a common enough observation that it shouldn't be brushed aside as mere fanboy nitpicking. That's not what it is. My friends who aren't Superman fanboys were WAY excited about the movie based on the trailers, and all of them came out of the movie ranging from "meh it was okay" to flat out disliking it. They all felt that the trailers had set them up for a fall.

BatLobsterRises is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:44 PM   #11
J.Howlett
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises View Post
The complaint that the tone of the trailers was different from the movie is a pretty common one. I don't think people should be blamed for "misinterpreting" the marketing when that marketing accomplished its goal: to get people excited about the fact that there was a new Superman movie and that this was going to be a "post-TDKT" take on Superman. People bought what the trailers were selling. I wouldn't go as far to say that it was "false advertising", and they probably were representative of the movie that Zack and co. honestly felt they were making. But at the end of the day, a LOT of people came away feeling that the movie didn't achieve the grandeur that was presented in the trailers.

I never expected the film to be 2 hours of introspective Clark wandering the world like the teaser, but I do think Trailer 3, especially through the use of Zimmer's theme (which isn't used in full until the end of the film), painted the picture of something more rousing, inspiring and triumphant. I thought it would feel more earned when Superman takes his first flight, but it just didn't to me in the film. A lot of the emotional beats in the film just fell flat to me, despite the fact that I found all 3 first trailers very emotionally engaging.

Trailer 4 counterbalanced that by focusing on the sci-fi/action/Bayhem aspects of the movie, but I think it was the most honest of all the trailers. By that point though, the effects of the first 3 trailers had already set in and people were already expecting something a little different.

It is what it is. I'm happy for those who felt they got the movie they wanted based on the trailers. I'm not here to go through yet another tedious lists of complaints against MoS. I just think the trailer thing is a common enough observation that it shouldn't be brushed aside as mere fanboy nitpicking. That's not what it is. My friends who aren't Superman fanboys were WAY excited about the movie based on the trailers, and all of them came out of the movie ranging from "meh it was okay" to flat out disliking it. They all felt that the trailers had set them up for a fall.
You found nothing triumphant about this Clark Kent finding his place in the world?

 
Old 02-19-2014, 12:50 PM   #12
BatLobsterRises
Lobsterized
 
BatLobsterRises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 11,231
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
You found nothing triumphant about this Clark Kent finding his place in the world?
The Daily Planet scene was nice, but I was still feeling the weight of Clark having to kill Zod and knowing the internal anguish it caused him. And no, I'm not one of those "Superman shouldn't have been put in that situation!" people. I'm fine with the fact that he killed Zod. But at the end of the day I felt the film left more looming questions about Superman's place in the world than it answered, so any triumph there felt a bit muted for me.

If you're referring to the first flight scene, it just felt too soon in the movie for me. I think it needed more buildup. But I get why they didn't do the full 1 hour origin thing.

Again though, I don't really want to get into my criticisms of the movie because I'm kind of in the middle with it. I sort of see both sides of the arguments, and I feel like most of it has been said already.


Last edited by BatLobsterRises; 02-19-2014 at 12:54 PM.
BatLobsterRises is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:29 PM   #13
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 19,612
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises View Post
The Daily Planet scene was nice, but I was still feeling the weight of Clark having to kill Zod and knowing the internal anguish it caused him. And no, I'm not one of those "Superman shouldn't have been put in that situation!" people. I'm fine with the fact that he killed Zod. But at the end of the day I felt the film left more looming questions about Superman's place in the world than it answered, so any triumph there felt a bit muted for me.
Why would it ask more questions. A hero killed a bad guy.

Objectively speaking this would be like watching a die hard movie, having the bad guy killed and you saying it opening up such and such vs closure...
That first die hard is about the dude and his wife issues and by the end that's addressed. MoS is the same:

The entire film mostly hinged on what Jon kent was talking about on the issue of finding a place/role in the world, and the film book ended that chapter with not only lois welcoming him to the world but literally his place of employment(secret id in place). I imagine this greater sense of closure comes from your personal knowledge of needing to see superman struggle with life taking. A requirement you surely didn't have at the end of any of the iron man movies or the batman films...unless you did. I say that cause they be killing their villains in those as well.

Perhaps the next chapter will study the difficult choices a hero must overcome in the face of being a 'saintly' symbol of hope/change/morality but also having to save the world. I'm sure wartime presidents can relate. I digress, the film answered it's own questions. This new question is something your preconceptions of the material is presenting imo.

__________________
"I care because filmmakers now make films under crippling security because of parasitic gossip. makes movies worse"
-James Mangold.

Last edited by Marvin; 02-19-2014 at 01:47 PM.
Marvin is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:44 PM   #14
J.Howlett
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Why would it ask more questions. A hero killed a bad guy.

Objectively speaking this would be like watching a die hard movie, having the bad guy killed and you saying it opening up such and such vs closure...
That first die hard is about the dude and his wife issues and by the end that's addressed. MoS is the same:

The entire film mostly hinged on what Jon kent was talking about on the issue of finding a place/role in the world, and the film book ended that chapter with not only lois welcoming him to the world but literally his place of employment(secret id in place). I imagine this greater sense of closure comes from your personal knowledge of needing to see superman struggle with life taking. A requirement you surely didn't have at the end of any of the iron man movies or the batman films...unless you did.

Perhaps the next chapter will study the difficult choices a hero must overcome in the face of being a 'saintly' symbol of hope/change/morality but also having to save the world. I'm sure wartime presidents can relate. I digress, the film answered it's own questions. This new question is something your preconceptions of the material is presenting imo.
Your last two posts...on the money.

In all honesty, you don't need further stories with Cavill's Clark Kent. At the end of the film, it's a complete story...you know, like how they use to make genre films before everything got serialized to death.

Watch Batman Begins. Did it need a sequel? No, it really didn't. Same with Green Lantern. Same with Man of Steel.

 
Old 02-19-2014, 02:02 PM   #15
BatLobsterRises
Lobsterized
 
BatLobsterRises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 11,231
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Why would it ask more questions. A hero killed a bad guy.

Objectively speaking this would be like watching a die hard movie, having the bad guy killed and you saying it opening up such and such vs closure...
That first die hard is about the dude and his wife issues and by the end that's addressed. MoS is the same:

The entire film mostly hinged on what Jon kent was talking about on the issue of finding a place/role in the world, and the film book ended that chapter with not only lois welcoming him to the world but literally his place of employment(secret id in place). I imagine this greater sense of closure comes from your personal knowledge of needing to see superman struggle with life taking. A requirement you surely didn't have at the end of any of the iron man movies or the batman films...unless you did. I say that cause they be killing their villains in those as well.
See, this is why I usually resist even commenting on the movie most of the time because right away I get lumped into a category. I'm not even that huge of a Superman fan. I walked into the movie pretty flexible about how they portrayed him. Him killing Zod was not an issue for me. But was that a triumphant moment? No. It was played as tragic.

I'm not making a statement about quality, I'm just saying that the film had a pretty tragic beat in its third act. It has nothing to do with Superman's "rule", it's just that he had to kill the last remaining member of his race, highlighting even more how alone he is, and surely that's not something he'll just be able to shrug off.


Last edited by BatLobsterRises; 02-19-2014 at 02:05 PM.
BatLobsterRises is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:47 PM   #16
Capt. Marvelous
Banned User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 398
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

My biggest disappointment with what the trailers gave us compared to the actual film, was that the trailers made it seem that MOS would be a deep, intelligent character study of Clark/Superman, just as BB was of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

MOS wasn't. We never really got into Clark's head in MoS and understood his psychology. It was all surface and exposition.

Capt. Marvelous is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:48 PM   #17
J.Howlett
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Marvelous View Post
My biggest disappointment with what the trailers gave us compared to the actual film, was that the trailers made it seem that MOS would be a deep, intelligent character study of Clark/Superman, just as BB was of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

MOS wasn't. We never really got into Clark's head in MoS and understood his psychology. It was all surface and exposition.
The first hour and 20 minutes does this! What are you even talking about?

 
Old 02-19-2014, 12:57 PM   #18
Capt. Marvelous
Banned User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 398
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
The first hour and 20 minutes does this! What are you even talking about?
It doesn't. Why does Clark desire to save people? What drives him?


All we really got was contradictory messages from bipolar Jonathan that the world isn't ready and you should keep your powers a secret, and maybe you should have let the kids die. But you should discover your origins and you are destined to change the world. All throwaway lines for the trailers and marketing, that were handled poorly in the actual film.


In BB, we got in-depth coverage of what motivated Bruce Wayne's desire to train, his crusade, his perception of justice and his ethics. And why he seeks to inspire fear in criminals (using the symbol that inspired fear in him) while bringing hope to Gotham.

Capt. Marvelous is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:09 PM   #19
Kevin Smith
Banned User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central City
Posts: 6,176
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Marvelous View Post
It doesn't. Why does Clark desire to save people? What drives him?


All we really got was contradictory messages from bipolar Jonathan that the world isn't ready and you should keep your powers a secret, and maybe you should have let the kids die. But you should discover your origins and you are destined to change the world. All throwaway lines for the trailers and marketing, that were handled poorly in the actual film.


In BB, we got in-depth coverage of what motivated Bruce Wayne's desire to train, his crusade, his perception of justice and his ethics. And why he seeks to inspire fear in criminals (using the symbol that inspired fear in him) while bringing hope to Gotham.


Truth.


Last edited by Kevin Smith; 02-19-2014 at 01:12 PM.
Kevin Smith is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:25 PM   #20
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 19,612
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Marvelous View Post
It doesn't. Why does Clark desire to save people? What drives him?


All we really got was contradictory messages from bipolar Jonathan that the world isn't ready and you should keep your powers a secret, and maybe you should have let the kids die. But you should discover your origins and you are destined to change the world. All throwaway lines for the trailers and marketing, that were handled poorly in the actual film.
This is where things get fickle.

Right off the bat you are implying that when it comes to what and why characters do things, rather why heroes act like heroes, it should literally come by way of another(pa kent of course) telling him how to be? Otherwise we aren't getting a proper character study. (One day I want to visit the universe where MOS is an original picture...)

How's about this kid believes in saving people because he grew up in the mid west and more importantly, by good natured parents. You know unlike all those bullies he ran into. Jon kent gave him guidance, real guidance not silver age fan fiction. But that's beside the point. Superman, young or old(unlike the donner films), is a life time hero cause he was brought up to be that way. Same as parker, when he tells a bully to stop picking on another kid in the opening of ASM. We don't need Ben looking into the camera telling him to stop bullies, but rather Ben Perker acting like a solid father figure, it's literally right there. It's a subtle mans game that. Jon is clearly a good man and so is his boy. Ergo, why the kid believes in saving people but has to struggle with the grayness of the real world in doing so. I imagine the father son convo going a similar route in the instance of Jesus and his step father.

The irony here is that you are actually suggesting that big characterization needs to be earned. I suppose that would explain whey Snyder opted for earning the No Kill mentality vs what many fans say should be inherent.

Like I said, it's a fickle thing.

__________________
"I care because filmmakers now make films under crippling security because of parasitic gossip. makes movies worse"
-James Mangold.

Last edited by Marvin; 02-19-2014 at 01:52 PM.
Marvin is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 12:56 PM   #21
CountOrlok
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 702
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

I didn't see Man of Steel until a few weeks ago. Was a bit too action-porny for me but I liked the character moments. Definitely prefer it to Nolan's Batman films.

CountOrlok is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:12 PM   #22
Kevin Smith
Banned User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central City
Posts: 6,176
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Marvelous View Post
My biggest disappointment with what the trailers gave us compared to the actual film, was that the trailers made it seem that MOS would be a deep, intelligent character study of Clark/Superman, just as BB was of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

MOS wasn't. We never really got into Clark's head in MoS and understood his psychology. It was all surface and exposition.
Exactly.

Kevin Smith is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:24 PM   #23
BH/HHH
You Are My World
 
BH/HHH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Leeds
Posts: 26,751
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Marvelous View Post
My biggest disappointment with what the trailers gave us compared to the actual film, was that the trailers made it seem that MOS would be a deep, intelligent character study of Clark/Superman, just as BB was of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

MOS wasn't. We never really got into Clark's head in MoS and understood his psychology. It was all surface and exposition.
So in other words you needed everything spelled out to you rather than focusing on what was actually happening on screen.

There is a huge amount of this in the visuals and we get very deep into Clark's psychology with dialogue alone, there is just a ton more in the visuals.

__________________
#TEAM SNYDER
BH/HHH is offline  
Old 02-19-2014, 01:44 PM   #24
J.Howlett
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by BH/HHH View Post
So in other words you needed everything spelled out to you rather than focusing on what was actually happening on screen.

There is a huge amount of this in the visuals and we get very deep into Clark's psychology with dialogue alone, there is just a ton more in the visuals.
This.

 
Old 02-19-2014, 01:53 PM   #25
BH/HHH
You Are My World
 
BH/HHH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Leeds
Posts: 26,751
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - Part 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Howlett View Post
This.

__________________
#TEAM SNYDER
BH/HHH is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:54 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.