new Zack Snyder quote implies WB forced Batman/Superman movie instead of MOS2???

[tomoe]

Originally Posted by Superchan

Dude don't bother, I've been trying to say that for ages but for some people nothing is enough, it's best to let people think what they want to think because you'll just end up arguing in circles, believe me!
The fact is the film is a certified box office hit however it could have had better legs and made more had it been a better film (I thought it was a solid film IMO). But like another poster put it so aptly in order to go up against disney in 2015 you'll need superman and batman because neither of them are gonna cut it against films like averager or star wars or even finding nemo 2 (the original was a monster hit and it wouldn't surprise me if that film could end as one of 2015's biggest earners).

I have to admit it is the logical decision, even though I don't like it at all. MOS was a hit but its legs were so weak, which implies that many people didn't like it, though the majority did. However, WF can only compete with Avengers and Star Wars if it is a strong movie that has much better WOM than MOS, and much more importantly, better WOM than Star Wars and Avengers 2. Otherwise it will just open big and crash like MOS. Whedon and Abrams are both much better storytellers than Snyder IMO, so I suppose I can only expect the worst and hope for the best.

[Skrilla31]

Originally Posted by DvilDog

Understood. Don't know what to say to you boss. Sorry I guess.

It's cool man. Glad you loved MOS and I'm glad you're amped for this sequel.

[The Question]

Originally Posted by DvilDog

Good on you. If I want critically acclaimed I will watch The Godfather. I don't go to see comic movies because there is a chance they will win oscars. I go to be entertained. Evidently I'm not the connoisseur you are and that's cool man. Continue on without me.

Dismissing my argument by passive-aggressively implying that I'm a snob is very rude.

As is using a strawman argument, which is what you did when you said "I don't go to see comic movies because there is a chance they will win oscars." I never said comic book movies had to be oscar bait to be good. I never even implied that. And listing amount of critical acclaim received as one of many possible criteria for judging the success of a movie that isn't based on money doesn't mean I'm talking about critics raving about something like Schindler's List of Beast of the Southern Wild. Critics can also acclaim big summer blockbusters that will never come close to on Oscar. They often do. I was never not talking about films in the context of big summer blockbusters like you implied.

Just because a movie isn't trying to be like "The Godfather" or a movie like that doesn't give it license to be a badly made film. It doesn't excuse the flaws a film might have. The original Star Wars trilogy, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Die Hard, The Avengers, Men in Black, Terminator 2, these are all big summer blockbusters that were made with the primary goal of having a good time. They're also expertly crafted films that have a lot of heart and a lot of meaningful emotional substance that make them more than just a collection of action set pieces. Those are the movies I'm thinking of when I judge wether or not I'd call Man of Steel a success. And by the standard of those films and other great films like them, no, I wouldn't call it a success.

[TheFlamingCoco]

Originally Posted by Skrilla31

Yea, women and casual movie goers. You ever think maybe the studios make these films for more than just hardcore comic geeks?

Can you name a Batman movie where Batman didn't have some type of love interest written into the story? The answer is no. And do you wanna know why? Because the studio needs to drive home the point that Batman isn't gay and that he digs chicks. And last time I checked, the only chick in this movie is Lois.

There's just no way that they're gonna put Batman in this movie and NOT write in some scenes of him chasing tail. And no I'm not talkin about flirting with models under the guise of Bruce Wayne. People could just interpret them as beards. Batman has to have a genuine romance interest or else his character might alienate a portion of the male audience.

I think the male audience just wants Batman to be a bad@$$

[Motown Marvel]

to be fair, zack could always choose to not do the film.

[TheFlamingCoco]

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

to be fair, zack could always choose to not do the film.

Walking out would be the most heroic thing to do, if the rumors are true.

[DvilDog]

Originally Posted by The Question

Dismissing my argument by passive-aggressively implying that I'm a snob is very rude.

As is using a strawman argument, which is what you did when you said "I don't go to see comic movies because there is a chance they will win oscars." I never said comic book movies had to be oscar bait to be good. I never even implied that. And listing amount of critical acclaim received as one of many possible criteria for judging the success of a movie that isn't based on money doesn't mean I'm talking about critics raving about something like Schindler's List of Beast of the Southern Wild. Critics can also acclaim big summer blockbusters that will never come close to on Oscar. They often do. I was never not talking about films in the context of big summer blockbusters like you implied.

Just because a movie isn't trying to be like "The Godfather" or a movie like that doesn't give it license to be a badly made film. It doesn't excuse the flaws a film might have. The original Star Wars trilogy, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Die Hard, The Avengers, Men in Black, Terminator 2, these are all big summer blockbusters that were made with the primary goal of having a good time. They're also expertly crafted films that have a lot of heart and a lot of meaningful emotional substance that make them more than just a collection of action set pieces. Those are the movies I'm thinking of when I judge wether or not I'd call Man of Steel a success. And by the standard of those films and other great films like them, no, I wouldn't call it a success.

I was not implying you were a snob. I was implying that it takes a lot less to impress me than it does to impress you. All the movies you listed above, I like everyone of those too.

[TheFlamingCoco]

Rewatching TA, I noticed that there was a film serial type quality to the film. I honestly think TA will be a modern classic, despite what the hipsters say. A non MOS2 Superman/Batman movie should take a hint from it.

[The Question]

Originally Posted by DvilDog

Maybe I'm just a simple minded Marine. Or as I have said before I just don't quite have the IQ to grasp your problems with the movie. Or maybe I just don't see it because, the problems you have with the movie are the problems I don't. I don't think your being unreasonable. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I have said if you didn't like it that's cool. Personally and this is all opinion, I was fine with the story, I like how it was told. Was it a character driven piece? No. But it's everything I ever wanted in a Superman movie. We will agree to disagree, I certainly hope the next one that comes along knocks your socks off boss.

I understand, and I appreciate what you said here. And I think I came off as a little cold and harsh in my last post and for that I apologize.

Really, I have nothing against people who liked the film. There's no reason to be bothered by it.

The thing that bugs me is when people who liked the film are dismissive of people who didn't. When the response is "you're just a biased fanboy who can't ever be pleased and you dislike this movie for irrational reasons" or "you're just a snob who needs everything to be high art and can't enjoy a fun romp" instead of "I understand your points but, but I really don't see the flaws in the film that you see" or "that wasn't a problem for me like it was for you, and here's why..."

Like, I enjoy debating the merits of a film with people, very passionately even, I just don't dig it when people straight up dismiss my right to dislike a film.

That's the vibe I was getting from your posts. If I misread you, I apologize wholeheartedly.

[The Question]

Originally Posted by DvilDog

I was not implying you were a snob. I was implying that it takes a lot less to impress me than it does to impress you. All the movies you listed above, I like everyone of those too.

I apologize. I misread your intent.

[Mysteryman]

Well, I went to the site and it just says a source of The Superman Homepage told Snyder about some of the fans concerns,
particularly about Miller/TDKR and Snyder supplied that quote .
I would like somebody to track Snyder down and see what he says about the quote,
As well as the conversation he had with the source .

[Skrilla31]

Originally Posted by TheFlamingCoco

I think the male audience just wants Batman to be a bad@$$

If writers really went deep into Batman and brought that character to life on the big screen, I'm not really sure how male audiences would react. You'd have a lot of people suspecting he's gay, which is why I suspect there's always a female love interest in every movie. To combat that from happening.

This next movie will be no different.

[DvilDog]

Originally Posted by The Question

I understand, and I appreciate what you said here. And I think I came off as a little cold and harsh in my last post and for that I apologize.

Really, I have nothing against people who liked the film. There's no reason to be bothered by it.

The thing that bugs me is when people who liked the film are dismissive of people who didn't. When the response is "you're just a biased fanboy who can't ever be pleased and you dislike this movie for irrational reasons" or "you're just a snob who needs everything to be high art and can't enjoy a fun romp" instead of "I understand your points but, but I really don't see the flaws in the film that you see" or "that wasn't a problem for me like it was for you, and here's why..."

Like, I enjoy debating the merits of a film with people, very passionately even, I just don't dig it when people straight up dismiss my right to dislike a film.

That's the vibe I was getting from your posts. If I misread you, I apologize wholeheartedly.

That is the problem with the written word sometimes. I'm also kinda sarcastic in my tone when I speak. Maybe that part flows into my writing. It does seem I offended you. My apologies also. It was not my intention.

[Brother Jack]

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

to be fair, zack could always choose to not do the film.

I doubt he doesn't want to make the film. In the past he has talked about wanting to adapt Dark Knight Returns (he called it his favorite comic) and has an affinity for Batman. If anything I think it would be the other way around and he would rather make this than another standalone Superman film.

[DvilDog]

Batman doesn't need a chick. Batman just needs thugs lining up at his door asking to be beat down. "Please Batman, throw another bat-a-rang at my face!! It just goes to show you what a semi-normal person like me would do with all those gadgets, skills, and money! I won't even begin to get into what I would do if I had Superman's powers. Talk about the world being my oyster!

[TheFlamingCoco]

Originally Posted by Skrilla31

If writers really went deep into Batman and brought that character to life on the big screen, I'm not really sure how male audiences would react. You'd have a lot of people suspecting he's gay, which is why I suspect there's always a female love interest in every movie. To combat that from happening.

This next movie will be no different.

Nah man. I'm pretty sure that most wouldn't jump to conclusions, and even less wouldn't care, especially if he looked cool.

All it takes is a photo of a woman in his wallet or something like that to signify Bruce's straightness.

[Gort Baringa]

BH/HHH said, "Superman deserved to have more development in a solo sequel."

If the quote from Snyder is true, then WB obviously were getting worried that MOS was not the surefire hit that was expected. They might have even become a bit worried that they might have another Superman Returns type reception for MOS2. And after all, it is WB's money that goes to financing such a big budget sequel, and they have every right to ask this question.

I am just a bit confused, and also a bit annoyed if it is true, that it was strictly Christopher Nolan's idea to have the Dark Knight series as a trilogy. Why would Warner Brothers restrict a monumentally spectacular series to only three movies? If Noland didn't want to make more than three films, the story could have continued under someone else's direction. Let us continue with the characters that have already been successfully established - but with new actors in the continuing roles if necessary. Okay, the masterpiece that was Ledger's Joker is gone, but someone else could eventually step into that same characterization created by him - there are plenty of really good actors out there who could probably do the same Joker interpretation.

I am happy that WB stepped in if this is true. It could have been years - maybe over five - to seen our favourite character return if they had not.

[TheFlamingCoco]

Because Nolan's very protective of his movies. He also earned WB a lot of money.

[Skrilla31]

Originally Posted by TheFlamingCoco

Nah man. I'm pretty sure that most wouldn't jump to conclusions, and even less wouldn't care, especially if he looked cool.

Any guy who doesn't make time for chicks is gonna come off gay. You can't have Superman be all gooey eyed for Lois and then just have Batman there with his gadgets and his tights not tryna get laid.

This is like Hollywood 101. Trust me, Batman will have a lady friend.

[John Lambert]

Originally Posted by I SEE SPIDEY

I mostly agree with you. All of these movies are product to a large degree. My sister constantly says that and I chuckle because she is right, these big films are product.

I do see how the less than stellar reaction to MOS maybe sped up the Batman/Superman movie but it was always going to happen.

With the same creators? I don't think so. If this was a reaction to MOS "not going over well", they would change around who was behind creating it. Going with the same people behind the product leads me to think this was planned all along.

[TheFlamingCoco]

Originally Posted by Skrilla31

Any guy who doesn't make time for chicks is gonna come off gay. You can't have Superman be all gooey eyed for Lois and then just have Batman there with his gadgets and his tights not tryna get laid.

This is like Hollywood 101. Trust me, Batman will have a lady friend.

All it takes is an inflatable doll, for crying out loud.

No need to bring Lois into this.

[Skrilla31]

Originally Posted by TheFlamingCoco

All it takes is an inflatable doll, for crying out loud.

No need to bring Lois into this.

Lol I could already hear Morgan Freeman's voice as he's showin Bruce around.

"Ah, here are we are. Inflatable blowup doll. Also doubles as a sperm receptacle."

[TheFlamingCoco]

One night, Bruce has too much fun in the Batcave.

[John Lambert]

Originally Posted by herolee10

Well it's not really fair to compare MOS to the previous installments of all of those films mentioned above because they all had several films and years to build off of.

If we were to base the box office earnings from all of their "starter/origin" films, then MOS would have a better footing against them since Iron Man 1, which was the start of the MCU only made about 585 million dollars, while Pirates 1 only made about 654 million, which is a number I think MOS can still reach up to by the end of its run.

But inflation and other factors mean that 654 million for MOS is not the same as 654 million in 2003. 10 years means a chance in a lot of things, not the least of which is MOS being in 3-D. Also MOS's $225 million budget was a lot bigger than Pirates $140 million budget. Even if MOS pulls off another $30 million, it still will not really be a bigger success than Pirates was 10 years ago.

[John Lambert]

Originally Posted by Skrilla31

People are forgetting that there's also gonna have to be a subplot that involves Bruce fighting Clark over Lois. It's not like they're gonna be able just create a new female love interest for Batman out of nowhere so the next logical decision is that he develops a thing for Lois.

We already have the new female love interest in Jenny Jurwich.