The SuperHeroHype Forums  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-22-2014, 11:52 PM   #351
NoLaNitE007
Side-Kick
 
NoLaNitE007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,950
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackMercy View Post
The Thor sequel wasn't moved due to creative issues; they planned these "unconventional" dates for the Thor and Cap follow-ups...Marvel and Disney made a different choice for a release date, and Patty Jenkins had just been hired...and this was done early on, in fall 2011. Studios shift a lot of things in early planning...



Oh yeah....Marvel just "plans" everything don't they? It didn't matter...Thor 2 was lousy anyway.

NoLaNitE007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 11:54 PM   #352
TheVileOne
Side-Kick
 
TheVileOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 36,121
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Well Cap always had the April release date.

__________________
"This is true. This is real. This . . . Is . . . Straight Edge."

- CM Punk
TheVileOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 12:52 AM   #353
Lantern Venom
No, I will NOT "Imagine"
 
Lantern Venom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: With YOUR MOM
Posts: 6,696
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Masone View Post
Marvel is not a big film studio. They are more focused on getting films and characters out there as opposed to the quality of said films.
Considering that there has yet to be a bad Marvel Studios film, I think their approach is working perfectly.

__________________
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
1994-2014: Twenty Years of the Torch-Bearer.
You went full Topher, man. NEVER go full Topher.
Lantern Venom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 12:55 AM   #354
NoLaNitE007
Side-Kick
 
NoLaNitE007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,950
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scar Predator View Post
Considering that there has yet to be a bad Marvel Studios film, I think their approach is working perfectly.

What? "There has yet to be a bad Marvel film?" GTFO here with that!


NoLaNitE007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 12:57 AM   #355
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoLaNitE007 View Post
What? "There has yet to be a bad Marvel film?" GTFO here with that!

There's yet to be a bad Marvel Studios film. Which I agree with.

Lots of bad Marvel films. Elektra, Fantastic Fours, Daredevil, HULK, Spider-Man 3.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:00 AM   #356
MrsKent26
Whatever.
 
MrsKent26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 10,468
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAE072 View Post
There's yet to be a bad Marvel Studios film. Which I agree with.
I disagree. For me Thor 2 and Iron man 2/3 are pretty bad. And there's some others I find good/decent, but nothing special. Of course, that's just my opinion.

MrsKent26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:01 AM   #357
Flint Marko
#BringSpideyHome
 
Flint Marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Where the skies are so blue
Posts: 2,242
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Masone View Post
Marvel is not a big film studio. They are more focused on getting films and characters out there as opposed to the quality of said films. Every time we turn around there is an announcement of another Marvel movie or another character appearing in one of the Marvel movies. They have all these movies in various forms of development at one time. After flaunting this approach as something that's desirable(as opposed to DC's approach), you can't now claim that they don't do this. They do, and their films have suffered for it.

They're like a network TV series, 23 episodes a year, hectic schedule, filler episodes, stretched stories, more focused on quantity. Your typical NCIS type show. DC's approach is more like a 10 episode cable series, a Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones. More focused on the actual content than just hurrying up and getting to the next episode.
What in the world are you basing this off of?
I see this imagined flaw in Marvel Studios approach to film making being criticized here constantly and, quite frankly, it's completely ridiculous. All of their films have been critical successes and a hit with audiences; explain to me how their films have 'suffered'? They're pumping out movies at a consistent pace every year with an interwoven continuity, and have been dang successful at it. So successful in fact, that DC and other studios who own superhero properties are attempting to copy their plan.
On that note, it's a stretch to say that DC has any sort of "approach" to their movies. They've been throwing things at the wall to see what sticks; Jonah Hex? Green Lantern? They had a good thing with Nolan but now that he's out of the picture they're copying Marvel's blueprint to see if that'll work for them.

Flint Marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:01 AM   #358
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsKent26 View Post
I disagree. For me Thor 2 and Iron man 2/3 are pretty bad. And there's some others I find good/decent, but nothing special. Of course, that's just my opinion.
You may not have liked them, which is fine, but they certainly were not bad movies.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:02 AM   #359
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint Marko View Post
What in the world are you basing this off of?
I see this imagined flaw in Marvel Studios approach to film making being criticized here constantly and, quite frankly, it's completely ridiculous. All of their films have been critical successes and a hit with audiences; explain to me how their films have 'suffered'? They're pumping out movies at a consistent pace every year with an interwoven continuity, and have been dang successful at it. So successful in fact, that DC and other studios who own superhero properties are attempting to copy their plan.
On that note, it's a stretch to say that DC has any sort of "approach" to their movies. They've been throwing things at the wall to see what sticks; Jonah Hex? Green Lantern? They had a good thing with Nolan but now that he's out of the picture they're copying Marvel's blueprint to see if that'll work for them.
Yep.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:03 AM   #360
MrsKent26
Whatever.
 
MrsKent26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 10,468
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAE072 View Post
You may not have liked them, which is fine, but they certainly were not bad movies.
"Bad" is subjective. They were bad to some people, like me.

MrsKent26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:07 AM   #361
Lantern Venom
No, I will NOT "Imagine"
 
Lantern Venom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: With YOUR MOM
Posts: 6,696
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoLaNitE007 View Post
What? "There has yet to be a bad Marvel film?" GTFO here with that!

Are we talking about pre-MCU joint productions like Elektra and Man-Thing? If so, those were bad. All of the MS productions (ie, the Avengers related movies) have been in the great-to-amazing range in terms of quality.

__________________
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
1994-2014: Twenty Years of the Torch-Bearer.
You went full Topher, man. NEVER go full Topher.
Lantern Venom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:10 AM   #362
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsKent26 View Post
"Bad" is subjective. They were bad to some people, like me.
Which isn't what you said literally 2 minutes ago.

Quote:
For me Thor 2 and Iron man 2/3 are pretty bad
If bad is subjective then good is also subjective and you wouldn't be able to call a film good or bad.

Whether or not you like a movie is where the subjectivity comes from. Movies can be objectively good or objectively bad.

Those movies were listed were not objectively bad. They were objectively good.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:10 AM   #363
InJustice
Side-Kick
 
InJustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,138
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scar Predator View Post
Are we talking about pre-MCU joint productions like Elektra and Man-Thing? If so, those were bad. All of the MS productions (ie, the Avengers related movies) have been in the great-to-amazing range in terms of quality.
I think it's debatable. I feel the Phase II movies are amongst the worst that Marvel Studios has ever brought out (IMO worse than IM2, which gets **** on here quite often).

InJustice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:11 AM   #364
InJustice
Side-Kick
 
InJustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,138
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAE072 View Post
Whether or not you like a movie is where the subjectivity comes from. Movies can be objectively good or objectively bad.
Objectivity based on what...?

InJustice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:13 AM   #365
Flint Marko
#BringSpideyHome
 
Flint Marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Where the skies are so blue
Posts: 2,242
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

I think this bears repeating: I think it's tough to really criticize a studio whose every film has received reviews ranging from generally positive to unanimous acclaim.

Flint Marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:13 AM   #366
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by InJustice View Post
Objectivity based on what...?
Directing, cinematography, writing, acting, etc.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:14 AM   #367
TheNextNolan22
Oh Hi There Mistah J!
 
TheNextNolan22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: BatFleck Cave by way of Twin Peaks
Posts: 35,240
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Only reason why Marvel Studios are pumping out superhero movies left and right is because that's all they can afford to do.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawyer View Post
Comics fans have been spoiled ****ing rotten over the years, and as soon as DC doesn't kiss their asses as efficiently as Marvel does, they throw internet s***fits. I'm over that stuff.
TheNextNolan22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:15 AM   #368
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint Marko View Post
I think this bears repeating: I think it's tough to really criticize a studio whose every film has received reviews ranging from generally positive to unanimous acclaim.
Again, yep.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:16 AM   #369
MrsKent26
Whatever.
 
MrsKent26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 10,468
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAE072 View Post
Which isn't what you said literally 2 minutes ago.



If bad is subjective then good is also subjective and you wouldn't be able to call a film good or bad.

Whether or not you like a movie is where the subjectivity comes from. Movies can be objectively good or objectively bad.

Those movies were listed were not objectively bad. They were objectively good.
You're twisting what I said. I mean "bad" is in the eye of the individual view. As is "good." No movie is objectively good. None. It's up to each viewer to decide. That's what I said. Subjective. Opinions. My post was clearly stating that they are bad to me. And good to you.

Objective means: not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

Subjective means: based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

There is no objective opinion on whether a movie is good or bad. There are subjective opinions. Which is literally what I said 2 minutes ago.

MrsKent26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:17 AM   #370
InJustice
Side-Kick
 
InJustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,138
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAE072 View Post
Directing, cinematography, writing, acting, etc.
That's still subjective no matter how you slice it. See: MOS's writing and directing. People liked and people hated these things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint Marko View Post
I think this bears repeating: I think it's tough to really criticize a studio whose every film has received reviews ranging from generally positive to unanimous acclaim.
So legitimate criticisms should be ignored because of what the majority thinks?

That's like someone saying TDKR has no problems because it has an 85% in RT and generally positive review. Surely, you realize how arbitrary this way of thinking is.

InJustice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:22 AM   #371
RAE072
Samhain
 
RAE072's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,042
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsKent26 View Post
You're twisting what I said. I mean "bad" is in the eye of the individual view. As is "good." No movie is objectively good. None. It's up to each viewer to decide. That's what I said. Subjective. Opinions. My post was clearly stating that they are bad to me. And good to you.

Objective means: not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

Subjective means: based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

There is no objective opinion on whether a movie is good or bad. There are subjective opinions. Which is literally what I said 2 minutes ago.
Look at it this way.

Bad movies have bad writing, directing, etc. but can still be liked.

Good movies can have good writing, directing etc. but can still be disliked.

Movies can be objectively good or bad. Subjectivity comes in when someone expresses their feelings about said movie.

RAE072 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:25 AM   #372
MrsKent26
Whatever.
 
MrsKent26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 10,468
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAE072 View Post
Look at it this way.

Bad movies have bad writing, directing, etc. but can still be liked.

Good movies can have good writing, directing etc. but can still be disliked.

Movies can be objectively good or bad. Subjectivity comes in when someone expresses their feelings about said movie.
There is no objectivity. There's only popular opinions and less popular ones when it comes to movies. Who decides what is good or bad writing? Opinions decide and opinions are subjective.

MrsKent26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:26 AM   #373
smallville fan
Hero
 
smallville fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,589
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by InJustice View Post
I think it's debatable. I feel the Phase II movies are amongst the worst that Marvel Studios has ever brought out (IMO worse than IM2, which gets **** on here quite often).
Agree on Iron Man 3, but I felt Thor 2 was better, Agents of SHIELD I can understand. I feel the preferences of what most General Audiences liked about the Marvel Studios films so far(the style of humor akin to that of Joss Whedon and Shane Black) are being milked to the max in order to increase good reception and thus box office return as they're the ones really paying for the movie. Since they're a business, no doubt this is their motive. One of these days, the GA and critics are going to get tired of this and that day will be the downfall of Marvel Studios. That is unless Captain America: TWS and Guardians of the Galaxy redeems it. However, they did say Avengers 2 would be more serious.

__________________
Bonafide Fan of Almost Everything
Please check out my Power Rangers Movie Fan Trailers!
VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:
smallville fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:28 AM   #374
Flint Marko
#BringSpideyHome
 
Flint Marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Where the skies are so blue
Posts: 2,242
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by InJustice View Post
So legitimate criticisms should be ignored because of what the majority thinks?

That's like someone saying TDKR has no problems because it has an 85% in RT and generally positive review. Surely, you realize how arbitrary this way of thinking is.
I see little to no legitimate criticisms to speak of in this thread; every negative comment I've seen made towards Marvel here amounts, in my eyes, to nothing more than senseless nitpicking.
It's fine if you don't like the movies they're making, I get that. But to make baseless accusations that they're mindlessly churning these things out and paying attention only to quantity and not quality (a criticism I've seen on this thread and elsewhere) is nonsense.

Flint Marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2014, 01:36 AM   #375
InJustice
Side-Kick
 
InJustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,138
Default Re: Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint Marko View Post
I see little to no legitimate criticisms to speak of in this thread; every negative comment I've seen made towards Marvel here amounts, in my eyes, to nothing more than senseless nitpicking.
It's fine if you don't like the movies they're making, I get that. But to make baseless accusations that they're mindlessly churning these things out and paying attention only to quantity and not quality (a criticism I've seen on this thread and elsewhere) is nonsense.
What do you consider "senseless nitpicking?"

I think a case can be made for deteriorating quality if you compare both Phase I and II movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smallville fan View Post
Agree on Iron Man 3, but I felt Thor 2 was better, Agents of SHIELD I can understand. I feel the preferences of what most General Audiences liked about the Marvel Studios films so far(the style of humor akin to that of Joss Whedon and Shane Black) are being milked to the max in order to increase good reception and thus box office return as they're the ones really paying for the movie. Since they're a business, no doubt this is their motive. One of these days, the GA and critics are going to get tired of this and that day will be the downfall of Marvel Studios. That is unless Captain America: TWS and Guardians of the Galaxy redeems it. However, they did say Avengers 2 would be more serious.
I think Thor II is problematic in its plot (or lack thereof IMO). We see characters do things, but the script never really shows the larger narrative at work (mainly because Marvel never really made Malekith's intentions clear, and the poor decision to have little backstory on him). I also feel that they really went overboard with the humour.

I agree in terms of milking, I mean it's jarring to see the tonal differences between Phase I and II. Marvel isn't known for their serious tone, but they really went overboard with the crappy humour rather than create a healthy balance like what Joss Whedon accomplished. And if they don't realize that they're doing it in excess, then people are eventually going to be tired of them.

InJustice is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:57 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.