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 04-24-2014, 11:00 AM   #926
The Endless
WE are Groot
 
The Endless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 4,789
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

I ain't exaggerating when it comes to GL. It was terrible as a film, it's nothing to do with me being a "fanboy". Everyone on this website is a fanboy/girl.

GL had probably THE most poorly written protagonist in any superhero movie ever. It had probably THE most poorly created antagonist in any superhero movie ever. I mean Parralax was a poor mans Galactus from Fantastic Four 2... and that is saying something!

What were the redeeming features of Green Lantern? I'm interested to know.

__________________
People think dreams aren't real just because they aren't made of matter, of particles. Dreams are real. But they are made of viewpoints, of images, of memories and puns and lost hopes
The Endless is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:02 AM   #927
Fizicks
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 147
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by snpklsdmbldr View Post
must be the only one here who thought GL is not that bad, not saying it's good either. for some reason I think a lot of people just joined a hate bandwagon on that movie.
No you're definitely not the only one. I also did not understand the hate it received. I remember not being blown away when leaving the theater but thought it was a fun flick. And I'm sure I'm the minority here but I was a big fan of the CGI suit; I thought it was a very inspired idea.

I just thought it was a huge wasted opportunity from what SpideyFan866 said- apparently the original script was highly praised and was setting up the DCCU. Just thought we'd be deeper into the DCCU by now, had they gone the route of the first script.

Fizicks is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:05 AM   #928
Lencho01
Shazoogle! Shazoogle!
 
Lencho01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 16,027
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Endless View Post
I ain't exaggerating when it comes to GL. It was terrible as a film, it's nothing to do with me being a "fanboy". Everyone on this website is a fanboy/girl.

GL had probably THE most poorly written protagonist in any superhero movie ever. It had probably THE most poorly created antagonist in any superhero movie ever. I mean Parralax was a poor mans Galactus from Fantastic Four 2... and that is saying something!

What were the redeeming features of Green Lantern? I'm interested to know.
It was pretty boring. It's kinda funny how much they harped about it being the first time in a while that a superhero was saving the world.

Redeeming features? Um...


__________________
I was at some diplomatic party once. Got to talking to this princess who told me that when it came to Superman, I was missing the point. She told me, "His real strength lay in his generous spirit and sense of what's fair." - King Faraday

"
Heís much more of a working class superhero, which is why we ended the whole book with the image of a laboring Superman. Heís Everyman operating on a sciĖfi Paul Bunyan scale." - Grant Morrison

"Self Portrait" By Batman
Lencho01 is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:07 AM   #929
HighFivingMF
Welp.
 
HighFivingMF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 14,151
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Watched Green Lantern again last night. Still great.

__________________
I like Ben Affleck.
HighFivingMF is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:08 AM   #930
Fizicks
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 147
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Endless View Post
I ain't exaggerating when it comes to GL. It was terrible as a film, it's nothing to do with me being a "fanboy". Everyone on this website is a fanboy/girl.

GL had probably THE most poorly written protagonist in any superhero movie ever. It had probably THE most poorly created antagonist in any superhero movie ever. I mean Parralax was a poor mans Galactus from Fantastic Four 2... and that is saying something!

What were the redeeming features of Green Lantern? I'm interested to know.
Well I thought Mark Strong was superb as Sinestro.

I agree Parallax was poorly done. No identity and no personality at all...but wasn't that the same as what Galactus was in Fantastic Four 2 as well? I don't see how the former is the poor man's version of the latter. They were pretty much the same.

And I think saying Hal is the most poorly written protagonist is quite an exaggeration. He was a cocky irresponsible guy, who slowly learns to show more responsibility and compassion towards the end. Sure it wasn't done greatly, but saying it's probably the worst protagonist is a stretch.

Fizicks is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:09 AM   #931
Tra-El
Side-Kick
 
Tra-El's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Trying to find out where I hang my cape? YOU WON'T
Posts: 2,704
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lencho01 View Post
A cameo like this would've been interesting to see. Story takes place early in Superman's career. Not even called Superman yet...





Superman tells Mongul he's turning him over to the proper authorities. GL shows up saying he was wondering when he and Superman's paths would cross. Also, complements him on his signal, but he's not a caped crusader jumping on rooftops for a police commissioner.

Was this in an Adventures of Superman issue?

__________________
MOS theater count: 6
Tra-El is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:10 AM   #932
hafizbat
Side-Kick
 
hafizbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,803
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Marvel chose those two properties at the time cause they were a studio with money but no big properties left to fund productions for. WB has been in a similar situation only they chose 2 different properties(followed by various others). Safe to say marvel chose their two biggest names at the time, if there were as bold as people suggest then they would have chose antman and the raccoon, if they had spidey and xmen(something WB has in it's own way), they would have chosen those. Granted hulk fell short and they put it on the back burner...that is until they found their golden ticket in the form of 'tie in'.

That is also to put into question just how much more success it to be found in selling the audience a linked universe to rather tying everything to your biggest brand. If Heath or Bale showed up at the end of Lantern the way Loki or Stark has shown up in various stingers, would it have made 'Cap/Thor' money and been a 'success'? Hard to say, the GA is a fickle thing imo.

And please stop with the, they didn't have enough success to make a solo superman sequel. The film made a crap ton more than just about any cbm start up that has become before it(minus spidey) A good deal more than Batman's start up(and he's the/thier biggest). It's an opportunistic statement at best and people are jumping on it any chance they can. Did anyone say Marvel didn't have enough faith in Cap/Thor before launching the big crossover? Or did people just see the 'genius' it in... I for one have never understood why people think MOS was supposed to make a crap ton more money than it did. I mean I get why people expected TDKR to but no one expected Begins to. Yes it's superman but what did the last superman make(also superman)? I see why everyone expects the next bond film to make a crap tone but who expected that of Casino Royal?
If anything the studio see's alot more pros to going about this venture than the traditional sequel route. Why let marvel have all the novelty success? So fans can continue to rub it in their faces? The DCU land scape will be alot more viable after a BvS film than a MOS2 film, period.
Just has it has been for Marvel. There was no guardians after Ironman 2 but after avengers? It's viable. If anything WB might not be so confident in simply relaunching batman post nolan and bale, and to do it this way almost guarantees massive success. That statement I can get behind.
Sorry, you're in denial if you think MoS was a success. Financially? Sure, so is Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean. MoS was a failure with the critics, failed to endear the new Superman with the audience, and did not inspire hope in the new shared DC universe. If MoS was a financial success, it was a failure on so many other (perhaps more important in the long run) levels. And coming off a billion dollar TDK trilogy, $600m WW isn't that impressive. Considering that they plastered Nolan's name all over it and sold it as the TDK-trilogy version of Superman. Clearly, they had high expectations.

Also, if MoS was such a success, why is WB stuffing Batman into the sequel? Not even just a cameo or appearance...the movie is called Batman vs Superman (unofficially). Actions speak louder than words, and the direction they're taking looks like they aren't satisfied with MoS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Endless View Post
Marvel didn't have the money. They had to procure loans to fund IM and TIH. They were basically big budget indie movies.

Iron Man and Hulk may have been their biggest "brands" at the time. But Iron Man wasn't a famous character before his movie. Hulk had a stinker with Ang Lee's film. Huge risks really. If those films bombed there would be no MCU and there probably would have been financial repercussions for the Marvel brand as a whole.



MoS obviously was a success. 670 million ain't nothing to laugh at. But the fact is, a Thor film gave it a run for it's money. The Winter Soldier is set to outgross it.

Captain America outgrossing Superman... are you kidding me?

Warner Bros expected MoS to be a bigger success than it was. With Nolan's name all over the marketing, i'd say they were expecting at least 800 million from MoS.

And let's not pretend that they had a plan to introduce Batman all along. Bollox. If MoS went out and made upwards of 800 million the next film would be a solo Superman film. I'm sure of it.

But WB can now kill 2 birds with one stone. They can boost a Superman film and reboot Batman at the same time. I'd have liked to have seen another solo Superman adventure and a new solo Batman vision. But i ain't gonna lie, i'm excited for Batman/Superman. Who isn't?
I agree completely. It's easy to forget that Iron Man was a B-lister before the MCU. Certainly lesser to Flash and Green Lantern.

hafizbat is online now  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:15 AM   #933
Lencho01
Shazoogle! Shazoogle!
 
Lencho01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 16,027
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tra-El View Post
Was this in an Adventures of Superman issue?
Yep, #16-18.

__________________
I was at some diplomatic party once. Got to talking to this princess who told me that when it came to Superman, I was missing the point. She told me, "His real strength lay in his generous spirit and sense of what's fair." - King Faraday

"
Heís much more of a working class superhero, which is why we ended the whole book with the image of a laboring Superman. Heís Everyman operating on a sciĖfi Paul Bunyan scale." - Grant Morrison

"Self Portrait" By Batman
Lencho01 is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:15 AM   #934
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,900
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Endless View Post
Marvel didn't have the money. They had to procure loans to fund IM and TIH. They were basically big budget indie movies.

Iron Man and Hulk may have been their biggest "brands" at the time. But Iron Man wasn't a famous character before his movie. Hulk had a stinker with Ang Lee's film. Huge risks really. If those films bombed there would be no MCU and there probably would have been financial repercussions for the Marvel brand as a whole.
Like I said, a studio with money looking to invest in the most viable brands on hand...If they had spiderman it would have been spiderman.

Quote:
MoS obviously was a success. 670 million ain't nothing to laugh at. But the fact is, a Thor film gave it a run for it's money. The Winter Soldier is set to outgross it.

Captain America outgrossing Superman... are you kidding me?

Warner Bros expected MoS to be a bigger success than it was. With Nolan's name all over the marketing, i'd say they were expecting at least 800 million from MoS.

And let's not pretend that they had a plan to introduce Batman all along. Bollox. If MoS went out and made upwards of 800 million the next film would be a solo Superman film. I'm sure of it.
Cap has already outgrossed the majority of superman films that have been produced. It's not a matter of kidding your or not, it's a matter of appreciating that the brands are only as strong as circumstance will allow. For example, did you know Cap 2 out grossed Batman Begins? Do you find this impossible or hard to believe as well? I mean it is batman after all.

If MoS grossed 800million I for one think there is more success and opportunity in a crossover film for both batman and the DCU now, rather than another superman solo(which you can do afterwards). Here's another question, with the 'massive' success that marvel is seeing with Cap2(i have my own personal curiosities if it will end up with a higher gross than mos tbh), should marvel make another cap sequel or move forward with Avengers? If cap 2 made 1.4 billion do you think Marvel would move forward with a cap sequel or avengers....Hopefully you say Avengers in both instances and hopefully in doing so you see why WB is taking this opportunity now and not later.

Lastly, nolans name, like camerons name in the role of producer can only do so much in spite of circumstance. I heard Nolan's name was on transcendence for example. A film will make what it makes.

Why not compare MoS1 to a pre Avengers cap and thor one. I assume this is because of brand power. Fair enough. Though that didn't seem to stop Ironman...

Quote:
But i ain't gonna lie, i'm excited for Batman/Superman. Who isn't?
Precisely.

__________________
Stephen Lang for Cable, the most obvious casting in cbm history.
Marvin is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:20 AM   #935
I SEE SPIDEY
HYPE AWARD WINNER!
 
I SEE SPIDEY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In Superman's arms
Posts: 36,545
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Marvel chose those two properties at the time cause they were a studio with money but no big properties left to fund productions for. WB has been in a similar situation only they chose 2 different properties(followed by various others). Safe to say marvel chose their two biggest names at the time, if there were as bold as people suggest then they would have chose antman and the raccoon, if they had spidey and xmen(something WB has in it's own way), they would have chosen those. Granted hulk fell short and they put it on the back burner...that is until they found their golden ticket in the form of 'tie in'.

That is also to put into question just how much more success it to be found in selling the audience a linked universe to rather tying everything to your biggest brand. If Heath or Bale showed up at the end of Lantern the way Loki or Stark has shown up in various stingers, would it have made 'Cap/Thor' money and been a 'success'? Hard to say, the GA is a fickle thing imo.

And please stop with the, they didn't have enough success to make a solo superman sequel. The film made a crap ton more than just about any cbm start up that has become before it(minus spidey) A good deal more than Batman's start up(and he's the/thier biggest). It's an opportunistic statement at best and people are jumping on it any chance they can. Did anyone say Marvel didn't have enough faith in Cap/Thor before launching the big crossover? Or did people just see the 'genius' it in... I for one have never understood why people think MOS was supposed to make a crap ton more money than it did. I mean I get why people expected TDKR to but no one expected Begins to. Yes it's superman but what did the last superman make(also superman)? I see why everyone expects the next bond film to make a crap tone but who expected that of Casino Royal?
If anything the studio see's alot more pros to going about this venture than the traditional sequel route. Why let marvel have all the novelty success? So fans can continue to rub it in their faces? The DCU land scape will be alot more viable after a BvS film than a MOS2 film, period.
Just has it has been for Marvel. There was no guardians after Ironman 2 but after avengers? It's viable. If anything WB might not be so confident in simply relaunching batman post nolan and bale, and to do it this way almost guarantees massive success. That statement I can get behind.


The internet tends to see recognizable names and vision tends goes red. The goyer effect if you will.
I partially think this has something to do with the serialized format of TV. Countless interviews with the creators talking about all the 'live' adjustments they've made based on fan feed back and such. Then there is the ravager situation. Sick of Laurel, well here's the new love interest..etc. Movies don't tend to have that luxury.
Safe to say as great as the show has been, it wasn't all that it is in it's first 2 and half hours but rather the entirety of it's run and due to it's build up. An IM tv show would no doubt enjoy the same benefits.
This entire post is just amazing, one if the best posts I've ever seen.

__________________
Come think with us:http://thinkmcflythink.squarespace.com/

2014 IS THE YEAR DC/WB DECIDED TO GET SERIOUS.
I SEE SPIDEY is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:21 AM   #936
roach
I am the night
 
roach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Under your Refrigerator
Posts: 39,610
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Sorry, you're in denial if you think MoS was a success. Financially? Sure, so is Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean. MoS was a failure with the critics, failed to endear the new Superman with the audience, and did not inspire hope in the new shared DC universe. If MoS was a financial success, it was a failure on so many other (perhaps more important in the long run) levels. And coming off a billion dollar TDK trilogy, $600m WW isn't that impressive. Considering that they plastered Nolan's name all over it and sold it as the TDK-trilogy version of Superman. Clearly, they had high expectations.

Also, if MoS was such a success, why is WB stuffing Batman into the sequel? Not even just a cameo or appearance...the movie is called Batman vs Superman (unofficially). Actions speak louder than words, and the direction they're taking looks like they aren't satisfied with MoS.
Nothing about what you are saying is anyway true...just your perceptions you are trying to pass off as fact.

1) Man of Steel is a success. $600M is a success on every level. In fact the movie grossed more than what it was expected to do. There is an easy way to tell if it's a success or not...it's getting a sequel...with the cast that survived coming back. Was Green Lantern a disappointment? Yes. How do we know? There's no Green Lantern 2. If Batman is the cure-all why didn't we get Batman vs Green Lantern?

2) If a movie is a disappointment adding Batman to it is not a guarantee it will not still disappoint. The fact is WB has been trying to do a Batman vs Superman movie since 2000. They haven't had success starting a shared universe and their big name director was not a fan of it. MOS is the start of that shared universe.

3) Funny how having Batman in Batman vs Superman means they have no faith in Superman. Does that apply to Marvel as well? Did Marvel not have faith in Iron Man and brought in Black Widow and War Machine in IM2? Did Marvel not have faith in Cap so they brought in Falcon and Black Widow for Cap 2?

__________________
There seems to be a grave misunderstanding in todayís protest-hungry world of entertainment fans into how far their opinion should really matter. You donít like a story? Thatís fine Ė donít read a story. Former Marvel editor Tom Brennan

Last edited by roach; 04-24-2014 at 11:25 AM.
roach is online now  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:23 AM   #937
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,900
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

I didn't know 650plus million was such a mediocre number for a film to make. Looking all all the trades this very week, one would think it was...'impressive and or amazing'.
Who knew.

__________________
Stephen Lang for Cable, the most obvious casting in cbm history.
Marvin is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:23 AM   #938
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,900
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by I SEE SPIDEY View Post
This entire post is just amazing, one if the best posts I've ever seen.
Thanks for reading, I rather liked it.

__________________
Stephen Lang for Cable, the most obvious casting in cbm history.
Marvin is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:27 AM   #939
roach
I am the night
 
roach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Under your Refrigerator
Posts: 39,610
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I didn't know 650plus million was such a mediocre number for a film to make. Looking all all the trades this very week, one would think it was...'impressive and or amazing'.
Who knew.
Because people who know nothing about the industry try to pretend like they know whats going on.
"This is what I think is going on so it must be true"

__________________
There seems to be a grave misunderstanding in todayís protest-hungry world of entertainment fans into how far their opinion should really matter. You donít like a story? Thatís fine Ė donít read a story. Former Marvel editor Tom Brennan
roach is online now  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:28 AM   #940
Kane52630
Bio-Digtial Jazz, Man.
 
Kane52630's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Skynet
Posts: 69,455
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

Quote:
I immediately think to all the internet fanboys who tell me that the DCAU DVD movies are very good and better than the live-action movies.
hmm..

__________________
Design of Chaos

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:
Kane52630 is offline  
Old 04-24-2014, 11:28 AM   #941
Thread Manager
SHH! Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 0
Default Re: All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 4

This thread is now closed it has a continuation thread Here

Thread Manager 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 11:49 PM.

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.