BvS All Things Batman v Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 2

[writer0327]

Ben as Bruce gives a chilling performance all around. I was never really worried about him as Bruce, and this validates my feelings. It was always about how does he look and act as Bats. If he owns that end of the role as well, he'll be in the conversation of Best Batman Ever.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

It would be foolish to think the reaction about the destruction didn't affect the creative process of Batman v Superman. That's a pretty obvious given or should be.

 

[Astro13Zombie]

I have to admit, I didn't expect Affleck to have any sort of intensity in this film....figured he would just try overly hard to be a cool playboy. Good intensity, at least for one scene.

 

[Guts]

I think these two will steal the prize for best looking DC couple.

 

[ernesth100]

The more TV Spots they show. The more I'm not sure who the bad guy is. On one hand Bruce seems to be going off that one incident in Metropolis as a sign that Supes needs to be put in his place. As opposed to oh I dont know the dozens upon possible hundreds of lives he saved inbetween the time of MoS and DoJ. Then on the other hand Supes is coming off a bit selfish of the hero gig. I don't care how fast he is, he still has a limit to how much he can do. If anything it would be good to let Bats continue his vigilantism since Supes himself is also techically a vigilante.

He should actually understand Batman since much like Batman, not everyone in the world is a fan of Supes. I know Bats is rough but he's not killing anyone(atleast not from what we've seen and the dream sequence doesn't count). I mean, it's only a matter of time for another villain like Zod shows up and Supes has to get serious again and beat them down(Doomsday). So he's no peacemaker himself. Bat's doing what Superman is doing and keeping people safe. Something Superman can't do all by himself.


Now that brings us to who's in the right and who's in the wrong. Superman's being a hypocrite and Batman is jumping to conclusions. But they're both doing so thinking it's for the greater good. In the end, they're both wrong but for the right reasons.

 

[fake]

More than 60% of people know that.

141 2/3rds percent of people know that

[YT]WFoC3TR5rzI[/YT]

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Affleck is going to be the best Bruce/Batman.

Bruce

Batman:

+Fong/Snyder imagery

=Definitive Batman for me (as long as he doesn't kill)

 

[Boy Scout]

Yeah, beautiful find there, thanks Wolf.

BvS was not written to "address the criticism," as was suggested by the post you responded to.

I didn't suggest anything of the sort. What I said was that Snyder's decision to address the criticism - for whatever reason - does absolutely nothing to invalidate the validity of the criticism in the first place.

 

[TripleJ]

He's out of his mine with anger though. "If there's even a 1% chance he's our enemy, we have to take it as an absolute certainty." That's ridiculously paranoid. The fact that he's calm makes his unwarranted rage even more worrisome.

It is, but I think it's pretty normal (especially considering it's Bruce).

A God like being who's power that cannot be matched...even if his intentions and actions are good right now, what guarantee do we have of his actions/intentions in the future?

 

[Astro13Zombie]

I didn't suggest anything of the sort. What I said was that Snyder's decision to address the criticism - for whatever reason - does absolutely nothing to invalidate the validity of the criticism in the first place.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

I didn't suggest anything of the sort. What I said was that Snyder's decision to address the criticism - for whatever reason - does absolutely nothing to invalidate the validity of the criticism in the first place.

There is nothing to defend, but anyone thinking the amount of focus on the destruction as a topic was not affected by the MOS commentary... is out of their mind.

 

[Boy Scout]

I was clarifying a misunderstanding in a civil way. Don't turn it into a thing.

 

[Rapunzel]

The more TV Spots they show. The more I'm not sure who the bad guy is. On one hand Bruce seems to be going off that one incident in Metropolis as a sign that Supes needs to be put in his place. As opposed to oh I dont know the dozens upon possible hundreds of lives he saved inbetween the time of MoS and DoJ. Then on the other hand Supes is coming off a bit selfish of the hero gig. I don't care how fast he is, he still has a limit to how much he can do. If anything it would be good to let Bats continue his vigilantism since Supes himself is also techically a vigilante.

He should actually understand Batman since much like Batman, not everyone in the world is a fan of Supes. I know Bats is rough but he's not killing anyone(atleast not from what we've seen and the dream sequence doesn't count). I mean, it's only a matter of time for another villain like Zod shows up and Supes has to get serious again and beat them down(Doomsday). So he's no peacemaker himself. Bat's doing what Superman is doing and keeping people safe. Something Superman can't do all by himself.


Now that brings us to who's in the right and who's in the wrong. Superman's being a hypocrite and Batman is jumping to conclusions. But they're both doing so thinking it's for the greater good. In the end, they're both wrong but for the right reasons.

With Batman being such an rage filled jerk... I think it's pretty clear Supes is NOT being hypocritical wanting to such him down. Especially with this last TV spot, I can completely imagine that Batman is going too far and needs to be stopped. Supes seems clearly in the right to me...and I'm a diehard Bats fan who never liked Supes till MoS.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I didn't suggest anything of the sort. What I said was that Snyder's decision to address the criticism - for whatever reason - does absolutely nothing to invalidate the validity of the criticism in the first place.

So, Snyder doing what Spielberg did with Indiana Jones following Temple of Doom (offering a cinematic apology for his earlier work) is a bad thing?

PS. By apology, I think he's saying "I should have addressed it in Man of Steel, but I'm gonna address it this time"

BvS looks like it's going out of its way to avoid the storytelling "mistakes" in MOS.

 

[wnjcwjkk]

Sorry, I keep seeing "Based Snyder" and now "Based Affleck", what does "Based" mean, like based on the comic book?

 

[RadioSha]

=Definitive Batman for me (as long as he doesn't kill)

Too late. I think this is the kind of Batman we get in the beginning. Superman inspires him to be less of a dick by the end of the movie I assume.

 

[Clark-Kent]

Sorry, I keep seeing "Based Snyder" and now "Based Affleck", what does "Based" mean, like based on the comic book?

Just some people trying to use trendy internet lingo They just found out the words and are posting them frequently to fit in

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I'm hoping it's a dream.

To me, Batman killing is like taking 10 percent of away from the character. You could get 90 percent of him right, but that 10 percent is the difference between "comic Batman" and movie "Batman."

 

[Guts]

Too late. I think this is the kind of Batman we get in the beginning. Superman inspires him to be less of a dick by the end of the movie I assume.

Wondering what those boxes at the bottom are.

 

[Marz69]

Bats and Supes are both right to feel what they feel even if they don't handle as well as they should & therefore wrong to the opposing viewpoint. That's what makes this story so intriguing. That's what brings layers to the story & the characters. Add in Lex' viewpoint and this film has a chance to be amazing. And I'm talking from a story perspective. We already know snyder will bring the action & visuals.

 

[Rapunzel]

It is, but I think it's pretty normal (especially considering it's Bruce).

A God like being who's power that cannot be matched...even if his intentions and actions are good right now, what guarantee do we have of his actions/intentions in the future?

He thinks it's acceptable to destroy Superman if there is even a 1% percent chance he's evil. He thinks a 1% chance deserves to be treated as an absolute certainty.

That is no way rational, and should not be treated as such.

It actually makes me wonder if Bats isn't going after innocent folks on slim evidence that they are criminals, hence Clark's statement about trampled civil liberties. A vigilante who judges based on a 1% chance of guilt is a scary prospect.

 

[RadioSha]

Wondering what those boxes at the bottom are.

Washing Machines

 

[Boy Scout]

So, Snyder doing what Spielberg did with Indiana Jones following Temple of Doom (offering a cinematic apology for his earlier work) is a bad thing?

Never said that. I wasn't commenting on whether or not it was a good or bad thing.

Plus, I wouldn't consider it an "apology." Snyder still stands by the creative decisions he made in MOS, which I can respect.

 

[rogbngp]

In thinking on it more, it's actually a fair question as to how much of a reaction BvS's script is to the criticisms that MoS received for the destruction at the end of MoS. Only insiders would really know. I would like to think that with MoS being the first film that launched the DCEU, and knowing that it would have a sequel, that Snyder can be taken at his word in the quote the KillerWolf shared: he wanted to show that the actions of superheroes in the real world would have consequences. And that it was as theme that he wanted to work with ever since directing Watchmen. But not being a fly on the wall as they were mapping out the DCEU master plan, I'm really not in a position to know.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ I am 100 percent okay with Batman wanting to kill Superman.

Because "he has the power to wipe out the entire race."