BvS All Things Batman v Superman: An Open Discussion (TAG SPOILERS) - Part 302

[FunkMiller]

That's not true at all. Nolan's Batman was a reasonably faithful version of post crisis Batman. At least the first two films were. And Nolan may not care about the do over, but he did care about his version of the character.

Absolutely right. Nolan only tripped up because he wanted to end the Batman story without him dying, which was always going to be a big ask without steering away from the character's roots.

But in BB and TDK, he's a pretty faithful representation of modern comic Batman.

 

[Kane52630]

 

[SomeOldGuy]

That's not true at all. Nolan's Batman was a reasonably faithful version of post crisis Batman. At least the first two films were. And Nolan may not care about the do over, but he did care about his version of the character.

I was talking primarily about BvS, but sure, let's look at all of Nolan and Snyder's films. We've got two at the beginning that are faithful, a third less so, and a fourth and fifth that offer radical departures from the norm. That's not a trend I find reassuring.

Maybe WB takes steps to reverse it. Reports of greater oversight of Snyder give me some hope. Then again, earlier reports of Wonder Woman being "dark" bum me right back out again.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I was talking primarily about BvS

In your original point you said Nolan and Snyder. Nolan had nothing to do with BvS.

 

[AndrewOz]

The whole fan thing is hard for me to buy since anyone with any understanding of it would know fan numbers are fairly small and Hollywood has shown that yeah, it's good to make something fans can enjoy, but it has to be accessible to the general audience. This film has issues with both groups.

It is hard to buy, but it's not just about the numbers, it's trying to understand what rationale of how it ended up the way it did.
He probably sold WB on the idea that he's their DC equivalent of a Joss Whedon, who loves these characters and so could put them up on the screen and translate the material in an adult way that would in a way that would appeal to fans and the GA and that the fan service would result in positive WOM.

It doesn't make sense after you watch the actual movie, but then we live in a world where this movie, which should have been a smash hit, is what it is instead.
Just imagine Zack as delusional and the WB execs unsure of themselves and with low sales resistance.
He's already managed to convince a lot of people that don't know any better that TDKR is about a Batman who kills, and that Tim Burton invented the whole no-kill thing.
Delusional is an easy sell to me after that.

 

[AndrewOz]

I disagree with this.

Iron Man captured Loki.

Thor literally barges in and takes Loki out of Cap/IM's custody.

Iron Man, the known hothead, takes off and attacks Thor for "taking his stuff".

Thor, known hothead as well, and IM fight.

Makes sense to me.

Thor attacks Cap because he's basically in a rage at that point (which Thor has a history of flying into).

Umm, I don't think you are getting the context. I'm not saying these movies are the same. At all. It's mocking BvS.
If you wan't to know what I think about the brief tussle in Avengers, why it works and the 2hr build up to the attempted murder of Superman doesn't, how this image popped into my head, read post #434.

 

[AndrewOz]

In your original point you said Nolan and Snyder. Nolan had nothing to do with BvS.

Or MoS.
I read Nolan's "advice" not as a bit of cynical permission to do whatever he'd like, because it's just another cow to milk - after it's empty, kill it, start again - but a wry comment born from frusteation at trying to explain to Snyder why he thought his ideas were bad.

As I stated in an earlier post:I think Nolan was saying that in exasperation and what he meant was "fine, f@€k it up as much as you like, someone will come along later and undo the damage like I did with Schumacher. You ar$e".

It's just a lot harder to do it in an interconnected Universe.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Or MoS.

Wasn't he a producer? And had a hand in the script?

 

[Sorath]

Nolan had nothing to do with Batman vs Superman. Also on top of that Zack Synder didn't write Batman vs Superman he just directed. I'm sure he was allowed imput on he story but all the writing goes to David S. Goyer and Chris Terrio.

People have this knack for blaming directors for a bad story line. When in many cases the director has very little to do with the writing process. The director can make minor alterations once filming begins but even then it's not him that does it. It's once again the writers.

I contribute much of the flaws to Batman vs Superman as well as Man of Steel to David S Goyer. Who has no business writing for Superman. He great at writing Batman but his stuff is to dark for Superman. What Man of Steel need was some one who is writen Superman comics. Grant Morrison would been a great pick to write Man of Steel along with another writer to help him.

As for Batman vs Superman they should had a team of say Grant Morrison, David S Goyer and another writer to help them. Then you have two writers who understand both respective characters and to write them well. The third writer to help balance it out and flush out there ideas.

The writers need to have a real basic understanding of the character and be able to reflect the tone and mood of those characters worlds. Well that's my opinion any way.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

People have this knack for blaming directors for a bad story line. When in many cases the director has very little to do with the writing process. The director can make minor alterations once filming begins but even then it's not him that does it. It's once again the writers.

Not in this case. Snyder was heavily involved in the writing process and the story.

Also on top of that Zack Synder didn't write Batman vs Superman he just directed.

Yeah. He just did the most important part of making a film. No big deal.

 

[shauner111]

Terrio didn't know much about the character. Snyder obviously had his hands in there. He wanted a specific Dark Knight Returns influence. This is Snyders take on Batman, his more extreme version of Frank Miller Bats.

I blame him, Terrio and Goyer. Not as much Goyer though because it seems like his original idea was different.

Even if Snyder had nothing to do with the script, which is b.s because his type of characters are all over this movie...I still blame him for choices he made as a director.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

If we are to circumvent all blame from Snyder to the writers, then we must pass all praise from Snyder to the writers too.

Dawn of the Dead was only good because of James Gunn's screenplay. 300 is only good because of Frank Miller. Eh?

But I won't make that argument. Because a director's job is too far reaching to be dismissed as 'just' something.

 

[DerekLake]

Nolan had nothing to do with Batman vs Superman. Also on top of that Zack Synder didn't write Batman vs Superman he just directed. I'm sure he was allowed imput on he story but all the writing goes to David S. Goyer and Chris Terrio.

People have this knack for blaming directors for a bad story line. When in many cases the director has very little to do with the writing process. The director can make minor alterations once filming begins but even then it's not him that does it. It's once again the writers.

I contribute much of the flaws to Batman vs Superman as well as Man of Steel to David S Goyer...

The director directs ALL aspects of film, including writing. At the very least he's the one who translates the story from script to film. That means the fault does lie with him.

Blaming Goyer seems like the reactionary thing to do. Remember, Goyer and Nolan developed Man of Steel's approach and story. You might say it was less idyllic than past versions, but it wasn't dark, and it certainly wasn't a pessimistic take on Superman. MOS is full of optimism about the future, even if the present is quite melancholy. Batman v Superman, in contrast, was most certainly a pessimistic take on Superman from start to finish. There's no optimism until the very end, and it has mostly to do with Bruce Wayne's new outlook on life, rather than Superman's ability to inspire hope as a living superpower.

So I blame Snyder for that approach, and then Terrio for crafting a script with at least three different plot strands in the first half, with the two dominant ones being for Bruce Wayne and Lex Luthor, rather than Clark/Superman.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Cinema isn't called the directors medium because someone decided to peek into the future and made an enemy out of Snyder and therefore trying to screw him from the past.

 

[wnjcwjkk]

Absolutely right. Nolan only tripped up because he wanted to end the Batman story without him dying, which was always going to be a big ask without steering away from the character's roots.

But in BB and TDK, he's a pretty faithful representation of modern comic Batman.

It doesn't really bother me if it steers away from the character's roots, just once it was nice to see Bruce Wayne happy and at peace

 

[wnjcwjkk]

For the folks who think they irreparably screwed up a lot with BvS, like publicly killing Clark Kent, or the characterizations or killings, things like that:


What if they were to do similar to the X-Men films, using the whole Flash time travel concept to retcon some of the unpopular things from BvS, do you think that would be an acceptable way to save the franchise for you? I mean, everybody seems to have forgiven and forgotten X Men 3.

Sorry if this has been discussed

 

[Timebomb]

For the folks who think they irreparably screwed up a lot with BvS, like publicly killing Clark Kent, or the characterizations or killings, things like that:


What if they were to do similar to the X-Men films, using the whole Flash time travel concept to retcon some of the unpopular things from BvS, do you think that would be an acceptable way to save the franchise for you? I mean, everybody seems to have forgiven and forgotten X Men 3.

Sorry if this has been discussed

I'm not a huge fan of the X films partly because of this. The X cinematic universe is a complete muddy mess.

However I'm up for anything the DCEU does, as long as they get off the current path. Reboot, time travel, alternate universe, whatever.

 

[shauner111]

Interesting point wnjcwjkk.

I wouldn't care for it, but i can see some people wishing for something like that. Personally, i find it gimmicky and lazy.

 

[StormC]

I feel like the damage is done for the DCEU for me. I'm very interested in Affleck's solo, and Suicide Squad could be cool, but besides that it's hard to be invested in a cinematic universe that already defiled its characters and mythology so much.

It doesn't really bother me if it steers away from the character's roots, just once it was nice to see Bruce Wayne happy and at peace

I agree. Batman's constant self-imposed war is as much in part due to the never-ending nature of comic books as it is something related to the character and story - Nolan is arguably the first storyteller to definitively tell the end of Batman, and I think ending with that sort of closure was very cathartic.

 

[Slick]

So I'm assuming that the original cut will be canon and the ultimate cut is just a bonus version. What do you guys think?

 

[titansupes]

^ Guaranteed.

 

[Slick]

Yeah that's what I'm guessing because with the marvel movies the theatrical is of course the canon cut. They don't do directors cut. So I'm pretty positive that the theatrical cut of BvS is the canon cut.

 

[wnjcwjkk]

Yeah im not a big fan of the X-Men retconming either, I feel like they wanted Hugh Jackman to stay as Wolverine so bad, they weren't gonna give up on that universe no matter how muddled it got. I would have preferred they just reboot it at First Class, give us a better Cyclops as well as other characters, and that way they're free from the missteps. Plus, they could make the visuals and costumes closer to the comics. "Would you prefer yellow spandex?" Absolutely, give us the real Wolverine costume!

So, idk that I would like them muddling up the DCEU story with time travel retcons, unless they did it in a really good way

 

[AndrewOz]

Wasn't he a producer? And had a hand in the script?

He's an EP, presumably for the entirety of DCEU, but it has been widely reported that he is ignored by Snyder.
He told him not to have Superman kill Zod, as an example.
Hence my take on his reported comments to Zack about only being caretakers.

 

[AndrewOz]

It doesn't really bother me if it steers away from the character's roots, just once it was nice to see Bruce Wayne happy and at peace

Plus, there's no reason it had to permanent.
It left room for his return, however unlikely, if a big enough threat demanded it.
Or Nolan or WB wanted to return to it without a reboot.

Unlike poor Jimmy