Enriquespy
Superhero
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 7,991
- Reaction score
- 2,034
- Points
- 103
I'm easily pleased too. I still admit the movie was a mess, a beautiful mess.
Mjölnir;33451509 said:It's pretty unavoidable that it happens when we have two superhero movies, within roughly a month from each other, that deal with heroes coming into conflict with each other. Well, you could even say that we have three within the span of roughly two months and Apocalypse will be compared to the other two as well.
Your example is so hyperbolic in both time span and comparison that it loses it's point.
Reviews are just help for consumers and making comparisons can make it easier for the consumer to understand the message. I don't see anything wrong with it, as long as that's not all they are saying of course.
Batman is pissed at Superman I get that but Superman vaguely mentions Batman and watches TV.
If you have to make comparisons from one movie to the other, that just tells me you can't sell your movie on it's own.
^ That's what I consider it as, an average movie that is accepted as bad, because of the hype surrounding it. Now with a better script and a better director, I think it could've lived up to the hype.
This interview disappoints me every time I hear about it.
Why does superman need to be down for Bruce to form the JL? To me, that's misunderstanding of both characters. Superman isn't just an "auto-win" for every situation. There's no need to keep him out for drama's sake. And why would his presence invalidate batman's role? He could still help form the JL whether superman is there or not. In fact, it'd be a moving and probably funny concept to have two people who were in a fight to the death not long ago seeking to find these other metahumans.
Because this is the story they chose. They chose to have these two at serious odds, to have Batman feeling he failed Superman, and forming the League is going to be part of Batman's redemption. The guilt and duty Batman feels to uphold Superman's legacy is a lot more powerful a concept if Superman isn't alive the whole time.
But that's clearly not the only reason they did this. There are likely story reasons, character reasons AND logistical reasons they chose this route.
It's quite clear that this decision was a key part of Superman's arc. In that very interview, Snyder also talks about this, citing experiencing death as Superman's "crucible", something he has to go through to identify with humanity.
And as far as Batman forming the league....
It's not just Batman. It's going to be Batman and Wonder Woman. Which will strengthen their interaction as characters and inform the leadership structure of the JLA.
Also, Batman's a detective. In many versions of the story, Batman develops leads on prospective members/recruits, etc and locates them.
I really didn't find this that out of left field when it was revealed. Many fans speculated they should do just this to start the league, making Superman's emergence and then absence a key motivator for it to exist. But people keep cherrypicking complaints about things Snyder says without looking at them in context.
as a concept that is fine, it's in the conveyance of those concepts where it's failing.
This is pretty much where i'm at as well. Frankly, i'm skeptical WB understands exactly why the film has faced so much criticism and what is turning people off. I suspect they think the issue is only how light or dark the film was as opposed to the broader and more in-depth criticisms of the film.
I guess the question is, is this film just an example of the growing pains and a rocky start to the DCCU, or is this the quality we can expect going forward.
If you have to make comparisons from one movie to the other, that just tells me you can't sell your movie on it's own.
I keep hearing this, about how people doubt WB even knows the issues it had with this film.
What is this based on?
The fact that they didn't immediately give the critics and fans Zack Snyder's head, push back their universe and basically admit defeat and retool? I think that would have been a rather extreme response in the face of a movie that even with LOUSY reviews, appears to be making a decent amount of money.
So is it based on clickbait rumors that they reshot SUICIDE SQUAD to be funnier, which now do not appear to be true?
There's so much about this film and this universe that is down to perception. Now it's perceived that the film was an awful mess, that WB doesn't have a plan, doesn't know what they're doing, etc, and I find much of that ridiculous, and unsubstantiated besides.
And what's sad is that because it's such a hot topic, it's become cool to hate on the movie, so now, apart from all the memes and such, the story is clickbait for pretty much every media outlet, which just feeds and reinforces the perception even more.
This movie didn't happen in a vacuum. It's quite clear WB knew what they were making. Their company line was to make darker, more serious films. They talked about taking risks. They talked about not doing exactly what Marvel has done.
Their BVS and JUSTICE LEAGUE screenwriter came out before this movie was even released and said Justice League was going to be lighter in tone. The studio announced a Director's Cut before the film was released.
The studio knew something about what the response was likely to be, they just didn't expect it to be savaged by critics like it was.
I think it's really unrealistic to think WB doesn't know the very obvious problems people have with this movie. They've been shouted from the rooftops this time around.
Almost every single critic who had issues with this movie said the following:
-Superman is not warm and charismatic enough
-The tone is too dark
-Not enough fun/action
And besides complaints about source fidelity, these are the main issues that fans continue to complain about as well.
I guarantee you WB has heard the message loud and clear.
The question now is what they will do about it. And there's plenty they can do.
It was a 9/10 for me as well. It was exactly what I was looking for and it diverted from the standard CBM formula (clearly for worse based on the majority). However, I am not easily pleased, but it's a matter of taste. I like things overly serious. Good to see you though, troll.
I'm easily pleased too. I still admit the movie was a mess, a beautiful mess.
Age of Ultron is the closest comparison I would give.
that, to me, is BvS in the nutshell.
Because this is the story they chose. They chose to have these two at serious odds, to have Batman feeling he failed Superman, and forming the League is going to be part of Batman's redemption. The guilt and duty Batman feels to uphold Superman's legacy is a lot more powerful a concept if Superman isn't alive the whole time.
But that's clearly not the only reason they did this. There are likely story reasons, character reasons AND logistical reasons they chose this route.
It's quite clear that this decision was a key part of Superman's arc. In that very interview, Snyder also talks about this, citing experiencing death as Superman's "crucible", something he has to go through to identify with humanity.
And as far as Batman forming the league....
It's not just Batman. It's going to be Batman and Wonder Woman. Which will strengthen their interaction as characters and inform the leadership structure of the JLA.
Also, Batman's a detective. In many versions of the story of the formations of various League's, Batman develops leads on prospective members/recruits, etc and locates them. So it's not unprecedented in the mythology.
Heck, there are versions where Superman didn't even actively join the League for a while.
I really didn't find this that out of left field when it was revealed. Many fans speculated they should do just this to start the league, making Superman's emergence and then absence a key motivator for it to exist.
But people keep cherrypicking complaints about things Snyder says without looking at them in context.
it's 60% of what was shot. no way you take a script and cut that much without hurting what's left. It should have been 2 films. they should have ended part 1 when Bats got the Kryptonite. Show a big fight scene with him infiltrating Lexcorp. Maybe add Diana and let her and Mercy go at it. During that fight we find out Mercy is a cyborg. Make getting the rock a big deal is what I'm saying.
I don't like that bit about superman needing to die to identify with humanity. Sure, it's a valid choice and they have creative license to do it, but it's not something I want to see for the character. Superman has existed on Earth for 33-35 years and been rescuing them for almost as long, and it takes his death to identify with people?
My issue about Batman, WW or whomever forming the league isn't a vote against those characters. My complaint is more about what superman is missing, not what they get to do. He's in a casket and not being seen to interact or participate or endear himself to the audience. If he'd gotten better characterization thus far, I may not have such a resistance to this. But as of now, I feel it's just going to exacerbate the existing issues with his character.
I agree with this. The movie would have gained a lot if they had split it.
No one said that was the only way he can identify with humanity. It's just a key way to do so. It's a transition point for his character.
Have you seen JUSTICE LEAGUE? Do you know how they will address Superman's death and resurrection for sure? How do you know he's not going ot have an integral role in bringing the League together, cementing them?