• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation - Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the centre of your thesis, your defence for all of Batman's characterisation throughout this movie, yes?

Answer me this... why would Bruce Wayne be so traumatised by the Black Zero Event? This is supposed to be a man who has been on a twenty year mission to save Gotham. He's meant to have had all the experiences as Batman we know about from the comics. He's meant to have fought The Joker, Killer Croc, Mad Hatter, Clayface, Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul etc. etc. That's this version of Batman's USP. He's meant to have seen death, destruction, pain, hate, suffering and evil up close and personal for decades.

Your argument is that he was effectively 'classic' Batman after all of this, but before Black Zero. A non-killing, mentally stable Batman.

...and then two aliens knock some buildings down. Which throws Batman over the edge completely.

Ever talked to anyone in the emergency services, who's been in their jobs for decades, and had to experience something horrific? I have.

I know both police officers and medical staff who went through 7/7 here in the UK. Ordinary people who experienced absolute hell. And yes, it stays with them... but they didn't crack, or break, or change fundamentally as human beings. If anything, their previous experience of traumatic eventsn their jobs, lessened the mental impact for them.

But you think Batman would just fall apart, do you? That none of his previous experience would have toughened him up, and that he'd have a breakdown because it was aliens?


Please. This is meant to be ****ing Batman.


Did you miss how Bruce had already become more cynical, angry and lost hope after Robin's death ?

or, the fact that Bruce lost Wayne Enterprises Office Staff members in Black Zero event ?

or, How countless lives were lost during Zod vs Superman fight in Metropolis, and Bruce was present there at that time during the Zod vs Superman fight ?

Or, how Lex Luthor manipulated him gradually over the period of two years post BZ event ?

It's all there in the movie :huh:
 
The main problem with BVS is that its sloppily written and executed. That's a big problem in storytelling. However, Batman is still dumb. PTSD or not. You'd think in those 18 months or whatever he'd have investigated who Superman is and find out everything he needs to know. But nope. He was just chilling around I suppose.

Exactly, I don't really know for sure whether Bruce exhibited the full spectrum of what one would qualify as PTSD the only thing that was made clear was that Bruce was angry at Superman and when one combines that with his jaded attitude after decades of service Batman's 1% speech begins to make abit of sense. However even if Batman had PTSD it wouldn't explain the character's apparent stupidity and lack of preparation.

overall, the way the whole film is staged: it RIDES on absence of rational thinking of it's key characters.

Agreed and imo that's one of the major reasons why the film failed for so many people because the 'versus' part wasn't earned. What would've happened if Batman found out that Superman is actually CK with a mom called MARTHA? And would've happened if superman exercised abit more patience after being attacked by Batman (if nothing else than to save his mother whose life was on a timer) instead of just ramming him into a building inorder to start a pointless fight that existed solely because the title of the movie said so?
 
I can't have listened to Gibson's abusive domestic rants and feel good will towards the DC film he's making. It is a double standard and hypocritical, but my "separate artist from art" muscle fails me there, with this particular context.
 
Snyder was also intrigued with the concept of Superman, but when you hate the idea of superheroes, it unfits you to make a lovable superhero movie.
What is this? 2011? :woot:

Its 2017 and we know the facts. WB didnt want Snyder for Superman. Only after everyone turned them down they started to work with Snyder. Snyder needed superman because Watchmen underperformed and Owls of Ga'Hoole,Sucker Punch bombed.

Now IMO the obvious that is not a fact. Snyder wanted to direct batman since 2007 when 300 was realesed. Taking on a superman project he hoped to get to a batman movie in the future. After MOS underperformed basedon WB's expectations they agreed on batman and superman in the same movie. with Snyder it was always about getting batman.
 
Yeah that's a fair assessment, the substance is always there but it's not always presented in the best way and isn't always easy to spot.

I do find always thought re-watching his movies are interesting for this reason as you spot something new every time.

I'm the opposite. I just see more issues.

Why isn't Batman and Superman's bio in the Lex's meta file?
 
Why isn't Batman and Superman's bio in the Lex's meta file?

Because that is there purely to set up other movies. It's serves no purpose at all otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Did you miss how Bruce had already become more cynical, angry and lost hope after Robin's death ?

or, the fact that Bruce lost Wayne Enterprises Office Staff members in Black Zero event ?

or, How countless lives were lost during Zod vs Superman fight in Metropolis, and Bruce was present there at that time during the Zod vs Superman fight ?

Or, how Lex Luthor manipulated him gradually over the period of two years post BZ event ?

It's all there in the movie :huh:

...and you think those justify Batman's characterisation as a murdering, unthinking, reckless a-hole.

They don't.

And Lex manipulating him just makes him a stone cold moron, so that hardly helps your argument.
 
Because that is there purely to set up other movies. It's serves no purpose at all otherwise.

The ideas are there and some of them are actually good, they are just executed so poorly.

Having Batman and Superman there would explain that Luthor has kept his eyes on all Metas (Luthor wouldn't necessarily know that Batman wasn't.) which allowed him to emotionally blackmail :rolleyes: Bruce and find Clark's mom.
 
Career agenda aside, I think that Snyder jumped into Superman with all he had to give. He's a Christian Scientist, as I understand it, and he brought as much meaningfulness reflective of those themes as he was able to. I feel that I completely understand what people mean when they say MOS was "the Superman movie I've always wanted", because in the broad strokes it's what I had always hoped for, too. Modern origin, serious and ambitious, elevated into something discussion-worthy, huge stakes and action. It's not a solid movie and I would've liked more cleverness to it all around, but he went for it and kept it standalone, without excessive hints at DC worldbuilding. My two pro-Snyder cents.
 
Man Of Steel was made for one reason & that was to avoid a law suit at the time from the creators heirs if a Superman movie was not made in a certain amount of time because they wanted the Superman rights back & the WB was sitting on it & the WB had no plans of a universe
what Negan wrotte is fact. They had to jump into production before 2012.
 
Man Of Steel was made for one reason & that was to avoid a law suit at the time from the creators heirs if a Superman movie was not made in a certain amount of time because they wanted the Superman rights back & the WB was sitting on it & the WB had no plans of a universe


As far as I can remember, Judge Otis asked WB to either make a Superman movie and share some percentage of it's profit with heirs or else pay them some fixed amount as compensation, in the event WB was not able to make a movie, I think they were ready to pay them some amount each year till they made a movie.


If they were that desperate, then they could have green lighted a sequel to SR back in 2010.
 
I am by no means a BvS fan, but my understanding of it was that with the Black Zero event, it drives Bruce over the edge primarily because of fact that after a life spent as basically the most powerful and effective 'superhero' on the planet, he felt so helpless to do anything about it because it was simply a world-changing, unprecedented level of power. It's him being reduced back to the powerless little boy who is forced to stand by idly as his parents are murdered, and him feeling like his whole crime fighting crusade of punching bad guys in the face is basically irrelevant when you have flying gods in the picture. So going after Superman, for the good of the Earth (by his logic), became his newfound purpose. Hence Alfred's line about "the feeling of power-less-ness...that turns good men cruel."

Now, I do think the way it was handled in the movie was a bit muddled when trying to determine how Robin's death affected him vs. Black Zero. And I think this could've been handled without having such little regard for human life. Personally, I think it would've been more interesting to see a more thoughtful Bruce Wayne encountering all of this stuff, and how he might've tried to figure out Superman rather than seeing him as a pure enemy through and through. What it comes down to is I think they may have boxed themselves into this depressing direction by making it a VS movie.

I guess what I'm saying is, I can see what the movie was going for with Bruce's motivations, but I wish it was handled with more nuance and that Bruce was portrayed as less Trump-ish with his paranoia of "the other". It's not even that I think there's no precedent for Bruce to be written that way ("Bat-d**k", anyone?), but I think more of a chess match between Bruce and Lex would've been far more interesting than Lex just using Bruce's blind rage to make him a pawn in his strange plan.
 
As far as I can remember, Judge Otis asked WB to either make a Superman movie and share some percentage of it's profit with heirs or else pay them some fixed amount as compensation, in the event WB was not able to make a movie, I think they were ready to pay them some amount each year till they made a movie.


If they were that desperate, then they could have green lighted a sequel to SR back in 2010.

The copyright was for both movies and television. So couldn't WB have just put a cape on Clark in Smallville? Smallville was still airing in 2011. It would seem that WB could have just extended Smallville
a few more season with Clark as an actual Superman, thus fullfilling the live action copyright obligations. Or was it a case that WB would still have exclusive rights to a TV version of Superman, but not
a movie version. I guess the part I don't get is why the fact that WB was running a TV show at the time didn't count. It had to be only a movie. Plus WB was still publishing the comic books. Why didn't those count?
 
Man Of Steel was made for one reason & that was to avoid a law suit at the time from the creators heirs if a Superman movie was not made in a certain amount of time because they wanted the Superman rights back & the WB was sitting on it & the WB had no plans of a universe

I get it. I personally never bought the story that Goyer out of nowhere came up with an idea that kicked everything into gear, and going back to Snyder, I don't think he was too much of a fan beforehand. By his own admission, back in his 300 days:

I always felt like the mainstream comic books were always a little too soft for me. They weren't gory enough and they weren't sexually demented enough, and that's not who I am. It's just true. When I went to the comic book store I had a hard time with Superman and Batman. Then when Frank [Miller] came along [...]

But they did not half-ass it. They got Chris Nolan and a 200-plus million budget. Regarding Snyder's approach, his own level of preexistent interest in the property aside, I think he did the common sense thing that most fans would've wanted, he kept it all about Superman. I think he tried hard to understand what fans would appreciate while doing his own spin on it. It was a fairly legitimate way of approaching that movie, all things considered.
 
This is the centre of your thesis, your defence for all of Batman's characterisation throughout this movie, yes?

Answer me this... why would Bruce Wayne be so traumatised by the Black Zero Event? This is supposed to be a man who has been on a twenty year mission to save Gotham. He's meant to have had all the experiences as Batman we know about from the comics. He's meant to have fought The Joker, Killer Croc, Mad Hatter, Clayface, Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul etc. etc. That's this version of Batman's USP. He's meant to have seen death, destruction, pain, hate, suffering and evil up close and personal for decades.

Your argument is that he was effectively 'classic' Batman after all of this, but before Black Zero. A non-killing, mentally stable Batman.

...and then two aliens knock some buildings down. Which throws Batman over the edge completely.

Ever talked to anyone in the emergency services, who's been in their jobs for decades, and had to experience something horrific? I have.

I know both police officers and medical staff who went through 7/7 here in the UK. Ordinary people who experienced absolute hell. And yes, it stays with them... but they didn't crack, or break, or change fundamentally as human beings. If anything, their previous experience of traumatic eventsn their jobs, lessened the mental impact for them.

But you think Batman would just fall apart, do you? That none of his previous experience would have toughened him up, and that he'd have a breakdown because it was aliens?

Please. This is meant to be ****ing Batman.

Your entire argument is flawed.

But, as I stated, that isn't realistic. Your argument is that Black Zero is the final catalyst for Batman essentially losing his mind - because he was powerless to stop Zod trashing the city.

But what about the twenty years or so beforehand, when he was crime fighting? What about all of Joker's victims he was unable to save? Penguin's? Riddler's? He would have felt powerless then as well, wouldn't he? Why didn't they 'break' him?

You attach so much significance to Black Zero, because without its significance your argument falls to pieces, but you fail to adequately underline why that series of events would be more traumatic to Bruce Wayne than any of his previous experiences as Batman... other than 'because aliens'.

Sorry, dog won't hunt.

...and besides all of that, at no stage in that entire crappy movie is there any indication given that Batman is suffering from PTSD. You, and all others who subscribe to the theory, have pulled it out of thin air.

Batman V Superman plainly states that Batman wants to kill Superman because he felt powerless to stop Zod and Black Zero, and doesn't want to risk feeling powerless again if Superman turns evil at some point, for no adequately explored reason - so he decides that killing him now the best thing to do, even though Superman is currently a hero.

THAT'S IT.

Thousands of words have been wasted trying to justify that creative character choice. It's a stupid, stupid motivation that makes no sense within the confines of the narrative. Bring up all the complex psychological arguments you like, but none of them are present in the movie itself.

Exactly, I don't really know for sure whether Bruce exhibited the full spectrum of what one would qualify as PTSD the only thing that was made clear was that Bruce was angry at Superman and when one combines that with his jaded attitude after decades of service Batman's 1% speech begins to make abit of sense. However even if Batman had PTSD it wouldn't explain the character's apparent stupidity and lack of preparation.



Agreed and imo that's one of the major reasons why the film failed for so many people because the 'versus' part wasn't earned. What would've happened if Batman found out that Superman is actually CK with a mom called MARTHA? And would've happened if superman exercised abit more patience after being attacked by Batman (if nothing else than to save his mother whose life was on a timer) instead of just ramming him into a building inorder to start a pointless fight that existed solely because the title of the movie said so?

Standing ovation to these posts.
 
The last two Superman projects were fast-tracked when name directors pushed them forward. Otherwise, movement on Superman stalls out.

We went through several Superman projects that were on and off again until Bryan Singer set up a meeting with WB and made his pitch to them around July 2005. The movie was greenlit and production began about 12 weeks later. Routh was cast in October and filming began in March.

After Superman Returns underwhelmed the supposed sequel was pushed back several times until they decided to start over. In one of the court documents dated around 2009, WB said they currently had no script and nothing in-development. The reboot was floundering until Nolan picked up the phone and got the film greenlit with one phone call.
 
That's a gigantic assumption to make which, granted I only saw the film once, is not backed by anything in the film

It's not, like many things in the movie, neccessarily readily apparent after one viewing.

But this is a key element of the film that I believe the filmmakers have actually discussed and confirmed as their intention for the character and the themes of the film. They have Alfred come rigth out and say that it's what's going on with Bruce earlier in the film.

It is not an accident that Bruce, when he is about to start finishing Superman off during their final battle, says the bit about "they taught me the world only makes sense when you force it to." He is not just saying a cool line, he is essentially expressing, at one of his most vulnerable moments, how powerless he feels in a chaotic world.

It is also not an accident that this line is the only line from THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS that they used in that particular sequence. That is the line that fit the themes they were working with: the sense of feeling powerless and meaningless.

Bruce expresses his feelings of powelessness several times throughout the film. He flat out talks about how he's not sure his mission against crime has accomplished anything.

And he absolutely projects his general feelings of powerlessness onto the situation with Black Zero, and this is what triggers his anger toward Superman. Not only then, but again during the Capitol bombing scenario.

Even the dream sequence is a reflection of his fears that he will be powerless to stop yet another major tragedy, in this case, global catastrophe.

In a sense, their battle is basically Bruce working out his anger and control issues on Superman. The entire plan to destroy Superman is Bruce Wayne's attempt to regain some control over the element of tragedy.

Now, an argument can be made that this concept is not totally made clear in the film, but then again, you can't exactly have a character come out and say "I am projecting my sense of powerlessness onto you!" while he's beating up Superman. Instead he says something that can be read that way.

Bruce's powerlessness though, is pretty clearly highlighted at several points in the film, including the "force it to make sense" bit.

It's also interesting to note with regardto the idea of Bruce projecting things onto Superman...

Previously in the film, during the Superman montage, a commentator says "What we've done is we project ourselves on to him." Which is a commentary on the Godlike nature of Superman, but also very, very applicable to Bruce Wayne's own beliefs about Superman in the film. The commentators then go on to talk about how we're not alone in the universe, how we're insignificant specks, etc. In other words, how we feel powerless when something like Superman shows up. This is also reflective of Bruce Wayne's beliefs, and his idea that he has done nothing of consequence throughout his life.
 
Last edited:
I have no issues with how Batman's condition is established in BvS (PTSD or whatever, I'm not a doctor), I just think it's a bad choice to start a cinematic universe. And Batman seeing Superman as a potentially the greatest threat to humanity? Not too convincing. I have issues with how it was resolved. Martha scene is a happy accident, that snaps Batman out of his rage trance, so he can think straight again. It's not a remotely satisfying finale of barely established conflict between Batman and Superman... And overall, the way the whole film is staged: it RIDES on absence of rational thinking of it's key characters.

The thing is that it (Bruce's issues) isn't really resolved. Not yet.

What he does in BVS is hit rock bottom. He's become paranoid, obsessed, cruel and lethal, and is about a kill a relative innocent. That's a pretty sound psychological event to make someone reconsider their path.

He begins to resolve things when he offers to save Superman's mother and helps with Doomsday, placing himself in some pretty decent personal risk to do so. After seeing Clark and Diana in action, and recognizing that larger threats may be on the way, he has a change in perspective about metas; they can be a force for good.

Actually resolving the issues he has is going to be a process, and will likely begin in earnest in JUSTICE LEAGUE. It will involve actively confronting and embracing the larger than life forces he encountered in BVS and working with them to protect humanity. In other words, he will need to approach his mission with more trust and compassion.
 
Last edited:
The copyright was for both movies and television. So couldn't WB have just put a cape on Clark in Smallville? Smallville was still airing in 2011. It would seem that WB could have just extended Smallville
a few more season with Clark as an actual Superman, thus fullfilling the live action copyright obligations. Or was it a case that WB would still have exclusive rights to a TV version of Superman, but not
a movie version. I guess the part I don't get is why the fact that WB was running a TV show at the time didn't count. It had to be only a movie. Plus WB was still publishing the comic books. Why didn't those count?


Because Shuster's advocate Marc Toberoff argued that the heirs were losing money they could have earned had WB made a Superman movie after every 5 (I don't know the exact number of years they specified in the court case) years.

Which was the reason why the judge asked WB to either pay them some fixed money as a compensation or make a movie and share a percentage of the profits earned by them, in addition to paying Shuster's heirs a license fee for using Superman every year.

More at -

http://deadline.com/2014/01/superman-warner-bros-dc-comics-copyright-lawsuit-668850/
 
Last edited:
And overall, the way the whole film is staged: it RIDES on absence of rational thinking of it's key characters.

Ding ding ding.

This is a movie that wants us to accept that the two greatest comic book heroes ever created are both incapable of rational thought.

Way to set up a successful cinematic universe fellas :up:
 
I'm the opposite. I just see more issues.

Why isn't Batman and Superman's bio in the Lex's meta file?

Because they are both public and already known world wide at that point?

Why would they need a bio when people see them operate every day? The others stayed in the shadows and we're not known about, that's why they had a bio. So that's not a flaw of the movie.
 
Last edited:
Because they are both public and already known world wide at that point?

Why would they need a bio when people see them operate every day? The others stayed in the shadows and we're not known about, that's why they had a bio. So that's not a flaw of the movie.
It's still a file on "known" metahumans.

And Batman is not as visible as Superman despite being at it for as long as he was. It's not like he gave interviews.

It would have made more sense.

Like I said, each time I pass this on cable and never stay on it for long, I find another annoying thing not including the stuff I read on here.
 
Because they are both public and already known world wide at that point?

Why would they need a bio when people see them operate every day? The others stayed in the shadows and we're not known about, that's why they had a bio. So that's not a flaw of the movie.

Yeah man, they definitely didn't need a bio on friggin' batman and superman. It's not like it would be useful to have scientific and psychological analysis on two of the most powerful people on the planet that you plan on manipulating. It's definitely not important to keep a bio around so you know how and why irradiated green rocks can hurt a guy who could drop a battleship on your head (or snap your neck). It's also not important to keep info on one of the richest men in the world who also goes out at night dressed up as a flying rodent beating up criminals with his bare hands.

Side note: is batman supposed to be an urban legend or not? I've seen the movie 4 times now and it's really unclear on that point. If he is an urban legend then he's not really known "worldwide" now is he?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,551
Messages
21,989,185
Members
45,783
Latest member
mariagrace999
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"