Discussion in 'Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice' started by Thread Manager, Nov 23, 2013.
That is very well done.
Affleck's Batman will likely get his own solo franchise. Batman is too big a money maker for Warners to avoid that. He's their #1. Meaning Batman will get his own set of love interests in his own films.
It makes the Wonder Woman pairing with Batman unlikely.
Though I wouldn't mind Diana introduced in BvS as Bruce's token 'love interest' of the week.
Maybe I was just too old to find it fun or interesting, but Timmverse, "Diana/Bruce", much like Timmverse "Lois/Bruce" just feels so off to me. I imagine that Diana has great respect for Bruce. She thinks he is a noble and focused hero, a true warrior and friend... But I also think Diana would find how Bruce treats many of his close "friends" very repellant. I just can't see her ever going "I wonder what's going on under that mask?" To me it'd be more like "(sigh) Why do you just HAVE to be a *****e, Bruce?"
Too soon to make generalizations about this version of Superman either way. Man Of Steel is really it's own thing.
Superman's future with Lois, or lack of, has been pretty inconsistent in past mediums. Even in the Donner films, he ends the relationship.
Anything could happen really.
I liked it. Their dialogue was pretty fun.
I didn't mind Bruce and Lois in the Timmverse either.
The Timmverse Lois was easily the best incarnation of the character. Very entertaining. She was edgy, witty, charming and yet quite the badass. She wasn't soft, and came across like an alpha. Very true to the modern postcrisis Lois Lane.
^To each their own, brotha/sista.
Dude, no offense, but I feel like you have a huge misconception of what Wonder Woman is supposed to be like.
She isn't a character that's there to be someone else's trophy prize, ala "token love interest of the week". To do that would be to go against what the character was created and stands for. She wouldn't be Wonder Woman any more in a sense.
Plus, are you seriously using the Donner films and SR as a basis for why MOS, a film that has NOTHING to do with those previous films, Clark and Lois will not work out in this franchise? Seriously?
You must have missed Snyder repeatedly saying that they weren't really taking anything from the previous films into account and went into making this film as if there had been no superman films before it.
And really, prior to the New 52, Lois and Clark were happily married for like over a decade, and were each other's primary love interests for most of their canon history before that.
Honestly, you have YET to provide one GOOD reason that isn't SHALLOW or demeaning towards woman, on why Superman and Wonder Woman should be together.
Steve Trevor is everywhere in the New 52 he's come back big time.
Wonder Woman wasn't created for Superman and to say something like that that demeans her character.
What the heck are you on about inconsistent? They were each others main love interest till the reboot and will be again. They were married since the mid 90's in the main continuity and before that engaged.
No, it really doesn't, but some people love their knee jerk reactions. WW and SM as a couple doesn't AUTOMATICALLY demean her character anymore than Black Canary/Green Arrow being a couple demeans their characters, or Ant Man/Wasp, or Luke Cage/Jessica Jones, etc. It's all a matter of the writing, simple as that. Saying that something can NEVER work says more about the fan than the writer.
I wouldn't mind seeing Diana in a cameo, but I really want Kara introduced. They don't have to do her whole story right away, but dropping a few hints about Argo City would be cool. They already mentioned Kandor in the first film.
Interesting couple of Tweets from elmayimbe:-
Both references to a certain Superman villain, whose name begins with D, ending in 'Day'....
Looks like this film IS a MOS sequel after all...
It was ALWAYS a sequel anyway.
As for Doomie nah can't believe that for one second.
Oh ****, if that's the case they may be doing something different here. Have Doomsday try to kill Superman after Supes & Bats have had their fight in the middle of the movie. Then Bats comes to Supermans rescue and we see them double team Doomsday at the end. While Lex is in a small role pulling the strings all along.
THAT could work.
I'll be shocked if Doomsday is the villain.
Not as much as Clark. " I don't wanna die". t:
If Doomsday is in the movie and doesn't kill Superman, will that be equivalent to the Mandarin reveal in Iron Man 3, in terms of pissing on canon?
Yeah it would if your going to have Doomsday in a film and he doesn't kill Supes what's the point of having him in your film?
IF he's in it and it's a big one then I expect Supes to be a goner.
So every story with Doomsday has to have him killing Superman? I think that's a narrow minded way to think. Every character has the potential to be taken into new directions. They can tease the killing and not do it, which would be fresh. In that case i say screw the canon since it's a movie, it can do what it wants. It's not that big of a deal. It's like Joker not falling into chemicals or Dent in TDK in the courtroom with Maroni and guess what? He doesnt get acid thrown on his face right there. They do something a little different.
Or maybe he does "kill" Superman and he returns at the end or the next big team up to lead the Justice League.
The real question is not "what's the point of having Doomsday if he's not killing Superman?"...
The REAL question is "why make movies of these characters if it's not going to be a little different and something fresh that we haven't exactly seen in the comics?"
You get it
I was asking a question about how people think the fans would react to this hypothetical scenario, not delivering a verdict of condemnation of Goyer and Snyder over a mere rumour that is probably wrong.
If they did use Doomsday, odds are we'd see even more destruction.
And if Luthor's goal was to discredit Superman and turn people against him, and his basis for doing so was the destruction in Metropolis from the battle with the Kryptonians, Doomsday would make for a nice 1-2 punch in that regard.
I wouldn't be surprised if we saw Luthor, Braniac and Doomsday. It's unlikely, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Why would you use the character who is most famous for killing Superman if you aren't going to have him kill Superman?
I don't disagree with what you're saying in general, but this is Doomsday. He isn't so much a character as he is a plot device. The only thing he's ever done is kill Superman. That's his claim to fame. That's all he's good for. So if he isn't going to kill Superman, why use him?
The difference between them and Doomsday is that they are three dimensional characters. Doomsday is not. He is a mindless killing machine. He doesn't think, he barely speaks, and he isn't compelling.
They could always change him to suit their needs, which I wouldn't have much of a problem with, but if you're going to turn him into something he's not, why not just create an original character?
You summed up my problems with using Doomsday excellently. Even if he is re-imagined, the destructive potential of his character would dwarf what Zod did to Metropolis. We don't need more destruction, we need an intimate hero vs. villain scenario. At that point, it'd be even more repetitive than MOS's violence, and a lot of people bashed it for it's excessive and repetitive violence. Doomsday would take that to a whole new level.