BvS All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - Part 13

[shauner111]

Devin Faraci did NOT say Vandal Savage - he said he heard a rumour that Mamoa was playing VS - as in Batman VS SUPERMAN.


It a joke.


Geddit?

Oh ok, who's the knucklehead that misinterpreted that? t:

 

[Green Goblin]

I wonder if the Wonder Woman casting is just a cameo?

 

[Fallen Angel]

I wonder if the Wonder Woman casting is just a cameo?

Slightly above a cameo is my guess. Does that have a name? I think she'll have a few scenes.

 

[mad-sci]

Ramble time. Be warned.

1. Topic of discussion - villains.

Ok, time to potentially annoy almost everyone on this board.

Please be aware of the following. Without question, my favourite Superhero is Superman. More than Batman, Spider-man, X-Men, etc. My earliest memories are watching the Reeve movies (I thought Superman IV was great, when I was 8! No excuse, but my parents thought it was hysterical!). I remember watching the Superboy series, the underrated Ruby Spears cartoon series. I was a 100% follower of Lois and Clark, I loved STAS, watched all of Smallville (watching in the UK, before YouTube and file sharing). I watched SR many times in the cinema, and defended it to all my friends. MOS was great. So believe me when what I say is necessary.


Superman has the worst rogues gallery for any Comic book hero. Fact


This is barely up for discussion. The difference between the powers of the hero and villains in Supermans case is staggering. Best case in point - at least 2 of his most popular enemies are mirror versions of him, down to the abilities (Bizarro/Zod - not even counting Faora and other Kryptonians). That's not even counting Parasite, an enemy who TAKES HIS POWERS (becoming ANOTHER mirror). And WHO is the number one villain for THE most powerful superhero in the DC universe?

An immoral human being.


Then we have Metallo, who everyone wants as the next villain for MOS 2, partly because he has never been seen in live action, in film. A villain who's claim to fame is to be a cyborg, who's power source can make the hero a weakling. This would follow a film where the same hero was seen flying across the world, and FROM SPACE to avoid these problems. Talk about anti-climactic...

The problem is that MOS's action was HUGE, on a global scale. The sequel has to match or surpass this, and Metallo, Bizarro, Parasite are villains that don't match up. Even adding just Lex Luthor would be a letdown (flashbacks of SR).

There are only 3 Superman villains that would be work in an MOS sequel, in terms of scope:-

- Darkseid (who is better suited for a JL film)

- Brainiac (who is best fitted for a 'true' MOS sequel, like IM3)

- Doomsday, who I think IS the villain in MOS2


2. Overcrowding in MOS2, or that new DCU film that guest stars Superman


Everybody is guilty of this. We've all heard of casting, made assumptions, looked at previous examples and convinced ourselves that the film is doomed / WB have NO idea what they are doing.


With every new casting, the film reads less and less like an MOS sequel and more like a JL film instead. Or at best, it seems overstuffed.

But this sort of casting HAS happened before?


Remember the casting of The Dark Knight? We had the Joker, Harvey Dent, his Two Face, Sal Maroni, Batman copycats, the Chechen, the mob, Mr Lau, a Wayne Enterprise Employee learning Bruce's secret, an excursion to Hong Kong, Gambol, Gordon's family AND Anthony Hall's TV reporter? Would there be ANY Batman in this film? It worked, though.

(Also remember that story writer of who managed to make this all work is the same guy doing MOS2. Yes, he also wrote TDKR, but at least the focus was ON the title character...)

The 2/3 examples of overcrowding ruining these films are Thor, Iron Man 2 and Spider-man 3.

Thor and Iron Man 2's problems are exactly the same - the inclusion of Shield was 100% unnecessary, and spoilt the overall film. For Iron Man 2, Shield has NO relevance to the overall film, except to introduce Black Widow (who is just shown), and to say Tony Stark is no longer accepted into the Avengers (THAT worked out well, didn't it?). You could have removed those 20-25 minutes, have Tony find the home movies and temporary cure BY HIMSELF, and use that time to develop the villain. THAT would have been better. Then again, it DID help the Avengers in the long term, didn't it?

As for Spider-man 3, that was a case of 3 storylines from 3 sources that didn't match. Harry's descent followed on from SM2, and needed to be addressed in Part 3. Raimi wanted Sandman for his villain, Sony demanded Venom. None of the story plots would budge, so all were used (to the detriment of the overall film).


I don't think this film is overstuffed, and I don't think the studio is demanding certain character inclusions (well, no more than usual). I DO believe that Batmans casting was a key WB decision (considering Affleck, Gosling and Brolin were approached - all top talent). But look at the casting difference for WW - not being sexist either. If WB were demanding her inclusion, there would a much bigger name choice - e.g. Olivia Wilde, Mila Kunis level. Instead, the choices were all lesser knowns. That suggests that the character is in the script by the filmmakers choice - not a Venom/Black Widow scenario.


Sorry for that randomness. I've looked at all the info so far, given some ideas, and now refined them even more. I know a way that this film is an MOS sequel with a focus on Superman, with Batman as the other main character (despite the inclusion of WW and possibly Flash), and with all these plot points/characters working together. And if this IS what MOS2 will be, I think we'll all be pleasantly surprised. See you for part 2.

 

[charl_huntress]

I wonder if the Wonder Woman casting is just a cameo?

I think Wondy may have a cameo, but there may be a bigger role for Diana Prince. IMO, Synder has to show her doing something bad azz for her appearance to really count, or it's just a waste.

edit:

Good post mad-sci. You bring up some very interesting points.

 

[Alonsovich]

So wait, is the stance right now that WB is constantly forcing Snyder to throw in characters while he is working on the script? That's not their MO at all. You don't have to look further than movies like TDKT, Gravity and the new Harry Potter films that are coming. They are known for respecting the visions of directors and writers. The one time they screwed with that on a big tentpole, Green Lantern came out the other end.

If these ideas came from the studio, they asked Snyder if he was interested in taking them on and tasked him with coming up with the script. And he agreed to do it. Goyer has said they are further along in the process than people know about, and fans are complaining because they don't have the story outline or script in their hands to point out who exactly Jason Momoa could play or why Wonder Woman is suddenly announced as being in this movie.

The one time they gave absolute freedom to a director with the Superman franchise, Superman Returns came out the other end.

Thus said, I'm pretty certain Goyer/Snyder had this quite planned beforehand. The fact is, in BB Goyer wrote the Joker card scene as Batman's last scene. In MoS (a suspiciously similar film to BB) Goyer put Superman taking down a Wayne Enterprises satellite and Superman taking down a drone as Superman's last two scenes. I doubt it was studio mandate. Those things were already planned and are there in the film, we just didn't see them and now are claiming "OMG TEH RUSHHHHHH!!!!!1111".

 

[Herolee10]

Honestly, if we ever did get Vandal Savage in the DCU, then I think Eric Bana would be more appropriate to play the role than Jason.

 

[Serpico Jones]

I would say Iron Man's rogues gallery kinda sucks. The Superman rogues gallery is ok.

 

[InJustice]

The thing is Goyer and Snyder haven't earned the right to do what they want yet in WB's eyes. After the Dark Knight broke a billion, WB let Nolan do whatever the heck he wanted for TDKR because they knew it would be bank either way. After BvS makes over a billion, and believe me it will, they'll give Goyer and Snyder much more leeway.

 

[Vaibow]

Slightly above a cameo is my guess. Does that have a name? I think she'll have a few scenes.

introduction..... where the character is introduced to us!

I hope it's just where these 'meta humans' come out the wood work to support superman.

Batman is obviously pulling strings - being the worlds greatest detective, he probably has a data base of these sightings and character profiles. Imagine trying to track down big foot with the best computer going - can collaborate all the sightings, information to come up with a pretty decent profile.

Metallo is Lex's creation, gone wrong - drones from lexcorp army going hay wire, who swoops down to help when Superman is clearly shown to be trying to battle and help - Batman and other other 'secret' meta humans wanting to show support to the alien.

At least that's how i see it.

 

[InJustice]

The problem is that MOS's action was HUGE, on a global scale. The sequel has to match or surpass this, and Metallo, Bizarro, Parasite are villains that don't match up. Even adding just Lex Luthor would be a letdown (flashbacks of SR).

No it doesn't, why do people automatically assume that sequel means upping the action? Last time I checked, X-Men 2, Spider-Man 2, and The Dark Knight, didn't have some large, over-the-top action sequences in order to be a good movie. It still depends on the fundamentals, which is the story.

 

[Krumm]

Ramble time. Be warned.

1. Topic of discussion - villains.

Ok, time to potentially annoy almost everyone on this board.

Please be aware of the following. Without question, my favourite Superhero is Superman. More than Batman, Spider-man, X-Men, etc. My earliest memories are watching the Reeve movies (I thought Superman IV was great, when I was 8! No excuse, but my parents thought it was hysterical!). I remember watching the Superboy series, the underrated Ruby Spears cartoon series. I was a 100% follower of Lois and Clark, I loved STAS, watched all of Smallville (watching in the UK, before YouTube and file sharing). I watched SR many times in the cinema, and defended it to all my friends. MOS was great. So believe me when what I say is necessary.


Superman has the worst rogues gallery for any Comic book hero. Fact


This is barely up for discussion. The difference between the powers of the hero and villains in Supermans case is staggering. Best case in point - at least 2 of his most popular enemies are mirror versions of him, down to the abilities (Bizarro/Zod - not even counting Faora and other Kryptonians). That's not even counting Parasite, an enemy who TAKES HIS POWERS (becoming ANOTHER mirror). And WHO is the number one villain for THE most powerful superhero in the DC universe?

An immoral human being.


Then we have Metallo, who everyone wants as the next villain for MOS 2, partly because he has never been seen in live action, in film. A villain who's claim to fame is to be a cyborg, who's power source can make the hero a weakling. This would follow a film where the same hero was seen flying across the world, and FROM SPACE to avoid these problems. Talk about anti-climactic...

The problem is that MOS's action was HUGE, on a global scale. The sequel has to match or surpass this, and Metallo, Bizarro, Parasite are villains that don't match up. Even adding just Lex Luthor would be a letdown (flashbacks of SR).

There are only 3 Superman villains that would be work in an MOS sequel, in terms of scope:-

- Darkseid (who is better suited for a JL film)

- Brainiac (who is best fitted for a 'true' MOS sequel, like IM3)

- Doomsday, who I think IS the villain in MOS2

Being a good villain doesn't have as much to do with the physical equality to the hero as much as it does the emotional or psychological impact they carry.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

No it doesn't, why do people automatically assume that sequel means upping the action? Last time I checked, X-Men 2, Spider-Man 2, and The Dark Knight, didn't have some large, over-the-top action sequences in order to be a good movie. It still depends on the fundamentals, which is the story.

I consider the train fight in SM2 to be large and over the top, X2 had a LOT of action throughout, TDK..had a pretty big brawl near the end, but the action was very brief, infrequent, and..not that great.

2/3s are good SEQUELS-that really expand upon the ideas of the original. TDK did to an extent, but I feel like it's more of an awesome stand-alone, with TDKR being the "true" sequel.

 

[Lencho01]

What makes Wonder Woman feel like a warrior is how she carries herself in battle and her demeanor.

I've said if they really wanted to use and excuse as to why Superman or Batman have trunks (not that it's really needed), they should just say they're wrestling fans. Now, that excuse can be used for Wonder Woman. Just say they got cable/satellite on Paradise Island. t:

 

[charl_huntress]

Honestly, if we ever did get Vandal Savage in the DCU, then I think Eric Bana would be more appropriate to play the role than Jason.

I think Momoa has the perfect look for Savage, but I don't think he has the acting chops to play the sort of Savage I want to see.

 

[mad-sci]

Being a good villain doesn't have as much to do with the physical equality to the hero as much as it does the emotional or psychological impact they carry.

Agreed, but characters like Metallo, and Parasite cannot carry a film.

Case in point - The Amazing Spider-man 2 has Electro as the main villain, including tragic backstory. Oh wait, not anymore. Now it's Rhino, Electro AND a Green Goblin, as there's not enough of a threat to Spidey.

 

[Krumm]

Agreed, but characters like Metallo, and Parasite cannot carry a film.

Case in point - The Amazing Spider-man 2 has Electro as the main villain, including tragic backstory. Oh wait, not anymore. Now it's Rhino, Electro AND a Green Goblin, as there's not enough of a threat to Spidey.

Well it depends how they would write the characters of Metallo and Parasite. As long as they can affect Superman emotionally and psychologically then that's all that matters.

And both of those characters would be lackeys to Lex who has more than enough power to get at Superman. He's not one of the greatest villains of all time for nothing.

 

[Smashlilman]

No it doesn't, why do people automatically assume that sequel means upping the action? Last time I checked, X-Men 2, Spider-Man 2, and The Dark Knight, didn't have some large, over-the-top action sequences in order to be a good movie. It still depends on the fundamentals, which is the story.

Your wrong when it comes to xmen 2 and spider-man 2. they massively upped the anty. the action in both dwarfed the action in first movies.

 

[mad-sci]

Well it depends how they would write the characters of Metallo and Parasite. As long as they can affect Superman emotionally and psychologically then that's all that matters.

And both of those characters would be lackeys to Lex who has more than enough power to get at Superman. He's not one of the greatest villains of all time for nothing.

In a film already starring Batman, Wonder Woman and possibly the Flash?

Better to have ONE big villain that only Superman can stop, than lots of little ones...

 

[The Question]

Agreed, but characters like Metallo, and Parasite cannot carry a film.

1: Who says?

2: I think we can all agree that characters like Lex Luthor and Brainiac can carry a movie. What's wrong with going with one of those guys?

It may be that not all of Superman's foes can be the main villain of a story on their own (which I think is nonsense, it all depends on what the filmmaker's take on the character is), but I don't see how other super heroes' rogues galleries are so much more burdened with arch fiends. Spider-Man's biggest enemies are Doctor Octopus and the Green Goblin. Maybe Venom. The rest of his foes are basically brawlers or gimmick villains who need a bit of tweaking to step up to the stakes of a movie. I don't see how Superman's enemies are somehow deficient.

Case in point - The Amazing Spider-man 2 has Electro as the main villain, including tragic backstory. Oh wait, not anymore. Now it's Rhino, Electro AND a Green Goblin, as there's not enough of a threat to Spidey.

What does that prove, exactly?



I really don't know what you're point is. I think Superman has some great enemies. I don't see how they're lacking in any way.

 

[Krumm]

In a film already starring Batman, Wonder Woman and possibly the Flash?

Better to have ONE big villain that only Superman can stop, than lots of little ones...

The only confirmed star is Batman. Who knows the extent of WW's presence.

And what is "lots?" I don't recall hearing that there is more than one villain confirmed for the film.

 

[charl_huntress]

Superman has the worst rogues gallery for any Comic book hero. Fact

I don't think he has the worst. In DC that honor goes to Flash's posse of baddies.

For my two cents some of the best villains to face off against Supes usually work to destroy him mentally. Manchester Black did a number on him and he couldn't have faced off against Supes if he tried, and he knew that.

This movie has to have a puncher and a brain. I'm not a fan of Doomsday, but you need someone or something who can physically face off against Superman. Considering how powerful he is that limits the playing field.

 

[The Question]

I don't think he has the worst. In DC that honor goes to Flash's posse of baddies.

The Flash's Rogues are great.

 

[Mikelus]

Superman has the worst rogues gallery for any Comic book hero. Fact


This is barely up for discussion.

You lost me there, sorry! Wonder Woman's rogues gallery is clearly inferior, most people can't even name one of them! Martian Manhunter's? Even worse!!

There are only 3 Superman villains that would be work in an MOS sequel, in terms of scope:-

- Darkseid (who is better suited for a JL film)

- Brainiac (who is best fitted for a 'true' MOS sequel, like IM3)

- Doomsday, who I think IS the villain in MOS2

Here I agree, Brainiac would be the best option for MOS2, save Doomsday and Darkseid for the JL trilogy.

Regarding the nonsense from some emofans that is too crowded blahblahblah... what matters is the quality of the story, not the number of characters. Nolan had many characters in TDKT, it didn't matter because the story was good, specially in the first two. If the story is about Superman gaining the trust of Batman, inspiring him and other heroes to help save the world by creating the Justice League, then the potential for a really good movie will be there, is all about the characters.

 

[charl_huntress]

The Flash's Rogues are great.

They're campy. All flash, but no real substance. I also don't find any of them particularly threatening.