BvS All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - Part 72

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]482317[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]482117[/split]

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I see Luthor as being xenophobic in Batman v Superman.

That could be, but why does it HAVE to be that way all the time? Why can't it be that he's actually excited at first to have, as Pa Kent put it, "The ANSWER"? A genius scientist of any stripe may have a very different view about such an occurrence than the average person. Maybe Luthor has been searching for clues to ET life since childhood? Maybe he assumed Aliens would have a superior intelligence and morality? He meets Superman and is disappointed when he sees the same pedestrian morality he's had to swallow his whole life? Again... A slow burn for Luthor's hate makes for a better character and story than just, "he hates Superman because of the Battle of Metropolis and he's spent two years engineering Doomsday... CUZ HE'S EVIL! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!"

 

[TheNextNolan22]

That could be, but why does it HAVE to be that way all the time? Why can't it be that he's actually excited at first to have, as Pa Kent put it, "The ANSWER"? A genius scientist of any stripe may have a very different view about such an occurrence than the average person. Maybe Luthor has been searching for clues to ET life since childhood? Maybe he assumed Aliens would have a superior intelligence and morality? He meets Superman and is disappointed when he sees the same pedestrian morality he's had to swallow his whole life? Again... A slow burn for Luthor's hate makes for a better character and story than just, "he hates Superman because of the Battle of Metropolis and he's spent two years engineering Doomsday... CUZ HE'S EVIL! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!"

That ****in' JL:U episode.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

Luthor sees everything in Superman that he could never be ---- and hates him for it.

 

[TheNextNolan22]

Luthor sees everything in Superman that he could never be ---- and hates him for it.

He has all the wealth and power in the world, but is living in the shadow of an ALIEN.

 

[MrsKent26]

See, the differences between the two actually are so minimal as to not raise to the level of conflict though. Only in a TDKReturns version where you almost make the two caricatures does it REALLY make any kind of sense. Are Batman's methods AS different from Superman's as we fans always say? Cuz... They aren't. Neither ever do long term damage to opponents. Neither uses lethal force as a first option (THough a new version of the character let's look at TDK, trilogy. Batman breaks his ONE rule a lot, only to be saved by technicalities and the like. Not to mention the whole, "no guns... EXCEPT ON EVERY VEHICLE I OWN" thing which is just ). Both will use force to end a situation when it is called for, and if you think Superman has never broken a bone or two or handed out concussions, even to totally human criminal types, well, you have a much more idealized version in your head than I have in mine. they both use subterfuge to get info and further their crusades. About the only thing I can think of is that Batman wants criminals to think he's far more vicious than he actually is, because frankly, he's never actually going to kill or maim long term most of the mooks he dangles from the rooftops. His threats are actually all hollow. But we act like he's going to follow through. He's never going to. So what is it that separates the two really? Respect for privacy or the like? Sorry, but if Superman thought there was a threat big enough, he'd X-Ray a whole damned city if need be and listen to every conversation, and in fact HAS done exactly that in comics. Is it the "fear thing"? Well... people would be afraid of Superman's power even if they loved and respected him. It may not be at the forefront of their emotions, but... Yea, it's in the mix somewhere. It's prudent to have some fear of the guy that can shatter titaniu, with his pinkie. I've just always thought the ideological differences between the two is WAY overblown.

With regards to the "fear" component, I think intent is the major difference. Batman intimidates on purpose because he needs to. He needs all that smoke, mirrors and creature of the night stuff to enforce the fearsome idea that he is more than a man. A man in a batsuit doesn't sound that frightening on paper, but he finds a way to do it because intimidation is partly how he wins fights. The combo of dark streets, gadgets, intimidation and expertise means he can appear to be a force much stronger than some dude in a suit.

If we contrast that to superman...

There's no artifice in what Superman does. He is what he is. To many, he is frightening simply because of his abilities. As soon as he drops onto the scene, whatever wrong doing the average human is conducting comes to an end. There's no escaping him. Running, guns, vehicles...it's all useless. Superman doesn't need to intimidate because his success against the usual foe is guaranteed.

While batman has spent years trying to scare people into submission, superman has spent them trying to gain trust and alleviate fear of his powers. I could see batman and superman working together and discussing the whole "good cop/bad cop" routine and superman wishing he could truly play good cop for once, but the criminals are scared of the dude that crushed their getaway van minutes before.

 

[D.P.]

He has all the wealth and power in the world, but is living in the shadow of an ALIEN.

Pretty much he was thee alpha male until Kal showed up.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

He has all the wealth and power in the world, but is living in the shadow of an ALIEN.

Calling him an alien in terms of a derogatory intent, is just masking the real crux of the issue. Superman is a god amongst men, and what does he do with this power? He uses it for good, and chooses not to rule over men.

The superpowers are a level beyond human, and the ability to not abuse them, a level beyond Lex.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Luthor sees everything in Superman that he could never be ---- and hates him for it.

Or Luthor sees another powerful force in the world as his only rival.

Or he sees a resource that he can't buy, intimidate or charm into submission.

Or he sees a force that is holding back the human race's capacity to truly adapt and grow, what with all the selfless acts of kindness on Superman's part.

Or he's a man that's been a genius for as long as he can remember and has been looking to rule the world for a long time and the only force that could possible oppose him is the Last Son of Krypton.

There's tons of, to my eyes, totally valid ways to go about it.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

Or Luthor sees another powerful force in the world as his only rival.

Or he sees a resource that he can't buy, intimidate or charm into submission.

Or he sees a force that is holding back the human race's capacity to truly adapt and grow, what with all the selfless acts of kindness on Superman's part.

Or he's a man that's been a genius for as long as he can remember and has been looking to rule the world for a long time and the only force that could possible oppose him is the Last Son of Krypton.

There's tons of, to my eyes, totally valid ways to go about it.

Or... all of the above

 

[Zionite1]

In truth the best antagonist to illustrate Supermans battle to win Public trust has always been Lex-not Batman.Batman is not the next logical step.

Howver Bats is needed to set up the DCCU thats why he is in the movie.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

Batman is a logical step because he was the hero before superheroes became known to existence. Superman is the first superhero stepping forward, and Batman must come out of the shadows to deal with this potential threat in his mind. It's very logical.

 

[Zionite1]

Batman is a logical step because he was the hero before superheroes became known to existence. Superman is the first superhero stepping forward, and Batman must come out of the shadows to deal with this potential threat in his mind. It's very logical.

The introduction of Batman is the next logical step in the DCCU narrative NOT the Superman narrative.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Let's not get too precious about these things. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble but books like JLA are conceived as attention grabbers to sell the idea of the DCU. Period. So if you like GL, hey, maybe you'd like to check out this Flash dude too. To be all "I'm shocked there's gambling going on in this establishment" because they have the idea to expand the MOS-Verse into a full fledged DCCU is kind of naive. And also, you can have seemingly organic story and plot that also dovetails nicely with the financial interests of a copyright holder. Just saying.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

I'm just saying regardless of the DCCU, in terms of the timing of Batman appearing, it makes plenty of logical sense to bring him out after discovering for the first time a being such as Superman.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

Btw, I know it is impossible to prove: but do any of you think if Man of Steel were a Marvel film the critic reviews would have been much more accepting of the perceived flaws?

I can't help but feel Thor 2 was a snooze and still got better reviews.

 

[Zionite1]

Let's not get too precious about these things. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble but books like JLA are conceived as attention grabbers to sell the idea of the DCU. Period. So if you like GL, hey, maybe you'd like to check out this Flash dude too. To be all "I'm shocked there's gambling going on in this establishment" because they have the idea to expand the MOS-Verse into a full fledged DCCU is kind of naive. And also, you can have seemingly organic story and plot that also dovetails nicely with the financial interests of a copyright holder. Just saying.

My thoughts exactly

I'm just saying regardless of the DCCU, in terms of the timing of Batman appearing, it makes plenty of logical sense to bring him out after discovering for the first time a being such as Superman.

It cant be irregardless of the DCCU. Its a teamup between heroes.
What Im saying is that Batman is not necessary to tell the next phase of Supermans story unless you take the DCCU in account.You can tell the next phaseof Supermans story without heroes but you have to include them if you want to setup the DCCU.

Thats why Batamn is needed-not because he is naturally the next antagonist for Superman to face(thats Lex)but to setup the DCCU

 

[Zionite1]

Btw, I know it is impossible to prove: but do any of you think if Man of Steel were a Marvel film the critic reviews would have been much more accepting of the perceived flaws?

I can't help but feel Thor 2 was a snooze and still got better reviews.

Yes they would have.I agree A LOT about Thor 2.

Cap-First avenger had a flawed 2nd half just like MOS did yet had more favorable reviews.

Lucky for MOS however that the audience really seems to like itjudging by box office and DVD sales.

 

[scatterax]

It seems odd to me that batman would be acting on the publics backlash on superman when typically the public loves superman and batman is always the hero in question. Will metropolis trust batman over superman? I hope not. That would be out of character for all.

 

[DA_Champion]

Well done friends, part 72 !

 

[DA_Champion]

Btw, I know it is impossible to prove: but do any of you think if Man of Steel were a Marvel film the critic reviews would have been much more accepting of the perceived flaws?

I can't help but feel Thor 2 was a snooze and still got better reviews.

Critics definitely have biases, among those are a dislike for Zack Snyder and a positive predisposition to Marvel studios.

There's actually been a lot of Thor 2/ Man of Steel comparisons made on this site elsewhere. MoS is undoubtedly better, but don't take that as a great achievement, beating up on a weak competitor is nothing to brag about.

 

[zryson]

That could be, but why does it HAVE to be that way all the time? Why can't it be that he's actually excited at first to have, as Pa Kent put it, "The ANSWER"? A genius scientist of any stripe may have a very different view about such an occurrence than the average person. Maybe Luthor has been searching for clues to ET life since childhood? Maybe he assumed Aliens would have a superior intelligence and morality? He meets Superman and is disappointed when he sees the same pedestrian morality he's had to swallow his whole life? Again... A slow burn for Luthor's hate makes for a better character and story than just, "he hates Superman because of the Battle of Metropolis and he's spent two years engineering Doomsday... CUZ HE'S EVIL! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!"

I dont see Luthor being excited about Superman. Far from it. I see Luthor thinking "this alien leveled parts of my city."

 

[DA_Champion]

Yes they would have.I agree A LOT about Thor 2.

Cap-First avenger had a flawed 2nd half just like MOS did yet had more favorable reviews.

Lucky for MOS however that the audience really seems to like itjudging by box office and DVD sales.

There's been a lot of high-riving over the MoS DVD sales on this site, because MoS outsold IM3 and The Wolverine, but I'm not sure if that's warranted as IM3 and The Wolverine were failures on the DVD+BluRay market.

Relative to IM1, Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers, etc all of the 2013 CBMs did badly on the bluray+DVD market.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

I'm sure Lexcorp could make some profit and growth from helping rebuild the city. I didn't see THAT many Lexcorp signs in MOS