Discussion in 'Man of Steel' started by TheFlamingCoco, Jul 21, 2013.
my point exactly.
I don't like this; this Superman deserves a sequel by himself. I don't know what Warner Bros. game is here.
I'm fine with that if the movie is called World's Finest instead of MOS2.
This poll isn't as one sided as I thought it'd be. Respect to those other 16 people.
What did you vote for?
Realistically, this can happen. But hypothetically, if handled right, it can ADD to the story. Think of Harry Osbourne in Spider-Man 2. His role in the story was important, but didn't DRIVE the narrative. The key is to show Batman/Bruce as a mysterious character, before humanizing them and "completing" Clark as a superhero.
Bruce and Clark becoming friends could bring the whole friendship/mentor relationship theme in the first installment full circle. If MOS was about Clark trying to behave in a world in which people don't except him, MOS2 can resolve that by having a supporting male figure that he can confide in.
Similarly, Clark serves as a symbol of hope to Bruce.
I'd rather not have the "team fight" against evil just yet in this film, though. I feel like that's good sequel material, and that the focus of the final act would be "oh look-Superman/Batman" rather than Batman resolving a dramatic conflict relating to superman.
MOS2 should be about Superman inspiring good in a "real world" setting. It should also be about Lois, the Daily Planet/reaction to him as a person, Lex Luthor as a hidden threat, and Superman knowing his presence is a good thing through a personal revelation. That is, Bruce coming out of the woodwork and placing his trust in Superman, saying he'll be back in case Clark has something that he cannot resolve alone. That happens after the inevitable fight and confusion about Luthor. It'd be nice if Bruce offers to protect Lois against a possible Metallo attack or something. That can "write Batman out of the picture" for the final showdown with Lex.
And I REaally want Lex to get away with being a creep. I want Superman to foil his plan, but not be able to prove the guilt of Luthor as a person.
This sets up the sequel, while being tonally relevant to MOS.
I'm not saying my way is the only way, but I think it's better than a World's Finest lite ending
It seems like everything that goyer and snyder does always ends with ppl being split about it.lol
With all due respect that's not true, Timm is a bigger batman fan than he is a superman fan we all know that but during the 3 episode arc the "world's finest" superman was shown in top form, in that arc:
batman flips superman (much to the amusement of Clark!) but then superman body slams batman into a wall like a pancake.
Batman struggles to protect himself and lois from one of lex's robots throughout the better half of the episode and was about be killed only for superman to come in and crush the robot with one step! He then looks at Bruce and lois and say's very casually "did I miss anything!"
Joker traps superman, lois and batman with kryptonite and batman couldn't really come up with a way to escape noting that the jar of hydrochloric acid would take a week to melt through the door, but superman despite being hurt and weakened by the kryptonite tells batman to use the HCL to melt the kryptonite!
That was the most interesting part of the arc, where the team showed superman to come up with the solution not to mention the fact that he then saved batman and lois from the subsequent explosion.
Superman saves batman again at the end when he and harley quinn were about to be engulfed by the flames.
There were 2 other team ups; the first was "knight time" where superman (with robin's) help saves batman and while disguised as batman shows brainiac that he is on to his plan prompting brainiac to tell superman (thinking he is batman) that "you are every bit the detective that your followers on the internet believe". This was a great episode highlighting superman's intellect and his discomfort at being batman
The other episode was the demon reborn with Ra's Alghul were superman ends up saving batman at the end and batman reluctantly notes how clever clark was at using Alghul's devotion to Talia to distract him and save them both!
Look I don't know how WF (or MOS 2) is going to turn out but when it comes to STAS (not JL) I have to give Timm and co ALOT of credit for showing superman in great light despite of their greater affection to batman.
So it was JL/JLU that downgraded Supes to build up Batman?
The more I think about it and get beyond the initial shock of the announcement, the more disappointed I am that we're not going to get the pure MOS sequel I craved.
I wanted Superman's equivalent of The Dark Knight - a fantastic, epic story featuring the hero's most famous villain now that the origin is out of the way - and now we're not going to get it because the execs at WB just couldn't wait. They're so anxious to get their greedy hands on those Avengers dollars that they just blew their wad on a perfectly good franchise-in-the-making by forcing their real golden boy, Batman, into the picture where he didn't belong.
I'm not saying Snyder's Batman vs. Superman film can't be good. What I am saying is that this is a big disappointment to us Superman fans who wanted to see at least one more good solo Superman story onscreen, and will instead have to put up with yet more Batman.
Batman just had an epic trilogy. Why do we need him to crowd in on Superman's turf? I'm sorry, but even though Marvel's Phase One strategy was clearly a business plan, something about it also felt pure and joyful. Everything seemed to work out perfectly - introduce each hero, then mix. But this just seems way too fast. Unlike Thor or Captain America, Clark wasn't "established" at the end of MOS, but was barely finishing his journey to the starting point we all know. It's taking away from Superman to include another major hero like Batman in what was supposed to be a solo sequel.
Superhero movies have always one of the few areas where I can put aside my general hatred of capitalism and enjoy the fruits of what corporate Hollywood has to offer - even tracking box office results to make sure we get sequels. But this is too much. It's just too much of an obvious cash grab.
What's the main difference between Marvel Studios and Warner Bros.? If you had to narrow it down to one, it would be that Marvel is headed by fans who genuinely care about the characters, while WB has always reeked of empty-headed executives trying to mimic whatever worked best the last time. They somehow captured lightning in a bottle with TDK by pairing the right director with the right material, and they've been trying to recapture it ever since. All you have to do is look at something like Green Lantern - perfect example of an empty corporate product made by people who had no real affinity for the characters or the world they were creating.
Zack Snyder at least knows comics and you could tell he was trying to please the fans in MOS with all those Alex Ross-influenced shots, so I have no doubts that his Batman vs. Superman film will have plenty of striking visuals. But whereas MOS, despite its origins and commercial pressures, could still seem to me like they were trying to create an actual work of art, this Batman vs. Superman movie seems like nothing but a cynical attempt to compete with Marvel. It was financial considerations that determined what movie WB decided to produce, and that strategy has rarely yielded awesome creative results in the past.
And by the way, I totally agree with everyone who suggested that WB would never have tried to force Superman into a Batman movie.
^Well said, I'm in total agreement.
Ignoring the fact that you very much can still get that in a WF movie(but I doubt fanboys will be satisfied), If you were at the Con this weekend you would have seen a Thor trailer and a Cap "trailer" that allude to good Thor and Cap movies. And imagine that, they are coming after the cross over film but they are still good character developing films....
Point being, even if WF isn't a superman movie, like the way Avengers isn't a Cap movie, that doesn't mean you won't get your superman movie in the next installment....just a thought.
Actually people(especially dc fans) wouldn't shut up about how badly marvel was screwing with their films along the way. Yes it all "worked out" but that doesn't account for the sheer amount of *****ing along the way(see im2 rants). And here we are, DC's turn. How's about we see where this ends up.
Um..Cap is very much known for his man out of time persona. I didn't see any of that established by the end of TFA. Well I did actually, the last 4 minutes set it up, kinda ironic eh.
Won't get into thor.
You must have lost your mind when they announced Avengers at the very same con they premiered the first footage of cap and thor..
Try and prove this.
Fanboys are usually split about everything so the reaction to this doesn't surprise me.lol. I've seen very little consensus on these type of films with may be the exception of TDK, Avengers, and Superman the movie .
BW was one of the founding Avengers (she got more screentime than anyone other than CA, thank you Joss). She was NOT a minor character. Also, seeing Batman and Superman play off each other could be great. They will likely disagree about the events of MOS (killing Zod for instance) and that could make for interesting characterizations.
Assuming there is a next installment. It all rides on the success of this Batman vs. Superman movie now, whereas before, at least we would have been assured of the solo MOS sequel.
As far as Cap is concerned, you basically had all the elements in place so that when he was eventually unfrozen, he would be a certified "legend". That was the minimum bar for Cap to appear in The Avengers, and they got it. The equivalent for Superman would have to be a somewhat seasoned hero who has the Clark Kent/Daily Planet/glasses disguise down and has encountered his arch-enemy (Lex Luthor).
We all knew the Captain America and Thor movies were leading up to The Avengers, and indeed, might not even have been made otherwise. To me, the main test was whether we got solo movies that seemed to exhaust enough of the character's main potential to leave appetite for a team-up. With Superman, I still feel like we've barely scratched the surface for a guy who's supposed to be leader of the Justice League (note that RDJ/Tony Stark, the most popular member of The Avengers, got a full two films to develop before the teamup). With Thor and Cap, I felt like we had enough.
I can't, it's just a gut feeling. But I can tell you that I've never heard a rumour about Batman appearing in a Superman movie, whereas even in the 90s, there were all kinds of rumours that Batman might appear at Superman's funeral in the proposed Tim Burton/Nicolas Cage movie and that Michael Keaton might play Bats. Never heard any similar rumour for a Batman movie about Superman making a guest appearance ("This is why Superman works alone" in B&R doesn't count).
The Avengers was hinted at the end of Iron Man (2008), so there was a 4 year buildup. I wouldn't compare WF to TA right now.
So? It didn't hurt Marvel in any way. It actually got them quite a lot of money. Plus all the movies were generally well received.
Exactly. I want this to be the first movie in which the audience roots AGAINST Batman. And I love the character. I hope to eventually land a TV series. He's in my comics, DVDs, and video games. I can't stop drawing him
That being said, Superman should perceive him as a threat, and the film narrative should conform in such a format. When (hypothetically) Batman stealthfully tries to subdue Superman, we should want Superman to be able to overcome him without using deadly force or crippling him.
If they make it a cliche'd 'let's watch Batman kick butt' fight, the emotions will fall flat, and it will be a missed opportunity. I want this Batman to be a menace, only to find out that the character was trapped in an epic misunderstanding. He shouldn't be the main bad guy, or the puppet master. He should be someone who shows up in a few scenes and complicates things. A mysterious stalker figure.
If Superman is framed, then other superheroes will attempt to stop him, out of duty. But what if Batman is the only 'known' superhero out there? By venturing outside Gotham to find superman, he's freeing up other heroes to go outside of their respected territories (this can tie into the later DC movies).
This way he makes the plot more interesting, and adds a real-world element. By having a human exploit the weaknesses of Superman, it can establish the intelligence of Bruce Wayne (but also his paranoia, allowing him to be taken advantage of by a certain evil billionaire).
I'd strongly prefer them to part ways when the truth comes out than team up and save the day.
I know, that's bold, different, and probably unsatisfying. We can have an entire movie of Superman and Batman working together, though.
But a character driven sequel that HAPPENS to have Batman in it would be a rare gift. It would give us the hope of a satisfying buddy movie sequel, while showing the significance of Superman on earth.
In short, it can close out MOS2 while paving way for an awesome sequel, like the Joker tease at the end BB if done right. But I am reaally worried :/
It's no surprise they turned to WF so soon.Where the heck could they go after a world invasion that leveled an entire city and having Supes be forced to kill?There was no way to raise the stakes any higher,since they squeezed events that should've taken place over an entire trilogy into one film.
^ Harsh but true.
For me, it all comes down to marketing. They need to play this right or they'll piss off a lot of people. If this is a World's Finest movie, go all the way and do it. Give them equal screen time and show them at their best. Show what makes them the two most awesome superheroes on earth and why they are so different at the same time.
And let the fans know what this is. If they play it as a Superman sequel and batman shows up making Superman look like an idiot, Supes fans will be pissed off. If they play it like a team up movie and batman doesn't have enough screen time, the batman fans will freak out. They just really need to figure out what they're doing, and sell it that way. It's when expectations are not met that franchises crumble.
Having said that, I'm really excited for this movie. It will get my money. But being a life long Superman fan above all others, I'm a little bummed we won't be getting Superman's "Dark Knight" from the looks of it.
Throw Lex Luthor in as well as Superman supporting characters and you have a movie.
That is a very good concept, but I doubt that they will go that route.
Assuming that this is considered as MOS 2, Batman has already hampered Superman's potential trilogy already.
For the years to come, Superman will no longer be remembered mostly for being a hero on his own anymore, let alone for having his own solo trilogy/franchise since Batman will always be a part of that now.
This new batman will likely have his own set of solo films to go by off and I doubt Superman or any other hero will be in it, thus giving Batman not one, but potentially two solo trilogies on his own.
Well said. I guess what really rankles with me is this idea that Batman is indisputably worthy of solo movies, whereas Superman - the supposed king of the genre - can't even get to Movie #2 without the Bat getting all up in his grill.