BvS Is anyone else not excited about Superman and Batman? I feel nothing but dread. - Part 1

[BobJM]

MOS wasn't great, but it laid groundwork for a potentially great sequel (established character, great cast, possible Lex intro, etc.)

The reason I feel "dread" for this project is because it feels too random and too much like DC is skipping steps to get to their "event" movies.

A good story can come out of this, but it's WB/DC's track record that makes me cautious. They seem to be thinking only about the next movie (what's after this? MOS2? Batman? WF2? Another hero? JL?) There's no rhyme or reason, no common strand.

There's a reason Marvel has movies planned until 2021. Even if its loose outlines, it's still a guideline that they can work with and construct storylines from.

 

[Tobias]

MOS wasn't great, but it laid groundwork for a potentially great sequel (established character, great cast, possible Lex intro, etc.)

The reason I feel "dread" for this project is because it feels too random and too much like DC is skipping steps to get to their "event" movies.

A good story can come out of this, but it's WB/DC's track record that makes me cautious. They seem to be thinking only about the next movie (what's after this? MOS2? Batman? WF2? Another hero? JL?) There's no rhyme or reason, no common strand.

There's a reason Marvel has movies planned until 2021. Even if its loose outlines, it's still a guideline that they can work with and construct storylines from.

I just read Flash in 2016 and JL 2017. No word on if Superman will get another film or not. Its a hot mess as they say.

Flash is also getting a TV series so he looks like WB's emerging favored character after Batman.

 

[EssayM]

Now that nolan is "gone" perhaps these lesser talents who have been responsible for more faithful adaptations in the past will produce something different. Batman in particular.

That's the opposing perspective anyways.

You mean faithful adaptations like Blade: Trinity, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, and Jumper? (Goyer wrote all three.)

Also, being good at adaptations doesn't automatically make you a good filmmaker.

EssayM, there have been different versions of Batman and his world. Nolan made BATMAN films, more grounded films, but the basics of Batman are still there.

I guess it depends on how you define the "basics of Batman". To me, almost every Batman story (the good ones, anyway) is basically about a serious, driven man, facing down the most insane and outrageous enemies the human mind could concoct, yet still keeping a calm, rational mind in the face of it all. By contrast, the Batman of Nolan's film was a lot more vulnerable and his villains weren't quite as over-the-top and exaggerated. That worked for the tone and story they were trying to convey, but I wouldn't call it a direct adaptation of Batman.

And here's my own point, not responding to either of the above quotes:

I'm not opposed to changing a classic character to be more relevant, or adding drama to same. Nobody wants a boring story where everything always goes right and there's always a happy ending.

However, there's a difference between uniformity and consistency. In the comics, Batman and Superman have, for the most part, always had consistent personalities: Batman the unflappable vigilante policing the streets, Superman the morally certain Boy Scout defending Earth from aliens. Yet even with those core personalities, writers over the years have managed to create tons of different stories around them and give the characters plenty of development.

So no, it's not necessary to make either character "edgy" or "dark" or "modern" in order for them to still be interesting. That may have worked back when all comic book movies were schlocky and silly and needed to calm down, but now we seem to have gone in the complete opposite direction. There's a happy medium to be found, and that involves figuring out why these characters have lasted so long in the first place.

 

[Migu-EL]

Well, that's just it. A few or select people who hate the movie but repeat themselves constantly in different threads giving the impression there is more hatred for this film than there actually really is. That's how it usually works on the internet, not just with this movie either.

And look at the thread you are in, it deals with dread, it is to be expected. None of the hate that I have read on here has dampened my love for MOS in the slightest. It is easily one of my favorite superhero films ever made. I found it bold, exciting and emotional. Hopefully this follow-up can deliver as well.

I agree, it seems that the same people that hated the movie seem to repeat the same things over and over. In no way will that lessen the enjoyment I got from MOS or the excitement I have for the sequel.

 

[Migu-EL]

I just read Flash in 2016 and JL 2017. No word on if Superman will get another film or not. Its a hot mess as they say.

Flash is also getting a TV series so he looks like WB's emerging favored character after Batman.

I wouldn't assume that getting a Flash movie in 2016 and a JL in 2017 that it would mean no Superman for a while. We'll just have to wait and see what type of success this Superman/Batman movie has. I find it hard to believe if it's a huge blockbuster that there won't be any Superman movies after that. I mean, the movie is going to revolve around Superman and what happened in MOS. At least that is what has been said by WB so far. I wouldn't get too worried as of now.

 

[Tobias]

Besides the fact WB does not plan ahead with its DC properties - no plan is a plan to fail - their PR could be better.

The WF announcement many fans who wanted a stand-alone MOS2 before team-ups..

More importantly, it infers a lack of confidence in the Superman franchise. There are stories out there that WB is doing this because it needs to get a billion dollar box - and Superman can't get near that. That's the inference and it sows doubt over MOS which is already under a heavy cloud of negative reviews.

At the very least WB should have announced WF in 2015 and then added it will lead into a planned Batman film and another Superman film. They wouldn't need to give dates for the latter two. That one addition would in itself would have calmed fears of Superman fans and excited further Batman fans. A win/win for WB.

 

[Marvin]

You mean faithful adaptations like Blade: Trinity, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, and Jumper? (Goyer wrote all three.)

Yes, I looked at the combined list of cbm material that Goyer and Snyder have had a hand in and it is these 3 adaptations I was specifically referring too.
(I never once thought about the one in my avy)
I see you are on the cynical side of things again today.

Also, being good at adaptations doesn't automatically make you a good filmmaker.

Of course not, it actually makes you a bad filmmaker.

The very simple point was that for all the people that dreaded MOS and called it a train wreak and whatever what not, they should bare in mine that MOS was with nolan in creative and executive power. It's just a thought. Twist that to a positive or negative angle at your leisure.

 

[Migu-EL]

Besides the fact WB does not plan ahead with its DC properties - no plan is a plan to fail - their PR could be better.

The WF announcement many fans who wanted a stand-alone MOS2 before team-ups..

More importantly, it infers a lack of confidence in the Superman franchise. There are stories out there that WB is doing this because it needs to get a billion dollar box - and Superman can't get near that. That's the inference and it sows doubt over MOS which is already under a heavy cloud of negative reviews.

At the very least WB should have announced WF in 2015 and then added it will lead into a planned Batman film and another Superman film. They wouldn't need to give dates for the latter two. That one addition would in itself would have calmed fears of Superman fans and excited further Batman fans. A win/win for WB.

Or they could've just decided to make a Superman/Batman film because it would be a kick ass movie. Plus, it's not like WB out of nowhere decided to team the two super-heroes up. I guess whatever floats your boat. If you want to think that WB had no confidence in Superman or MOS and that is the reason that they are bringing in Batman in the sequel (even though WB has said numerous times before the theatrical release that MOS was the start of the DCCU), then by all means go right ahead.

 

[Tra-El]

Or they could've just decided to make a Superman/Batman film because it would be a kick ass movie. Plus, it's not like WB out of nowhere decided to team the two super-heroes up. I guess whatever floats your boat. If you want to think that WB had no confidence in Superman or MOS and that is the reason that they are bringing in Batman in the sequel (even though WB has said numerous times before the theatrical release that MOS was the start of the DCCU), then by all means go right ahead.

What people are failing to realize (because it's all the Batman Koolaid), is that WB has a VERY delicate situation on their hands.... and it's Batman.

This generation knows NOTHING other than Bale's Bat that appeared from 2005-2012 and rebooting him so soon could cause a major stir with casual fans, who happen to be the general audience.

There was a poll recently done that casual movie-goers on the streets not only liked Man of Steel, but didn't know of this Superman/Batman teamup. When told, they were asked who they thought this new Batman would be and they answered: Christian Bale.

You don't think that's going to be a problem for the GA when their exepcting Christian Bale, literally the FACE of BATMAN for so many years and then get a totally different guy?

It's delicate, so why would WB put that delicate of a situation on Superman's shoulders if they claimed MOS a dissapointment? It's simple, because they got what they wanted from Henry Cavill and the overall direction of MOS and feel more comfortable introducing this new Batman into Man of Steel's already established world for people to ease into acceptance.

WB is confident in Superman more than anything at this point because Cavill is going to have to make up for potential loss of people expecting this new Batman to be Chrisitian Bale.

If anything, I believe WB is grateful to of finally found their Superman lead-man in Henry Cavill, who is ALREADY signed on and announced to retain his part as the Man of Tomorrow.

That's not worry. That's confidence.

 

[Tobias]

Or they could've just decided to make a Superman/Batman film because it would be a kick ass movie. Plus, it's not like WB out of nowhere decided to team the two super-heroes up. I guess whatever floats your boat. If you want to think that WB had no confidence in Superman or MOS and that is the reason that they are bringing in Batman in the sequel (even though WB has said numerous times before the theatrical release that MOS was the start of the DCCU), then by all means go right ahead.

Its the perception that is given. No matter what WB actually believes.

MOS2 should have come first as a stand-alone. WB should have realized this would cause consternation which it has. How to head that off - as I said, announce another stand-alone Superman film and a stand-alone Batman to follow off of WF.

Impressions matter. This reinforces Superman's image as a second tier character. Just saw a graphic with IronMan/Batman top tier and then Thor/Superman as equivalent second tier characters.

WB does not manage these perceptions well.

 

[Marvin]

Or they could've just decided to make a Superman/Batman film because it would be a kick ass movie. Plus, it's not like WB out of nowhere decided to team the two super-heroes up. I guess whatever floats your boat. If you want to think that WB had no confidence in Superman or MOS and that is the reason that they are bringing in Batman in the sequel (even though WB has said numerous times before the theatrical release that MOS was the start of the DCCU), then by all means go right ahead.

It seems so obvious when you say it here but yet, Tobias has been on that wagon of thinking for a long time now.

I think his point would be better served if WB had WF before MOS....
Instead if they had WF after MOS2 then these various people would concede. It's a mess.

 

[Migu-EL]

What people are failing to realize (because it's all the Batman Koolaid), is that WB has a VERY delicate situation on their hands.... and it's Batman.

This generation knows NOTHING other than Bale's Bat that appeared from 2005-2012 and rebooting him so soon could cause a major stir with casual fans, who happen to be the general audience.

There was a poll recently done that casual movie-goers on the streets not only liked Man of Steel, but didn't know of this Superman/Batman teamup. When told, they were asked who they thought this new Batman would be and they answered: Christian Bale.

You don't think that's going to be a problem for the GA when their exepcting Christian Bale, literally the FACE of BATMAN for so many years and then get a totally different guy?

It's delicate, so why would WB put that delicate of a situation on Superman's shoulders if they claimed MOS a dissapointment? It's simple, because they got what they wanted from Henry Cavill and the overall direction of MOS and feel more comfortable introducing this new Batman into Man of Steel's already established world for people to ease into acceptance.

WB is confident in Superman more than anything at this point because Cavill is going to have to make up for potential loss of people expecting this new Batman to be Chrisitian Bale.

If anything, I believe WB is grateful to of finally found their Superman lead-man in Henry Cavill, who is ALREADY signed on and announced to retain his part as the Man of Tomorrow.

That's not worry. That's confidence.

I agree. It's a good way to reboot Batman with a successful Superman universe. That's a pretty balsy move that I think will garner a huge hit for WB/DC.

 

[Migu-EL]

Its the perception that is given. No matter what WB actually believes.

MOS2 should have come first as a stand-alone. WB should have realized this would cause consternation which it has. How to head that off - as I said, announce another stand-alone Superman film and a stand-alone Batman to follow off of WF.

Impressions matter. This reinforces Superman's image as a second tier character. Just saw a graphic with IronMan/Batman top tier and then Thor/Superman as equivalent second tier characters.

WB does not manage these perceptions well.

I don't know, I still think that this movie can have a feel of a stand alone sequel, it will just have Batman as another character. This can really be a win/win situation if you think about it. But it seems that you are stuck on not liking MOS and seeing nothing but doom and gloom for this superhero team up.

 

[Migu-EL]

It seems so obvious when you say it here but yet, Tobias has been on that wagon of thinking for a long time now.

I think his point would be better served if WB had WF before MOS....
Instead if they had WF after MOS2 then these various people would concede. It's a mess.

Yeah, he is dead set on his displeasure for MOS and it's Superma/Batman sequel.

 

[STARMAN]

Batman is too important to be just another character in a Superman film.

 

[EssayM]

Yes, I looked at the combined list of cbm material that Goyer and Snyder have had a hand in and it is these 3 adaptations I was specifically referring too.(I never once thought about the one in my avy)
I see you are on the cynical side of things again today.

Really? Because I've never heard of any of those three movies noted for their fidelity to the source material.

Of course not, it actually makes you a bad filmmaker.

The very simple point was that for all the people that dreaded MOS and called it a train wreak and whatever what not, they should bare in mine that MOS was with nolan in creative and executive power. It's just a thought. Twist that to a positive or negative angle at your leisure.

Not really. From what I've read, it seems like Goyer had the original idea and Nolan just said "Cool!" and got the studio to finance it. In fact, the only place his name appears in the credits is the meaningless "story by" and "producer" credits. For all people keep tying him to this movie's creative process, the only creative decision he really seems to have made is regarding the ending (he opposed it and had to be convinced to put it in). I think it's more fair to lay most of the blame at Snyder and Goyer's feet.

Also, completely OT, I happened to find a couple of interesting links while writing this post:

LA Times says Nolan admired SR, particularly its connections to the Donner films

David Goyer quoted at great length about how he thought up and approached MOS. I personally disagree with some of his points, but I'll let others be the judge.

 

[Tobias]

There was a poll recently done that casual movie-goers on the streets not only liked Man of Steel, but didn't know of this Superman/Batman teamup. When told, they were asked who they thought this new Batman would be and they answered: Christian Bale.

We can all spin this to our own preconceived notions. There is enough apparently contradictory stuff out there to do so and all of us, myself included, are guilty of this.

The operative word about the poll is "casual". MOS's retention was poorer than most CBM films. That seems to contradict the poll. I have friends at work who saw the film, said it was OK and then told co-workers to save a few bucks and see it in the fall when they can rent it.

We will never know the truth as to MOS and in part because we are not getting a stand-alone sequel. Would a true MOS2 have suffered the Tomb Raider fate or gone on to crack 800 million WW.

I say 800 million as those were the projections after the first weekend. These assumed normal retention and would have resulted in MOS being huge.

Audiences turned out in droves opening weekend. They loved what they saw in the trailers. But they didn't return for second viewings or encourage friends to see the film. In a general sense. We know that cause of the steady steep fall-off.

What happened between those early crowds ready to embrace Superman and the less that great holds that followed?

I think the answer is simple and its not Pitt or MU, its the quality of the film. It did not blow folks away. This is not rocket science.

Folks are down a bit because of the poor holds but, the upside is that initial turnout. The GA was ready to embrace Superman big-time. But MOS did not prove the vehicle by which to get them hooked again.

How to do that? Hard question to answer but if the pacing/editing and characterization problems weren't there this film probably would have cracked 700 million and maybe approached TASM WW.

In a weird way the glass is half full. Getting it full to the brim is the hard part.

 

[Tra-El]

Batman is too important to be just another character in a Superman film.

Which is why WB is putting him in a Man of Steel sequel. He's too important, so if he was so important, why would they risk using (like EssayM pointed out) an entirely new Batman in a "disappointing" Man of Steel world?

This new Batman isn't as automatic as everyone is suggesting, which is the importance of Henry Cavill's Superman.

According to the haters, MOS was a dissapointment and that it is the Bat that needs to swoop in to save the day. So pretty much, Superman is now a dog***** failure.

Do you think WB is that dumb? Now what if this new Batman misses the mark, which is highly likely at this point judging by people's comparisons (that are inevitable) to Bale's Batman? Now, they just screwed up the rebooted Batman and since (according to MOS haters) Superman is a mess-up, now WB has TWO *****ups in Batman and Superman, which happen to be their bread and butter cash-cow of their most successful movie franchises.

I think it's the other way around. If the audiences don't take to this new Bat, then they can always lay their head on another MOS solo film down the line and go forth with this universe that was created FOR Superman and save the Bat for a Justice League.

As of RIGHT NOW, Superman is the only one established here, not anybody else. Superman is DC's hope right now and they are hoping this new Batman looks good standing next to him.

 

[Tra-El]

We will never know the truth as to MOS and in part because we are not getting a stand-alone sequel.

Yeah, we won't know the truth about MOS, though the entire cast is coming back and so is the creative team. Such a mystery. SUCH a mystery. Sorry dude, though you had problems with the film, WB proved everything by bringing back ANYBODY and EVERYBODY associated with Man of Steel. Now if they were STILL silent about everything 'til this day (as you said in the earlier months..what did you say? WB is silent and we wouldn't get information about a sequel in 2014? You were on THAT kick for awhile) then we wouldn't know, but.. I think we do know. WB got what they needed out of Man of Steel.

Audiences turned out in droves opening weekend. They loved what they saw in the trailers.

Yeah, they turned out in droves, which wasn't expected, especially with all those critical reviews. Still didn't drive people away. No, instead, I think people DID get their Superman-fill and turned out larger crowds than expected and then simply chose to go elsewhere with other blockbusters coming out the next few weekends that just...didn't....let....up.

What happened between those early crowds ready to embrace Superman and the less that great holds that followed?

I think the answer is simple and its not Pitt or MU

That's what every hater would say, but it's cool. Yeah, Pitt OR MU had absolutely, positively NOTHING to do with cutting MOS's legs and audience. NOTHING. It was ALL bad W.O.M, though the BO still exceeded your expectations, even in a tumble in week 2.

 

[Marvin]

Really? Because I've never heard of any of those three movies noted for their fidelity to the source material.

That's nice. (My last post was lite a sarcasm smiley, give it another look)

Again, perhaps I wasn't referring to those three...perhaps I was referring to their other works.

Not really. From what I've read, it seems like Goyer had the original idea and Nolan just said "Cool!" and got the studio to finance it. In fact, the only place his name appears in the credits is the meaningless "story by" and "producer" credits. For all people keep tying him to this movie's creative process, the only creative decision he really seems to have made is regarding the ending (he opposed it and had to be convinced to put it in). I think it's more fair to lay most of the blame at Snyder and Goyer's feet.

Funny though there were many discussion on here about how blame or credit would be laid out once dust settles. They almost always came down to how the film was received. Who would have thought that Nolan had so little to do with this films story. Guess we'll never know.
I do know what a producer credit means as far as script approval though, food for thought.

Also, completely OT, I happened to find a couple of interesting links while writing this post:

LA Times says Nolan admired SR, particularly its connections to the Donner films

Yes, he likes Donner, Nolan said that he admired Singer’s film, especially the way it connected to director Richard Donner’s version of Superman and the first two movies starring Reeve. Nolan added, though, that this new movie will stand on its own. Funny how he didn't apply that same logic when producing his own superman film.

Funnier still the title of that article, unlike many here the man seems to be hip to MOS' story. Who'd have thunk.

Most of what I took from the second interview/article was that Goyer in fact had a bigger hand in the batman "films" than he is given credit for, around there parts anyways. Then we did what we did on the Batman films. We met four or five times and we sort of broke the story on cards, and expanded it. Then, from that point onwards I wrote all the scripts. It’s hard to say what part was Chris because we just sat in a room and threw out ideas. It was just a fluid process. But from the script stage on it was all me, with Chris giving notes. I did two drafts and that’s when Zack came on board.
Not sure how this serves your no credit for nolan bit. Seems like his role was as meaningless as you would have me presume. Amazing how Nolan let all the broad stroke bad ideas in MOS get past him. Such as an "evil" pa kent lol.

And of course this little gem
We knew that people would be upset by some of the choices we make. We got some grief when we did Batman Begins. Now people think what we did was great but when Batman Begins first came out, people were upset by some of the choices we made.

 

[Marvin]

Audiences turned out in droves opening weekend. They loved what they saw in the trailers. But they didn't return for second viewings or encourage friends to see the film. In a general sense. We know that cause of the steady steep fall-off.

What happened between those early crowds ready to embrace Superman and the less that great holds that followed?

I think the answer is simple and its not Pitt or MU, its the quality of the film. It did not blow folks away. This is not rocket science.

Folks are down a bit because of the poor holds but, the upside is that initial turnout. The GA was ready to embrace Superman big-time. But MOS did not prove the vehicle by which to get them hooked again.

Curious what you think the drop would have been if MOS second weekend was completely devoid of relevant competition(let alone 148 mill worth), as happens with most big cbms these days...

To think competition means nothing would be like arguing that avengers opening a week after TDKR is worth ignoring when it comes down to WOM vs Number correlation. The drop off wasn't that far off of the average cbm, now what is it about mos' release that wasn't the same as most cbm release? The word of mouth right

How to do that? Hard question to answer but if the pacing/editing and characterization problems weren't there this film probably would have cracked 700 million and maybe approached TASM WW.

In a weird way the glass is half full. Getting it full to the brim is the hard part.

Ok so can one assume that if MOS breaks 700 mill then you will finally stop moving your number further up the scale to prove your point?

It's interesting you comparing it to a 700mill ww success like ASM, considering MOS is trouncing it domestically, I wonder what that says about the editing.

 

[jmc]

Just curious. As I too feel MOS was weak film. Instead of asking what was wrong creatively with MOS I'll make it positive - what would have made it a good film in your opinion?

I don't even know where to begin to be honest. To me there's a solid story foundation, I just get a much better director.

 

[jmc]

There is a common portrayal of Batman and his world that appears in most incarnations, and Nolan chose to forgo it in favor of the story he wanted to tell. It was a good story (mostly), but the fact remains that it was not much related to Batman.

I'm sorry, but that is bull ****. Nolan was more than faithful to the source material, more than he needed to be if I'm honest.

 

[TheBat812]

I just read Flash in 2016 and JL 2017. No word on if Superman will get another film or not. Its a hot mess as they say.

Flash is also getting a TV series so he looks like WB's emerging favored character after Batman.

Why would they announce another Superman film after Flash and JL? We're getting a Superman sequel in 2015....

 

[Mysteryman]

Curious what you think the drop would have been if MOS second weekend was completely devoid of relevant competition(let alone 148 mill worth), as happens with most big cbms these days...

To think competition means nothing would be like arguing that avengers opening a week after TDKR is worth ignoring when it comes down to WOM vs Number correlation. The drop off wasn't that far off of the average cbm, now what is it about mos' release that wasn't the same as most cbm release? The word of mouth right


Ok so can one assume that if MOS breaks 700 mill then you will finally stop moving your number further up the scale to prove your point?

It's interesting you comparing it to a 700mill ww success like ASM, considering MOS is trouncing it domestically, I wonder what that says about the editing.

Once it reached 700 million
Tobias would say"it would have reached 800 miillion if..."