BvS Skepticism Regarding the Film - Part 6

[MrsKent26]

So in other words...create/discover a way to essentially de-power Superman, weaken him, and/or "level the playing field"... just like kryptonite does.

I don't think so much time or energy needs to be spent explaining or showing such a complicated method of weakening Superman when kryptonite, a staple of Superman canon, serves the same purpose. And kryptonite comes with a certain level of irony and symbolism anyway; that literal pieces of his home world are the only thing that can kill or weaken him. It drives home the point that, for Superman, he can never go "home", and it shows the influence that his home world still has over its Last Son...and will always have over him.

It isn't a lazy plot device just because it's been done before.

This is pretty much why I'm not against Kryptonite. As hokey as it seems to some, why should they take the time to explain something else which has the same hokey, debilitating effects? I'm not really into any lengthy explanations. "Here's this rock. It poisons superman" is enough for me. I'd rather they spent more time on the character motivations and implications of using the rock.

 

[flickchick85]

I'm completely sold on Affleck, been sold on Cavill since well before he was even cast, and am cautiously optimistic about Gadot. But the only other thing that trailer sold me on was that Zack Snyder films make for amazing trailers. Which isn't exactly new information. I just hope he's finally made a film that lives up to one of them, because for me, they never have.

For that reason, I'm way more excited for the solo films (still waiting on that solo Superman announcement).

 

[Shikamaru]

Finally had a chance to sit down and view the trailer.

First thing's first. Lex Luthor. Originally when Jesse was announced, we (the "haters") said we were dissapointed with the direction they were taking the character in. It was less about the actor himself and more of what the casting told us about the portrayal. I still feel that way now, but worse: they're not doing anything new. Despite all that talk regarding how these films have to separate themselves from Donner, the new Lex seems to be about as campy and over-the-top as Hackman was. It's incredibly disappointing, as it's the third time we missed the opportunity to bring the cold calculating Lex to the screen.

Overall, I thought the trailer was solid. Everything from it alone looks promising. However, we have yet to break the classic Snyder pattern of having solid trailers that lead up to a disappointing film. That's not to say the film can't be good, but it's silly to assume all skepticism should be thrown out just because the trailer is good; not when we take certain people's track records into account. And even then, I'd still give an edge to the early MoS trailers by comparison. They had a bit more of an existential touch, whereas this put more emphasis on the action.

 

[Brother Jack]

I'm completely sold on Affleck, been sold on Cavill since well before he was even cast, and am cautiously optimistic about Gadot. But the only other thing that trailer sold me on was that Zack Snyder films make for amazing trailers. Which isn't exactly new information. I just hope he's finally made a film that lives up to one of them, because for me, they never have.

For that reason, I'm way more excited for the solo films (still waiting on that solo Superman announcement).

Yeah, that's a very important thing to keep in mind. I honestly feel like the guy would be more at home directing music videos or five minute short films.

 

[Marvin]

kryptonite doesn't excuse batman being faster than heat vision

Seems to excuse just about everyone else that uses it.
Incase you can't see it, my point is somewhere along the lines of why the buck stops at batman.

Unless ofcourse you(s) have this issue with how this rock/device has been present since the beginning of this mythology.

 

[The Question]

Seems to excuse just about everyone else that uses it.
Incase you can't see it, my point is somewhere along the lines of why the buck stops at batman.

Unless ofcourse you(s) have this issue with how this rock/device has been present since the beginning of this mythology.

Ooh! Ooh! Me! Me!

Kryptonite sucks.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I'm with you on that. I've been burned by Snyder many times before - from Watchmen to Man of Steel. WB knows how to make fantastic trailers and their marketing team is consistently rolling out incredible content. I have felt this level of hype for Snyder's previous films, especially Watchmen, but that hype is not present today. I will be keeping my excitement at bay, because the thing that matters to me the most is the film's drama. The film is, like all of Snyder's work, visually gorgeous. It also features many callbacks to the comics. But, I STILL do not have faith in him to communicate believable drama and character dynamics. Although the trailer appealed to me visually, it still leaves me very skeptical in the drama department.

And Gal, while only in the trailer for a few brief moments, does not look believable to me. Perhaps its the costume or something, but she looks like a young lady playing dress-up. This, however, is purely a nitpick, and I cannot judge a performance on only 2 seconds of footage. But, how do I say it? Her appearance, facial expression and the shots' compositions look too choreographed. She is almost TOO attractive for the role that I cannot take her seriously when she presents her "warrior face." It has a very magazine model quality to it. It also does not help that in nearly every Snyder film, the female characters casting and performances are atrocious. Malin Akerman in Watchmen falls flat in every scene and Gugino is overly theatrical in her role. I also was not a particular fan of Adams as Lane (that could be the script's fault however).

Just my opinion, and before you kill me, I understand Gal was only shown for 2 seconds. She might be good, and I'll eat my words then.

The trailer, itself, works and is gorgeously shot.

Agreed on everything.

 

[PerryYellow]

I'm completely sold on Affleck, been sold on Cavill since well before he was even cast, and am cautiously optimistic about Gadot. But the only other thing that trailer sold me on was that Zack Snyder films make for amazing trailers. Which isn't exactly new information. I just hope he's finally made a film that lives up to one of them, because for me, they never have.

For that reason, I'm way more excited for the solo films (still waiting on that solo Superman announcement).

This. So much this!

 

[The Batman]

First thing's first. Lex Luthor. Originally when Jesse was announced, we (the "haters") said we were dissapointed with the direction they were taking the character in. It was less about the actor himself and more of what the casting told us about the portrayal. I still feel that way now, but worse: they're not doing anything new. Despite all that talk regarding how these films have to separate themselves from Donner, the new Lex seems to be about as campy and over-the-top as Hackman was. It's incredibly disappointing, as it's the third time we missed the opportunity to bring the cold calculating Lex to the screen.

That's why its baffling to me to see some people praising Eisenberg when most people on this site love to hate Hackman's Lex. So far, they pretty much feel like they come from a similar realm of villainy.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

So in other words...create/discover a way to essentially de-power Superman, weaken him, and/or "level the playing field"... just like kryptonite does.

I don't think so much time or energy needs to be spent explaining or showing such a complicated method of weakening Superman when kryptonite, a staple of Superman canon, serves the same purpose. And kryptonite comes with a certain level of irony and symbolism anyway; that literal pieces of his home world are the only thing that can kill or weaken him. It drives home the point that, for Superman, he can never go "home", and it shows the influence that his home world still has over its Last Son...and will always have over him.

It isn't a lazy plot device just because it's been done before.

I'm in total agreement.

I actually kind of love Kryptonite.

 

[Captain Tired]

I'm sorry but I'm utterly bemused at the Hackman comparisons. I fail to see any or even the slightest hint of Hackman/Spacey in the few snippets we saw of Jesse's portrayal. I'll assume people are talking about his mocking delivery of the redcaps line, but if a mocking tone is suddenly a specific staple of Hackman's Luthor alone...good god man. Look at that quick flash of the guy's eyes when he's talking to Holly Hunter's character. That fleeting look embodies everything great about the Luthor character: Manipulative, intelligent, apathetic, sinister, conniving, dastardly. From that trailer, I've high hopes for the character.

 

[The Batman]

Because Hackman and Spacey weren't manipulative, intelligent, apathetic, sinister, coniving, or dasterdly?

Cause if we're pretending that Eisenberg is the only cinematic Lex that possesses or will possess those qualities, well....

 

[Captain Tired]

But you're citing the comparisons in a negative light.

In which case, fair enough if you don't value those traits of the character, but then it's rather silly of you to criticise such a faithful portrayal of the character at all. But then we both know you didn't mean it in that way, you just favoured a witty comeback/ironic echo as opposed to sensible reasoning. It's fine.

 

[The Batman]

But you're citing the comparisons in a negative light.

Um..is my name Shikamaru?

But then we both know you didn't mean it in that way, you just favoured a witty comeback/ironic echo as opposed to sensible reasoning. It's fine.

Like I said in the "All Things" thread, the movie has the potential to be incredible. It looks good. Hopefully Terrio did a god-tier rewrite of the script. Batfleck looks excellent so far. It really feels like Affleck took his acting to another level in the clips they showed.

But these "See, they're mentioning the destruction, happy now?" type posts are eye-roll inducing. As if people are going to magically reverse their position on MOS because they're doing here what they should've done in that film.

And for all the crap Hackman's Lex gets....for some reason, Eisenberg's version feels like an updated version of what Hackman did in some ways, not a radically different take. Which is fine by me, because I never particularly hated Hackman's Lex in the first place.

But I know you didn't mean it that way...you just favored a condescending remark instead of actually knowing what you're talking about. It's fine.

 

[Captain Tired]

That's not sensible or logical reasoning, that's gut reaction and feeling. And that's also fine, but it might have been quicker to have just clarified it as being a gut reaction, instead of firing off another weak, easily disposable witticism.

Which you just did again. Badly.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I'm so not into Kryptonite being in this movie. Kryptonite is so lame. They should try to give Luthor a more creative scheme to take down Superman than growing a plot device rock.

So find another superhero.

 

[The Batman]

And that's also fine, but it might have been quicker to have just clarified it as being a gut reaction, instead of firing off another weak, easily disposable witticism.

Which you just did again. Badly.

And it would've been easier to simply admit that you were wrong and made an assumption about my views, instead of continuing your tired, condescending style of responses.

Which you've done again. Which you will continue to do.

 

[Captain Tired]

An assumption about your views? Talk about assumption, I wasn't even specifically addressing you. It was more a response to the general feeling embodied by a fair few people. And even calling it a response would be generous of me, it was more just a statement. You're the one who had to act all defensive and constantly try to turn my posts back on me in a very silly, childish seeming way. So you have a view on this portrayal, that's more fulled by gut feeling than it is with fact or evidence (let's not be charitable and call a trailer as being evidence). That's perfectly fine, I've nothing against. I certainly don't agree with it, but you have the right to say what you wanna say. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Grow up.

 

[DeadPresident]

I love watching people compare a handful of scenes of Eisenberg to the well known, and fully available portrayals of the other actors and making sweeping statements now already.

Maybe he'll suck, maybe he won't. But constructing an argument based on limited information? Smarten up people.

 

[The Batman]

An assumption about your views? Talk about assumption, I wasn't even specifically addressing you. It was more a response to the general feeling embodied by a fair few people.

I mean, if I make a comparison between Hackman and Eisenberg, and you make a post commenting on people who make those comparisons, I'm going to respond. Its a public forum.

You're the one who had to act all defensive and constantly try to turn my posts back on me in a very silly, childish seeming way.

Maybe if you were less condescending and made less assumptions, the debate could've been more civil from both sides.

That's perfectly fine, I've nothing against. I certainly don't agree with it, but you have the right to say what you wanna say. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Grow up.

I mean, if want to believe that I'm being "childish" to you because I disagree with you, fine. Making baseless assumptions seems to be your forte.

 

[Captain Tired]

I mean, if I make a comparison between Hackman and Eisenberg, and you make a post commenting on people who make those comparisons, I'm going to respond. Its a public forum.

Well of course. As I already said, you have the right to say what you wanna say. But don't act like I've a specific vendetta against you and your lousy opinions. I don't.

Maybe if you were less condescending and made less assumptions, the debate could've been more civil from both sides.

The pot meets the kettle at last. Let's stop now, because I can only see it as further descending into mud-slinging.

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

That's why its baffling to me to see some people praising Eisenberg when most people on this site love to hate Hackman's Lex. So far, they pretty much feel like they come from a similar realm of villainy.

Reminded me of Spacey in the Superman Returns trailer.

Wouldn't it be awesome if Superman turned back time at the end of Dawn of Justice to save Lois?

"Much better than the stupid ending from the stupid Don...wait!"

 

[The Batman]

Well of course. As I already said, you have the right to say what you wanna say. But don't act like I've a specific vendetta against you and your lousy opinions. I don't.

I don't think you have a vendetta against me. I think you're condescending and prone to making dumb assumptions due to your snobbish arrogance. You accuse people of being childish while...being childish, and you might be this way with other posters as well. Pot meet kettle indeed.

Reminded me of Spacey in the Superman Returns trailer.

Wouldn't it be awesome if Superman turned back time at the end of Dawn of Justice to save Lois?

"Much better than the stupid ending from the stupid Don...wait!"

LOL, I wouldn't even be surprised if this happened for real.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I don't think we've seen enough of Eisenberg yet to make a fair assessment of his Lex. Maybe he'll be similar to Spacey or Hackman but at this point, I don't really see that. And I like Hackman's Lex in Superman '78 (not really in the other films though).

 

[BH/HHH]

I'm in total agreement.

I actually kind of love Kryptonite.

Ditto, yes it can be overused (Smallville been an example although I will argue what they did with it on that show actually made sense for the show) but it's part of Superman's history and shouldn't ever be not used because some view it was overused or lazy.