Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)

[Rorywan]

I don't know. I'd say that certainly SUPERMAN '78 and probably even BATMAN '89 came into a very different media and pop culture climate that we have today. And both of those characters (particularly Batman, as the image within the zeitgeist was still the Adam West show) NEEDED to be reborn and re-introduced to the mainstream.

It's just not the same today.

No I get that the cinematic climate has changed tremendously, but that's not the point. To get the gravitas and wow factor that was needed for BVS, we need more establishment.

**** even if Bale's Batman had been brought into this and was face to face with Cavill as Superman it would have had that missing element.
I'm no Marvel fanboy either, but when Guardians of The Galaxy finally end up fighting alongside Captain America and the rest of that MCU, it will have a similar effect.

DC rushed into this with one mediocre movie behind them and wanted what Marvel had done without the effort. Will it pay off? Maybe short term, I have no doubt BVS will make a lot of money, it has too. But why not take their time, make really good product, introduce their characters properly?

 

[Rorywan]

That's complete horse cupp...
Batman has had 7 movies made already, plus a tv show plus a couple of cartoons, Superman has had 6 movies made....

If you don't know who these characters are u aren't from this planet...

The only one that has not have anything like that is wonder woman and they are giving her her own whole movie...

Not having a solo batman movie before this is not a problem because we just came out of a batman trilogy. Ur points are ridiculous.

I must have missed the 7 Ben Affleck Batman movies? You know the ones from this DC Universe?
Are they on Netflix?

 

[greygoose]

DC rushed into this with one mediocre movie behind them and wanted what Marvel had done without the effort. Will it pay off? Maybe short term, I have no doubt BVS will make a lot of money, it has too. But why not take their time, make really good product, introduce their characters properly?

Marvel Phase 1 - Good. Iron Man still being the pinnacle.

Marvel Phase 2 and beyond - Fun but mediocre/only good in parts.

 

[IrishJedi]

At the end of the day, all WB needs to do is make good movies. The rest is just noise.

 

[a-dev]

No I get that the cinematic climate has changed tremendously, but that's not the point. To get the gravitas and wow factor that was needed for BVS, we need more establishment.

**** even if Bale's Batman had been brought into this and was face to face with Cavill as Superman it would have had that missing element.
I'm no Marvel fanboy either, but when Guardians of The Galaxy finally end up fighting alongside Captain America and the rest of that MCU, it will have a similar effect.

DC rushed into this with one mediocre movie behind them and wanted what Marvel had done without the effort. Will it pay off? Maybe short term, I have no doubt BVS will make a lot of money, it has too. But why not take their time, make really good product, introduce their characters properly?

Yep. This is what I'm saying. I fear that a total newb Batman that we've never seen before interacting with a Superman we saw once (and many of us didn't even like) won't have as much impact as it otherwise could if at least Affleck's Batman had gotten one film on his own beforehand.

Also...I kinda think Irish overestimates how well known some of these DC characters actually are. Batman and Superman yes. Wonder Woman to a slightly lesser extent because there's been nothing of note since the 70s. The others? Ehhhh..gotta be honest, not so long ago I used to confuse Green Lantern and Green Hornet.

 

[kryptonianmutie]

The reason why it seems like WB is more of a mess is because they are contradicting themselves in their approach to building this universe. They want to say that everybody is so familiar with all these characters we can throw Batman and WW together in a Man of Steel sequel(with some other cameos), but yet they went through all the trouble of establishing an origin story in a film for the most recognized super hero in the world.

 

[a-dev]

Yeah, every team-up film can't go the MCU route. Imagine if before X-Men we had to first have a Wolverine solo film, Cyclops, Nightcrawler, etc., before finally letting them all join together five films later. Though with regard to the current "universes" I definitely think that the MCU did "the MCU way" better than the DCCU is doing the "DCCU way" if that makes any sense.

I never really considered X-men as a team-up movie because I personally only knew these characters from X-men. Sorta like Fantastic Four.

So ''jumping straight to'' an X-men movie didn't jar with me in any way.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

But why not take their time, make really good product, introduce their characters properly?

I agree that the new Batman and Superman have no real history, so the fight is between a Superman that was in a film that got bad reviews and a brand new Batman that we don't know yet, but what makes you think that taking their time and giving each character their own movie like Marvel is going to work? Remember Jonah Hex, Green Lantern, Steel, Catwoman, Constantine ...and the list goes on and on

 

[a-dev]

I agree that the new Batman and Superman have no real history, so the fight is between a Superman that was in a film that got bad reviews and a brand new Batman that we don't know yet, but what makes you think that taking their time and giving each character their own movie like Marvel is going to work? Remember Jonah Hex, Green Lantern, Steel, Catwoman, Constantine ...and the list goes on and on

In itself not the most flattering argument for DC but OK.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

In itself not the most flattering argument for DC but OK.

Oh, I'm not taking any sides. They have made a lot of bad movies, and the only two characters they seem to get right are Batman and Superman, and even those franchises have some bad films

 

[karamazov80]

I can understand the specific argument for this movie being the first integration of major DC characters pro and con. I'll have to wait until I see the movie to pass final judgment. But putting that aside, in theory, I see don't agree at all that the Marvel example should be the only model others would need to follow. Funny, I was arguing with NamMagazine about this years ago It's all about execution. You can start a movie right smack dab in the thick of things, and it can work. But you have to respect your audience's intelligence, and obviously, construct a movie around that that makes sense, and doesn't feel awkward or incomplete.

Some backgrounds/origins will probably be necessary. But there is a limit on necessary exposition in movies like this. I swear if we get another Spider-Man origin story I'm gonna throw my popcorn on the ground and shake my fist at the film projector.

 

[IrishJedi]

Maybe audiences are just beaten into submission from the glut of constant origin films? Now people seem them as necessary.

I'll add, though, the way DEADPOOL did it was perfect... sporadic flashbacks that were perfectly sprinkled throughout the film and kept it on an even pace throughout. The problem is that is very, very hard to pull off... and Deadpool is the type of character that also fits that type of method perfectly. That's rare. But they took perfect advantage of it.

 

[IrishJedi]

I swear if we get another Spider-Man origin story I'm gonna throw my popcorn on the ground and shake my fist at the film projector.

 

[karamazov80]

I think it worked well in Deadpool, but that they still overdid it a bit with the origin. After my post above, I was thinking about Saving Private Ryan. Didn't the exposition work just fine there? And the opening scene is of these grunts getting off of a PT boat at Normandy.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Batman Begins did the flashback origin perfectly. With Deadpool, it took me out of the film a little bit, because they kept going back to the same present scene and it disrupted that fun sequence by constantly going back and showing this sad origin. It didn't work for me.

 

[RIDDICK]

I'm no Marvel fanboy either, but when Guardians of The Galaxy finally end up fighting alongside Captain America and the rest of that MCU, it will have a similar effect.

Sorry to ruin your point but GotG was a team up film about five obscure characters and yet most people liked it very much.
BvS is a team up film with well known iconic characters, I don't see the problem here.

 

[Skywalker(OG)Kush]

Got my tickets for opening night, 3 seats dead center... reserved seating is the ****.

 

[GasparZizou]

This is a notion that I just don't understand (and I'm not singling you out, a-dev, as your thoughts on this are absolutely among the majority.

But here's the deal: The Marvel Studios way of building their cinematic universe WAS perfect. FOR THEM. But it need not be a blue print for the only way to do so. People often overlook the reason why Marvel took a slower, methodical approach to introducing each Avenger character: They basically had to. It might be hard for some people to believe now, but before 2008 Iron Man was NOT exactly a household name. To say nothing of a character like Black Widow.

The main difference is that Warner Bros/DC doesn't really need to introduce the core Justice League characters to the world. Everyone is already familiar with them. And not just Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman (who pretty much any human in the civilized world is familiar with)... even their 2nd tier characters (Flash, Aquaman, etc) are pretty well known. So there was no need to do several solo films before bringing them all together. All they had to do was introduce a movie universe that they could all share and inhabit, and then get on with it. And that's exactly what they did. Whether or not it will work will remain to be seen over the next couple of years, but clearly WB felt that this was the best way to build THEIR cinematic universe. And I personally tend to agree. This is not a Zero Sum game. It's also not a race, despite how the internet wants to see it.

I don't know. I'd say that certainly SUPERMAN '78 and probably even BATMAN '89 came into a very different media and pop culture climate than we have today. And both of those characters (particularly Batman, as the image within the zeitgeist was still the Adam West show) NEEDED to be reborn and re-introduced to the mainstream.

It's just not the same today.

Also, I'm personally sick of ******* superhero origin movies.

Maybe audiences are just beaten into submission from the glut of constant origin films? Now people seem them as necessary.

I'll add, though, the way DEADPOOL did it was perfect... sporadic flashbacks that were perfectly sprinkled throughout the film and kept it on an even pace throughout. The problem is that is very, very hard to pull off... and Deadpool is the type of character that also fits that type of method perfectly. That's rare. But they took perfect advantage of it.

God damn you ARE A jedi

Sorry to ruin your point but GotG was a team up film about five obscure characters and yet most people liked it very much.
BvS is a team up film with well known iconic characters, I don't see the problem here.

there isn't a problem, not every universe needs a build up, I'm glad they're doing a crash team up, JL almost always forms this way, since they're not a government formed team. One big threat and they get together.

 

[Baneofdemon22]

I know a lot of people that never saw Batman Begins or any of the Marvel movies before seeing the Dark Knight and the Avengers, and they loved those movies. When I read comics or watched the cartoons as a kid (or even later on), I jumped on random era's in a character's history and fell in love with the characters. I didn't enjoy watching the Justice League cartoon, but jumped right into Justice League Unlimited and loved the characters. They don't tell the origin for those characters, and I don't really care to know.

I like jumping right in, and so do a lot of people. I didn't like the Avengers movie, and while I only watched the first Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, Thor, and half of Captain America before seeing it (I really like the first half of TFA, but wasn't a fan of the second half so I stopped watching), and I didn't get any impact of those characters teaming up. They weren't even written the same. They were throwing out annoying quips every second. When I watched The Winter Solider it felt back to basics with the Steve Rogers that I liked from the first movie.

 

[GasparZizou]

Jumping right in is the comicbook way. Even IN the comics. You rarely ever get an origin story, usually stories start in the middle of stuff happening, introducing characters you know nothing about and probably make no sense until entire issues later, then you get a little exposition or a little background.