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

[jye4ever]

this is the thing about reviews. Reviews for dark knight rises were not all that positive and i didn't give a hoot and i went and paid and really regretted it.
Avatar didn't even have that horrible reviews, but I had doubts and i went to see it even though a lot of people told me it sucked personally.
Reviews for the hobbit were so so and i just went and hated it.
I know "its only 10 dollars brah" but its the whole thing, it is the drive there, the waiting for it, the wasting time for it. the gas money, the snacks or whatever.

So when everyone is like "Why do you follow reviews brah, cant make your own mind brah? cant create an original thought brah? ) well yeah, Sure I can, but I dont want to waste a day and some money to "make up my mind" I dont have to see this now, It can wait. I Might still see it in theaters but I dont have the same hype to see it. I was dying to see this and now im not. i can wait. (I might end up loving it, but its okay if i dont see it right now)

Valid counterpoint, makes sense.

But I am too invested in these characters to not go and make up my own mind.

I will follow reviews on other properties that i'm not fully invested in like I am with superheroes.

How does a comic book reader NOT go see Batman and Superman together for the first time in a high budget movie!?!

 

[crows]

Valid counterpoint, makes sense.

But I am too invested in these characters to not go and make up my own mind.

I will follow reviews on other properties that i'm not fully invested in like I am with superheroes.

How does a comic book reader NOT go see Batman and Superman together for the first time in a high budget movie!?!

thats a good point too, I dont know. maybe Ill go, I am waiting on two more reviews, (plus I want to see what difabio says, he warned us about rises)

I never cared about reviews like that, but the hobbit and avatar and Dark Knight rises burned me really bad. I Like Rises now, but i felt so robbed at first. then the hobbit completely destroyed any faith I had in Hollywood. I started to take reviews more serious after the hobbit 2

 

[karamazov80]

To rushmore's point, that's not my understanding of things in many cases. A re-write isn't free (and the producers may or may not pay for one, or may not allow for one because it will push things too far behind on schedule or have too many cost-associated implications), and different directors have a different amount of influence, depending on various factors (including the role and preferences of producers, the extent of diva behavior by stars, etc.). I've read/seen a smattering of behind the scenes discussions where this has been a major concern. Back to the Future had a lot of decisions driven by the producer, for example (including the initial decision to cast Eric Stoltz). The Island of Dr. Moreau had the director completely replaced because the producers lost faith in him. Poltergeist was essentially co-directed by Hooper and Spielberg, because Spielberg wanted more explicit control.

Having said that, my understanding of the WB/DC movies here is that Snyder is extremely hands on and has been allowed more or less free reign. Thus, I think he does deserve a lion's share of the blame/praise for this film. But as far as I know, Goyer may have been forced on him because of his success with the Nolan films. None of us are going to know all the ins-and-outs.

 

[Solidus]

It halarious watching the BVS fan pages on facebook. They're like, "It's not true...don't listen to the hate, the film is a masterpiece...the best superhero film I've ever seen! Affleck deserves an Oscar."

I saw the same on Facebook, too

"I saw it twice already, it's a masterpiece. My favorite comic book movie ever, Ben Affleck is the best Batman ever, and Eisenberg is astonishing as Luthor. Hope the movie will smash the box office, all those critics can go to hell. They don't have a clue."

 

[Victοr]

Spoiler

I like him less and less the more he talks. Dropping a car on people isn't killing by proxy. Its killing, plain and simple.

And dude doesn't even know his Bat-film history. Burton's Batman is NOT where he got the rep of not killing people. At all. Burton's Batman WAS willing to use lethal force, since he was a direct translation of the 1939 comics version (who also killed).

That's just plain idiocy right there... a complete lack of understanding not only the history of character on film but also in comics. But then again, this is also the guy that says MOS is just like the comic books....

Sallah

Spoiler

I know, right? He's so hang up on his own versions of the characters, that he's twisting the facts to fit his version of events. This man does nothing but throw shade and defend his own choices by citing fake sources.

 

[crows]

To rushmore's point, that's not my understanding of things in many cases. A re-write isn't free (and the producers may or may not pay for one, or may not allow for one because it will push things too far behind on schedule or have too many cost-associated implications), and different directors have a different amount of influence, depending on various factors (including the role and preferences of producers, the extent of diva behavior by stars, etc.). I've read/seen a smattering of behind the scenes discussions where this has been a major concern. Back to the Future had a lot of decisions driven by the producer, for example (including the initial decision to cast Eric Stoltz). The Island of Dr. Moreau had the director completely replaced because the producers lost faith in him.

Having said that, my understanding of the WB/DC movies here is that Snyder is extremely hands on and has been allowed more or less free reign. Thus, I think he does deserve a lion's share of the blame/praise for this film. But as far as I know, Goyer may have been forced on him because of his success with the Nolan films. None of us are going to know all the ins-and-outs.

yeah that's true too, If Snyder was given so much freedom then yeah, he's to blame.

I saw the same on Facebook, too

"I saw it twice already, it's a masterpiece. My favorite comic book movie ever, Ben Affleck is the best Batman ever, and Eisenberg is astonishing as Luthor. Hope the movie will smash the box office, all those critics can go to hell. They don't have a clue."

 

[DiFabio]

If wasting 10 bucks, 2 hours of your time and driving out to a theater is a big deal for you guys, maybe you should just stay home.

For me, every movie is an experience. I like going to theaters. I've paid money to see great movies and terrible movies but I never really regret going to them. There's always something to talk about with the person you go with. Maybe that's just the movie guy in me. People are being so dramatic and sensitive about this. Okay, you saw what you perceived to be a bad movie, it still has some merit i.e. discussing it ad nauseum with your fellow sideshow bros. I hated TDKR and Man of Steel, they were disappointments, but I didn't feel like I wasted time and money. Last year when I was in Europe I paid a good bit to see Age of Ultron in Italian and that movie was mediocre and lame. Like I said though, it's the experience. You got to see these things for yourself.

I've known the plot and seen 80% of the footage of this thing for the past 5 months and I know a few of the fights, including the Batman action, is worth the price of admission alone, even if the rest is a mess. I've been saying that since the beginning.

 

[myc]

I haven't seen it yet.. but I knew from the first time I saw the trailer.. "you seen the trailer.. you saw the movie"

 

[Uncle Bingo]

How does a comic book reader NOT go see Batman and Superman together for the first time in a high budget movie!?!

 

[Rorywan]

In most cases, directors are far better known then the writers, but I have seen many threads where the writer of a bad script was bashed. Ultimately though, the responsibility for the whole film falls on the Director. If its a bad script, the Director is supposed to order a rewrite, if there is bad acting, the Director is supposed to motivate the actor and reshoot the scene. If your the Director, everything is your responsibility, unless the studio takes the film from you and re-edits it.

The Director is in charge and controls every aspect of the film, as it's supposed to be.

Prometheus comes to mind, but your right the director's normally take the rap, even if they had little control.
This is different though, it's Snyder's baby through and through. People simply haven't responded to what he has made.

 

[crows]

If wasting 10 bucks, 2 hours of your time and driving out to a theater is a big deal for you guys, maybe you should just stay home.

For me, every movie is an experience. I like going to theaters. I've paid money to see great movies and terrible movies but I never really regret going to them. There's always something to talk about with the person you go with. Maybe that's just the movie guy in me. People are being so dramatic and sensitive about this. Okay, you saw what you perceived to be a bad movie, it still has some merit i.e. discussing it ad nauseum with your fellow sideshow bros. I hated TDKR and Man of Steel, they were disappointments, but I didn't feel like I wasted time and money. Like I said, it's the experience. You got to see these things for yourself.

I've known the plot and seen 80% of the footage of this thing for the past 5 months and I know a few of the fights, including the Batman action, is worth the price of admission alone even if the rest is a mess. I've been saying that since the beginning.

I stay home when the reviews are bad (or if they talk about stuff I know I wont like) When a movie is bad sometimes i kinda feel insulted by the creators. It always makes me think, how was this greenlit? how did no one spoke about how bad this was. how come they spent months working on something so bad.
And the more i think about it the more annoyed i get. Like with the Thing prequel, I legit felt so insulted as a fan by the studio. I dont mean to be overly dramatic but... what were they thinking with that movie? I felt taken advantage of as an audience member. with the Thing, They just take your money and show you this horrible garbage... I dont even care about the 10 bucks but that experience, I wish I didn't have it. it bothers me that I added to their box office.

 

[Jameson Rook]

I saw the same on Facebook, too

"I saw it twice already, it's a masterpiece. My favorite comic book movie ever, Ben Affleck is the best Batman ever, and Eisenberg is astonishing as Luthor. Hope the movie will smash the box office, all those critics can go to hell. They don't have a clue."

But they forgot the Hans Zimmer soundtrack?

 

[Rorywan]

If wasting 10 bucks, 2 hours of your time and driving out to a theater is a big deal for you guys, maybe you should just stay home.

For me, every movie is an experience. I like going to theaters. I've paid money to see great movies and terrible movies but I never really regret going to them. There's always something to talk about with the person you go with. Maybe that's just the movie guy in me. People are being so dramatic and sensitive about this. Okay, you saw what you perceived to be a bad movie, it still has some merit i.e. discussing it ad nauseum with your fellow sideshow bros. I hated TDKR and Man of Steel, they were disappointments, but I didn't feel like I wasted time and money. Last year when I was in Europe I paid a good bit to see Age of Ultron in Italian and that movie was mediocre and lame. Like I said though, it's the experience. You got to see these things for yourself.

I've known the plot and seen 80% of the footage of this thing for the past 5 months and I know a few of the fights, including the Batman action, is worth the price of admission alone, even if the rest is a mess. I've been saying that since the beginning.

That does change when you have a family Fab. Easy trips to the movies become like major excursions into deepest Africa.
It changes things a lot. Regarding whether this is worth seeing, it absolutely is. But for varied reasons.
I never ever listen to reviews though. I have hated and loved movies in polar opposition to the reviews they have received.

 

[Spartan Rex]

I liked GL.

 

[rushmore223]

To rushmore's point, that's not my understanding of things in many cases. A re-write isn't free (and the producers may or may not pay for one, or may not allow for one because it will push things too far behind on schedule or have too many cost-associated implications), and different directors have a different amount of influence, depending on various factors (including the role and preferences of producers, the extent of diva behavior by stars, etc.). I've read/seen a smattering of behind the scenes discussions where this has been a major concern. Back to the Future had a lot of decisions driven by the producer, for example (including the initial decision to cast Eric Stoltz). The Island of Dr. Moreau had the director completely replaced because the producers lost faith in him. Poltergeist was essentially co-directed by Hooper and Spielberg, because Spielberg wanted more explicit control.

Having said that, my understanding of the WB/DC movies here is that Snyder is extremely hands on and has been allowed more or less free reign. Thus, I think he does deserve a lion's share of the blame/praise for this film. But as far as I know, Goyer may have been forced on him because of his success with the Nolan films. None of us are going to know all the ins-and-outs.

Absolutely, there are many cases of hands on producers working counter to the efforts of the Director, but in this case, especially with all the money they threw at this, I don't think that case can be made. From what I've heard on here, even Affleck tried reworking parts of the script, when the actor starts rewriting the script that should be a huge red flag, either the actor is over-stepping his bounds, or the script isin real trouble. Many Directors have stepped away from a project after butting heads with the studio, because they know that in the end, the blame will fall squarely on their shoulders. Perhaps Snyder can't tell a good script from a bad script, if so, he has no business being a Director. I've said before, he creates a compelling look for many of his films, but he falls short everywhere else. He should be a cinematographer, something he would shine at, but not a Director, he just doesn't have the skill set for it.

 

[karamazov80]

You make a fair point rushmore. To Rory's post, a $10 getaway for one becomes a $70 getaway for two in our case

 

[rushmore223]

Prometheus comes to mind, but your right the director's normally take the rap, even if they had little control.
This is different though, it's Snyder's baby through and through. People simply haven't responded to what he has made.

True, I don't blame Richard Marquand for the Ewoks.

 

[jye4ever]

If wasting 10 bucks, 2 hours of your time and driving out to a theater is a big deal for you guys, maybe you should just stay home.

For me, every movie is an experience. I like going to theaters. I've paid money to see great movies and terrible movies but I never really regret going to them. There's always something to talk about with the person you go with. Maybe that's just the movie guy in me. People are being so dramatic and sensitive about this. Okay, you saw what you perceived to be a bad movie, it still has some merit i.e. discussing it ad nauseum with your fellow sideshow bros. I hated TDKR and Man of Steel, they were disappointments, but I didn't feel like I wasted time and money. Last year when I was in Europe I paid a good bit to see Age of Ultron in Italian and that movie was mediocre and lame. Like I said though, it's the experience. You got to see these things for yourself.

I've known the plot and seen 80% of the footage of this thing for the past 5 months and I know a few of the fights, including the Batman action, is worth the price of admission alone even if the rest is a mess. I've been saying that since the beginning.

Damn that's good.

 

[sallah]

That does change when you have a family Fab. Easy trips to the movies become like major excursions into deepest Africa.
It changes things a lot.

Agreed. Its not often that the stars align enough for my wife and I to see a movie without the kids... or even for just one of us to go if the other has no interest. And a film with the kids? You're talking about spending like $50-$70.

And I've never really been one to say I enjoyed a film if something like 75% of it stinks, 15% is okay, and 10% of it is was really cool. Its an overall performance for me.

Otherwise... I'd have felt satisfied after seeing Spider-Man 3. Or Star Wars Episode 2. Or Iron Man 3. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Superman Returns. Etc, etc, etc.

I can't justify the price of admission and time just for a few minutes of thrills sprinkled in a 2+ hour mess. I am happy for those who can though.

Sallah

 

[Gates70]

So let me get this straight, it's dark, serious, and gloomy ? Count me in !! I'm tired of the kiddie Marvel movies and I have no allegiance to either Marvel or DC as I don't read comic books. Less than half those Marvel movies are even good IMO. Too light hearted and made them out to be comedies instead of action movies.