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

[Victοr]

But again, he outsold one of the Superman series, which is saying a lot, she may not be that well known, to the casual audiences to you (even though I think she is), but that doesn't matter, in the comicbook world and in DC she is undoubtedly an A-lister. Being in a big budget movie doesn't make you A-lister, to this day I don't consider BW or Arrowguy A-listers.

Eh, I dissagree. A-List is reserved for the characters known all over the world. The ones that transcend the medium. And, IMO, Wonder Woman just isn't on that level currently. If my father who spent his childhood in Australia and had a whole room full of comics doesn't know her, then I don't consider her an A-Lister outside of her in-universe presence.

If you ask anyone to say who's the most famous female superhero I guarantee you most people will say WW.

On that yeah, sure, I agree. There's no other female character that has her status.

No no, they are pandering with laser focus to THAT demographic, it's not that they don't have other demographics in mind, is the fact that they are using flagship characters and using their built in fanbase to shove that stuff down people's throat, DC also has something for everyone, but they're not using those cheap tactics (imo) to win over fans, or they weren't at least, since now there's a Chinese Superman right around the corner

Eh, I don't see it. How many are the cutesy/Tumblr comics? Hellcat, Gwenpool, Spider-Gwen, NuThor, maybe Spider-Woman and Captain Marvel? Ms. Marvel as well? That's it. Iron Man is still Iron Man. Captain America is still doing Captain America things. The Thunderbolts are getting a revival. The Punisher is getting a new solo. Supreme Nighthawk is getting his own series. Really, they're just trying new stuff. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy them. It's there. Like it? Cool? Don't like it? Sure, whatever.

And yes, DC tried the very same thing. LGBT solo with Midnighter. Minority leads in Cyborg, Doctor Fate and Doomed. Quirky fun in Prez and Batgirl, complete with Queer characters and a Tumblr-approved costume. Really, I don't see how Marvel is "shoving it down your throat" while DC is just putting out books. Just because they gave the mantle to someone else? Hell, DC turned Alan Scott gay and Wally West black! That's a far bigger departure than simply lending a character's mantle to someone else for a while to boost their profile.

They're doing the very same thing. And honestly, I don't see the downside in that, or having a Chinese Superman. Represantation is important to lots of folks and yes, the majority is tired of seeing straight, white, American males star in everything. Why does the German or the Russian have to always be the bad-guy? Why does the Italian have to be the loud-mouth comedic relief? Why do the Balcans have to be the drug dealers and the smugglers? I don't agree with everything, but I like this new movement. For example, I'm able to identify much more with Doctor Doom and Moon Knight because they're not Americans, but rather European and Jewish. It goes a long way for readers that reside outside of the US to see protagonists or even antagonists with features and roots close to their own.

The Tumblr crowd is not small by any means, I'm not saying their comics aren't good, I'm saying the movie hype gave them a big push is all.

And I don't see how that's bad. If anything, DC should get a movie-hype, because for the most part, they're not in a very good position. Movies should build hype for the comics and vice versa. I don't see why they shouldn't co-operate.

 

[Ropen]

I have a question, is this movie victim of modern Hollywood original movie story telling? Every movie plays it safe for fan service, but whenever an original movie comes out, people bash it, like this one that doesn't hold the hands of the crowd...


Sent from Le iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[SnakeDoctor]

..... I have 10 year old twins (boy & girl) which have seen all of the Marvel Cinematic Movies, all the Raimi Spider-Man movies (which they liked), the crappy ASM movies (which they didn't, good taste), and both the FF movies (not the new crap which I refuse to ever see). The only DC movie I felt comfortable with them watching was Green Lantern. I wanted to watch MOS again with them, and I would've had I felt they were able to see this (BvS). MOS was a little violent, but the scene that got me was when Lois had to make the comment in the Arctic about "putting their @icks away"... Really, absolutely no need for that. They can watch the original Superman movies, just never got around to them, and the only Batman movies I'd be comfortable with was Batman Forever & Batman & Robin. Two movies which I'll be happy to never watch again in my lifetime. They loved the Justice League cartoon, Superman animated, Batman Beyond, Batman Brave & The Bold, and I'm sure some others. It's just sad that they like Batman and out of 8 movies, I'm only comfortable with them seeing 2..

I was fine with Batman Begins and TDK for the kids. BB was a little slow for kiddos, but not objectionable. TDK had was creepy enough for kids that are nightmare prone ... but my kids didn't care. We've let 'em watch TDKR -- but, skipped the Bruce and Miranda scene. Flat 'no' on Batman Returns.

I let my son see BvS. Like others, I found the Lois-bathtub scene most objectionable. I'm far less concerned about my kids screwing-up their lives with gunfights or brawls than I am with ill-advised, unmarried ***. There was just no need for the 'boy scout' hero of the DC Universe to climb into a bathtub with a girl he hadn't married. It isn't the nudity. It's the *** ... and that the HERO is the one engaged.

Violence really doesn't bother me at all for kids who don't get scared at such things. Gore bothers me. *** bothers me. Language, if it's really bad (that MOS '****-measuring' line was totally unnecessary).

Parents who have no problem with their young kids seeing Batman decapitate a henchman with his car bumper but get the vapors over a barely exposed breast crack me up. So stereo-typically American--the country's puritanical hypocrisy is always a source of worldwide amusement, if not an outright joke.

The only non-hypocrites on the planet are those with no values to betray. That's no badge of honor.

I doubt anyone who knows me would call me 'puritanical'. But, teaching kids right-and-wrong with regard to both *** and violence is probably a good idea for the puritanical and non-puritanical alike. Like Khev said ... I'm not too concerned about my kid potentially ruining his life with a gunfight or brawl. The chances are a lot better that he could screw something up with a hormonally-driven encounter with a chick.

Either way, we'll teach him how, and when to use a gun ... and how, and when it's appropriate to climb into a bathtub with a naked chick. I don't see any hypocrisy in that.

Tell us--what's it like living in the 19th century?

Anyway ... the 19th would be a little rough here in Texas. Maybe the early to mid-20th.

Yeah, not sure why "Gully Foyle" thinks I give two ****s about what he or she or it thinks about my parenting. We all have our convictions but as anyone who actually has kids knows so much depends on the individual child anyway. Some kids can handle certain levels of violence, others get nightmares, some situations hit too close to home based on the environment they live in, etc. I'm not about to scoff at anyone who does or doesn't take their kids to a film like BvS. I do think that a full R might have gained them more adult audience members than lost tickets from underaged kids, however.

Regarding *** and violence in general, sure a murder is worse than looking at naked bodies but how many lives are ruined by people committing cartoon acts of violence? Versus jobs and marriages that end due to someone having an addiction to ****? For whatever reason we collectively struggle with *** more than we do violence and it's hardly Puritan to simply be aware of that fact.

Is the tub scene in BvS some mind scarring horror of horrors? Hell no. But I certainly understand why some people like myself wouldn't be thrilled with it just as I understand others would probably think something that "tame" (relatively speaking) would be no big deal.

Damn straight. The big problem to me wasn't that Lois took a bath naked. It was that Clark -- a hero -- climbed in there with her. Generally speaking, I'd like Superman to be an example my son can look-up to, not somebody I have to make excuses for.

SnakeDoc

 

[Victοr]

I have a question, is this movie victim of modern Hollywood original movie story telling? Every movie plays it safe for fan service, but whenever an original movie comes out, people bash it, like this one that doesn't hold the hands of the crowd...


Sent from Le iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk - now Free

No, this movie is victim of not being well made. The audience isn't stupid, but they expect some sort of narrative. The God v Man theme ain't original, the super-hero deconstruction ain't original, the cynical world-view ain't original. This movie, like many, many others, is not original. It's execution that matters, and in that, it failed, IMO. But hey, folks who didn't like it obviously didn't grasp the undertones of the magnificent script, right?...

 

[GasparZizou]

Eh, I don't see it. How many are the cutesy/Tumblr comics? Hellcat, Gwenpool, Spider-Gwen, NuThor, maybe Spider-Woman and Captain Marvel? Ms. Marvel as well? That's it. Iron Man is still Iron Man. Captain America is still doing Captain America things. The Thunderbolts are getting a revival. The Punisher is getting a new solo. Supreme Nighthawk is getting his own series. Really, they're just trying new stuff. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy them. It's there. Like it? Cool? Don't like it? Sure, whatever.

And yes, DC tried the very same thing. LGBT solo with Midnighter. Minority leads in Cyborg, Doctor Fate and Doomed. Quirky fun in Prez and Batgirl, complete with Queer characters and a Tumblr-approved costume. Really, I don't see how Marvel is "shoving it down your throat" while DC is just putting out books. Just because they gave the mantle to someone else? Hell, DC turned Alan Scott gay and Wally West black! That's a far bigger departure than simply lending a character's mantle to someone else for a while to boost their profile.

You're focusing on female only, and yes all of those are definitely that, I like Miss Marvel, but it's a tumblr book by definition, so is Cap Marvel, another cardboard cut-out stronk womyn character, also black Cap, Asian Hulk, Mexican Ghost Rider, etc etc, some of those may be good, but most of them are blatant hollow pandering for the sake of pseudo progressivism. The fact that they're using flagship characters and changing them to push this stuff, using their fanbase as vehicle whether they like it or not, and there was an uproar when all this stuff was announced, is the very definition of "shoving it down your throat".

And no, Midgnighter is not an example of that at all, he was always an LGBT character, Cyborg's always been black, Doctor Fate maybe, but it was an alternate universe, yeah Batgirl was tumblr-approved... Until that outrageous cover... And they may added a new "hip" setting, but the character was the same, Alan Scott is also an alternate version, sure Wally is now black, so far is the only one you mentioned who is anything similar to what Marvel is doing hell, DC used to make fun of angry tweets of "when r u gon add more deeverzity to ur comiks ei"?

They're doing the very same thing. And honestly, I don't see the downside in that, or having a Chinese Superman. Represantation is important to lots of folks and yes, the majority is tired of seeing straight, white, American males star in everything. Why does the German or the Russian have to always be the bad-guy? Why does the Italian have to be the loud-mouth comedic relief? Why do the Balcans have to be the drug dealers and the smugglers? I don't agree with everything, but I like this new movement. For example, I'm able to identify much more with Doctor Doom and Moon Knight because they're not Americans, but rather European and Jewish. It goes a long way for readers that reside outside of the US to see protagonists or even antagonists with features and roots close to their own.

There is a downside to that and people don't see it.

Being unable to relate to a character until they're "more like me" is inherently wrong an hypocritical to their "inclusive" goal.

I've never had a problem relating to WW because she was a woman, or to Spawn because he was black, or Superman because he was white, and I didn't feel more "connected" to Ghost Rider when he was Mexican, all of that is ********, why the hell are people not able to enjoy a character until they're more like them? That's racist in it of itself.

I'm not against having more characters like those, I'm against changing established characters to force that quota, make new characters or give the ones that already exist more exposition.

 

[YoNoSe]

I have a question, is this movie victim of modern Hollywood original movie story telling? Every movie plays it safe for fan service, but whenever an original movie comes out, people bash it, like this one that doesn't hold the hands of the crowd...


Sent from Le iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk - now Free

BvS is based, in general, on comic book stories using the two most recognizable comic characters in history. Aside from that, the narrative is a mashup of two of the most popular stories in comic book history. I don't know if it's a victim of anything but it's definitely not suffering for it's originality.

 

[jye4ever]

Yeah, I totally get that, and I apologize if I pressed the issue at all. At any rate, Snyder's Superman may be a fornicator, but at least he's not a deadbeat dad like Routh was. Looking in people's windows, letting Cyclops raise his progeny. How's that for a positive role model?

Nope, it wasn't you that crossed that line so from my seat apology not required from you.

But we also can just move forward now.

 

[batfan08]

Nope, it wasn't you that crossed that line so from my seat apology not required from you.

But we also can just move forward now.

Ah, good to know. I just wanted to be sure.

 

[jye4ever]

You are forgiven.

 

[Ropen]

BvS is based, in general, on comic book stories using the two most recognizable comic characters in history. Aside from that, the narrative is a mashup of two of the most popular stories in comic book history. I don't know if it's a victim of anything but it's definitely not suffering for it's originality.

Original in the sense that it's breaking the marvel mold of feeding the audience everything and being cheesy and funny, I honestly think everyone associates super heroes movies in this day and age like that.

 

[Victοr]

You're focusing on female only, and yes all of those are definitely that, I like Miss Marvel, but it's a tumblr book by definition, so is Cap Marvel, another cardboard cut-out stronk womyn character, also black Cap, Asian Hulk, Mexican Ghost Rider, etc etc, some of those may be good, but most of them are blatant hollow pandering for the sake of pseudo progressivism. The fact that they're using flagship characters and changing them to push this stuff, using their fanbase as vehicle whether they like it or not, and there was an uproar when all this stuff was announced, is the very definition of "shoving it down your throat".

Captain Marvel is just a super-hero sci-fi book now. Ms. Marvel is just a modern take on Spider-Man, same with the Morales book. Cho is a funnier Hulk book that will reveal Banner's whereabouts eventually. Really, why is this so different than the time **** took the mantle, or Bucky became Cap? Or when Masterson became Thor? Or when Reilly temporarily took over from Peter? They're just trying to spice things up a bit. Hell, Rogers is already back and starring in his own solo! Odinson will get another solo as well. Really, I don't see what the fuss is all about.

And no, Midgnighter is not an example of that at all, he was always an LGBT character, Cyborg's always been black, Doctor Fate maybe, but it was an alternate universe, yeah Batgirl was tumblr-approved... Until that outrageous cover... And they may added a new "hip" setting, but the character was the same, Alan Scott is also an alternate version, sure Wally is now black, so far is the only one you mentioned who is anything similar to what Marvel is doing hell, DC used to make fun of angry tweets of "when r u gon add more deeverzity to ur comiks ei?"

Tomato, tomato. Fact is, they're both trying to be more diverse. "Alternate Universe" or not, they were titles published monthly, featuring the only version of those characters. There was no straight Alan Scott or Kent Nelson Doctor Fate, the Earth-2 characters, were the characters. Doctor Fate is also a minority (from India I think, though I'm not sure) in Prime-Earth as well. Hell, you won't find a more Tumblr-like character than Harley! She's quirky, bi and constantly eats, paints her nails, has quirky adventures and features a diverse cast.

Either way, I don't see why that's a bad thing or why I should care. If I like a book, I'll buy it. If not? I won't fret over it. Nobody's forcing me, you, or anyone else to buy them. They're there and will be there until the writers have told their stories.

There is a downside to that and people don't see it.

Being unable to relate to a character until they're "more like me" is inherently wrong an hypocritical to their "inclusive" goal.

I've never had a problem relating to WW because she was a woman, or to Spawn because he was black, or Superman because he was white, and I didn't feel more "connected" to Ghost Rider when he was Mexican, all of that is ********, why the hell are people not able to enjoy a character until they're more like them? That's racist in it of itself.

I'm not against having more characters like those, I'm against changing established characters to force that quota, make new characters or give the ones that already exist more exposition.

Yeah, sure, Black Panther is my 3rd favourite CBC, but it doesn't change the fact that I want to see more characters from Europe and other parts of the world. When another reboot happens, I don't see why certain characters can't be changed to be more inclusive. I'm not saying Batman or Parker should become Japanese-Americans, but I wouldn't mind if Flash Thomson had German anscestry or Foggy Nelson came from Turkish parents. The world is a big place, why limit it to just the US?

Either way, this isn't going anywhere, because in matters like these, you either are for or against. Nobody's wrong, it's all about preference. Personally, I don't agree with all of Marvel's decisions, but at least they're committed. DC's trying to do the same, but at a smaller scale. They're both following the same tactic, it's just that Marvel has found more success. A good thing or not, that's up to you to decide.

 

[Adolfo]

I can't believe we are seeing eye to green eye.

So glad youre recovering and getting back to being normal..BvS rules yo!

 

[jye4ever]

So glad youre recovering and getting back to being normal..BvS rules yo!

It really did, the 6 of us that really liked it should meet up for a beer.

 

[GasparZizou]

Captain Marvel is just a super-hero sci-fi book now. Ms. Marvel is just a modern take on Spider-Man, same with the Morales book. Cho is a funnier Hulk book that will reveal Banner's whereabouts eventually. Really, why is this so different than the time **** took the mantle, or Bucky became Cap? Or when Masterson became Thor? Or when Reilly temporarily took over from Peter? They're just trying to spice things up a bit. Hell, Rogers is already back and starring in his own solo! Odinson will get another solo as well. Really, I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Cap Marvel is generic in its entirety, it may be "sci-fi" but it's nothing you didn't get from GotG already, I don't know, I tried to like Carol Danvers until I realized there's nothing to like because there's barely a character there, its selling point isn't the interesting sci-fi stuff in it, the selling point is that she's a stronk womyn. I already said I liked Ms. Marvel, but it's undoubtedly a tumblr-tier book. It's different because they're not just trying to spice things up, they were pushing something, is Thor going back to be Thor? Or is he still getting powercucked by Jane?, That's the thing, he may be getting a new book, but he's not really Thor, he's "unworthy" Thor Not a big fuss for me except for the already mentioned cases, I'm just pointing out why it's a cheap scheme.

Tomato, tomato. Fact is, they're both trying to be more diverse. "Alternate Universe" or not, they were titles published monthly, featuring the only version of those characters. There was no straight Alan Scott or Kent Nelson Doctor Fate, the Earth-2 characters, were the characters. Doctor Fate is also a minority (from India I think, though I'm not sure) in Prime-Earth as well. Hell, you won't find a more Tumblr-like character than Harley! She's quirky, bi and constantly eats, paints her nails, has quirky adventures and features a diverse cast.

Either way, I don't see why that's a bad thing or why I should care. If I like a book, I'll buy it. If not? I won't fret over it. Nobody's forcing me, you, or anyone else to buy them. They're there and will be there until the writers have told their stories.

Not really, there is a difference here, a vital difference, one was doing it by pushing already diverse characters, and the other one is bandwagoning on the popularity of already established characters for this purpose.

But Harley was already like that, since the animated series, Catwoman too, Poison Ivy too, there IS a difference between giving characters that have the characteristics you're looking for, a push, and twisting a character to fit the ******** demand.

They are kinda forcing most fans of those characters to buy them, the fans that have brand loyalty and or are morbidly curious about those **** shows, which is why it's a cheap ploy, which is why they are using those characters in the first place.

Yeah, sure, Black Panther is my 3rd favourite CBC, but it doesn't change the fact that I want to see more characters from Europe and other parts of the world. When another reboot happens, I don't see why certain characters can't be changed to be more inclusive. I'm not saying Batman or Parker should become Japanese-Americans, but I wouldn't mind if Flash Thomson had German anscestry or Foggy Nelson came from Turkish parents. The world is a big place, why limit it to just the US?

Because they are based in the US, created in the US by US creators, not only that, Superheroes are sort of US mythology.

They've come this far because of what they are, if people want more minorities, diversity, etc etc, introduce new characters that fit your cravings, don't change the ones that already exist and are the pillars of the entire genre to please some generational whims.

Either way, this isn't going anywhere, because in matters like these, you either are for or against. Nobody's wrong, it's all about preference. Personally, I don't agree with all of Marvel's decisions, but at least they're committed. DC's trying to do the same, but at a smaller scale. They're both following the same tactic, it's just that Marvel has found more success. A good thing or not, that's up to you to decide.

Personally I was hoping DC would stay out of all that pandering BS, but they're starting to bend to it, unfortunately.

 

[jye4ever]

[h=1]Batman v Superman' Drops Big While Crossing $680 Million Worldwide[/h]by Brad Brevet

April 3, 2016

The steep second weekend drop suffered by Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice will receive the bulk of attention this week and rightfully so as it is the fifth largest second weekend drop for a film that opened over $100 million. That said, the superhero feature maintained the #1 position and has now crossed $680 million worldwide.


Should BvS also finish with a 2.18 multiplier that would still result in a domestic run of $362.8 million, enough to rank in the top 30 all-time.



Perhaps some of the film's second weekend drop could be attributed to the NCAA Tournament's Final Four games on Saturday night. If so, that may help Batman v Superman exhibit some third weekend stamina, helping push it toward a domestic run over $370 million.


Internationally, Batman v Superman added an estimated $85 million this weekend as its worldwide cume now climbs to $682.8 million.

From a worldwide perspective, the film has already surpassed the entire global returns from films such as Man of Steel ($668m), Thor: The Dark World ($644.6m), Iron Man 2 ($623.9m) and Iron Man ($585.2m) on the all-time list where it currently ranks #84. All that said, while it looked like the film might become the 25th to ever cross $1 billion worldwide, its chances at crossing that mark aren't looking so good any longer.

 

[Khev]

The 6 of us that really liked it should meet up for a beer.

"And to all of you, uh, all you phonies, all of you two-faced fans, you sycophantic Disney suck-ups who smile through your teeth at negative reviews, please leave us in peace. Please go. Stop smiling. It's not a joke. Please leave. The party's over. Get out."

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

while it looked like the film might become the 25th to ever cross $1 billion worldwide, its chances at crossing that mark aren't looking so good any longer.

I refuse to believe that a movie that gives us the trinity for the first time ever in a live action film, Batman interacting with Lex Luthor for the first time ever, the first live action Doomsday, the first live action Batman and Sups fight, Aquaman, a Flash cameo and references to Darkseid can't even make it to a billion

 

[jye4ever]

I refuse to believe that a movie that gives us the trinity for the first time ever in a live action film, and Batman interacting with Lex Luthor for the first time ever, and the first live action Doomsday, Aquaman, a Flash cameo and references to Darkseid can't even make it to a billion

You also forgot...

First ever Batman to fight like the Arkham games!
First ever Man Bat!
First ever Robin costume!
First ever jar or piss in a superhero movie!

 

[GasparZizou]

[h=1]Batman v Superman' Drops Big While Crossing $680 Million Worldwide[/h]by Brad Brevet

I've seen people claiming the poor 2nd weekend performance since Friday, 81% drop they said, with Saturday and Sunday left, 60something% on Saturday, with Sunday left It's sitting at 680 mill with one day of weekend left, probably gonna reach 700 mil when they report tomorrow, taking Sunday into account, but people have been trying to bury this movie since before it premiered even the articles that are trying to sound positive are like "yeah this isn't doing so bad after all, but take a look at this other movie which did better"

So what's the word on the budget, this oughta cover it right? Theater cuts and all.

Budget was 250 mil with like 150 mil in marketing which was most likely already payed itself, I remember when some sites were claiming from those 400 mil it needed twice as much just to break even, someone took the 400 mil marketing included budget reported, and thought it was 400 mil production budget, and doubled it because "that's how it works" . And everybody ran with that story.

700 million with how many weeks left? 2, 3? I think it can do it, unless the ticket sales suddenly stop or die completely.

 

[rushmore223]

Anyone know the formula, studios keep half of box office?

Theaters keep the other 50% cut plus 100% concessions obviously.

You guys should google how much the theaters made on concessions for TDK/TFA, .... the record holders.

I don't know if this has been answered yet, as there are a lot of pages, but theaters keep next to nothing of the ticket sales. With a big release, studios will often take nearly all the revenue from ticket sales for the first 4 weeks, after 4 weeks, theaters start getting a bigger and bigger percentage. This is why a large soda will cost you $6 and a $1 candy will cost you $5 in the theater.