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

[meanstreak]

I don't see Dr. Strange appealing to kids... maybe that will change with the marketing though. We've only seen one trailer but it looks like it would be over all of their heads and be more similar to batman begins/inception

 

[IrishJedi]

Well, the same can be said about Walt Disney, George Lucas, Bob Kane and plenty of other creators that get way too much credit for other people's work. I don't know how much Lee was involved in creating all those books and characters, but I still respect the guy.

Bob Kane. Now there was another self-promoting douche pump who directly took credit for the work of others. He and Stan Lee should have a few drinks together in the afterlife. They'll need em. It'll be warm.

 

[jye4ever]

A. Dr. Strange is hands down MCU's worst trailer. Only good thing in that trailer is the last shot.

B. Stan Lee cameos take me out of the movie everytime, it's like the 4th wall is broken everytime! They should've stopped after Raimi's Spiderman 1.

 

[karamazov80]

Yeah, fairness to Lee that he never claimed credit for Captain America that I know of. If others attribute that to him, then that's on them.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Bob Kane. Now there was another self-promoting douche pump who directly took credit for the work of others. He and Stan Lee should have a few drinks together in the afterlife. They'll need em. It'll be warm.

It's ironic because here you see Stan Lee defending Jerry Robinson when Kane was talking about the Joker and you can see Kane getting upset It starts around the 3:00 minute mark.




I'll still give Lee the benefit of the doubt because it's impossible for people who weren't there to know how involved Lee was in creating those books.

 

[IrishJedi]

Yeah, fairness to Lee that he never claimed credit for Captain America that I know of. If others attribute that to him, then that's on them.

Supposedly he did strongly hint at it in one of the "History of Marvel" magazines they used to put out back in the day. But even if he didn't, there's still plenty he has taken credit for, almost all of which his main contribution was the name:

Spider-Man (Ditko)
Fantastic Four (Kirby)
Doctor Strange (Ditko)
Avengers (Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Ant Man, Wasp) (Kirby)
X-Men (Kirby)

Lee's greatest gift and talent is that of a salesman and he was once upon a time a great ambassador and promotor of comics. The problem is, he was just as much of a salesman and promoter when it comes to his own legacy, and it's road paved with bull ****.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Supposedly he did strongly hint at it in one of the "History of Marvel" magazines they used to put out back in the day. But even if he didn't, there's still plenty he has taken credit for, almost all of which his main contribution was the name:

Spider-Man (Ditko)
Fantastic Four (Kirby)
Doctor Strange (Ditko)
Avengers (Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Ant Man, Wasp) (Kirby)
X-Men (Kirby)

Come on now. I understand that maybe those guys don't get enough credit, but to discredit someone's contribution without any significant prove because he's getting too much credit isn't fair either. I highly doubt he would have been able to get away with taking so much credit (if true) for so many years if he didn't play a significant creative role.

 

[IrishJedi]

I'll still give Lee the benefit of the doubt because it's impossible for people who weren't there to know how involved Lee was in creating those books.

Kirby disputed Lee's claims when he was still alive, and Ditko is still alive and has never shied away from saying that Lee is full of crap.

 

[IrishJedi]

Come on now. I understand that maybe those guys don't get enough credit, but to discredit someone's contribution without any significant prove because he's getting too much credit isn't fair either. I highly doubt he would have been able to get away with taking so much credit (if true) for so many years if he didn't play a significant creative role.

Oh you'd be surprised. The comics industry has always been just that unethical.

I can suggest some books, autobiographies and documentaries if you care to see how shady folks like Stan Lee, Bob Kane and several others have been over the years.

 

[IrishJedi]

But in regards to those two... Kane's father was a powerful attorney (during a time when comic creators didn't have 2 nickels to rub together ) and Lee was related to the owner/publisher of Marvel at the time. That's how they were able to get away with it.

 

[GeneralZodLives]

People taking credit for other people's ideas and creators not being properly compensated was how it was done in the industry back then. Siegel and Shuster were ****ed over big time with Superman, Bill Finger with Batman, Kirby, Ditko, etc. etc. The list goes on and on and isn't company specific.

 

[ZombieRepublican]

Suicide Squad will be just fine. Marvel should be worried about Doctor Strange though.

You gave me a thought. If Suicide squad is good that'll be the N'th movie in a row that had a good trailer and was good, and movies with bad trailers being bad.

It used to be the trailers were made to trick us to like a movie. Now all they do is show how bad they probably are

 

[kryptonianmutie]

Lee has been a great ambassador for comics and that should be his legacy. There's too much brouhaha about what he actually contributed to comics in terms of creativity. I've seen him a number of times correct people and give credit to others but then I've seen the hurt on the faces of Kirby's family and I know Stan didn't do everything he could to make things right with the King.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Oh you'd be surprised. The comics industry has always been just that unethical.

I can suggest sole books, autobiographies and documentaries if you care to see how shady folks like Stan Lee, Bob Kane and several others have been over the years.

I don't think it's just the comic industry.Thomas Edison is the perfect example of someone who technically took credit for hundreds of things other people created under his "brand" and "leadership."However, how come Lee hasn't been discredited with actual physical prove by people in the industry? I'm not talking about one guy's opinion, but people who worked for or with Lee? I know about Kane's reputation, although I do think he played a role in creating Batman and several other characters, but because he gets all the credit and he was so arrogant, some people want to completely discredit him as a reaction. I think it's the same with Lee. I can picture him working in a room full of writers and artists in an era where comic writers and artist didn't get any respect and they are all somewhat involved in creating the latest names of character and stories that only children will read, but ultimately one or two guys get the credit because they're the ones in charge. I bet they, including Lee never thought any of those characters would become so popular and long lasting.

 

[jye4ever]

Lee and Kirby were/are Jewish, Lee is the one who handed Kirby over to Pontius Pilate.

 

[karamazov80]

Supposedly he did strongly hint at it in one of the "History of Marvel" magazines they used to put out back in the day. But even if he didn't, there's still plenty he has taken credit for, almost all of which his main contribution was the name:

Spider-Man (Ditko)
Fantastic Four (Kirby)
Doctor Strange (Ditko)
Avengers (Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Ant Man, Wasp) (Kirby)
X-Men (Kirby)

Lee's greatest gift and talent is that of a salesman and he was once upon a time a great ambassador and promotor of comics. The problem is, he was just as much of a salesman and promoter when it comes to his own legacy, and it's road paved with bull ****.

Oh sure, I'm not disputing any of the others, just Captain America in particular.

I don't think it's just the comic industry.Thomas Edison is the perfect example of someone who technically took credit for hundreds of things other people created under his "brand" and "leadership."However, how come Lee hasn't been discredited with actual physical prove by people in the industry?

The evidence that has come out over the years is pretty compelling. And Lee's own claims have become weaker and weaker with time, and he has begrudgingly acknowledged more credit being warranted for others. But a big part of this is that this is the way Lee understood comic creation and credit to work. This gives you a nice overview:

https://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff_Lee-Kirby.html

In Lee's mind, the editor and publisher are really the ones responsible. And in fairness, Lee did seem to come up with many of the broad sketches from which those great comics developed. And Lee was a great writer of dialog, which was one of the strengths of Marvel in the early days. But it was a symbiotic relationship.

 

[Victοr]

Since we're on the subject of creators, co-creators and the like, here's Gibbons' view of BvS: https://www.comicbookmovie.com/batman_vs_superman/watchmen-co-creator-dave-gibbons-slams-dc-batman-v-superman-a142211

In a video interview with Flicks And The City, Gibbons was asked about his thoughts on the film and the overal direction of the DC fim universe. "I feel that what is happening now with the DC characters in film, to my mind, is going in the wrong direction... What Marvel has seemed to have done is take their characters, with a dark side and a light side, and their humor and their pathos, and their human emotion, and they actually have a long vision of what they're going to do. They put together films that are really entertaining, that are exciting, that do have threat and jeopardy, but have humor and a human quality to it, and a sense of hope. But I feel what DC has done particularly with the Superman vs. Batman movie is they really have taken a misstep on it. I mean, I wrote a comic book called 'World's Finest', which was Superman vs. Batman, and what I homed in, and I am not saying this is the only take, but it might have helped, was you have Batman who is a dark hidden creature who lives in a dark evil city whose antagonist is a brightly colored clown. You got Superman who is a brightly colored figure, the yang if you like to Batman's yin, he lives in a bright hopeful city, but with a villain, an opponent, who is a dark grey scheming business man. So the whole universe's are completely complimentary. When I wrote my story, I got a lot of mileage out of crossing those over, and it turned out Luthor went to Gotham, and the Joker went to Metropolis, and the Joker wanted to black out Metropolis, and Luthor wanted to set Gotham on fire. So to me if you are doing Superman vs. Batman, the first thing, which is implied by the "vs," is there has to be a difference, and I think where the latest film suffered was because they were both these dark opaque angsty creatures.

It's a harsh analysis, but Gibbons' words don't fall too far away from what a lot of critics and fans have critiqued about the film to begin with. Despite this, Gibbons had nothing but praise for Ben Affleck's Batman, though he was less appreciative of the inclusion of the other Justice League members. "I thought, I have to say that Ben Affleck's Batman was brilliant. I thought if he'd been in a Batman film on his own... I also think DC sort of lost their nerve because Superman Vs. Batman, which is basically Frank Miller's Dark Knight story, is enough for a movie without putting Doomsday in it, which is another complete Superman movie, without shoehorning The Flash and the Cyborg, and without Wonder Woman, she's a movie in her own right." Gibbons went on to say that he's not overly thrilled with DC in general at the moment, and was rather impressed with Marvel's most recent film, Captain America: Civil War. "Perhaps at the moment, I'm less than 100% thrilled with DC. I'm certainly not coming down on Zack, but to my taste, they kind of missed the [inaudible] there. I think also Marvel have been really bold. They introduced the characters slowly, so when they put them all in a movie together, it gave me that same thrill as I had when a kid when they put all the characters into the Avengers. 'Wow! They're all in one comic!' And the latest Captain America [Civil War] movie, the bit when the two teams run toward each other with all their powers blazing was just 'Oh! Yeah! This is what comics are all about!' I think Marvel have done it with verve and wit. DC kind of missed out on that."

When asked for his thoughts on the recent reboot that incorporated the Watchmen characters into the DC universe, Gibbons kept his answer brief, though he didn't seem pleased. "I wouldn't make the question too long. All I'm going to say is no comment," Gibbons said when Rebirth and Doctor Manhattan were brought up. "I have no comment."

 

[karamazov80]

In contrast to Kirby, Dave Gibbons is a guy who probably gets more credit than he deserves for Watchmen Though Moore seems happy to share that credit with him. And Gibbons is a fantastic illustrator and did spend a ridiculous amount of effort on that project in particular. It certainly is a better project for his being involved. I finished his Watching the Watchmen book not long ago, and it was a really great read.

 

[IrishJedi]

That's only because Moore doesn't want anything to do with it anymore and is all too happy let Gibbons be the sole creator representative, but it was definitely a full collaboration from start-to-finish (though Gibbons' contributions were obviously more on designs).

 

[kryptonianmutie]

IrishJedi, is it true that this is an accurate portrayal of the state of affairs DCFilms?