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

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I love that one of your complaints about Man of Steel is the "hope" thing. Superman's been a symbol of hope for as long as I can remember. In the comics, he's the champion of earth; a god walking among men, and he lights the way for humanity to follow. Even in the Reeve films, that was made clear, with Brando's monologues about how "they only lack the light to show the way." In a lot of ways, though, I think your whole claim is ********. These are stories of extraordinary people doing extraordinary things for the good of their people; of course they're going to be associated with hope. That's one of the things that pisses me off about some Batman fans; they think just because he's relatively dark and brooding in some incarnations, that they can pidgeonholing him into being nothing more than an agent of fear, and a dark avenger. One of my favorite Batman stories ever is "Epilogue" from Justice League Unlimited, where Amanda Waller tells Terry McGinnis that she'd "never met anyone who cared as much for his fellow man as Bruce Wayne." Batman is an agent of Justice, not vengeance; if he were the latter, there's be nothing holding him back from becoming The Punisher. Point is:as long as there are superheroes, they will be associated with hope.

batfan08 looking for a fight.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I love that one of your complaints about Man of Steel is the "hope" thing. Superman's been a symbol of hope for as long as I can remember. In the comics, he's the champion of earth; a god walking among men, and he lights the way for humanity to follow. Even in the Reeve films, that was made clear, with Brando's monologues about how "they only lack the light to show the way." In a lot of ways, though, I think your whole claim is ********. These are stories of extraordinary people doing extraordinary things for the good of their people; of course they're going to be associated with hope. That's one of the things that pisses me off about some Batman fans; they think just because he's relatively dark and brooding in some incarnations, that they can pidgeonholing him into being nothing more than an agent of fear, and a dark avenger. One of my favorite Batman stories ever is "Epilogue" from Justice League Unlimited, where Amanda Waller tells Terry McGinnis that she'd "never met anyone who cared as much for his fellow man as Bruce Wayne." Batman is an agent of Justice, not vengeance; if he were the latter, there's be nothing holding him back from becoming The Punisher. Point is:as long as there are superheroes, they will be associated with hope.

I think what DiFabio was getting at with regard to certain current heroes being "****ies" is that they go around lecturing people about hope and then don't deliver. We get enough of that with our own idiot leaders in real life. When I go to the movies I don't want to see my heroes preaching empty promises that they don't embody I want them to get in the game and *inspire* hope with their heroic and praiseworthy actions.

When I saw TFA opening night it was a pretty rowdy crowd and with lots of gals that didn't seem to be comic book fans that were seemingly dragged there by their husbands/boyfriends. A lot of them were laughing inappropriately and not getting into the movie during the first few minutes. A hush instantly fell over the crowd when Steve fell on that grenade. They knew he was the real deal for once and were captivated from that moment on.

As opposed to MOS Supes, Bale Batman, and Garfield Spidey who promise "hope" that they'll clean up messes that THEY caused when they created or attracted the villains in the first place. Gee thanks guys, hey next time maybe just don't show up at all?

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Pita-man would be a great name for a Greek fast food joint.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

You don't like falafel?

 

[chewblacca]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

That's the difference between then and now. The first time the world sees Superman in the Reeve movies he's saving Lois Lane from a helicopter, rescuing kitten out of trees, and foiling criminals from robbing buildings and getting away in boats. Today the first time Superman is seen he's leveling a town in a fight with aliens and trying to defend the army.

 

[crows]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I'm more of a taco guy.

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

In honor of all you guys I watched MOS again last night. It wasn't that bad! You guys are way too hard on it.

Agreed

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

They're preachy mother****ers instead of actual men. . .like the heroes of old.

Word.

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I think what DiFabio was getting at with regard to certain current heroes being "****ies" is that they go around lecturing people about hope and then don't deliver. We get enough of that with our own idiot leaders in real life. When I go to the movies I don't want to see my heroes preaching empty promises that they don't embody I want them to get in the game and *inspire* hope with their heroic and praiseworthy actions.

When I saw TFA opening night it was a pretty rowdy crowd and with lots of gals that didn't seem to be comic book fans that were seemingly dragged there by their husbands/boyfriends. A lot of them were laughing inappropriately and not getting into the movie during the first few minutes. A hush instantly fell over the crowd when Steve fell on that grenade. They knew he was the real deal for once and were captivated from that moment on.

As opposed to MOS Supes, Bale Batman, and Garfield Spidey who promise "hope" that they'll clean up messes that THEY caused when they created or attracted the villains in the first place. Gee thanks guys, hey next time maybe just don't show up at all?

How do they cause the messes that they caused, though? The Dark Knight Trilogy was something of a domino effect, I'll give you that, with Batman, potentially, inspiring theatrical characters like The Joker, but how did he create the mess? He saved his city, and managed to shake them out of their feelings of apathy. That's the whole point of the "Batman can be anyone" thing; not that anyone can be Batman, but that anyone with the will to help their fellow man can do so. Literally, I'll give you that Man of Steel Superman was cleaning up his own mess, but, at the same time, is it really fair to find him responsible? He was a confused young man trying to find out who he was; he didn't know that doing so would lead a psychopathic, genocidal maniac to Earth. In the end, he managed to save the world from total annihilation; was there a cost? Yes, but, in the end, the potential for destruction was far greater.

With that in mind, I don't see how these things negate them being symbols of hope.

Yup, Khev gets it.


Batfan, Reeve Superman embodied "hope" without ever once having to utter it. Like Cap, he could say that he doesn't lie and always tells the truth and I'd believe it. Batman =/= hope and never has. He's a dude that throws on a horned, demon cowl and scalloped cape to go beat the snot out of crime to comfort his own personal anger and frustration. Spider-Man has always been about responsibility and having to give up your own wants and desires for the good of others, not, "Pida-Man is a symbol of hope that maybe tomorrow will be a brighter day!"

It's corny and cliched, a broken promise that has manifested in the past couple of years. It's a hoax and a lie. The fact that every superhero is now relying on the concept (except the good ones), just shows how unobtainable such an ideal is. They're preachy mother****ers instead of actual men of action like the heroes of old.

Again, though, when did Cavill actually have to utter it? He was explaining what his family crest meant to someone who didn't know. I hardly see that as him going and saying "I STAND FOR HOPE!" It's no different than someone mispronouncing your name; of course you're going to correct them when it's a part of your lineage. I also disagree about Batman. One does not necessarily have to adopt a theme of hopefulness to be seen as a symbol of hope. Batman is an ordinary human being trying to make the world a better place, whether you say so or not, people will always find hope in those trying to make a positive difference, and, frankly, I must say that, if you're referring to the actual idea of hope in that last paragraph, as a "corny and clichéd broken promise," I kind of feel sorry for you. If not, then my apologies for misunderstanding, but, for someone to be so cynical as to literally reject hope is kind of sad to me.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I don't mind characters cleaning up their own messes, I just prefer they don't do it in movies where I'm beaten over the head with the notion that they are "symbols of hope."

If my name means hope and I put a city in danger and then someone asks how to say my name I'd probably say, "uh, I'll tell you later. I've got something to take care of first."

I certainly wouldn't raise my eyebrows and confidently tell them. Two of the guys on the other side of the one-way mirror who were watching Supes boast about his family symbol would later die in the black hole, nobly sacrificing their lives to save everyone on the planet. Maybe THOSE guys should have been our symbols, not the dope who was cracking jokes about making out with aliens minutes after they paid the ultimate price.

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

The city wasn't in danger, yet, though. He was just in an interrogation room having a conversation with a reporter.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Supes was being interrogated because he surrendered himself after Zod threatened the whole planet. That's pretty much the definition of them being in danger.

How embarrassing for him to be so cocky when the guys on the other side of the glass were actually going to make the sacrifice plays so HE could live happily ever after.

 

[GasparZizou]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Hope is not supposed to get anything done, hope is just to expect a positive outcome, hope without action is a fool's game.

And not Superman nor Batman in the most recent interpretations just mumbled hope and did nothing, they took action.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Hope is not supposed to get anything done, hope is just to expect a positive outcome, hope without action is a fool's game.

And not Superman nor Batman in the most recent interpretations just mumbled hope and did nothing, they took action.

Sure Superman took action. He fought off guys who came looking for him after they leveled half a city. How is that bringing hope to anyone? "Don't worry, if *I* attract anymore threats I promise I'll kill them before more than 2 or 3 million of you die." Oh good, I'm so glad you're here. Hey how about you don't bring us hope and just go somewhere else instead? We'd rather have our 2-3 million friends and family members back thanks.

EDIT: DiFabio beat me to it.

 

[GasparZizou]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Batman has always been the cause of many the problems that occur, most rogues are born cause they feel alienated by the mere existence of Batman, more specifically, the Joker lives ONLY to **** Batman's existence, but not Rha's Al Ghul nor Bane were Batman's fault.

And Superman was also responsible for Zod and his henchmen coming to earth in Superman 2, just like in MoS, unknowingly.

The only difference is that in MoS they were actually powerful.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Both of their city's are in ruin because of the actions they took and the decisions they made.

In the end, Clark Kent would have been better off staying at the bottom of the ocean for the rest of his life, while Bruce and Alfred made a suicide pact in the south east corner. Metropolis and Gotham would have been better off.

Pa Kent felt left out so he found the nearest Tornado.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Here's the thing, it really messes things up for a "hero" to CAUSE the loss of innocent life, directly or indirectly. Innocents can die, that can be part of the conflict sure, but that really needs to be the work of the BAD GUYS. Now if you want to say "but it's more realistic to have the heroes be flawed and flawed people make mistakes that cost lives" okay, fine. But they might need to turn in their "larger than life" hero card and they REALLY need to shut up about being associated with or a symbol of "hope for all." It's even worse if innocent lives are cost due to the actions of an actual messianic hero like Superman.

Think about this. On the commentary for Terminator 2 James Cameron mentioned that he carefully constructed the initial fight between naked Arnold and the guys in the bar so that even though the T-800 was being brutal and "terminator-esque" none of the bikers actually died. He stated that since Arnold would be a protector of sorts later in the movie he just didn't want to open the story up to that kind of "moral quandary" as he put it. And we're talking about a terminator! In an R-rated film! Even though it would have been *perfectly justified* for the pre-"I swear I will not kill anyone" Arnold to kill people who get in the way of him getting his clothes Cameron just knew that the story and people you root for would just get muddy and less inspiring.

It's just kind of sad when an antihero (at best) like a T-800 protects innocents and doesn't cause any of them to die better than arguably the most inspiring family oriented superhero of all.

 

[GasparZizou]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

The Wayne tech was his fault, the clean energy bomb was his fault, letting his family's company go to **** was his fault, etc. etc. etc.

How was the Wayne tech and the clean energy bomb his fault? They were used against him and that wasn't his fault.

The company, yeah that was his fault.

So? Reeve Superman didn't lecture about HOOOOPPPPPE and not deliver like Khev said. He didn't fly around the city smashing through buildings or endanger the lives of the people in Smallville by plowing Zod through the town and into a Sears.

Neither did MoS Superman, as usual, you didn't notice, but it was the military and Zod's henchmen who did 99.9% of the damage.

In fact, didn't the Reeve Superman have the bright idea of leaving Metropolis (pretending to be a coward), to move the battle field away from Metropolis so people wouldn't get hurt? Hmmm, what a great idea!

Yeah it's kind of easier when a punch from Stamp's Zod isn't capable of sending Superman through 5 or 6 buildings and it's not threatening to kill every human being.

 

[GasparZizou]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Why bother keeping something around when it has the potential to do more harm than good? Better yet, why was Bruce interested in clean energy again? Where the **** did that interest come from? He ain't no Tony Stark.

You do know that Bruce Wayne tries from several fronts to improve the city, right? Not only fighting crime, hence why he was donating to orphanages (which is one of the reasons his fortune was diminished) and getting clean energy to the city.

There's so many things he could have done to "better the world" as Bruce Wayne with his wealth, but nope, he's obsessed with a dumb, cliched "doomsday" plot device. Point is, he knew how deadly it was and even had the proper precautions built to destroy it.

Cause like every other engergy source, there's a risk of someone weaponizing it.

What does he do? Keeps it around. He's instead tricked by the women that manipulated him (she partially funded the damn thing and was obsessed with it since day 1) and then gives it to her. Everything that happens in the story happens because of how gullible and stupid Bruce and Fox are. Had Bruce not been a piece of **** for those 3-8 years and actually DONE something, none of that would have happened. Instead he got disgustingly comfortable with the effects of the lie he helped spread and sat up in his mansion doing absolutely nothing. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

The damage is ALL on him and his company. And what happens at the end when the city needs him most (financially and physically for the repairs alone)? He abandons it by going into retirement again. Wasn't the crime and corruption a direct result of the financial situation of the city in Begins? Well, judging by the 5 months of "Occupy Bane", the city is in the dark ages. All of it's bridges are destroyed, it's people are traumatized, it's very system is defunct. Worse yet, all of the criminals from black gate are on the loose and innocent, prosperous people were executed. The city is bankrupt or atleast facing severe poverty. What does poverty create? Depravity. Bruce most likely turned his back on the city when it needed him most.

You're kidding right? She was the daughter of Rha's not some dumb bimbo, and part of the same organization who infiltrated every level of Gotham in Begins, so it's entirely implausible they have the means to do it again, she succeeded in gaining access to what she wanted, villains are supposed to be resourceful and dangerous otherwise there wouldn't be the need for heroes.

It's not like in the comics there wasn't an organization named the court of owls which were ruling Gotham without Batman ever noticing it.... EVER.

Why even bother making these movies if villains are useless as ****.

He sent the signal to Zod and Co. He was carelessly smashing through the city (and Smallville) just as much as Zod.

He's a big, careless oaf in MoS. The Hulk from Avengers was more attentive of his surroundings than Supes was.

So? Superman sent the nuke who freed Zod.

And no, he wasn't, literally, the only damage he caused was the gas station, a few windows and some beams in the construction site, that's it.