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

[crows]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

since the body didn't matter to them they could have hired a better actress. and she could have definitely pull the WW role. she can be sweet, funny, tough, etc.

 

[RRJdesign]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I'm one of the very few people who is not complaining about casting Gal Gadot. I don't think Snyder is going to present her to us like that. The problem with her ****s and body can be fixed, and I think her face will look good with the costume. Nolan's Tom Hardy as Bane is not a tall guy but he looked huge on screen. Gal Gadot might surprise us as well. Affleck in the Bat suit looked good already.

I'm not going to complain until I see the movie. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Frank]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Yes debate there, mucho debate there, it's funny that it says "más delgado" and "muchas curvas" yet, apart from the hip and the ****s, they're equally thin.

They're both the same height, you saying Lynda's pic is farther away is baseless supposition, I see you're picking the Spanish lines that suit you, but not the one that says they're the same height.

You can be the same height and not the same build, which is what we were talking about. By any objective measure, they're not equally thin.

She was thick for her time...

Believe it or not, there was a time in Hollywood before breast and butt implants. She was noted for her figure which is remarkable today because she was only sporting a "C". I wouldn't call Gadot thick in any time or place save for a third world country in famine.

Yeah foolish you for not reading properly, in that quote of mine I never mentioned the term comic book standards, not once.

I said that **** has more variety in female bodies than comicbooks, I noticed you ignored the part where I said "in peak form" which implies that **** also deals with standardized women form, some of it could also be considered "unrealistic", regardless, it has more variety in female bodies...

What else do you mean when you say "comicbooks"? What is it an example (read: standard) of? I took your quote about "surgically enhanced exploding ****" to mean that comics depict females in general as too idealized and superhero chicks in particular. I think you're just moving the chains to whenever you've been cornered.

I thought we might be in agreement that Gal is not a typical representation of what you might find as WW in the comics. Boy I guess I was wrong! You went even further and said that comics aren't even as diverse (read: realistic) as **** actresses in all of their exaggerated plastic proportions, which quite honestly you have failed to establish nor could you ever really. At least not here. You have no point other than Gal is your Wonder Woman. Ok, but don't pretend like you have any consistent philosophy as to why exactly. You just like what you like.

Then there's this Lynda Carter thing. Some visual aids are in order here:

View attachment 110693

Despite the crappy distortion in Gal's pic, Lynda's arms and shoulders are still slightly thicker with more definition. Her thighs are in another league as you can see.

Then there's the actual measurements:

32-23-33 110 lbs

37-25-35 122 lbs

She's got an all around bigger frame, that's all there is to it. 12 pounds is more than just t&a dude.


There is an angle that is kind of staring us in the face in all this and that is her status as a feminist icon. It's problematic because between all the many waves of it we've had over the years, there are so many contradictions that they'd all be better off not trying to endorse anything. At first they want to prove that women can do everything a man can do. Wonder Woman pretty much embodies that with the exception of her true male counterpart. Then they wanted to redefine the standard for what would be considered an attractive female form. This is where I feel a good part of the fashion industry went with the anorexic model ascetic as a contrarian feminist ideal and where Gal derives alot of her look. Ironically their solution was to demphasize feminine traits and go for a less developed and sometimes even masculine look. They vary but usually between a pre-teen boy look to a concentration camp survivor on the verge of death. In the opposite extreme we have body-builders who can actually gain that special male secondary "trait" if enough hormones are taken.

That's why when I see the anorexic chic being touted as beautiful or desirable I instantly recoil with disgust. It's a real problem for that industry of which Gal is the latest product. I was hoping that they'd put a more athletic woman with an overall healthier look not only because it looks better but because it is at once more realistic and a healthier goal for the average.... gal.

 

[GasparZizou]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

You can be the same height and not the same build, which is what we were talking about. By any objective measure, they're not equally thin.

Like I said, besides the hip and bust, they are.

Believe it or not, there was a time in Hollywood before breast and butt implants. She was noted for her figure which is remarkable today because she was only sporting a "C". I wouldn't call Gadot thick in any time or place save for a third world country in famine.

She was thick? Even my mother used to say she was very thin, and she was thin herself.

What else do you mean when you say "comicbooks"? What is it an example (read: standard) of? I took your quote about "surgically enhanced exploding ****" to mean that comics depict females in general as too idealized and superhero chicks in particular. I think you're just moving the chains to whenever you've been cornered.

Exactly that, comic books in general, not the standards in comic books, in any case of a specific standard which in this case was breasts. I'm not cornered in the slightest, you're having problems with abstraction of information.

My comment clearly says that one industry has more variety in female bodies than the other, both filled with idealized bodies in peak form, that's it, where do you get that I hate comicbook standards in general from that? Where?

If there's one standard I'm tired of, are the surgically enhanced ****s in comics, maybe it's cause I'm a big boy enough to know **** don't look like that and I actually don't find implants appealing.

But to go from that to "you full hate on each and every single one of the aspects of comicbook standards" is ridiculous, so, how exactly am I cornered? ;

I thought we might be in agreement that Gal is not a typical representation of what you might find as WW in the comics. Boy I guess I was wrong! You went even further and said that comics aren't even as diverse (read: realistic) as **** actresses in all of their exaggerated plastic proportions, which quite honestly you have failed to establish nor could you ever really. At least not here. You have no point other than Gal is your Wonder Woman. Ok, but don't pretend like you have any consistent philosophy as to why exactly. You just like what you like.

I never said she was the ideal representation (you keep ignoring key things I say in order for your argument to move forward), she is also not atypical, I said that she is accurate to some of Wonder Woman representations, and she is, and therefore it's fine by me.

You're kidding yourself if you think mainstream comics are diverse when it comes to female anatomy, in that regard **** is indeed much more diverse, I'm sure you can find out, I didn't say realistic (there you go again), for someone who claims I'm cornered you're twisting and putting many words in my mouth, also, unless you're completely oblivious to ****, which I highly doubt, you'd know that by my **** comment I didn't only refer to those women who have breast implants, there is a very wide range of body types that are not surgically altered and yet are in peak physical form, which is something mainstream comicbooks don't have, and that's not a secret, it's a big current issue in the industry which many people are trying to change, I'm surprise you're even arguing about this...

And no, I've established my point pretty well and you haven't done a thing to refute it actually, the reasons as to why Gadot is acceptable as WW in the physical plane are valid, it's not only personal preference, personal preference comes only with your (or anybody's) dislike of Gadot, because if she fits some of WW's depictions through time, then the complaint about accuracy is rendered invalid.

Then there's this Lynda Carter thing. Some visual aids are in order here:

View attachment 110693

Despite the crappy distortion in Gal's pic, Lynda's arms and shoulders are still slightly thicker with more definition. Her thighs are in another league as you can see.

Then there's the actual measurements:

32-23-33 110 lbs

37-25-35 122 lbs

She's got an all around bigger frame, that's all there is to it. 12 pounds is more than just t&a dude.

This pic proves that your argument about the distance at which the pic was taken is not correct.

1. Her face, you can see Gadot has a full forehead cleared from hair while Lynda has her tiara which covers her forehead but when you take the tiara into consideration, Gadot's and Lynda's faces are around the same size, but you don't, you cut half of Lynda's forehead.
2. Gadot's left arm and Lynda's left arm swaps literally make no other difference than skin color, if perhaps there is, it's minimal.
3. You cannot see Gadot's shoulders there, another assumption, care to see the pic that Gadot took to her right bicep? If you tell me Lynda Carter still has more definition than that, I'll no longer take you seriously.

Her frame is not the same, but they are indeed just as thin, other than slightly more meat in the legs, ****s and hip, she's just as skinny, look at her chest, arms, back.

There is an angle that is kind of staring us in the face in all this and that is her status as a feminist icon. It's problematic because between all the many waves of it we've had over the years, there are so many contradictions that they'd all be better off not trying to endorse anything. At first they want to prove that women can do everything a man can do. Wonder Woman pretty much embodies that with the exception of her true male counterpart.

No argument there.

Then they wanted to redefine the standard for what would be considered an attractive female form. This is where I feel a good part of the fashion industry went with the anorexic model ascetic as a contrarian feminist ideal and where Gal derives alot of her look. Ironically their solution was to demphasize feminine traits and go for a less developed and sometimes even masculine look. They vary but usually between a pre-teen boy look to a concentration camp survivor on the verge of death. In the opposite extreme we have body-builders who can actually gain that special male secondary "trait" if enough hormones are taken.

That's why when I see the anorexic chic being touted as beautiful or desirable I instantly recoil with disgust. It's a real problem for that industry of which Gal is the latest product. I was hoping that they'd put a more athletic woman with an overall healthier look not only because it looks better but because it is at once more realistic and a healthier goal for the average.... gal.

Your whole issue here is referring to Gadot as anorexic, she may be skinny but she's far from being anorexic, and besides, anorexia isn't necessarily tied to being skinny, I find that to be a hyperbole of the worst kind and you're forgetting she is in training so while I understand you use pics of her being extremely thin to favor your argument, that's about as accurate as you'll get.

Also a part of my point is based of what Gadot can achieve physically, I've said it before, while I see she is fit to some WW representations, I too would like her to be more muscular, and judging by the time they have, I say that goal is not at all unfathomable.

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I've got to agree with Gaspar in that comic books give fanboys unrealistic expectations, in regards to female characters. End of the day, you're sadly mistaken if you think you're going to find a woman with a body like this, which, by some miracle, happens to be natural, a face that actually matches said body, and the acting ability to accurately convey the character they're portraying. Hell, even if the **** were fake, that's still a long shot.

Part of me wishes Snyder would recast Megan Fox just to spite you S.O.B.s.

 

[GasparZizou]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I have no problem with unrealistic expectations, but fake ****s piss me off

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Fair enough. I'm of the opinion that one's body is theirs to do with as they please, so, if that means bigger bazooms, that's their perogative, but I will concede that au naturel is my preference. With that in mind, I think people underestimate the power of the push-up. Just because she might not be as endowed as some of the other folks in Hollywood, that doesn't mean that she's not endowed enough to give off the illusion that her Wonder Woman's..well, endowed.

 

[MitchF1GTR]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Just find someone who's got charisma out the wazzoo and fill them full of plastic and be done with Gadot. That choice just never made sense to me....

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

I'm not denying that Gadot could be a disaster. It's a distinct possibility, and you'd be fooling yourself to think otherwise, when looking at a talent who is, for the most part, unproven. With that being said, though, why does it have to make sense to you for it to work? Keaton didn't make sense to a lot of people. "Mr. Mom playing Batman? 80's version of a facepalm; let's all write letters and sign petitions to have him removed." 2014: Michael Keaton is still considered to have one of the best portrayals of the caped crusader ever to have graced the silver screen. Heath Ledger didn't make sense to a lot of people; "I loved Batman Begins, but, seriously, what was Nolan thinking? The pretty boy who played the Gay Cowboy in Brokeback Mountain? This movie's going to suck. Crispin Glover for Joker!" 2014: Ledger's portrayal is still widely regarded as a triumph; it garnered him an Academy Award and is considered, in many ways, to be the legacy he left behind.

Those are just the famous examples. Christopher Reeve was a skinny unknown with sweat stains on the costume during his audition. What we would've been missing had Donner and the Salkinds decided that he was too risky to take a chance on. My point is that there's a reason, we, the fans, are out here paying for tickets, and then there's a reason why the people in charge are making the decisions they're making. Just because something doesn't make sense to you, that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense for the production. I fail to see how she would've won the role had they not seen something of merit in her auditions.

 

[Frank]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Welcome to Quote-a-Thon 2014!

She was thick? Even my mother used to say she was very thin, and she was thin herself.

Being "thick" does not mean belly fat, it refers to the secondary aspects of the female figure being well-rounded.

Exactly that, comic books in general, not the standards in comic books, in any case of a specific standard which in this case was breasts. I'm not cornered in the slightest, you're having problems with abstraction of information.

Standard: "something established by authority, custom, or general consent as a model or example." So when you are using comic books as a general example of something, you are in fact referring to a standard.

My comment clearly says that one industry has more variety in female bodies than the other, both filled with idealized bodies in peak form, that's it, where do you get that I hate comicbook standards in general from that? Where?

That was the standard I was talking about since you laid down those comic book pics of yours. The pr0n comparison doesn't quite hold up, because every actress in p0rn isn't trying to depict the same woman (read: Ww). In general you hate the big bust, and while there is enough room for a variety of looks within the WW archetype, Gadot falls short of what would be required at minimum.

In general comics do have a higher baseline as far as bustline goes, but Wonder Woman is really not the worst offender out there. Now, the standard for Wonder Woman as a single character, is more varied due to the sheer amount of artists depicting her in various states of physical fitness and builds, but in her case I can't think of the last time she ever looked below the C line in that respect. Love it or hate it, and you do hate it, it's one of the consistencies as far as her appearance goes and to be fair her bust really isn't all that big in the comics. The point is that Gadot is so noticeably slight and small. The rest of the argument has been over the difference between Lynda Carter and Gal Gadot's physique.

If there's one standard I'm tired of, are the surgically enhanced ****s in comics, maybe it's cause I'm a big boy enough to know **** don't look like that and I actually don't find implants appealing.

Now I'm starting to question your assessment of le pron. That is pretty much a given in the overwhelming majority of those "actresses" today. Variety doesn't begin to compare to the baseline amount of augmentation they go through. Actual female athletes would be a better comparison and one that I could agree with as preferable, especially in this case.

But to go from that to "you full hate on each and every single one of the aspects of comicbook standards" is ridiculous, so, how exactly am I cornered? ;

Now where did I say that exactly? The context was the standard WW bust size. You're cornered because you're trying to use **** as an example of variety of female bust size. Sure, varieties above C-Cup. As far as WW goes, why would we necessarily need a boatload of variety? She's never had the pretense of even being average, why should we accept someone who doesn't have a hope of meeting the baseline physical description?

I never said she was the ideal representation (you keep ignoring key things I say in order for your argument to move forward), she is also not atypical, I said that she is accurate to some of Wonder Woman representations, and she is, and therefore it's fine by me.

That's your problem right there. "Some" does not amount to "typical".

You're kidding yourself if you think mainstream comics are diverse when it comes to female anatomy, in that regard **** is indeed much more diverse, I'm sure you can find out, I didn't say realistic (there you go again), for someone who claims I'm cornered you're twisting and putting many words in my mouth, also, unless you're completely oblivious to ****, which I highly doubt, you'd know that by my **** comment I didn't only refer to those women who have breast implants, there is a very wide range of body types that are not surgically altered and yet are in peak physical form, which is something mainstream comicbooks don't have, and that's not a secret, it's a big current issue in the industry which many people are trying to change, I'm surprise you're even arguing about this...

I didn't bring up diversity as a preferred trait in comic book females, that was you. You want more diversity than is readily observable in comics (at least in WW's case) and therefore you like what Gadot has to offer on the low end of the spectrum. I get it. Why Superheroes or WW in particular have to be as "varied" as pr0nstars physically isn't entirely clear. They represent different ideals to start with. How hard could it possibly be to find an actress that has an above average build? Pick up a rock and throw it. Problem solved.

1. Her face, you can see Gadot has a full forehead cleared from hair while Lynda has her tiara which covers her forehead but when you take the tiara into consideration, Gadot's and Lynda's faces are around the same size, but you don't, you cut half of Lynda's forehead.

You could just compare them up to the point I cut off Lynda's head. If Gal's head is really that much larger, she should have gone for the Green Goblin role instead of WW.

2. Gadot's left arm and Lynda's left arm swaps literally make no other difference than skin color, if perhaps there is, it's minimal.

Except for the fact that Lynda runs out of arm by the end of Gadot's wrist. That's how I know there is significant distortion in the Gadot image.

3. You cannot see Gadot's shoulders there, another assumption, care to see the pic that Gadot took to her right bicep? If you tell me Lynda Carter still has more definition than that, I'll no longer take you seriously.

She can add definition all she wants, but not add any bulk to her pigeon-boned frame. That's the breaks.

Her frame is not the same, but they are indeed just as thin, other than slightly more meat in the legs, ****s and hip, she's just as skinny, look at her chest, arms, back.

I've looked, and by all appearances she's bigger in all ways save for height.

Also a part of my point is based of what Gadot can achieve physically, I've said it before, while I see she is fit to some WW representations, I too would like her to be more muscular, and judging by the time they have, I say that goal is not at all unfathomable.

So far as we know, we were only talking about peak female form to begin with. At no point was I talking about anything else or confusing your statement with anything else. Early photos do not look good. Thus the need for some special CGI wizardry.

she may be skinny

Now take that epiphany and apply it to WW. Does it still sound right to you? Skinny and Wonder Woman are not and should not be synonymous. And to be perfectly clear, when I say "skinny" I mean lack of curves. In all categories. At once.

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

People really need to stop getting so hung up on appearances; especially when we haven't even seen what she looks like in costume, yet. I'm just saying that you can at least wait until you see what she brings to the role before complaining how wrong she is for it.

 

[Silrian]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

BINGO.

the problem was Nolan beating you over the head with the notion of "I ONLY HAZ ONE RULE BAAAHHHHHH"

No the problem is people are biased and it's that simple. All films have to differing degrees critical and technical problems, but whether you're bothered by it is nothing but personal sentiment for the film.

My main problem with rises is that he tried to fit 4 hrs of story into 2 1/2 hrs

Exactly. They should've cut the whole talia thing. Bane on his own was enough of a villain, Talia was completely unnecessary. The whole romance thing, all of it was unnecessary with Bane and Catwoman in there. And the end fight should've been an epic fight with catwoman and batman teaming up against Bane. The second act in this film is probably my most disappointing piece of superhero cinema ever.

C cups aren't outlandish. Ms. Gadot has a particular look that works for her, it just doesn't work for me for a character like WW. I've come to look at Diana's muscularity/bust size as between Powergirl and Supergirl and about 4 inches taller in stature. Nothing slight about her.

I mean look at her, the only way she could be smaller is if she had indentations. Way below average. Just a quick cursory view on what is actually average, Canada=C, USA=D, Europe=C/D.

Except that C cups are exceptional if you truly wanna be in peak physical shape as a woman. A lot of what makes ****s big is fat. That simple. That's why men can have ****s too. Someone like Carano, that's a body type you have very little to say in from a natural pov. Where fat stores itself in the body is genetic. If you have the genetics for a model, like Gadot clearly has, you almost per definition do NOT have the genetics for a wonder woman physique. It's very opposed.

olga kurylenko tried for wonder woman?

WHAT
THE
HELL
IS
WRONG
WITH
SNYDER?
WTF????

I'm not sure if I think she has the feistiness as an actress to fit this part. I can't see her being convincing tbh.

Her acting in Haywire wasn't terrible. And no offense to Gadot but have you seen her in the FF movies? There's really nothing that stood out in her acting ability.

Jep, she was great in Haywire. And then I heard a thing about her lines being dubbed by a different actress and then I went haywire.


Also, I randomly stumbled upon this and I kinda only now truly felt what a massive contrast between times it is, almost two decades later, and we have none of this anymore. It's really weird though, as this was the first Batman cinema feature I ever saw. So there's some weird childhood nostalgia to it for me. You ****ing heard this track everywhere.

 

[Silrian]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

“Actors can sometimes find really cool things in characters that aren’t written well. This character is written really well.”

Great quote by Eisenberg imo, he basically nails most superhero casting **** ups with that one sentence.

Here's a cool mock up of him as Lex, if they actually manage to make him look like this he's gonna be freakin awesome:

 

[RRJdesign]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

People really need to stop getting so hung up on appearances; especially when we haven't even seen what she looks like in costume, yet. I'm just saying that you can at least wait until you see what she brings to the role before complaining how wrong she is for it.

You really cannot convince people to be patient, most of the haters are closed minded and does not give chances to actors who have not yet proven themselves. So they say early bad judgements based on the past movies that of the actor. All we can do is wait for the movie to be released and maybe we can prove them wrong (again). It already happened before with Keaton, Ledger, Hathaway, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RRJdesign]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

“Actors can sometimes find really cool things in characters that aren’t written well. This character is written really well.”

Great quote by Eisenberg imo, he basically nails most superhero casting **** ups with that one sentence.

Here's a cool mock up of him as Lex, if they actually manage to make him look like this he's gonna be freakin awesome:

Wow, did you do this mock up yourself? He looks really good here. I'm not complaining about Snyder casting him even the 1st time I heard of it. The reason why most people is doubting him is because of his hair, his skinny body, he talks fast in most of his movies, and he looks like a high school at some angles. But I believe those things can be fixed.

When Tom Hardy was casted as Bane, I also wondered how Nolan is going to pull it since Tom is a short guy and his face does not scare me. But he actually surprised me during the movie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Silrian]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Like Shaggy so aptly sang during my childhood "It wasn't me."

UPDATE ON BAT SUIT COLOUR: Kevin Smith confirmed in his podcast that he saw a different batman photo, which was in colour, and he revealed that the colour scheme is exactly that of the dark knight returns book 3: Hunt the Dark Knight!

I haven't read the TDKReturns books so if someone can grab a good page from Hunt the Dark Knight that'd be great because we can be pretty much sure of the fact that that is gonna be it.

Update: Kevin Smith also claims it's pretty much all actual Affleck under there. He's bulked up crazy according to him. And he has the same trainer Cavill has.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

^ That sounds truly awesome dude.

 

[Silrian]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

Also those behind the scenes photos of Affleck don't reveal much, friends of mine actually do body building, it's really hard to constantly have the bulk of all the muscle mass you have. But before they shoot they will start doing exercises and warm up and then you'll suddenly see how much muscle they have. Musscle bulk usually only is at it's full size when it's put to work. One friend of mine is pretty small and has thin arms but when he even shortly puts his arms to work he becomes a beast. It's quite insane how transformable the body is per day, per hour, per action you do. Batman being a sick bulked mofo and yet a fairly thin bruce wayne is genuinely realistic.

Having said that, I don't worry at all about Affleck, and I worry a little less about Gadot. The body isn't meant to constantly be bulked up. And if you eat a lot anyone can look fat, even the best body builders. So all those behind the scenes photos don't reveal that much.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

So black and grey basically. That's great.

A dark blue cowl, cape and gloves would have been cool, but I dig black and grey too. As long as it isn't yet another black rubber suit, I'm game.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)

At which point did Miller do the blue cowl etc?