Hot Toys Batman V. Superman Dawn of Justice Speculation Thread

[YankeesFanboy]

Will Hot Toys be making this in 1/6 scale?????

I'd say the odds are good.

 

[dario2739]

All of those videos don't change that for me this movie was a poorly written and directed mess.

Well we're all entitled to our opinions... just so happens your's is wrong!

I totally disagree with every part of your statement.

 

[nexus]

I can wait a couple of years for the Batmobile. I'd prefer to get the '66 version first.

 

[batfan08]

Well we're all entitled to our opinions... just so happens your's is wrong!

I totally disagree with every part of your statement.

That's a load of ****. I'm a fan of Man of Steel, but I agree with cmiller99, wholeheartedly. There was a lot of **** in that movie that just didn't work, and I do believe he's right in saying it was poorly written. It felt like you were watching a very rough first draft of a film. The pacing was all over the place, the concepts, while cool, weren't executed with nearly as much subtlety as they could've been in the right hands, and I'm one of those people that believes a visual director like Snyder is only as good as his material.

I didn't want to see it, at first, but, over the years, you notice these things, and it's disappointing, to say the least.

That's part of the reason why I'm so excited for Batman v Superman. It feels like they're learning from their mistakes. Rather than trusting Goyer to deliver the (un)finished product, they're letting an Oscar winning screenwriter with an ear for dialogue come in and clean up his mess.

 

[Motuxmen]

Half the stuff you attribute to poorly written has very little to do with actual writing. It's editing and directing that controls pace and jumps. If you think the dialog was horrid with MOS I'm not sure how you then use BvS as a better example. Lol it's not exactly brimming with subtext and subtlety. But that's on purpose. Not every film needs to have layer upon layer of subtext and require a college degree to follow. We are not taking about a film based on Hemingway or Homer...it's okay to be on the nose when your source material comes from a picture book that has 30 words in the entire story.


(And I'm not slamming either film...I worked on BvS. I like mos.)

 

[batfan08]

I'm not talking about it requiring layers and layers of subtext, but some of the dialogue in Man of Steel was cringeworthy, and I wasn't just referring to the dialogue when I said that there was no subtlety. From Pa Kent telling Clark "maybe you should've let those kids die" to Lois Lane showing how much of a spitfire she is with her "if we're done measuring dicks" line that was abysmal. Plus, the very Pa Kent death scene. You can have Pa sacrifice himself to preserve Clark's secret without having him get sucked into a ****ing tornado.

I liked the movie, but it was hamfisted as **** when they were trying to make a point.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

I really like MOS, and I agree that some of those lines weren't great and the tornado scene wasn't ideal, but as stupid as it was, this new film has made sense of it by proving Pa Kent right, the world wasn't ready then and is still not ready for Superman.

My only real issue with the film was Zod. They made him look weak from the very beginning. The moment Russell Crowe beat him in hand to hand combat, he lost all credibility as a villain and as a physical threat, because Zod was designed to be a warrior and to protect Krypton, he should be the best fighter on Krypton, but a scientist got the best of him and dominated him. The worst part is, Zod still kills Jor El anyway..so it was pointless for Crowe to win the fight, making the villain look weak. I get the feeling that was Crowe's idea...he needed to be the tough guy.

Then, the second time Zod is in a fight...what happens? He loses again!!! Now, it's justified the way it was done, but it didn't do the character any favors because once again he looked vulnerable and weak, so by the time he gets to the final battle, he's going into it with a losing record...and we know he's going to lose the last fight. A movie should always make a villain invincible until the end of the story, and MOS didn't do that with Zod, unfortunately. IMO, Faora was by far the best villain, and one of the reasons for that is that she was unstoppable until the end. Bane in TDKR is a perfect example, he was unstoppable until the very end when Batman finally overcomes the unstoppable force, and when he does, that moment is even better because Bane was so powerful. That's what heroes do, they overcome adversity. That's not to say Superman didn't face any adversity, he did...more than any other film hero...ever, but Zod wasn't that difficult, compared to everything else in the film.

 

[a-dev]

Bane in TDKR is a perfect example, he was unstoppable until the very end when Batman finally overcomes the unstoppable force, and when he does, that moment is even better because Bane was so powerful. That's what heroes do, they overcome adversity.

Yep, Batman defeated Bane by....doing exactly what he did in the first fight. Punch him in the face, and it worked the second time for no particular reason

 

[SilverStar17]

From Pa Kent telling Clark "maybe you should've let those kids die"

For the record, I didn't interpret Jonathan's line of, "Maybe" as meaning "Yes Clark, you should have let those children die", as what many people construed it as meaning. To me, it was basically him saying "I don't know".

Jonathan obviously held human life, and life in general, in high esteem (as demonstrated when he rescued the little girl from the car during the tornado scene and then handed her to Clark when he went back for their dog), but he was also trying to look out for the best interest of his son and the rest of the human race at the same time. He knew Clark obviously did the right thing, but at what cost in today's world and society? As he stated at one point during the film, "We're not your parents, but we've been making this up as we go along."

I think MoS made a lot of true points about today's society and the perspective of it. I think the statement, "People are afraid of/fear what they don't understand" is absolutely true. Most people in today's society already can't stand it when someone else merely holds a different opinion or belief than what they do, and because we simply can't fathom why they think the way they do, it's much easier for us to condemn them and label the person as an idiot for instance, rather than actually make an attempt to understand and see their perspective. Now imagine how people would react if we knew that there was something out there, an extraterrestrial at that, that we know we'd have no answer for, no defense for, no safeguard against should it decide its intentions were hostile.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Yep, Batman defeated Bane by....doing exactly what he did in the first fight. Punch him in the face, and it worked the second time for no particular reason

He didn't hit Bane that many times in the first fight actually, and he wasn't mentally ready for that fight...even Bane said that during the beating. By the time he fights Bane the second time Bruce was mentally ready and he knew his opponent better. Regardless of his strategy or lack of strategy, it's still a great moment when he finally defeats the unstoppable force. Also, he did change his strategy slightly in the second fight, he used his gauntlets spikes to break the mask, unlike the first fight. Batman attacked Bane's body more in the first encounter and he only landed to punches on Bane's face. It was the gauntlet that broke the mask in the second fight, not a punch.

 

[Motuxmen]

I really like MOS, and I agree that some of those lines weren't great and the tornado scene wasn't ideal, but as stupid as it was, this new film has made sense of it by proving Pa Kent right, the world wasn't ready then and is still not ready for Superman.

My only real issue with the film was Zod. They made him look weak from the very beginning. The moment Russell Crowe beat him in hand to hand combat, he lost all credibility as a villain and as a physical threat, because Zod was designed to be a warrior and to protect Krypton, he should be the best fighter on Krypton, but a scientist got the best of him and dominated him. The worst part is, Zod still kills Jor El anyway..so it was pointless for Crowe to win the fight, making the villain look weak. I get the feeling that was Crowe's idea...he needed to be the tough guy.

Then, the second time Zod is in a fight...what happens? He loses again!!! Now, it's justified the way it was done, but it didn't do the character any favors because once again he looked vulnerable and weak, so by the time he gets to the final battle, he's going into it with a losing record...and we know he's going to lose the last fight. A movie should always make a villain invincible until the end of the story, and MOS didn't do that with Zod, unfortunately. IMO, Faora was by far the best villain, and one of the reasons for that is that she was unstoppable until the end. Bane in TDKR is a perfect example, he was unstoppable until the very end when Batman finally overcomes the unstoppable force, and when he does, that moment is even better because Bane was so powerful. That's what heroes do, they overcome adversity. That's not to say Superman didn't face any adversity, he did...more than any other film hero...ever, but Zod wasn't that difficult, compared to everything else in the film.

Villains should be unstoppable until the final fight? I don't agree with that at all.

As for the bane fight...the instoppable force that got beat up by starving and sick prisoners...suddenly becomes unstoppable...only to lose later to a guy who healed his broken back with yoga and a rope and hit him three more times. Yep. Lol so much better then a guy losing to becuase he can't control these new powers, and to a guy who has had them for 30 years to master. People tend to elevate things above other things, as superior or better just becuase they like it. When it's more or less the exact same thing. I like all three bale batman films. A lot actually. And as I said, the mos. I just think your comparison is silly.

 

[Motuxmen]

I'm not talking about it requiring layers and layers of subtext, but some of the dialogue in Man of Steel was cringeworthy, and I wasn't just referring to the dialogue when I said that there was no subtlety. From Pa Kent telling Clark "maybe you should've let those kids die" to Lois Lane showing how much of a spitfire she is with her "if we're done measuring dicks" line that was abysmal. Plus, the very Pa Kent death scene. You can have Pa sacrifice himself to preserve Clark's secret without having him get sucked into a ****ing tornado.

I liked the movie, but it was hamfisted as **** when they were trying to make a point.

I wasn't making any judgment on the dialogue itself. Just that saying its bad but the new film will be better because the writer has an Oscar and all that, probably not the best analogy. You tell me from what you have seen thus far in the released content for BvS how it is superior in any way, in the dialogue, to mos. it was that comparison I was addressing, not the content of mos. if you think the one is bad them I don't see how you call the other better at this point.

 

[YankeesFanboy]

My only real issue with the film was Zod. They made him look weak from the very beginning. The moment Russell Crowe beat him in hand to hand combat, he lost all credibility as a villain and as a physical threat, because Zod was designed to be a warrior and to protect Krypton, he should be the best fighter on Krypton, but a scientist got the best of him and dominated him. The worst part is, Zod still kills Jor El anyway..so it was pointless for Crowe to win the fight, making the villain look weak. I get the feeling that was Crowe's idea...he needed to be the tough guy.

Were you not entertained?

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Villains should be unstoppable until the final fight? I don't agree with that at all.


As for the bane fight...the instoppable force that got beat up by starving and sick prisoners...suddenly becomes unstoppable...only to lose later to a guy who healed his broken back with yoga and a rope and hit him three more times. Yep. Lol so much better then a guy losing to becuase he can't control these new powers, and to a guy who has had them for 30 years to master. People tend to elevate things above other things, as superior or better just becuase they like it. When it's more or less the exact same thing. I like all three bale batman films. A lot actually. And as I said, the mos. I just think your comparison is silly.

That's fine if you disagree, but the best villains are usually unbeatable until the end...that's kind of how it works

Bane got beat up by 15...20 people while he was trying to save a little girl, which was his primary concern, not the fight.Still, he didn't died. And it was a flashback scene towards the end of the film...not the first 5 minutes of the movie. Through out the film he kills people easily and beats Batman...so yes, there's was no one who could beat him until Batman ...who was Ras Al Ghul's best student, and at the very end of the film.

You're wrong about Superman mastering his powers. First of all, that was Superman's first physical fight..well, second, both in the same day and until that point, he had never used his powers to his full potential...not even flying...he learned how to fly like a week before the invasion..maybe a day before the invasion. He had ZERO experience against a guy who was a warrior. Sups was probably stronger, so it made sense for Zod to lose at the end, but I'm not saying Zod should have won the final fight, all I said was that Zod looked weak from the very beginning when a scientist beat a warrior who was designed to be a fighter. The only time Bane lost was against an equal...

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Were you not entertained?

I was until he made the big bad villain look like a joke. I guess Zod never recovered mentally because he never won a single fight after that

 

[batfan08]

For the record, I didn't interpret Jonathan's line of, "Maybe" as meaning "Yes Clark, you should have let those children die", as what many people construed it as meaning. To me, it was basically him saying "I don't know".

Jonathan obviously held human life, and life in general, in high esteem (as demonstrated when he rescued the little girl from the car during the tornado scene and then handed her to Clark when he went back for their dog), but he was also trying to look out for the best interest of his son and the rest of the human race at the same time. He knew Clark obviously did the right thing, but at what cost in today's world and society? As he stated at one point during the film, "We're not your parents, but we've been making this up as we go along."

I think MoS made a lot of true points about today's society and the perspective of it. I think the statement, "People are afraid of/fear what they don't understand" is absolutely true. Most people in today's society already can't stand it when someone else merely holds a different opinion or belief than what they do, and because we simply can't fathom why they think the way they do, it's much easier for us to condemn them and label the person as an idiot for instance, rather than actually make an attempt to understand and see their perspective. Now imagine how people would react if we knew that there was something out there, an extraterrestrial at that, that we know we'd have no answer for, no defense for, no safeguard against should it decide its intentions were hostile.

It was the way it was framed, and that's on Goyer. Clark asked Pa "what was I supposed to do? Let those kids die," and Pa Kent responds with "maybe." You just don't do that ****. Pa Kent can be uncertain, but you don't paint one of the most wholesome characters in the history of comics as so callous as to suggest that it might've been alright to let nature take its course, if it meant preserving his son's secret.

Just off the top of my head.

"Did I do the right thing, dad?"

"I don't know, Clark. I don't have all the answers, and I really don't know what will happen, now, but what I do know is that all of those kids are alive right now because of something you did. So, you tell me. Do you think you did the right thing?"

See how easy that was? And Goyer gets paid how much?

 

[YankeesFanboy]

I was until he made the big bad villain look like a joke. I guess Zod never recovered mentally because he never won a single fight after that

MOS wasn't as bad the second time I saw it. But it's still not a good movie. And that's a shame.

 

[Motuxmen]

I said mastering his powers...not his fighting skills. It was an intential point made multiple times in the film. That Clark had learned all his powers over time. So he could control them all. With his final test being learning to fly. Where zod got slammed with all that in a days time. It's why he lost the fight when his mask was broken. He became Clark as a boy in that school closet.

As for bane. Again...I was addressing your gotta be unstoppable and never lose comment. Fact is, he both lost and was not unstoppable. Sure, it was a mass of folks he lost to. And no, he didn't die. But it was still old men and starving men. If he's unstoppable...then well, he can't be stopped. He was. And by not only mere mortals, but sick and dying ones. And sure, he latter kills people with easy. I don't see how that makes any diffenrece to this argument. And given the comparison...that bane is a great villain but Zod wasn't...Zod started off killing people in krypton, beat up and killed jor-el. Came to earth and killed lots of people. And only lost to what is portrayed in comics and movies and the movie he's in, possibly the most powerful thing anywhere in superman. But bane lost to sick dying normals...beat up some people who didn't fight back...a few who did...beat up a crippled Bruce Wayne who could hardly walk...them later lost to the same guy becuase he suddenly develops a glass jaw. I just don't see how one is so much better then the other, based on your argument. The timeline of both stories and how each Villian is used is nearly identical. The details and what not are different. But otherwise it's a very similar storyline.

 

[GasparZizou]

I really like MOS, and I agree that some of those lines weren't great and the tornado scene wasn't ideal, but as stupid as it was, this new film has made sense of it by proving Pa Kent right, the world wasn't ready then and is still not ready for Superman.

This is a great point which I realize since the first BvS traile, and it's not stupid, today's cynic society would undoubtedly react that way to someone like Superman.

My only real issue with the film was Zod. They made him look weak from the very beginning. The moment Russell Crowe beat him in hand to hand combat, he lost all credibility as a villain and as a physical threat, because Zod was designed to be a warrior and to protect Krypton, he should be the best fighter on Krypton, but a scientist got the best of him and dominated him. The worst part is, Zod still kills Jor El anyway..so it was pointless for Crowe to win the fight, making the villain look weak. I get the feeling that was Crowe's idea...he needed to be the tough guy.

Then, the second time Zod is in a fight...what happens? He loses again!!! Now, it's justified the way it was done, but it didn't do the character any favors because once again he looked vulnerable and weak, so by the time he gets to the final battle, he's going into it with a losing record...and we know he's going to lose the last fight. A movie should always make a villain invincible until the end of the story, and MOS didn't do that with Zod, unfortunately. IMO, Faora was by far the best villain, and one of the reasons for that is that she was unstoppable until the end. Bane in TDKR is a perfect example, he was unstoppable until the very end when Batman finally overcomes the unstoppable force, and when he does, that moment is even better because Bane was so powerful. That's what heroes do, they overcome adversity. That's not to say Superman didn't face any adversity, he did...more than any other film hero...ever, but Zod wasn't that difficult, compared to everything else in the film.

I've come to the conclusion that Zod wasn't a very good hand 2 hand combatant, he was a genetically designed as a strategist, hence why the grunts (Faora & Nam-Ek) showed a lot more proficiency in combat, they were designed that way.

 

[batfan08]

I wasn't making any judgment on the dialogue itself. Just that saying its bad but the new film will be better because the writer has an Oscar and all that, probably not the best analogy. You tell me from what you have seen thus far in the released content for BvS how it is superior in any way, in the dialogue, to mos. it was that comparison I was addressing, not the content of mos. if you think the one is bad them I don't see how you call the other better at this point.

People give Goyer a lot of ****, myself included, but I'm not trying to discredit the guy. He has great ideas, but I just think that it kind of seems like he's so caught up in getting his point across that he overlooks the fact that his characters should feel "whole." I look at it as a comic book. Primarily, you have the writer and the penciler who get all the credit, but you also have the colorist, the inker, the letterer; all of these different people involved in creating the comic book you see on shelves. I know this is kind of a weird analogy, but I imagine Goyer as a penciler. He does excellent framework, but you can't just publish a book with rough sketches (unless it's one of those collector's edition "director's cuts" they're doing, now, but I think you understand my point). I like Pa Kent being uncertain, I like Pa letting go to make sure his son was safe; I just thought the execution could've been better is all.

As far as why I think BvS will be better. I can't say that it will or not, but, from what I saw of Terrio's previous work, I thought Argo was a tightly scripted, fantastic film, and I'm hoping his work for BvS will be, too. I've liked everything I've seen in the trailers, but, still, there are? What? Two hours and twenty plus minutes that we haven't seen? So, anything can happen. The other part of it is just them not putting all their eggs in one basket. Like I said, as an idea man, I won't complain about Goyer in the slightest, but, with that being said, I do think it's a little more reassuring to know that, after what I would classify as a bit of a stumble with Man of Steel, they aren't putting all the power in one man's hands.