Hot Toys Batman V. Superman Dawn of Justice Speculation Thread

[Remy]

Apparently these are part of the set of photos companies like HT are provided with to make figures and merchandise.

Snyder really nailed the casting. Although I bitched and whined when I first heard about Affleck being batman, I admit I was wrong to jump to conclusion. He may actually turn out to be the best batman so far.

But I always loved the casting of Gadot even when the other people were bitching and whining about her casting.
Casting Wonder Woman is a lot trickier.
As can be seen with a lot of Photoshop pics of actresses being Wonder Woman, or even with the failed Wonder Woman tv pilot which had that really pretty girl from Friday night lights, it's hard to cast just a pretty girl and not have it looking like an ad for a sexy Halloween costume.

Man, Gadot looks the part...she's stunning.

 

[ZombieRepublican]

I see what stryker means. TDK could be held up to alot of the best of film. It's brilliantly directed scripted and acted. Because it was extremely grounded.

I loved how they took that approach with MOS, but it got OTT at the end. It's my i only nit pick of the movie. If they just removed that one scene where Supes fights the octopus thing... It would have helped pacing alot and given more time for character development.

The other issue is that the story was soo epic, and having an adversary so powerful and a story so grand, left a big question of where the series could go next.

Now we know JLA is coming together, can all these elements really gel with the grounded world and tone they've set? Even if they do, it couldn't be taken as seriously more dramatic films.

 

[Remy]

The word grounded gets thrown in there a lot And most people associate it with what Nolan has achieved in dark knight.
So when the word is associated with MOS, it can be perceived that it didn't live up its goal.

It has a different meaning in comparison to nolan's batman.
As I mentioned on previous comment, Nolan always insisted on keeping the story grounded with no supernatural elements whatsoever. No Bane with green juice to pump him up, nothing. All are based on real human beings, like if this would happen today.

For superman, when they use the term grounded, again, this is what it would be like...if today, an Alien reveals himself and we find we are not alone.
But unlike nolans batman where it has no supernatural elements, Snyder's MOS is not limited to this rule.
That's the extent of the meaning.
This is not like reeve superman where he just shows up and people all ok with it.

That's why you see in batman v superman the consequence of the destruction of superman's fight with Zod. A lot of people including the government hold him accountable for what happened.
This is not like the avengers where you have supernatural beings just show up and people,are all like...Yay!!! And at the end of all destruction, they go get shawarma.

 

[Stryker2011]

I may have been misunderstood. I don't have a problem with the supernatural elements in these films, that's not my beef with cgi. Watching all the destructions scenes in a lot of these movies gets not only repetitive. The tower of Mordar collapse was copied by some of the building collapses in Transformers movies, or MOS, or The Avengers. Or every time a new movie comes out there has to be twice as much destruction as the previous movie, because the filmmakers don't have half the talent or imagination that came decades previous. The Avengers part of New York City was destroyed, but in the sequel... well, now we have to destroy an ENTIRE city. What's next, half the damn planet? Ray Harryhausen didn't try to make bigger, louder and more destructive creations, he just made different ones, because it wasn't just about the special effects telling the story, it was about the special effects helping to support the story. The reason I brought up practical effects like car chases and stunts in more realistic movies, was not to compare the movies as real-life to fantasy, but to point out that practical effects show things that can actually be done, whereas cgi is all about doing stupid crap like dropping cars out of a cargo carrier, have them parachute hundreds of feet, land and take off down the road. Sometimes the absurdity of cgi becomes just that... absurd.

 

[olbertfrog]

I agree but to me it has all to do with execution.
The metropolis destruction, the way it was shot, was way more satisfying than any destruction porn movie ive seen for years.
You were with the people and then bam you were with Supes and zod fighting.
That fight for me is the most exhilarating super fight i have ever seen.
The music "if you love these peoples" give me chills.
Its violent, its apocalyptical, for once you really believe that the bad guys could win.
I know the fight quality has a lot to do with the fact that Jay Oliva one of the most gifted dc animation directors/Storyboard artist did a lot of work on it.
Also i was invested in the characters, Supes was in suit for like 24hours he kept making mistakes after mistakes.
Zod had a noble motivation and you could understand What fueled his killing rage.
Far from Perfect but i really dont understand why some were dissapointed of bored by the climax after all these years when we were Hoping to see superman punching and fighting like he does in the anime or comics.

 

[dario2739]

I agree but to me it has all to do with execution.
The metropolis destruction, the way it was shot, was way more satisfying than any destruction porn movie ive seen for years.
You were with the people and then bam you were with Supes and zod fighting.
That fight for me is the most exhilarating super fight i have ever seen.
The music "if you love these peoples" give me chills.
Its violent, its apocalyptical, for once you really believe that the bad guys could win.
I know the fight quality has a lot to do with the fact that Jay Oliva one of the most gifted dc animation directors/Storyboard artist did a lot of work on it.
Also i was invested in the characters, Supes was in suit for like 24hours he kept making mistakes after mistakes.
Zod had a noble motivation and you could understand What fueled his killing rage.
Far from Perfect but i really dont understand why some were dissapointed of bored by the climax after all these years when we were Hoping to see superman punching and fighting like he does in the anime or comics.

Excellent, excellent post –*somebody who echoes my thoughts!

People somehow never seem to realise or remember that Clark had only just become Superman and was still discovering his powers and limits... he'd only just learnt to fly for example.
Also the destruction in Metropolis was mostly caused by the World Engine – the fight between Zod and Superman causes no more damage than the Avengers battle in New York... but Clark didn't have the luxury of team-mates trying to save people.

 

[SilverStar17]

The word grounded gets thrown in there a lot And most people associate it with what Nolan has achieved in dark knight.
So when the word is associated with MOS, it can be perceived that it didn't live up its goal.

It has a different meaning in comparison to nolan's batman.
As I mentioned on previous comment, Nolan always insisted on keeping the story grounded with no supernatural elements whatsoever. No Bane with green juice to pump him up, nothing. All are based on real human beings, like if this would happen today.

For superman, when they use the term grounded, again, this is what it would be like...if today, an Alien reveals himself and we find we are not alone.
But unlike nolans batman where it has no supernatural elements, Snyder's MOS is not limited to this rule.
That's the extent of the meaning.
This is not like reeve superman where he just shows up and people all ok with it.

That's why you see in batman v superman the consequence of the destruction of superman's fight with Zod. A lot of people including the government hold him accountable for what happened.
This is not like the avengers where you have supernatural beings just show up and people,are all like...Yay!!! And at the end of all destruction, they go get shawarma.

As you already know, my sentiments as well, Remy.

Excellent, excellent post –*somebody who echoes my thoughts!

People somehow never seem to realise or remember that Clark had only just become Superman and was still discovering his powers and limits... he'd only just learnt to fly for example.
Also the destruction in Metropolis was mostly caused by the World Engine – the fight between Zod and Superman causes no more damage than the Avengers battle in New York... but Clark didn't have the luxury of team-mates trying to save people.

The part of the film (MoS) that gave me the most chills was where Supes was summoning all of his energy and strength while flying straight up the beam that was emitting from the World Engine over the Indian Ocean, and it cut back and forth to scenes where other people were also summoning their strength and will power as well in their own little situations (Perry holding Jenny's hand while she was screaming, etc).

The thing that sort of baffles me the most is why a lot of steadfast fans of the Reeve films make it seem as if you have to prefer one or the other and that you have to make a choice. If you like MoS in any way, it's as if you are turning your back on the Reeve films, which is not the case.

It is possible to like both, realize that both are meant for a different time and that each conform perfectly to the time they're supposed to take place in. Comparing the two is really comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Remy]

As you already know, my sentiments as well, Remy.





The part of the film (MoS) that gave me the most chills was where Supes was summoning all of his energy and strength while flying straight up the beam that was emitting from the World Engine over the Indian Ocean, and it cut back and forth to scenes where other people were also summoning their strength and will power as well in their own little situations (Perry holding Jenny's hand while she was screaming, etc).

The thing that sort of baffles me the most is why a lot of steadfast fans of the Reeve films make it seem as if you have to prefer one or the other and that you have to make a choice. If you like MoS in any way, it's as if you are turning your back on the Reeve films, which is not the case.

It is possible to like both, realize that both are meant for a different time and that each conform perfectly to the time they're supposed to take place in. Comparing the two is really comparing apples and oranges.

Yup, we always seem to share the same sentiment to these movies.

And once again, excellent post about comparing movies.
I've had this conversation with a coworker about fanboys ruining the movies for themselves.

It's natural to compare another movie to another movie, or to its sequel.
But what I don't get is the need for a lot of fans to only like one or the other.
It's like if the other movie is better, then the other is a failure.

It's ok to like both movies even if one is better than the other.
When I see a movie, I always have an open mind and judge it for what it is. Not judge it to compare to another movie.
That's why I end up enjoying these movies.

I feel a lot of fans ruin their experience by always being too judgmental on these movies.

 

[BlackWidow89]

I want as many characters as possible from the film. Alfred, Lex, Bruce, Clark, Aquaman and Flash.

But no Doomsday.

Especially, Bruce Wayne, Aquaman, and The Flash!

 

[SilverStar17]

R

Yup, we always seem to share the same sentiment to these movies.

And once again, excellent post about comparing movies.
I've had this conversation with a coworker about fanboys ruining the movies for themselves.

It's natural to compare another movie to another movie, or to its sequel.
But what I don't get is the need for a lot of fans to only like one or the other.
It's like if the other movie is better, then the other is a failure.

It's ok to like both movies even if one is better than the other.
When I see a movie, I always have an open mind and judge it for what it is. Not judge it to compare to another movie.
That's why I end up enjoying these movies.

I feel a lot of fans ruin their experience by always being too judgmental on these movies.

Wholeheartedly agree. I do feel that many times fanboys ruin the films for themselves. I can totally understand that there are just some films where you simply didn't like it, but I often feel as if sometimes people are too critical of a film to the point where they want to find something wrong with it and end up ruining the film for themselves because instead of simply taking it for what it's meant to be, they're focused on finding flaws and negatives instead. Sometimes, I even think they end up confusing themselves and sounding like they're not even certain on what it is they really want to see. SR was too much like Reeve and not enough action and MoS was not enough like Reeve and too much action. So what does one want?

I too think it's natural to compare a new rendition of something or a sequel to its predecessor; similar to when a new band comes on the scene and you compare them to an already existing band. Like we both mentioned, it is possible to like both, and like you, this is why I also end up enjoying a lot of these films because I merely enjoy and digest them for what they are intended and meant to be.

I'm really looking forward to BvS. I admit I was dubious when they first cast Affleck in the role as he's not the first person that would come to mind when one would envision a Batman/Bruce Wayne actor, but I refrained from making any conclusion until I see him in the role. From what I've seen thus far, he looks like he has the potential to be the best Bats yet. Even then though, it's all subjective and would be wrong to compare him with the other interpretations. The Batman that they are trying to portray in this film is totally different than Bale's Batman and I'm sure Keaton's also. Sure I'll have one that I prefer over the other, but it doesn't by default mean that I think the other ones are POS interpretations.

 

[Motuxmen]

Will be nice to see the 1/4 scale BvS line. Should debut at the upcoming show next month.

 

[Motuxmen]

First off, let me say, I liked MOS for what it was, BUT: my problem with most modern sci-fi/fantasy/superhero movies is the over the top repetitive nature of all the cgi crap. Watching that end fight scene/destruction of Metropolis I had a complete sense of dejavue. Was I watching a Superman movie, or was I watching a Transformers movie, or the first Avengers movie? I can only watch so many cities being destroyed before my mind begins to wander, and I start thinking: "Who's going to pay to repair all this?" There's no denying that cgi artists in Hollywood are talented, but sadly, that seems to be where the talent ends. Story is sacrificed for bigger and "better" cgi explosions. Most car chases are done in computer, half of all stunts are performed by cgi doppelgängers, and acting has become so marginal, that at least two generations of people have no idea what a good movie really is. When your inundated by mostly mediocrity daily in film and television, when something is just slightly above mediocre, it suddenly becomes good. Sadly, I'd have to say as a huge fan of film and TV (I have over 4000 DVDs and blu-rays from all eras), over the last 20 years or so, nearly 80% of the stuff put out can't compare to earlier stuff. Give me the car chases from The French Connection or Bullit over those god awful horse $&@t Fast and Furious cgi fake stuff with actors barely above high school theatre quality. Maybe I'm getting cranky in my old age, or maybe being bombarded by repetitive junk aimed at the video game generation has just left me feeling nostalgic for the days when actors could act, car chases were done for real, stunts were done by an actual person, and most importantly, movies actually had a plot, and weren't designed around people who's attention span is about 3 seconds.

The problem I have with this is exactly the opposite of your view. You say they just throw out destruction scenes and it's over used, and older stuff is better. I don't see how you can tell a story with these massively powerful (transformers, superman, Thor, hulk ect) characters and not have it. They didn't do it back in the day because they couldn't tech wise, and the culture wouldn't allow anything close to reality. But you can't seriously look at any classic that had any super powered or oversized character and think that it was better done due to lack of damage...because it's just not believable. They don't use it now just for the porn aspect of it..it's part of the way it should be with these characters. In the 80s hulk would get in a fight and rip a bumper off or smash a windshield. How is that not worse? Or Godzilla breaks a few Windows and half smashed some cars. Superman hardly does any damage and it's not because they where making a better movie. Lol it's because they couldn't do it.

They are not just trying to one up the other films. It's about using the destruction to illustrate the power. You don't see that on daredevil because he doesn't have that much power. There's no way to have superman get into anything close to a true fight and not have it tear a city up. The guy sneezes and it's typhoon force wind. He punches and it's multiple nukes. He shoots laser beams out of his eye more powerful then any laser on the planet (we use lasers to cut half inch steel for armor plate just for comparison).

 

[Johnny Utah]

So there is a 1/4 line? I'm still hoping for a suited Bruce Wayne, maybe an Alfred too. Jeremy Irons needs a figure in 1/6.

 

[Starfleet Captain]

I will only entertain a 1/6 Wonder Woman from BvS...

If done right, she will become just as good, if not a better seller than all the Black Widows of MCU...

 

[Cammo]

The Hot Toys BvS Superman & Batman have a July-release estimate on my local retailer's website. So I guess Superman will be out this month in Hong Kong.

 

[olbertfrog]

Will be nice to see the 1/4 scale BvS line. Should debut at the upcoming show next month.

1/4?
Where did you get that from?

 

[Remy]

R



Wholeheartedly agree. I do feel that many times fanboys ruin the films for themselves. I can totally understand that there are just some films where you simply didn't like it, but I often feel as if sometimes people are too critical of a film to the point where they want to find something wrong with it and end up ruining the film for themselves because instead of simply taking it for what it's meant to be, they're focused on finding flaws and negatives instead. Sometimes, I even think they end up confusing themselves and sounding like they're not even certain on what it is they really want to see. SR was too much like Reeve and not enough action and MoS was not enough like Reeve and too much action. So what does one want?

I too think it's natural to compare a new rendition of something or a sequel to its predecessor; similar to when a new band comes on the scene and you compare them to an already existing band. Like we both mentioned, it is possible to like both, and like you, this is why I also end up enjoying a lot of these films because I merely enjoy and digest them for what they are intended and meant to be.

I'm really looking forward to BvS. I admit I was dubious when they first cast Affleck in the role as he's not the first person that would come to mind when one would envision a Batman/Bruce Wayne actor, but I refrained from making any conclusion until I see him in the role. From what I've seen thus far, he looks like he has the potential to be the best Bats yet. Even then though, it's all subjective and would be wrong to compare him with the other interpretations. The Batman that they are trying to portray in this film is totally different than Bale's Batman and I'm sure Keaton's also. Sure I'll have one that I prefer over the other, but it doesn't by default mean that I think the other ones are POS interpretations.

Yup, when I watch I movie, I come in to be entertained. So if I feel like I had a blast going along for the ride, I'm happy.
Now, what I'm guilty of is being critical of casting.
That's why I'm with you on casting Affleck. When I watch a movie, I'll believe Downey is stark, or Sherlock Holmes. I'll believe Evans is Cap.
I'll believe Cavill is superman.
But whenever it's a huge miscast, I can't get past the fact that the actor is trying to be someone else.
What I like is when the actors know their role that they disappear into that character.

Kinda like Jessica Alba in ff4, I couldn't get past the fact that that is just Alba pretending and failing miserably to the the invisible girl.
Or Topher Grace as Venom, that was a big big miscast.

So I was worried about Affleck, that I'm gonna watch a movie, and instead of absorbing the movie, I wouldn't get past the fact that it is Affleck trying to be Bruce Wayne.
But I can admit when I'm wrong. Even just from the trailers, I can tell he would be a great batman/brooding Wayne.

 

[batfan08]

1/4?
Where did you get that from?

Their recent "Hot Toys Gazette" Facebook post had them talk about the show showcasing Batman and Superman in different scales, but I just assumed they were going to do what they always do and have 1:1 versions on display. It'd be really cool to see 1/4 scale stuff, if they did it. I know it'd never happen, but it'd be badass if they did for Batfleck what the did for Bale and threw in everything but the kitchen sink. Multiple faceplates, a Wayne head, include the goggles, Trenchcoat, Shemagh, and pants for the desert version. ****, just make it super-expensive and include all the armor plating from the Superman battle and an alternate LED lit helmeted head.

 

[moose]

It is still unknown (at least to my knowledge) if Lex will don his infamous power suit, but lets just say he does I can see their being a HT of it.

Hum maybe it would be nice to have a double ending inside of just one bad as fight against DD he get to go a co I ple.of rounds against Luther in his iconic power suit, in any event they need t on announce when the superman sequel will happen as I can't wait for an adaptation of the death of superman still to date my favorite story arch. Hell if the rumors are true marvel might beat them to it in civil war with the rumored death of you know who.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

 

[moose]

The word grounded gets thrown in there a lot And most people associate it with what Nolan has achieved in dark knight.
So when the word is associated with MOS, it can be perceived that it didn't live up its goal.

It has a different meaning in comparison to nolan's batman.
As I mentioned on previous comment, Nolan always insisted on keeping the story grounded with no supernatural elements whatsoever. No Bane with green juice to pump him up, nothing. All are based on real human beings, like if this would happen today.

For superman, when they use the term grounded, again, this is what it would be like...if today, an Alien reveals himself and we find we are not alone.
But unlike nolans batman where it has no supernatural elements, Snyder's MOS is not limited to this rule.
That's the extent of the meaning.
This is not like reeve superman where he just shows up and people all ok with it.

That's why you see in batman v superman the consequence of the destruction of superman's fight with Zod. A lot of people including the government hold him accountable for what happened.
This is not like the avengers where you have supernatural beings just show up and people,are all like...Yay!!! And at the end of all destruction, they go get shawarma.

I with you on the idea of what the term "grounded " means in terms of the new DC /MOS what it would really be like if an alien revealed himself in this universe that they have created I have had several discussions on this topic in this movie BvS thread on what I think grounded means in. I think they will adapt certain elements from their characters mythos to better fit this world for instance WW is not a Greek Goddess ,but really of alien descendent or the Aqua man is not really from the fabled Atlantis they were an ancient race of aliens who evolved to live under water. The legends were formed over time but the roots are science .

I don't think they will mix these two elements in one movie , people might begin to expect the movie to turn in to another Clash of Titans and not be a DC comic movie.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk