Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I just feel all the overly deep thinking into it is what is going to get them in a bit of trouble. Look at say Spider-Man... they manage to tell a fun story (well the latest not so much) while the character deals with his struggle of being a superhero and real life situations, but the complaints from the public come through on news stories and paper articles shown in the film. We don't delve too far into the issues the various public feels as whole scenes. This kind of stuff is on the backend and on the front end is the hero doing his thing and trying to gain confidence in the people. It just seems like too much real world issue focus that's going to distract from what is the central thing people want to see, which is superman and batman being heroes and proving their worth as individuals who want to help.

I'm sure people were less than happy about the new York destruction in Avengers, but you see those mixed reactions in the media stories and isn't brought to the forefront. I think it's just a given that they have to rebuild and deal with those problems and that is that. Implied stuff.
 
I liked the trailer. Especially the Batman (costumed & armored). I think Affleck will do a fine job. Loved the Miller-esque TDKR elements.
 
Dam I just saw the Teaser, completely missed it due to all the Star Wars hype at the mo. The feeling and design reeks of Frank Miller even the Armored Bat suit is almmost a copy from Dark Knight Returns
3824605-2898111313-Batman.jpgBildschirmfoto 2015-04-18 um 09.11.46.pngBildschirmfoto 2015-04-18 um 09.14.35.png

Even the "normal" Bat suit looks like inspired from Frank Millers TDKR, look at the short ears and stuff
Bildschirmfoto 2015-04-18 um 09.16.37.pngbatman_the_dark_knight_returns_part_1_11.png
 
Last edited:
What is up with the "S" on the shoulders of the police jackets? I sure hope they haven't turned Superman into a dick-tator in this one. Maybe those guys are part of a cult/religion? I don't think I like either of those options
 
while this will have alot of miller influence, the difference is that this eventually leads into them becoming the justice league.
 
What is up with the "S" on the shoulders of the police jackets? I sure hope they haven't turned Superman into a dick-tator in this one. Maybe those guys are part of a cult/religion? I don't think I like either of those options

I think it would be pretty cool if to have a mash-up of different elements of different stories. I've gotten away from the fan-boy purist mentality that they need to stick religiously to one comic story. In my opinion TDKR + Injustice works a lot better than

Greatest-TV-Cartoon-Theme-Songs-6-Super-Friends.jpg

You're missing the point.
It makes me kinda sad that there's a whole generation of kids who won't accept good for the sake of good -

If you make a period piece that is based in the "world" of the Superman you grew up with then fine. The world we (and Superman) live in now is a lot more complex and is definitely NOT black and white, good and bad. We don't live in a world that has clearly defined/identifiable enemies any more than we have leaders who have the best interest of the country in mind as opposed to their own personal gain. How can a hero that represents what's right exist in a world that changes its own views of what is right on a regular basis. When we're fighting an enemy that a decade before was our ally against another enemy that later ends up being our ally. If you were Superman, who's side do you take if you're truly virtuous and ethical? Every culture has a different perception of what's right. Just because Superman grew up in the USA, does that mean he's bound to our views of what's right?
Sure, stopping bank robbers was pretty easy for 1938 Superman. We weren't even in WWII when Superman was starting out.
 
You're missing the point.
With the exception of Batman, DC heroes are GODS. They're infallible.

My earliest recollection of Superman was an old black-and-white serial I saw at my local theater when I was 3.
Clark Kent swerved off the road and crashed his car into a tree to avoid hitting a skunk that was crossing the road.
And in the George Reeve series (which I also grew up on) - Superman knew he was indestructible. Nobody could hurt him.
Empty your gun at him - you're not gonna hurt him. He knew that, and used it to his advantage.
He'd just let you shoot all your bullets, then he'd wrap a steel I-beam around you and wait for the cops to show up.
The Superman I grew up with wouldn't level an entire city block to kill (KILL!) one badguy.
He would have manipulated the fight into an unpopulated area, then wrapped the guy in a steel I-beam and waited for the cops to show up.

You want dark heroes?
That's why there's Batman.
Superman is supposed to represent what's RIGHT. Not what's GREY.
That's why my generation has a problem with Zach Snyder's Superman.
Superman doesn't make mistakes. Superman ALWAYS does what's right.
That's the whole point of Superman.

It makes me kinda sad that there's a whole generation of kids who won't accept good for the sake of good -
They have to have a psychologically troubled hero.
Like I said, that's why there's a Batman.
Let Batman be Batman, and let Superman be Superman.
If Superman isn't "dark" enough for you, then read Batman.

I don't know what else to say about this. You kids obviously just don't get it.

Gods are infallible? Since when? The ancient Greeks would disagree. As for leveling a whole city block to get one bad guy, crack open the book of Job.
 
That Batsuit is awesome. Love it. That cowl is REALLY growing on me.

Reel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It makes me kinda sad that there's a whole generation of kids who won't accept good for the sake of good -
They have to have a psychologically troubled hero.
Like I said, that's why there's a Batman.
Let Batman be Batman, and let Superman be Superman.
I think Man of Steel showed us a somewhat conflicted Kal-El/Superman who was trying to figure out how he was supposed to fit in on Earth, and by the end of that movie had done so. I don't think he'll be psychologically troubled in Batman vs. Superman, but I do think he'll be dealing with a lot of humans who are conflicted about him and behave incorrectly as a result, including Bruce Wayne/Batman.
 
I think Man of Steel showed us a somewhat conflicted Kal-El/Superman who was trying to figure out how he was supposed to fit in on Earth, and by the end of that movie had done so.

And the conflict?

"The world is not ready for you. If they knew about you, it would change everything."

Zod contacts Earth, tells everyone that they're not alone in the universe, that one of their kind has been living amongst them and even threatens the planet if Clark doesn't surrender within 24 hours. This is like taking Papa Kent's fear of the world not being ready for alien life and taking it to it's worst possible scenario. How does the world react?... like it's business as usual. No panics, no big earth shattering dilemmas, no nothing. The military treat the alien threat like they would any kind of threat and even the religious folk who know they're talking with an alien are completely unfazed by it. What kind of world changing phenomenon was Papa Kent was so afraid of that it was worth dying over?
 
I watched the trailer. All I could think was, "oh, they are finally filming the part of Miller's Dark Knight Returns where Batman and Superman go toe to toe."
 
And the conflict?

"The world is not ready for you. If they knew about you, it would change everything."

Zod contacts Earth, tells everyone that they're not alone in the universe, that one of their kind has been living amongst them and even threatens the planet if Clark doesn't surrender within 24 hours. This is like taking Papa Kent's fear of the world not being ready for alien life and taking it to it's worst possible scenario. How does the world react?... like it's business as usual. No panics, no big earth shattering dilemmas, no nothing. The military treat the alien threat like they would any kind of threat and even the religious folk who know they're talking with an alien are completely unfazed by it. What kind of world changing phenomenon was Papa Kent was so afraid of that it was worth dying over?

Umm, everyone in the news room seemed pretty freaked out after they watched the message Zod sent. And considering the first time we see any of the public after said message is when the city starts getting trashed by the world engine, we don't really know how the world reacted to it.

I'd say they most likely did not react like it's business as usual.
 
Last edited:
And the conflict?

"The world is not ready for you. If they knew about you, it would change everything."

Zod contacts Earth, tells everyone that they're not alone in the universe, that one of their kind has been living amongst them and even threatens the planet if Clark doesn't surrender within 24 hours. This is like taking Papa Kent's fear of the world not being ready for alien life and taking it to it's worst possible scenario. How does the world react?... like it's business as usual. No panics, no big earth shattering dilemmas, no nothing. The military treat the alien threat like they would any kind of threat and even the religious folk who know they're talking with an alien are completely unfazed by it. What kind of world changing phenomenon was Papa Kent was so afraid of that it was worth dying over?

Wow... excellent point.
Either one more flaw in this movie... or Kal realized this as well creating a huge amount of doubt about everything his father taught him.
He let his father die because his father convinced him the people would lose their minds if they saw what he could do....
a few years later he and his fellow aliens practically level Metropolis and most of them just stand there watching dumbfounded while pieces of skyscrapers fall fall on top of them... then minutes later everyone is back at work doing their thing. No much different than the aftermath of The Avengers. I get the whole "we will rebuild. We will carry on"... but I would think after not only finding out we're not alone in the universe, but attacked by aliens that things would really go bananas.

Hopefully BvS will expand on the fears of Pa Kent... as the reality of what happened sinks in as fear and panic sink in.
 
i just realized that the statue of superman is actually the ground zero of metropolis. Looks like the lit panels around it have the names of the deceased written on them.

i'd argue about the end of man of steel, it's obviously a time jump from the battle. Who knows how long, and it focus on Clark only, for all we know most people were still freaking out about the aliens and were slowly starting to take sides.
 
Being a resident living just outside Chicago, I can't see Metropolis anymore. The building we locals call the Vagina Building, sticks out like a sore thumb in that trailer.
 
Hahahahaha!

Poor DC. Avengers destroys NY, we love them. Nobody will call out Iron Man on fighting Hulk and ruining the city in Avengers 2. But Supes destroys Metropolis, we loathe him. Daredevil goes dark as hell, we praise their new grit. Superman goes dark as hell, we act like we're watching an "I love the 90s" special mocking goths (and wait, don't we all love the Crow?) Starlord kills the crap out of people, we cheer. Supes or Batman maybe kill someone? Our fingers start wagging and we break out the lecture on "heroes don't kill." I admit, DC has made some missteps (Green effing Lantern comes, sadly, to mind) but jeez.

You want a heroic Superman that hearkens back to the glory days of Reeve? Superman Returns is your movie. Oh wait, EVERYONE HATED THAT.

Sigh.

Well said. DC are really in a tight spot such is the plethora of super hero films at the moment. There's very little they can do except to try and grow their own distinctive "brand" by going "darker" at the moment. Lets be honest, "Batman and Superman become Best Mates over Lunch " isn't really an interesting story ,whilst by copying elements of the Millar story this could be quite good. Yes, I agree the overly "dark" nature of the trailer and the way its been put together is a bit disappointing but if they had copied the Marvel vibe they'd have been hacked down for that as well. The complexities of being a real Super Powered Super Hero living in the really modern world can be explored in many ways, Marvel have gone one way about it and DC are trying to find theirs. I didn't hate the last one,I thought it was a great new take on Superman and I think this one will be equally as good if not better. I guess if they had showed more of the action scenes ,rather than try and set up the tone of the movie people would have been better pleased, but give them a chance!

I guess my view is that there's a range of options between "That's right, Jimmy! And don't forget to eat your brussel sprouts!" style Superman and going all TDK on the material. I hope this film can and does explore those points in between. Maybe it just hasn't been shown yet, but it is in there. But from this trailer, it looks like they're just going dark and conflicted.

You're missing the point.
With the exception of Batman, DC heroes are GODS. They're infallible.

My earliest recollection of Superman was an old black-and-white serial I saw at my local theater when I was 3.
Clark Kent swerved off the road and crashed his car into a tree to avoid hitting a skunk that was crossing the road.
And in the George Reeve series (which I also grew up on) - Superman knew he was indestructible. Nobody could hurt him.
Empty your gun at him - you're not gonna hurt him. He knew that, and used it to his advantage.
He'd just let you shoot all your bullets, then he'd wrap a steel I-beam around you and wait for the cops to show up.
The Superman I grew up with wouldn't level an entire city block to kill (KILL!) one badguy.
He would have manipulated the fight into an unpopulated area, then wrapped the guy in a steel I-beam and waited for the cops to show up.

You want dark heroes?
That's why there's Batman.
Superman is supposed to represent what's RIGHT. Not what's GREY.
That's why my generation has a problem with Zach Snyder's Superman.
Superman doesn't make mistakes. Superman ALWAYS does what's right.
That's the whole point of Superman.

It makes me kinda sad that there's a whole generation of kids who won't accept good for the sake of good -
They have to have a psychologically troubled hero.
Like I said, that's why there's a Batman.
Let Batman be Batman, and let Superman be Superman.
If Superman isn't "dark" enough for you, then read Batman.

I don't know what else to say about this. You kids obviously just don't get it.

I don't think Superman needs to be infallible to be relevant and resonant. But I do think that what was missing from MoS was the sense of doing what is right being what drives Superman.

To me, that's the core difference between Superman and Batman, and what makes them equally interesting, yet very different characters.

Batman does what he believes is necessary.

Superman does what he believes is right.

I think it would be pretty cool if to have a mash-up of different elements of different stories. I've gotten away from the fan-boy purist mentality that they need to stick religiously to one comic story. In my opinion TDKR + Injustice works a lot better than

View attachment 465914

This is the false choice that I think people see -- a choice between two extremes, rather than an attempt to find middle ground. You can do both. DC comics -- in their actual comics -- do both not infrequently, and it's great.


If you make a period piece that is based in the "world" of the Superman you grew up with then fine. The world we (and Superman) live in now is a lot more complex and is definitely NOT black and white, good and bad. We don't live in a world that has clearly defined/identifiable enemies any more than we have leaders who have the best interest of the country in mind as opposed to their own personal gain. How can a hero that represents what's right exist in a world that changes its own views of what is right on a regular basis. When we're fighting an enemy that a decade before was our ally against another enemy that later ends up being our ally. If you were Superman, who's side do you take if you're truly virtuous and ethical? Every culture has a different perception of what's right. Just because Superman grew up in the USA, does that mean he's bound to our views of what's right?

Well, that's just it. There's an element of moral absolutism to Superman which, to be honest, I think is worthwhile. Not EVERYTHING is morally grey, even though we can dream up scenarios that challenge that statement. But ultimately, I think the most interesting story this film could tell with respect to its title characters is the value that both Batman's and Superman's viewpoints have in the modern world.

The thing is -- FROM THIS TRAILER -- I don't get the sense that the Superman side of the argument is being made by the film. I get the sense that Superman is just treated more as an object about which people react, and that's it. I don't see Superman believing in humanity being capable of true greatness, or standing as a paragon of virtue or anything along those lines. In short, I see no sense of hope, kindness, or goodness in the trailer coming from Superman.

I'm not saying we need him flying around Metropolis and saving cats from trees, either. Rather, I'm saying that we need a Superman who stands as a symbol of doing something because it is the right thing to do. That can happen at many different scales and in many different ways, but the film so far doesn't seem particularly interested in that.
 
Back
Top