Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Metropolis is Chicago. Gotham is New York.
Or vice versa? Or they're both versions of New York? Or...?

Historically, Metropolis was modeled after NYC - although the original skyline was inspired by Toronto. Metropolis was even nicknamed the Big Apricot.

But, even I was surprised to learn that in the comics, Metropolis and Gotham City were often depicted as twin cities - usually within driving distance from one another, at times with a bay between them and at one time with the 'World's Longest Suspension Bridge' separating the two. In the 90s, Metropolis was placed in Delaware and Gotham City in New Jersey.

Frank Miller summed it up best: "Metropolis is New York in the daytime; Gotham City is New York at night."
 
In my book he doesn't have to be a Boy Scout.
But I think it would be a bold breath of fresh air if they dared to do a Boy Scout in the midst of pessimistic superheroes. A man out of place in society but also with the naïveté of hope. That's no different than it was in the 70's. I think we could use the Boy Scout more than ever.

Instead of a social statement we just get another character who is reflective of the times rather than a challenge to the times.

He doesn't have to be all straight-laced. But it would help if he was written or performed well. Both the writing of Supes and the acting of Cavill struggle to inflate the role into more than one dimension. Reeves was at least interesting to watch and likeable. I actually care about the Reeve Superman. I have no empathy or interest in Cavill MoS. I really hope they can get more out of him in this film.


This is a prime example of what I was trying to convey. The old Boy Scout character works for Captain America, and they did little to change his character from comic to screen. In my opinion, it's just lazy writing when they update who Superman is. They can't grasp that his core values (that we've seen in the near 80 years) is what makes him work. The pessimism and jaded world can be kept intact, but have Superman be the counter to that.

Superman is a character that makes us, for a moment, be optimistic and hopeful about the world that we live in. Sure it can be ugly, but he is there to make it better, and serves as an inspiration for others to become better than who we are.

And honestly, the only reason I know who Henry Cavill is supposed to be playing is because of the costume he's in. The character that they wrote for him sure isn't Superman.
mattycsi: How he was brought up by the Kents should have been the foundation for who he becomes as Superman. Not, "Oh, I guess I'll learn how to be a hero as I go along" type of mentality. In Man of Steel there was no support for him via Jonathan Kent, nor is there any from Ma Kent in this new trailer. Clark's foundation as Superman is a culmination of how he was raised.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watching it again, it is still showing promise. I am very tired of seeing the Wayne's shot though. I mean seriously, just about every Bats film has a Wayne family massacre flash back.

I can't wait to see what Irons does with Alfred. I would have preferred him playing a villain, but I'm sure he will kill this role. Lex seems more like a punk than any respectable businessman. I guess he really is reprising the Facebook role. Meh.

Thought I saw a shot in the trailer of Athens. Maybe it was Detroit. Really doesn't matter since both places are broke,

I bet by the end of the film we see Brainiac.
 
That's not the character they built from 1938 until they changed him with this New 52 nonsense.

Right there is the kink in your well-argued point.

Everything we've seen or heard about not only BvS but everything else indicates that this is heavily influenced by the New52 universe. Superman's suit is based on New52 design. Aquaman's being played by Jason Momoa, an actor better suited to the New52 warrior Aquaman rather than the original. Cyborg's on tap to be part of the Justice League, just like in New52. This is not the classic era DC universe. As much as I'd like it to be, it just isn't, and I've just accepted that this is the direction they've chosen.
 
To those who still want Supes to be a boy scout: is there room in this world for that anymore? I mean, would anyone pay to see that movie? I imagine some strapping 50s stereotype telling me to stay in school and eat my Wheaties would be a really lame movie. The world has moved on. It's a much more cynical, jaded place. Nobody who can read actually thinks the words "truth, justice, and the American Way" unironically belong together anymore. Old-school nice guy Supes would be a catastrophically cornball box office bomb, and rightly so.
You could have made the same argument in the 1970's.
You'll recall those were "pessimistic" times, too. This was the era that produced Taxi Driver. Even Star Wars was full of sarcasm.

The Donner Superman exploded because it was a departure from the 70's - Remember when he rescues the cat from the tree for the little girl and flies off? The girl runs home to tell her mom who tells her to stop lying and then you hear SLAP! Just because the character is a "square" it doesn't mean the movie has to be "square."
 
You could have made the same argument in the 1970's.
You'll recall those were "pessimistic" times, too. This was the era that produced Taxi Driver. Even Star Wars was full of sarcasm.

The Donner Superman exploded because it was a departure from the 70's - Remember when he rescues the cat from the tree for the little girl and flies off? The girl runs home to tell her mom who tells her to stop lying and then you hear SLAP! Just because the character is a "square" it doesn't mean the movie has to be "square."

That's actually a very valid point. Fair enough.

- - - Updated - - -

The feel and tone with Superman should be like Captain America. You get the all around good guy/ boy scout in both of the Captain movies. Even with Winter Soldier, as somber toned as that movie was you still had the optimism of Cap through and through. It can be done and not come off as cheesy. That is what MOS lacked and I am afraid this new movie will lack as well.

Also a good point.
 
Right there is the kink in your well-argued point.

Everything we've seen or heard about not only BvS but everything else indicates that this is heavily influenced by the New52 universe. Superman's suit is based on New52 design. Aquaman's being played by Jason Momoa, an actor better suited to the New52 warrior Aquaman rather than the original. Cyborg's on tap to be part of the Justice League, just like in New52. This is not the classic era DC universe. As much as I'd like it to be, it just isn't, and I've just accepted that this is the direction they've chosen.
...and that might also be why DC's New 52 is considered (mostly) a failure.

(Also from what I understand, MoS was already in development when DC's New 52 was coming out. While they share a similar feel and probably have a lot of the same guidance from Warner, I'm not sure if Man of Steel was really 'heavily influenced by it).
 
...and that might also be why DC's New 52 is considered (mostly) a failure.

(Also from what I understand, MoS was already in development when DC's New 52 was coming out. While they share a similar feel and probably have a lot of the same guidance from Warner, I'm not sure if Man of Steel was really 'heavily influenced by it).

As I told Vivek. The only thing that would really make me hop onto this franchise while singing all the praises I can is if they dropped Wonder Woman's New52 origin. Wonder Woman ain't no illegitimate demi-god child of Zeus! When you say "We've fixed her now. You can say she's the daughter of a god", you are underscoring her character.
 
...and that might also be why DC's New 52 is considered (mostly) a failure.

(Also from what I understand, MoS was already in development when DC's New 52 was coming out. While they share a similar feel and probably have a lot of the same guidance from Warner, I'm not sure if Man of Steel was really 'heavily influenced by it).

Oh, I don't disagree that New52 is a colossal disappointment. I haven't been impressed by a single one of the DCAU movies since Flashpoint Paradox, except for Gods and Monsters. The whole thing is kind of meh.

I'm just saying that if you set aside the pre-New52 expectations and accept that New52 will be a big influence, you can possibly better accept the movies in that specific context.

Personally, I would love it if they went with a more iconic look and feel. Like everyone has said, Superman was a big blue boy scout. He was a paragon of hope, an ideal outcome of both the immigrant story and the perennial "small-town boy makes good" story. He was an ideal hero for an idealized world. DC comics never really dealt all that much with the nitty gritty aspects of life, not in the way Marvel did, and that's why Marvel caught up with DC and has made such relatable movies.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

DC's characters are iconic. The Justice League presents a unified front that the world looks up to.

Marvel's characters are relatable. The Avengers fight like any family does. Same with the X-Men and Fantastic 4.

The issue is that DC has been struggling to make their characters more relatable than before, and they've taken many missteps along the way, even before New52.
 
As I told Vivek. The only thing that would really make me hop onto this franchise while singing all the praises I can is if they dropped Wonder Woman's New52 origin. Wonder Woman ain't no illegitimate demi-god child of Zeus! When you say "We've fixed her now. You can say she's the daughter of a god", you are underscoring her character.
I'm not sure how DC is underscoring or emphasizing WW's character? You seem to be complaining about her - and then giving praise.

Either way, I haven't read a DC book in years now. (Other than the new Sandman book). ...and it's not because Wonder Woman is the daughter of a god.
Oh, I don't disagree that New52 is a colossal disappointment. I haven't been impressed by a single one of the DCAU movies since Flashpoint Paradox, except for Gods and Monsters. The whole thing is kind of meh.

I'm just saying that if you set aside the pre-New52 expectations and accept that New52 will be a big influence, you can possibly better accept the movies in that specific context.

Personally, I would love it if they went with a more iconic look and feel. Like everyone has said, Superman was a big blue boy scout. He was a paragon of hope, an ideal outcome of both the immigrant story and the perennial "small-town boy makes good" story. He was an ideal hero for an idealized world. DC comics never really dealt all that much with the nitty gritty aspects of life, not in the way Marvel did, and that's why Marvel caught up with DC and has made such relatable movies.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

DC's characters are iconic. The Justice League presents a unified front that the world looks up to.

Marvel's characters are relatable. The Avengers fight like any family does. Same with the X-Men and Fantastic 4.

The issue is that DC has been struggling to make their characters more relatable than before, and they've taken many missteps along the way, even before New52.
I think you and I are on the same page for the most part here - except that I think new 52 was developed alongside Snyder's Superman... there was a thought process to do what they're doing to Superman and these development's paralleled each other.

I do wonder that if they followed up Man of Steel with an immediate sequel - rather than jumping on the Batman bandwagon - if it would have been nearly as successful as MoS. I'm guessing it wouldn't do near the volume - they need Batman (and maybe even Wonder Woman) to sell this new DC Cinematic Universe. Without Batman, MoS 2 could fail miserably - they would've needed some serious magic to make it work right - Henry Cavill is no Robert Downey Jr. and they would've needed a killer story and someone to come in and blow folks away (ala Ledger and to an extent Downey Jr). Batman is a huge draw - Affleck as Batman might be the icing on the cake.
 
Here's a nice little side-by-side comparison someone did...

34MMuTL.gif
 
Trailer looks awesome. Looking forward to this one.

It's been AGES since I read comics (mostly 60's and 70's vintage), and I'm sure I'll incur the wrath of Jeyl on this, but Wonder Woman seems pretty tacked on and unnecessary from what I can see. Seems that it's enough to have two superheroes go at it and save adding other characters from the universe for future films. Otherwise, if she's integral to the plot, shouldn't there be 3 logos in the title graphic?

Minor gripe. I just don't like it when film makers try to cram too much in to what should probably be a simple story.
 
This is a prime example of what I was trying to convey. The old Boy Scout character works for Captain America, and they did little to change his character from comic to screen. In my opinion, it's just lazy writing when they update who Superman is. They can't grasp that his core values (that we've seen in the near 80 years) is what makes him work. The pessimism and jaded world can be kept intact, but have Superman be the counter to that.

Superman is a character that makes us, for a moment, be optimistic and hopeful about the world that we live in. Sure it can be ugly, but he is there to make it better, and serves as an inspiration for others to become better than who we are.

And honestly, the only reason I know who Henry Cavill is supposed to be playing is because of the costume he's in. The character that they wrote for him sure isn't Superman.
@mattycsi: How he was brought up by the Kents should have been the foundation for who he becomes as Superman. Not, "Oh, I guess I'll learn how to be a hero as I go along" type of mentality. In Man of Steel there was no support for him via Jonathan Kent, nor is there any from Ma Kent in this new trailer. Clark's foundation as Superman is a culmination of how he was raised.

Couldn't agree more with this. Not only does Cap. America work, but they actually use his boy-scoutish-ness as a storytelling advantage. Look how much mileage they got out of the "Language" joke in Ultron.

Double that with the direction batman has gone in the recent movies. I don't know what Affleck will be like, but so far he seems similar to Bale in that he comes across as moody enough that he's one espresso away from cutting himself in the parking lot because no one gets him. It's a character that could only be enhanced by having him be off-set with the more optimistic character.

~~~~~

Also, is Robin gone forever? I know we all hated O'donnel but that wasn't the characters fault. That movie had WAY too much stink in it to pin it on the fact that Batman had a sidekick. While we're on the subject of lazy writing...the character of Robin is nothing BUT potential.

Maybe we're just safer without it. Even as I wrote that I pictured Hollywood exec. butchering it...You just KNOW he'd ride a skateboard, probably have rap battles at school, and back talk batman. The whole precocious kid cliche is one that I'm very over. I'm still annoyed that in the original Jurassic Park, the dinosaurs never ate Timmy.
 
Also, is Robin gone forever? I know we all hated O'donnel but that wasn't the characters fault. That movie had WAY too much stink in it to pin it on the fact that Batman had a sidekick. While we're on the subject of lazy writing...the character of Robin is nothing BUT potential.

Maybe we're just safer without it. Even as I wrote that I pictured Hollywood exec. butchering it...You just KNOW he'd ride a skateboard, probably have rap battles at school, and back talk batman. The whole precocious kid cliche is one that I'm very over. I'm still annoyed that in the original Jurassic Park, the dinosaurs never ate Timmy.


I like Robin equally as much as Batman, so I'm REALLY hoping we haven't seen the last of him in this cinematic universe. The Arkham games did an okay job of making Robin not a joke, but man do they have a great opportunity to make Robin AWESOME in this new movie-verse.
 
I like Robin equally as much as Batman, so I'm REALLY hoping we haven't seen the last of him in this cinematic universe. The Arkham games did an okay job of making Robin not a joke, but man do they have a great opportunity to make Robin AWESOME in this new movie-verse.

I can't imagine Robin not having some kind of spot in this cinematic universe considering the (Jason Todd?) Robin suit is in (what I assume is) the Batcave.

If they give us the ****ing Wayne family murder again and don't touch a little on Robin I'd be very upset considering I'm a pretty big fan of Robin as well. Truth be told, I'd like to see this lead into a Red Hood movie if at all possible... Now that would be awesome. :lol
 
I can't imagine Robin not having some kind of spot in this cinematic universe considering the (Jason Todd?) Robin suit is in (what I assume is) the Batcave.

If they give us the ****ing Wayne family murder again and don't touch a little on Robin I'd be very upset considering I'm a pretty big fan of Robin as well. Truth be told, I'd like to see this lead into a Red Hood movie if at all possible... Now that would be awesome. :lol

I'm just worried they are going to roll the boys all up into one Robin and just call him Dick Grayson. That would then leave room for Carrie Kelly who is rumored to be in the movie (played by Jenna Malone). I would love to see Under the Hood in live action, and have a full fledged Nightwing, and Tim as Robin, but I don't know if a film maker will care enough about the Robins to do that.
 
The amount of story that we will get on Robin will all depend really on how far they will go with batman stand alones. So far all is going towards the justice league and ofc they cant really have any movie bomb. I do hope the Robin suit is tht of jason and that this is maybe a way of them going towards the red hood which would make a for a great "vilain" for a stand alone in which they can also add Leto's Joker in a way.

Not a fan of the rumored carrie kelly Robin tho.
 
I always,always HATED Robin the only reason I started to like Batman was because I read some of the lone Batman stories like Gothic where he fought the monk.

To me the whole "sidkick" idea was a thing of the 1930's and 40's and it needs to die NOW,Batman does not need a young boy in bright colors tagging along (or dark colors ether) if,and I mean IF Batman needs someone with him a female is a better choice to me,so Carrie Kelly is a more appealing idea.

In fact I've come to like the idea of "Robin" staying in the batcave and doing logistic work for Bats while he's in the field,running computers,finding answers and such.

Now if this person decides to go out on their own at some point and becomes Nightwing fine.
 
This thread is more than 7 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top