Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Oh dear...)

[Joker]

About whose opinion is more reliable, and why, really.

Remember that Hollywood is strongly (but not entirely) driven by the box office take of a movie. When you buy a movie ticket, even if you never see the movie, you are voting, "I want to see more of this," as far as Hollywood is concerned. You are, in effect, casting a vote for more of a thing *you haven't yet seen*.

In addition, it isn't like movie tickets are cheap, and that home video is still crappy. Waiting for it to come out on Netflix is a viable option. Or, really, how much are you missing if you just take a pass?

So, it isn't like, "Do I go to see this?" is a no-brainer question. Asking whether it is worth the time and money isn't irrational. Looking for information to help answer that question isn't foolish or pointless. Taking *hours* pouring over reviews trying to decide is probably foolish - if you spend more time reading reviews than seeing the movie, you've got a problem. So, it becomes a question of who has the more reliable opinion, so you can look someplace quickly and get an idea of whether it is worth it.

I was referring to the two in here having words with each other.

 

[Umbran]

Yes, to me, Obviously.

No, not obviously.

You shouldn't assume that people will understand you mean it is just your opinion, if you don't *say* so. Not that there's policemen who are going to come and get you, but you're setting the stage for misunderstanding if you do. This is especially true on the internet, where there are so many, many people who will state their opinions as objective facts and mean it, and people can't get any vocal tone or the like off you.

What do you think? Are the tones of the two films comparable? If you disagree with my assertion, let's talk about it.

I have no opinion, as I haven't seen MoS. I thought the Watchmen movie came off as... cynical, where I'd call the graphic novel more grim and dark. Similar, but not the same. And that's okay, as I never look to have a piece come across the same when it jumps between media.

 

[Janx]

So, it isn't like, "Do I go to see this?" is a no-brainer question. ...snip...

sans the y'all's dialogue on movies, our general metric was "is it sci fi/fantasy/super heroes?" If yes, we'll probably go see it in the theatre.

Except for the latest FF movie, we watch every Marvel film in the theatre.

We skipped Man of Steel, based on indicators that they betrayed Superman's strength of character (his earthly dad would NEVER tell him not to help people and such).

DoJ hits another negative vein. Classic superman is not evil. is not corrupt. doesn't force his will on good people. Batman appears to be starting a slew of trouble and fighting with a man who is NOT a problem. He should in fact be studying Superman, judging his behavior, and only when it crosses a line, does he intervene.

So like MoS, DoJ appears to betray the generally accepted moral strength of character of Superman, and as such, won't get my dollars.

I'll be plenty happy to watch Captain America and Iron Man squabble over their more plausible disagreement that is in line with both their characters.

Also, it should be a crime for Hollywood to reshoot the origin story of any character that has already been "origin'd" on film. Thus sparing us any more repeats of Batman, Spiderman and Superman's origin stories.

 

[Ryujin]

sans the y'all's dialogue on movies, our general metric was "is it sci fi/fantasy/super heroes?" If yes, we'll probably go see it in the theatre.

Except for the latest FF movie, we watch every Marvel film in the theatre.

We skipped Man of Steel, based on indicators that they betrayed Superman's strength of character (his earthly dad would NEVER tell him not to help people and such).

DoJ hits another negative vein. Classic superman is not evil. is not corrupt. doesn't force his will on good people. Batman appears to be starting a slew of trouble and fighting with a man who is NOT a problem. He should in fact be studying Superman, judging his behavior, and only when it crosses a line, does he intervene.

So like MoS, DoJ appears to betray the generally accepted moral strength of character of Superman, and as such, won't get my dollars.

I'll be plenty happy to watch Captain America and Iron Man squabble over their more plausible disagreement that is in line with both their characters.

Also, it should be a crime for Hollywood to reshoot the origin story of any character that has already been "origin'd" on film. Thus sparing us any more repeats of Batman, Spiderman and Superman's origin stories.

I would say that it isn't Superman's morality that isn't betrayed by this movie, it's Batman's. In this movie it appears that Batman fulfills the role that is commonly ascribed to Lex Luthor; the person who thinks that mankind shouldn't be using a godlike being as a crutch.

 

[MechaPilot]

We skipped Man of Steel, based on indicators that they betrayed Superman's strength of character (his earthly dad would NEVER tell him not to help people and such).

Johnathan Kent never told him not to help people in MoS. What he does tell him is a lot more profound than either "don't help people" or "go help everyone." He tells his young son that he doesn't have the answers. What he tells Clark in that discussion amounts to this, "I want you to grow up to be a good man, but I love you as my own son, and I'm scared for you, and what people will think about you and try to do to you when they find out how different you really are."

This is especially weighty given Clark's age at the time. Imagine what would happen if Clark's secret got out and the government came to claim him (recall that having contact with an alien life form is actually a federal crime that you can be imprisoned for in the U.S., and that he is illegally adopted, and an illegal alien, so there exists plenty of legal authority to rip that family apart). If child Clark, without the fully formed morals he would have as an adult, was faced with that situation he could very easily become a wildly destructive threat to others similar to the little girl in the film Firestarter (yes, I know it was a novel first, but I haven't read it yet).

 

[Hypersmurf]

One thing I didn't get - if Bruce Wayne has been Caped Crusading for twenty years, fighting the Joker, responding to Bat-Signals... why is he 'the Bat Vigilante in Gotham' who's newsworthy all of a sudden?

And is it canonical that Gotham and Metropolis are, like, a short cab ride apart?

-Hyp.

 

[Ryujin]

One thing I didn't get - if Bruce Wayne has been Caped Crusading for twenty years, fighting the Joker, responding to Bat-Signals... why is he 'the Bat Vigilante in Gotham' who's newsworthy all of a sudden?

And is it canonical that Gotham and Metropolis are, like, a short cab ride apart?

-Hyp.

If they've tied this closely to "The Dark Knight Returns", then Batman would have been inactive for a while.

I don't know about anyone else but in my own mind Gotham and Metropolis are Boston and New York, respectively.

 

[Kramodlog]

Batman V Superman: Spoilers of Plot Holes

Transfered.

 

[Ryujin]

...

I recommend that you put this in a spoiler block, so that you don't spoil the movie for anyone else.

 

[Morrus]

DoJ hits another negative vein. Classic superman is not evil. is not corrupt. doesn't force his will on good people. Batman appears to be starting a slew of trouble and fighting with a man who is NOT a problem. He should in fact be studying Superman, judging his behavior, and only when it crosses a line, does he intervene.

So like MoS, DoJ appears to betray the generally accepted moral strength of character of Superman, and as such, won't get my dollars.

Not that I care whether you see it, but that doesn't reflect the actual events in the film whatsoever. There's a lot more to it than that.

I just got back from it; I enjoyed it immensely. It managed to surprise me in major ways twice.

Also, it should be a crime for Hollywood to reshoot the origin story of any character that has already been "origin'd" on film. Thus sparing us any more repeats of Batman, Spiderman and Superman's origin stories.

Meh. just because you've seen it before doesn't mean every 10 year old has. There are kids who have never heard of Michael Keaton, to whom this will be their first introduction to the character. And in this one, it's just, like, a minute at the opening credits. They get it out of the way fast.