Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, March 25th, 2016) Movie • Page 30

I think a few things happened here.

First, WB wanted to replicate the success that they had with Nolan's films with Superman. Bringing Superman into a post-9/11 world. They attributed the success of the Nolan films to the portrayal of Batman as "dark, gritty, moody, and grounded". I am not sure if this was the correct lesson to learn from the Nolan films, but that was WB's takeaway.

During production of MoS, I don't know that WB had landed on the idea to actually create a shared cinematic universe. Keep in mind that The Avengers hadn't been released yet and other than the Iron Man movies, MCU films were just doing "ok" at the box office. I believe the original intention was to simply start a Superman franchise.

After that, 2 things happened. The Avengers was released and was massively successful, and MoS had a lukewarm critical reception and a decent-but-not-quite-good-enough box office take.

Everything that happened after that was a reaction to those two things. MoS 2 was essentially scrapped and at Comic Con 2013 a Batman/Superman movie was announced for Summer of 2015. Purely speculative, but I think that at this point, there wasn't even a treatment for this yet. All they had was a logo. They had no idea what they were going to do. All they knew was that shared universes were en vogue and Batman sells. They had to act quickly and throw the kitchen sink at this movie just in case the Marvel model was a short-lived fad.

So now we have BvS. I poorly plotted mess of a movie. WB execs basically said "People love The Dark Knight Returns, throw some of that in there. Death of Superman was popular, throw some of that in there. Death in the Family is a famous Batman story, put some of that in there. People liked The Avengers, put a bunch of Justice League call outs in there. The Avengers had Thanos, we need a Thanos, put a Thanos in there."

Keep in mind, all of these decisions were made before they found out that the Marvel model had legs. Had WB stuck to their original vision of bringing Superman into a modern context, they could have organically introduced their Justice League over the course of multiple movies and not relied on this one movie to catch up to Marvel.

 

I think it still has a chance at $1B, especially seeing HP-DH part 2 did. Besides they said it only needs to hit $800MM to do well for them and I definitely see it hitting that mark. Still think they stick with Snyder, maybe they just have a little shorter leash so to speak and maybe have more input than before?

 

The sad thing about this movie is, for all the people who say the JL cameos are such a horrible case of studio interference... I agree that it feels that way but I think it was 100% Zack Snyder and the writers' choice to implement it in the manner that it was. Snyder seems to be fully on board with what DC/WB is doing and he's a comic book fan over a filmmaker, so I don't find it hard to believe he was at the very least ok with it.

 

To me, this movie was closer to being 'good' than 'bad.' Just seemed messy. Will elaborate when I'm not intoxicated.

 

Read the first two issues of Action Comics in my Superman Chronicles trade, and I really think the template for a good modern take on the character has been in his DNA since literally his first appearance. Like, those issues had him knock down a mayor's door to save someone on death row for a crime she didn't commit, save a victim of domestic abuse, and take a politician corrupted by a munitions lobbyist to the warfront to see firsthand the effects of his actions.

Simple scifi/adventure escapism is underrated, but if we're interested in a more modern and meaningful look at the character, I think a heroic Superman like that trying to positively impact a dark world is far more interesting and rewarding, as well as more faithful to the character's history, than what Snyder's attempted with him.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with all of this. In my opinion what makes the Marvel movies superior is that they spend a good amount of time on building their characters. I just watched Guardians of the Galaxy again the other night, and while it really is such a basic story at its core, you really learn to love the characters and get a good sense of who they are. I don't think WB is doing that at all. Rather than tell a story, they're just pretty scenes poorly stitched together.

I find there's a real lack of human emotion in the last two DCU films. Real life is sadness, and real life is fun. There's a balance. Marvel does a good job of balancing that (especially given that they're generally more geared towards a younger audience). WB seems to forget that a little humor helps make the really dramatic moments hit hard. Nolan definitely had some moments that were funny in the Dark Knight Trilogy (i.e. when Bruce says something to the effect of "You never gave up on my Alfred" and Alfred responds "Nevahhhh" ... it's a silly simple moment but it shows so much of the characters love for each other)

 

There's a real danger in over-comparing Marvel and DC, and this from someone who's done so in the past and who isn't shy about preferring Marvel's approach (and bashing Snyder). At the end of the day, all comic book films shouldn't aim for the same thing; this is all the more true in a world with as many comic book films and shows as we're getting.

Even so, the GOTG/BvS comparison is an interesting one. If BvS existed as is, but without recognizable characters, would as many fans be defending it? Do these characters and this plot carry the film, or is it a terrible film carried by the raw nerd joy of seeing Wonder Woman, a more comic-book-y Batman, parademons, Cyborg's origin, etc. on the big screen for the very first time?

I think there's a way for DC/WB to maintain their distinctly different style in their future films while still learning the right lessons from the MCU. I don't want a Justice League film that feels like an Avengers film, but I do want the first Justice League film to balance its pieces as well as the first Avengers and first GOTG did. (And, the latter film didn't have solo films doing the legwork, so it's not like DC's decision to flip that formula inherently hurts them. If anything, I think Wonder Woman in BvS proves an ensemble film can launch a solo film just as easily as the inverse.)

 

Bringing this up here as to not derail the Suicide Squad thread, and initially I had kind of said I was done analyzing and pulling apart this movie, but @Nathan brought up a good point that Superman and Wonder Woman didn't exchange any dialogue and thinking about it, that's a pretty odd choice. If it was deliberate, I'd love to know or understand the reasoning and if not, then that's a pretty big oversight and seems pretty lazy in my opinion.

 

I personally doubt it was intentional. It's just indicative of the bad pacing of the film, how little she was in it, and how little Bats and Supes were face-to-face.

Definitely a weird detail to think about.

 

I seem to be in the minority when it comes to Argo. I just thought it was alright. Dragged on for way too long I felt. Plus, Affleck just was not that good in that movie.

 

Yeah the SS news has me very skeptical. If they do go back and edit it, I would hope that the version we were set to see (before Deadpool shocked the world) is still kept in tact and released as a different cut.

 

I think Nolan understood Batman's motivations better than Snyder does. Nolan's Batman ultimately cared about people, and wanted to make them safe. There is a sequence in The Dark Knight where one of Wayne Enterprise's consultants is about to out Bruce Wayne as Batman, the Joker orders a hit on him and Bruce ultimately saves him. When the consultant sees Bruce at the car wreck they share a look. That look said more about who Bruce Wayne is than anything that happened in BvS.

 

I honestly believe that if this movie didn't have Batman and Superman it would be completely cast aside as a terrible movie. The "plot" was horrendous and the characters were extremely flat and boring. The movie completely relies on people coming to their own conclusions about character motivations and making those conclusions based on past material. It does not stand on its own at all. Not that WB owes me anything, but I just can't get over how let down I was by this movie.

I hope that they right the ship, mostly for Affleck's case. I love a good underdog story, and seeing him really make a comeback in the last few years has made me happy. I really hope we get a Batman solo flick with him at the helm. Snyder needs to be given the boot as the head of the DCU, he clearly can't handle the role.

 

Agreed 100%. I definitely need to get back to the Dark Knight Trilogy soon. No feeling will ever beat leaving the theaters after Batman Begins and just being blown away.

 

I remember camping in upstate New York, and the big Batman fans my dad and I are, we drove 4 hours to get to the closest theaters to see it. One of the best experiences ever. Totally worth losing a day of camping and vacation for, in my opinion.

 

I think when it comes down to it, even if you strip away expectations, the movie fails because it tried to do too much. It wanted to be a political thriller, a redemption story, and set up for the justice league, but never quite got any of them right. The fact that people walked out not knowing if Batman was having a dream or premonition is evidence of this. All these little things were distraction from the core story.

Honestly I just wish they would adapt Kingdom Come and then we can finally get the DC Universe movie we deserve. But i know that's never going to happen.

 

I don't think it does too much. It barely does anything. It's a very thin story with little in the way of characterization. I say that having enjoyed the movie more than most people here, but the action and music and atmosphere would not have carried this movie if it weren't so exciting to see this version of Batman or Wonder Woman in live action for the first time (I think) since the 70s.

 

Alright, so Batfleck was great, Eisenberg was great, the score was great. The dialogue was weak except for Eisenberg's monologues (I especially loved his biblical references) and the Martha scene was great. I definitely think there was some fat towards the middle that could have been trimmed, including the bullet sideplot and the Justice League setup, and Doomsday looked like shit/also probably could have been cut tbh.

I still very much enjoyed it for what it was. I wanted a Zack Snyder movie and I got a Zack Snyder movie. I got some popcorn, turned my brain off for two hours and enjoyed the ride.

 

I'm still one of the ones hoping for a Man of Steel 2. Maybe there's still some hope for that.

 

Get different directors and writers and there's a good chance they make something great of this cast.

 

Would love to see a MOS2 with a different director. Was pretty excited a while back when they had that George Miller rumor.

 

Crossed $700 million globally.

 

People are saying this won't cross $1 billion. Also, I'm reading that WB apparently wants to green light fewer "small" movies to focus on their franchises.

I really like Henry Cavill as Superman, so I'm also down for a MoS2. I love the first one and enjoy Snyder's aesthetic and eye for iconic imagery, but I'd be open to someone else directing if they got someone good.

 

Wonder Woman film moved up to 6/2/17

http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/6/11378896/wonder-woman-movie-new-release-date

If WB decides to move on from Snyder, who would everyone want to see direct JL?

 

Obvious choice is George Miller because he's great at visual storytelling and action. They'd need good writers to really flesh out the characters and have a good script to work off of. Anyways, isn't JL supposed to start filming within the next few weeks, or am I remembering wrong? I figured Snyder was already a lock for Part 1 at least.