Tweet
Man of Steel looked like Little Mermaid compared to this.
-
-
I'm the minority, but I love the dark nature of the DC movies. the Trailer looks great and I cannot wait for this movie to come out.Comment
-
Wow, I'm not sure I'll be taking the kids to that.Mortui Vivos Docent
The Dead Teach the LivingComment
-
OK, but that doesn't explain how DC differentiates itself from Marvel.
Like it or not, Superman Returns did exactly what you suggested and it was a bust, while Nolan's Batman series is still darker and heavier character-wise than anything from Marvel, and it did business equal to Marvel. The best selling items from DC are the video games, which are Escape From NY bleak, even though Paul Dini laid the story framework.
I'm not implying anyone is wrong for wanting 4-color heroes, but what's happened, IMO, are the studios have reversed roles. Marvel was built on the idea of real-world problems compared to DC's Amazing Fantasies pulp heritage.Comment
-
Yeah, this one is out for my 7-year old, who will be 8 by then. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure she'll be fine for Age of Ultron, although I'll check it out without her first.Wow, I'm not sure I'll be taking the kids to that.
ChrisComment
-
Man of Steel movie repels my children.
The Avengers keeps them on the couch.Comment
-
Superman Returns wasn't a bust because it was lighter, it was a bust because the story was basically a repeat of Superman , Lois Lane was horribly miscast and had zero chemistry or appeal, and the super-kid idea was freaking stupid.
Batman Begins was solid, but hardly a blockbuster. Dark Knight was a blockbuster because of the Joker and Ledger's death. DK's success just happened to spill over onto DKR, which was an over-long mess and not nearly as good as DK.Comment
-
The Dark Knight series, for me, is a stand alone trilogy. I LOVED that series. I don't equate that with really anything out there. I thought thematically it was absolutely on point with the character and stayed consistent with the core ideas of Batman. But in saying that, I would NEVER look at that series and say to myself, " That's a formula for other characters." I know that gets thrown around allot in broadstroking the treatment of movies. I've lost count of how many times I hear the phrase," Oh their giving that the Dark Knight treatment." Eh... That's a handy throw away description, but to me it doesn't always serve justice to what is being talked about. Sure, the mood of some films seems to play on that idea, but if the mood is servicing the material correctly at that moment, then I don't consider it copying off another film. Snyder is NOT Christopher Nolan. And the success of Dark Knight played on a vastly greater scale than just being "dark".
What Snyder is doing here is pretty much what Snyder has always done. To me, he has a very distinctive style and a cynicism that creeps into all of his movies. I use Watchmen as a benchmark because it comes the closest to forecasting his treatment for these characters. And even though I personally thought the script for Watchmen catered to his strengths as a director, I don't feel his instincts are well served here. And that's just me. I'm not at all trying to suggest anyone who loves this is "wrong". I just think, in the way I see these characters, especially Superman, there's a direction you take to embody his essence that honestly I think Snyder just flat out missed. And I think that plays largely to why Man of Steel got mixed reviews and was really only a marginal success. And when he says things like he doesn't really care about what the fans like to see or feel loyalty to the comics, that bothers me. And it's not because I have any notion that "fans" should be his guide. But at the end of the day this is a high valued product. And when someone puts you in charge of that product and you essentially say, " I'll tell the consumer what I like," I think you are begging to take some hard lessons for that attitude. I believe there's plenty of room to bring style and vision to a film without throwing away the core elements that make the characters familiar to the fan base.
With regards to Superman Returns, that film did not cater to the comics so much as cater to it's former legacy to film, Christopher Reeves and Richard Donner. Brian Singer made an absolute mess of that film and it absolutely deserved to be dead on arrival. You had some actors cast and directed to give almost a karaoke performance to what other actors did, while still other's were then cast who looked nothing like the one's who came before. It was a mish-mash of concepts that collapsed on itself. Even worse it was intended to be a sequel to Superman II, which for me was a HORRID idea. It didn't remotely play off the character lessons of that film in any way, shape, or form. Superman was already taught from birth that his home was destroyed. He came to learn through the course of electing to lose his powers that becoming human was not his destiny, nor did it serve the interests of earth, which he reiterated at the end of II by flying to the White House and telling the president, "I've been away for while. I won't let you down again." So all of that connotation and lessons were just flushed from the very start of Returns and really throughout. There was no character continuity at all and so that was a mishandled project from the get go. Did the movie have a few moments in it? Surely. But as a whole, the movie was soulless because it didn't try to operate on its own instinct. It tried to mimic what came before.Comment
-
Agreed on all points. I was just saying Superman Returns had it's faults, but other than having Superman abandon Earth (again, after he learned his lesson in the previous film...Superman II, according to this chronology) and being a bit of a stalker, it portrayed Superman in a more traditional manner.Superman Returns wasn't a bust because it was lighter, it was a bust because the story was basically a repeat of Superman , Lois Lane was horribly miscast and had zero chemistry or appeal, and the super-kid idea was freaking stupid.
Batman Begins was solid, but hardly a blockbuster. Dark Knight was a blockbuster because of the Joker and Ledger's death. DK's success just happened to spill over onto DKR, which was an over-long mess and not nearly as good as DK.
^YES. Thank you, Tom. It's the same thing that bit comics in the but when they tried to apply Miller's Dark Knight and Moore's Watchmen approaches to EVERY comic going. And Snyder is apparently a big fan of both, and is doing the same thing here. I don't think either creator intended to have comics remade in their own image. And yes, a good chunk of DKR was the Batman/Superman battle, but then it was a novelty, the first time we saw it. Now, it's a cliche. And if they put their throwdown toward the end of their series, I'd be more behind it. But they are building their entire universe on a very dark, shaky ground, in my opinion.The Dark Knight series, for me, is a stand alone trilogy. I LOVED that series. I don't equate that with really anything out there. I thought thematically it was absolutely on point with the character and stayed consistent with the core ideas of Batman. But in saying that, I would NEVER look at that series and say to myself, " That's a formula for other characters." I know that gets thrown around allot in broadstroking the treatment of movies. I've lost count of how many times I hear the phrase," Oh their giving that the Dark Knight treatment." Eh... That's a handy throw away description, but to me it doesn't always serve justice to what is being talked about. Sure, the mood of some films seems to play on that idea, but if the mood is servicing the material correctly at that moment, then I don't consider it copying off another film. Snyder is NOT Christopher Nolan. And the success of Dark Knight played on a vastly greater scale than just being "dark".
Again, I hope I'm wrong. But as presented, this is going to be a very bleak film, and I'm not seeing the hope. Heck, Batman himself, in the Nolan movies mentioned before, WAS the hope in Gotham. Superman, by his very nature, by his very creation by Siegel and Shuster, was a symbol of hope. That's what the "S" stands for, according to Man of Steel. I didn't see any in that trailer. I hope it shows up at some point.
ChrisComment
-
I'm kind of missing Bale and Routh right now.Of all the souls I have encountered his was the most...human.Comment
-
Here's an official release of the trailer/teaser.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/ba...eak#.hnkr2PLpGComment
-
They would have been terrific had WB had the foresight to attempt something like this before Marvel made them look like second tier by leaving them far, far behind. Routh is just behind Reeve as my favorite portrayal, and not by much. Look at him now on Arrow/Flash. Bale was a bit older but could have easily done this. Now we get an Abercrombie model on roids with a receding hairline and AJ from Armageddon. I'm not giving up on this production but I'm far from impressed. I finally got to watch this tonight full screen and I am no closer to liking what I saw. This had the same or less heroic foundation than Aliens vs Predator. If Snyder messes this up he wont be able to get a job directing Subway commercials. Well, I guess he still could, it would be Ham v Salami with a bunch of BWAHM BWAHM sound effects.I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she dumped me before we met.
If anyone here believes in psychokinesis, please raise my hand.Comment
-
IMO Nolan COMPLETELY blew it with "The Dark Knight Rises." I consider The Dark Knight his last movie about Batman and the 3rd one doesn't exist to me(just like the Burton and Schumacher movies). He didn't stay true to the character of Batman and lost his way.
I'm very much looking forward to Synder's Miller/Batman...it's needed now to bring Batman back! I agree that a Superman movie shouldn't be "dark"...but he's getting sucked into Batman's world now and that's just how things get, when you bring Batman into the mix.
sigpicComment
Comment