The Official Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Movie Thread

[MartyMcFly]

Just curious, are we mad at WB for not giving their director creative control or was it an understandable position to not want a 3 hour movie?

The latter. Studios always get shaky about 3 hour runtimes recently. Unless your Copola in the 70s, very rarely does any director get to get away with that. Even Malick only gets like 240 now or 2 and a half. They worry about peoples attention spans or just how daunting a 3 hour movie can seem to someone people. Not everyone can handle the dopeness that is lawrence of arabia

 

[OnFleekTing]

Its funny how I hated Man of Steel but ended up loving this movie
maybe its because Batman was in this and he was legit comic book genius Batman
Either way this was great good definitely had narrative and editing problems. Character motivation just wasn't there for some people and the actions didn't make sense without certain scenes giving context.
Last half of the movie from when Batman first went after kryptonite was better than the boring 1st half

I like where the universe is at now
People are worried about how a Batman who kills can work with him having so many popular named villains but to me I'm not really so worried about that. Film made his body count seem like a consequence of him just doing Batman stuff instead of him actually just going out and killing people(KGbeast aside)

 

[AnonymityX1000]

The latter. Studios always get shaky about 3 hour runtimes recently. Unless your Copola in the 70s, very rarely does any director get to get away with that. Even Malick only gets like 240 now or 2 and a half. They worry about peoples attention spans or just how daunting a 3 hour movie can seem to someone people. Not everyone can handle the dopeness that is lawrence of arabia

I agree, it is indulgent to go on and on like that especially without built up good will as a director. Zack should have made a passable 2 and half hour joint IMO.

 

[MartyMcFly]

I agree, it is indulgent to go on and on like that especially without built up good will as a director. Zack should have made a passable 2 and half hour joint IMO.

Copola didn't have the good will, he just had the beauty of the studio not really giving a fukk about his little B-movie gangster picture. I mean they gave a fukk but not as much as they would now. And with godfather 2, they were completely hands off...and then with godfather 3, they should've been a lot more hands-on because that movie needed a savior

 

[Still FloW]

The problem with these so-called reviews just like the one with Kevin Smith is that they complain over what THEY expect all superhero films to be and not for what the film individually WANTS it to be. You cannot say a film is a "bad film" because you dislike its tone and want it to be a happy tone. That's not what the filmmakers are gunning for. They do not want an action comedy. They do not want a family fun joy ride. They wanted an adult-mature film that delves into modern day mythology.

As I said before, I can pass if people say it is bad editing or say they did not like someone's acting or even critique about the direction or parts of the screenplay. But when you saying it is dark, it is grim, it is joyless. THAT IS THE POINT. That is what they wanted. These are the SAME KIND of criticisms that people complained about for EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. About it didn't have hope and fun like the original Star Wars. That it left on a cliffhanger. That it was always dreary and hopeless and the heroes did not win. That it was too dark. Nothing about how revolutionary, how ambitious, and how well directed the movie was. Today it is viewed as one of the greatest films ever made.

If you don't want your movies to be serious and adult... fine. But do not bash a film for its INTENT. Criticize it for things that they intended to do and it didn't work. But to say it is depressing and hopeless, you do not deserve to be a critic.

And to add, some of these critics really are power-tripping. They truly trying to derail the movie and making ALL the excuses they could muster to undermine its success. I read an article today by a critic upset at the success of the film claiming the movie is the cinematic version of DONALD TRUMP. And the fans are no different from Trump fans. That is a disgusting use of comparison just because that individual didn't so-called care for the movie. But there's constant articles that really trying their all to smear this movie.

And it isn't really a critic conspiracy per'se, (even though MANY of them have their own personal agendas or vendettas), but it is the pompous attitude they have toward dark superhero films or series. Many actually criticized Darkdevil season 2 for the same reasons about TONE.

He's a prime example.

The Paradox of 'Daredevil'


But once the agenda machine to bash a film gets going, there's a bandwagon that follows... same with movies that gets praised and turns out being overrated, that bandwagon comes through. You look at the 1st Avengers and Age of Ultron, and they both had the same FLAWS (even though they're both pretty much the same movie), but one is praised dismissing the criticisms and the other get panned because of it. And I am not saying the critics had it out or defending... but stating a lot of it is bandwagoning....

That all said, part of the major success to BvS in its opening weekend that exceeded way more than was originally projected is due to people's curiosity because of the onslaught and their realization AFTER seeing it themselves that that onslaught isn't warranted. To me personally, if critics can live with Furious 7 & Jurassic World... then they should of been fair with this as well, because by the response of the majority that seen it is fairs in that category of quality. Not anything revolutionary or game changing, but good in most regards with a lot of flaws to be acknowledged.

Now critics are angry because they're forced to defend their own negative reviews... and that's where it gets sad to me. If you truly felt that way from the start. Say it and keep it moving.

Someone gets it.. SOMEONE GETS IT..

Thats what Ive been saying, these critics all saying what they EXPECTED, they dont even want to review the movie based on what it is, thats a lack of professionalism.. if you're going to give movies like sharknado 80%+ on the RT because its ''silly'' then dont turn around and say well this had no joy so its a terrible movie..

a lot of these critics are fanboys and its been exposed as a LOT of them kept on comparing the movie to marvel.. what professional does that ??

Since then, A LOT of fans have said the movie wasnt even that bad, so isnt that obvious the critics tried to pan the movie on purpose, if people are questioning the score then clearly its universally known that the movie is not warranting a score that low.. fukk the critics, the DCEU will move on strong. A billi here we come

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Copola didn't have the good will, he just had the beauty of the studio not really giving a fukk about his little B-movie gangster picture. I mean they gave a fukk but not as much as they would now. And with godfather 2, they were completely hands off...and then with godfather 3, they should've been a lot more hands-on because that movie needed a savior

Na, Robert Evans was hands on with that shyt if you believe 'The Kid Stays in the Picture' doc. I guess it was a different time all together is the difference. Lot more skrilla riding on these movies nowadays.
Besides casting his daughter I like GF 3.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Someone gets it.. SOMEONE GETS IT..

Thats what Ive been saying, these critics all saying what they EXPECTED, they dont even want to review the movie based on what it is, thats a lack of professionalism.. if you're going to give movies like sharknado 80%+ on the RT because its ''silly'' then dont turn around and say well this had no joy so its a terrible movie..

a lot of these critics are fanboys and its been exposed as a LOT of them kept on comparing the movie to marvel.. what professional does that ??

Since then, A LOT of fans have said the movie wasnt even that bad, so isnt that obvious the critics tried to pan the movie on purpose, if people are questioning the score then clearly its universally known that the movie is not warranting a score that low.. fukk the critics, the DCEU will move on strong. A billi here we come

Why are critics fanboys tho? Why do they have a certain standard in their head prior to watching the movie that they are comparing this movie to? I wonder.

 

[-DMP-]

no turrets on the batmobile in Suicide Squad

No kill batman is back? (or he was no kill batman during SS and something happened afterwards)

 

[MartyMcFly]

Na, Robert Evans was hands on with that shyt if you believe 'The Kid Stays in the Picture' doc. I guess it was a different time all together is the difference. Lot more skrilla riding on these movies nowadays.
Besides casting his daughter I like GF 3.

Nah I can't get with 3, this is actually the only time I've acknowledged it recently. But yeah different time, different money. Gangster movies were B movies then so fukk em. They'll make some money for us and we'll be in the black

 

[MartyMcFly]

no turrets on the batmobile in Suicide Squad

No kill batman is back?

Makes sense. He did say "I failed him in life" which points to him getting some of his humanity back seeing as how he clearly was on his edge in this movie.

 

[Still FloW]

Why are critics fanboys tho? Why do they have a certain standard in their head prior to watching the movie that they are comparing this movie to? I wonder.

Its your job as a critic to provide a level of professionalism without turning it into a personal vendetta which is exactly what these critics did... complete lack of professionalism, why comparing it to marvel or wishing it was marvel was included i have no idea

 

[gluvnast]

Just curious, are we mad at WB for not giving their director creative control or was it an understandable position to not want a 3 hour movie?

It's more likely an understandable move or compromise. Snyder mentioned this happened before with Watchmen and WB agreed to the director's and Ultimate cuts for that. It's just the same scenario. Snyder submitted his cut, the MPAA gave it an R-rating, so it had to be cut anyway. And WB is thinking about maximizing screens and not everyone is going to sit for a 3hr comic book movie. It's the same issue with Age of Ultron to where I think that movie would of been 10 times better had Disney not chopped that film up so it can be in theaters. Or at least put out the director's cut which they didn't. It's funny because with Star Wars, Disney actually release a trailer for the deleted scenes to hype up the blu-ray release.

 

[The_King_of_Everything]

no turrets on the batmobile in Suicide Squad

No kill batman is back? (or he was no kill batman during SS and something happened afterwards)

No kill batman before Robin died

 

[gluvnast]

Copola didn't have the good will, he just had the beauty of the studio not really giving a fukk about his little B-movie gangster picture. I mean they gave a fukk but not as much as they would now. And with godfather 2, they were completely hands off...and then with godfather 3, they should've been a lot more hands-on because that movie needed a savior

According to Copola in regards of GF3 is that they were TOO much interfering. He had almost little creative control to include titling it GF3, he wanted it to be called something else.

 

[MartyMcFly]

According to Copola in regards of GF3 is that they were TOO much interfering. He had almost little creative control to include titling it GF3, he wanted it to be called something else.

well ill be damned. I do know he had issues with the title though. He wanted to call it the death of michael corleone and the studio hit him with the