Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

  1. #1
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    To be honest I felt like attending a funeral watching this movie.

    The whole movie was just single-tone (dark tone). It’s not a bad movie but it wasn’t good either. So I give this movie an “Okay.”

    All my fears when the second trailer came out became true. The movie was exactly the trailer. The second trailer was basically a summary of the whole movie already – first act Bruce and Clark meet, second act Batman versus Superman, and finally the third act they team up to fight Doomsday.

    Story-wise it wasn’t very original either because (if you’re familiar with the comic books) this movie was just a mash-up of The Dark Knight Returns story arc (where Batman fights Superman), the Death of Superman story arc (where Doomsday and Superman kills each other) and the Trinity comics (where Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman are together). And as if the movie wasn’t already congested enough, they threw in teases of Darkseid and Injustice story arc. They also threw in teases of Justice League.

    But then Marvel also based their movies on comic books, right? Yes. But Marvel does not rush things. They don’t cram 2 or 3 or 4 comic book story arcs into one movie. They do one story arc at a time. Step by step. Batman v Superman rushed things. They rushed it guys. But you gotta admire the courage and the effort. At least that’s one area that I give to them. They really tried. But that doesn’t mean it works. And in this case it didn’t really work because everywhere you go people are divided over this movie.

    I stand by my previous statement that they should have cast Grant Gustin (the TV Flash actor) as the Flash in this movie and in the upcoming Justice League, for strategic reasons more than anything else. The TV series (Flash) has a big fan base. Merely casting Grant Gustin would get all his TV fans to support the films (even if the films bomb). But now, because Grant Gustin is not the Flash in the films, even the big TV fan base couldn’t care less about how BvS is received by the critics.
    Zack Snyder said in an interview that Grant Gustin was not cast as the Flash in his films, not because of legal reasons, but simply because he didn’t feel that the actor was well suited for ‘his version’ of the Flash in the movies. So it means that he could have cast him. As simple as that.

  2. #2
    Senior Member HarryCanyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
    Posts
    2,205

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor View Post
    To be honest I felt like attending a funeral watching this movie.

    The whole movie was just single-tone (dark tone). It’s not a bad movie but it wasn’t good either. So I give this movie an “Okay.”

    All my fears when the second trailer came out became true. The movie was exactly the trailer. The second trailer was basically a summary of the whole movie already – first act Bruce and Clark meet, second act Batman versus Superman, and finally the third act they team up to fight Doomsday.

    Story-wise it wasn’t very original either because (if you’re familiar with the comic books) this movie was just a mash-up of The Dark Knight Returns story arc (where Batman fights Superman), the Death of Superman story arc (where Doomsday and Superman kills each other) and the Trinity comics (where Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman are together). And as if the movie wasn’t already congested enough, they threw in teases of Darkseid and Injustice story arc. They also threw in teases of Justice League.

    But then Marvel also based their movies on comic books, right? Yes. But Marvel does not rush things. They don’t cram 2 or 3 or 4 comic book story arcs into one movie. They do one story arc at a time. Step by step. Batman v Superman rushed things. They rushed it guys. But you gotta admire the courage and the effort. At least that’s one area that I give to them. They really tried. But that doesn’t mean it works. And in this case it didn’t really work because everywhere you go people are divided over this movie.

    I stand by my previous statement that they should have cast Grant Gustin (the TV Flash actor) as the Flash in this movie and in the upcoming Justice League, for strategic reasons more than anything else. The TV series (Flash) has a big fan base. Merely casting Grant Gustin would get all his TV fans to support the films (even if the films bomb). But now, because Grant Gustin is not the Flash in the films, even the big TV fan base couldn’t care less about how BvS is received by the critics.
    Zack Snyder said in an interview that Grant Gustin was not cast as the Flash in his films, not because of legal reasons, but simply because he didn’t feel that the actor was well suited for ‘his version’ of the Flash in the movies. So it means that he could have cast him. As simple as that.

    Does this dark and gritty thing is taking the wrong lessons from Watchmen, Dark Knight and V For Vendetta? does it remind you of the same thing that happened to some 90's comics which was refered by some as "the dark age" of comics when some of them took the wrong lessons from Frank Miller, Alan Moore and Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira?

  3. #3
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    I don’t know. If we liken it to a chocolate it’s probably unsweetened. I mean there are chocolates that are dark but tastes bitter sweet and those are good. This one is just kind of dark and unsweetened.

    Also what’s wrong with Aquaman?! He looked uncomfortable in the water in BvS! He’s supposed to be in his “natural” environment. There is no way to do Aquaman correctly without using CGI water during close up shots. Because with real water there is no way any actor would look natural and comfortable. Aquaman should be able to talk and breathe underwater. Definitely gotta be CGI water not real water. Also Aquaman shouldn’t have hair. If I designed Aquaman I would give him a cool and sharp looking helmet -- something that could cut through water when he swims fast (like how shark dorsal fins work). That WOULD be more natural for his environment and not hair. Hair is for land creatures.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    986

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Maybe the movie would have been better if this scene would have been in it? Naah, it still would have been the same as it is now.
    This is a deleted scene that will be in the DVD / Blu-ray release and Zack Snyder wanted for people to understand who Lex Luthor was talking about, when he spoke to Batman at the end of the movie and said "He's coming. Ding dong ding dong, the clock is ticking, ding dong ding dong."
    If Justice League Part 1 and 2 will be like Batman v Superman, then I have no doubt that Marvel will kick DC's ass at the Box Office with it's upcoming Avengers: Infinity War parts 1 and 2.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    ^Okay, speaking of Lex Luthor…

    In fairness I kind of like Jesse in the movie. Sure he’s not like any Lex Luthor we’ve seen. But that’s because he’s not Lex Luthor to begin with. He’s Lex Luthor Junior. He’s the “son.”
    And Jesse Eisenberg was really good at delivering that “rich kid, spoiled brat” kind of character.

    Actually when I was watching the movie I was trying to feel it as a Superhero movie. But I couldn’t feel it. It felt like a murder movie. And the murderers were just wearing costumes! It was just violent and sad from start to finish. I actually liked Man of Steel better.

    Anyway, did anyone notice Zack Snyder paying homage to Nolan Batman in this movie? I kind of did, because if you watched the first Nolan Batman movie, in the end the Wayne Manor was burnt down by Ra’s al Ghul and his men. And then Alfred told Bruce to rebuild another one nearby. So they left the burnt manor untouched.

    In BvS you see a burnt and abandoned Wayne Manor. And Bruce would kind of just walk into it to remember his parents. But he lives and operates somewhere else nearby.

    Also the Batman in BvS has been around for some 20 years. It’s been explained in the movie. So he’s been around for a long time. 20 years prior he could be the Batman we all saw in the Nolan films. This could be Zack’s subtle way of saying “this is the same Batman, only 20 years older” and without having to go too official with it.

  6. #6
    Senior Member TIMtationX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    2,132

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    I thought the movie was just okay. What Marvel did across 4 movies, DC tried to do in one, and it clearly showed. The Justice League scenes felt forced and corny (especially Aquaman). Doomsday looked exactly like Abomination from the Ed Norton Hulk movie for some reason. The entire reason Superman and Batman fought each other in the first place was ridiculous, and the reason they stopped fighting was even MORE ridiculous. Lois literally had no reason to be around. Superman was kind of a dick for no real reason. Jessie Eisenberg tried way too hard.

    I don't notice every plot hole in movies like some people, but the fact that Superman didn't see the bomb inside the wheelchair was too much to ignore.

    What I DID like:
    Ben Affleck. I actually liked him more than Christian Bale.
    The fight scene with Batman taking out all those guys while trying to save Superman's mom

  7. #7
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Yeah it’s good you pointed out the reason they fought was stupid and even more stupid was the reason they stopped fighting. I forgot to mention that part of the film.

    Aquaman looked stupid as hell. He looked like he was holding his breath in the water.

    So far this movie is dropping faster than Deadpool. And to think this is BATMAN and SUPERMAN together in one movie -- two of the MOST iconic heroes in comic book history. One would imagine it SHOULD at least do Star Wars: The Force Awakens type of figures. But it’s so far behind.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    ABC News 07/29/08:
    Comic-Con Wrap-up: Are Superheroes Done For?
    Quote Originally Posted by SCOTT BOWLES
    Superman seems too earnest


    Of course, as this summer and this comic-book convention have unfolded, it has become clear that no one is Superman anymore. Perhaps, says "Watchmen" director Zack Snyder, Superman is gone for good.


    "They asked me to direct a "Superman movie", and I said no," Snyder says. "He's a tricky one nowadays, isn't he? He's the king daddy of all comic-book heroes, but I'm just not sure how you sell that kind of earnestness to a sophisticated audience anymore."


    So studios are selling everything else, including bitter themes and obscure heroes.

    /film 04/01/16:
    Screenwriter David S. Goyer Thought ‘Batman v Superman’ Was a Terrible Idea…Over Ten Years Ago
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob Hall
    Eventually, someone is going to write the comprehensive book about the superhero movie boom of the past fifteen years and it’s going to be a fascinating read. In the meantime, all we can do is pick through the rubble, dredge up trivia, and examine the broader strokes of how this genre, and the people making these movies, have changed.


    And sometimes, an interesting nugget of information bubbles to the surface. In this case, it’s a quote from Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice screenwriter David S. Goyer, who called the mere idea of a Batman vs. Superman movie terrible. Over a decade ago. While promoting Batman Begins. Which he also wrote.




    This entire L.A. Times article is fascinating as a piece of Hollywood history. Published on May 8, 2005, a month before Batman Begins arrived in theaters, it explores how Warner Bros. killed the Batman franchise and their many attempts to bring it back to life. Eventually, they put their trust in a young filmmaker named Christopher Nolan, who pitched a left-field, back-to-the-basics approach. This was before Nolan became a widely known and beloved filmmaker. This was three years before Iron Man and The Dark Knight would change the superhero movie landscape forever. And it was eleven years before Batman v Superman, so David S. Goyer could get away with saying this:
    Batman Vs. Superman is where you go when you admit to yourself that you’ve exhausted all possibilities. It’s like Frankenstein meets Wolfman or Freddy Vs. Jason. It’s somewhat of an admission that this franchise is on its last gasp.
    What’s especially interesting about this quote is that Warner Bros. almost made this movie over ten years ago. A script called Superman Vs. Batman was written and the film was deep into development when it was cancelled, causing a big rift amongst a few producers and executives at the studio. In that context, Goyer’s quote becomes even more interesting. This is from a time when Batman, as a cinematic character and movie franchise, needed saving in a big way and some thought the only way to rehabilitate him was to team him up with Superman. Now, the character feels bulletproof – they brought Batman in to prop up an ailing Superman after Man of Steel underperformed at the box office.


    While some will be quick to roll their eyes at Goyer or call him a hypocrite, it’s important to remember that he made this statement over a decade ago. The way comic book movies are made has completely changed the people who make them have evolved as well. So consider this quote something to be amused by rather than something with which to damn Batman v Superman. The movie is already good at that all by itself.

    BMD 03/17/16:
    Of Course Zack Snyder Wants To Adapt An Ayn Rand Novel
    He's working on THE FOUNTAINHEAD.
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVIN FARACI
    I've never fully understood Zack Snyder's politics. It's hard to judge them based on the movies he makes because so many of them are adaptations, and he is so faithful to what he's adapting. Yes, 300 is a paean to fascism but that's Miller's source material at work. Snyder isn't really bringing anything that wasn't already in the militaristic, jingoistic comic. I don't think he violates Alan Moore's politics in Watchmen, which are complicated but ultimately humane in way that Miller isn't. His one truly original film, Sucker Punch, makes a lot of effort to be a girl power story that could also be read as pro-choice (it's all about a woman gaining agency over her own body, albeit in the face of a pending lobotomy). Man of Steel is... weird, but it's hard to say where the weirdness comes from. Is it intended, or is it a result of a troubled development process?


    But knowing that Snyder loves Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead a lot of things snap into place. Especially things about Man of Steel and Pa Kent's absolutely baffling worldview: Snyder's an Objectivist. He believes in what Objectivists call 'rational self-interest,' which others might call 'radical selfishness,' which is the belief that the ultimate moral duty you have is to make yourself happy. Honestly, all the Pa Kent stuff becomes crystal clear now - Man of Steel is about a superhero who only becomes a superhero when it is in his own self-interest (ie, the planet's about to get destroyed). Otherwise he's happy keeping his powers to himself, seeing no need to use them to help others.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Save Martha

    ‘Batman v Superman': Zack Snyder on That Martha Moment & Why He Killed The Waynes Again
    Be aware there are spoilers for Batman v Superman.
    Quote Originally Posted by HALEIGH FOUTCH
    In an interview with Forbes, Snyder discussed his motivation behind the moment and why he considered it a payoff for the screentime devoted to the relationship between Clark and his mother.


    Said Snyder,
    You know, they’re both born and live in a world where someone can care about them and mourn them, and they can love their mother. And that’s the cool thing, you know we spend so much time with the Martha-Clark relationship that I think it kind of pays off there. You realize, oh, we needed that as viewers, so we could get to a moment with Batman where that moment with Martha resonates. Because we’ve lived on with Clark’s relationship with his mother, so that moment is like, “Wow, that’s ringing for me and I feel it.”

    I’m not quite sold on this explanation, if only for the fact that Batman v Superman spends very little time on Clark and Martha’s relationship in the face of the broad-scale look at Superman’s presence in the world (and a massive amount of setup for future films). Perhaps he was referring to their moments together in Man of Steel, but given the fact that Batman v Superman wasn’t even in the works at that point, there’s pretty much no way he was already setting up that moment.


    Likewise, that “Martha moment” also factored in his decision to feature the well-trod territory of Martha and Thomas Wayne’s murder. While fans have questioned the necessity of such a scene given how frequently Batman’s backstory has beene expounded on in previous adaptations. It’s like the death of Spider-Man’s Uncle Ben, we get it. It’s been done. But according to Snyder, witnessing the death of the Waynes was a fundamental set up for the payoff in Batman’s mid-battle change of heart.


    When we were shooting the title sequence, that whole idea about, “Do we really need to see the death of the Waynes again,” is a big thing to take a shot at again. But you realize you need it, because it actually pays off. And I really wanted to do it all the way.

    Ultimately, it’s easy to understand why suddenly being confronted with a direct reflection of his own personal tragedy would give Bruce pause, but it plays out too suddenly in the film and seemingly only because Snyder wanted it to play that way. Why wouldn’t Superman immediately try to reason with Batman by saying something like, “Lex Luthor is manipulating both of us and will kill my mother if we don’t work together” instead of an ambiguous “We need to work together.” The answer is because the story needed him to, and that’s never a satisfactory justification.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    This movie is not even making Iron Man 3 type of figures. It is pathetic.

    In other news they are now re-shooting scenes in Suicide Squad to add more humor.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Latino Review:
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Francisco Robles
    Dear Zack Snyder,


    I’ve had two weeks to think about your most recent film, “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.” As a longtime fan of these characters, and a devout follower of Superman in particular, I’ve found both of your films about him to be lacking the kinds of qualities that have made him resonate with fans around the world for nearly 80 years.


    I recall an interview you gave several years ago, while promoting “Watchmen,” where you were asked if you’d be interested in directing a film about Superman. Your answer then? To paraphrase: “No.” You stated that a character with such seemingly one-dimensional goodness didn’t appeal to you. You were far happier dealing with more complex, more subversive subject material like “Watchmen.” I respected that. I disagreed about Superman being simplistic and one-dimensional, but I respected that.


    Then you took the “Man of Steel” job a couple of years later.


    Needless to say, I was perplexed by this decision of yours- to take on a film about a character that you admittedly didn’t care all that much for. I assumed what did it for you was the opportunity to rebuild and remake the character in a way that did speak to you.


    I’m writing to inform you that the version of Superman you’ve created is a failure.


    By and large, the folks I’ve spoken to who enjoyed your two films about him have something in common with you: They didn’t really have an affinity for the character prior to your films. So, in essence, it's like you've made Superman films that aren’t for Superman fans. While that may have sounded appealing, the idea of bringing new people into the fandom, the unintended consequence is that you’ve alienated many of the people who were already there.


    For two-thirds of a century, writers have been able to create indelible versions of the character that captured the imaginations of fans worldwide. Be it Schuster and Siegel, Bruce Timm, Max Fleischer, Richard Donner, Mark Waid, Jack Kirby, Grant Morrison, Dan Jurgens, or countless others, there have been many people who’ve gotten it right and didn’t feel the need to fundamentally change who Superman is.


    There have been many great takes on Superman, but I'm going to isolate the single most influential one. The one that made a generation of fans believe a man can fly.


    Much has been made about how the Christopher Reeve Superman of the 70s and 80s would never fly with today’s modern audiences. The thing is, many- including you- have ignored what made that version so special to fans.


    People like to focus on the corniness, the wholesomeness, and the humor in those films, but they don’t seem to realize that none of that is why they worked. Why they worked was that behind Reeve’s comforting smile were eyes that conveyed a bittersweet sense of loneliness, vulner ability, and isolation.


    While you couldn’t pierce his skin, you could certainly break his heart.


    That’s what makes Superman special. He’s an orphan. He’s alone. He’ll never be one of us, yet he’ll also never be able to be a true Kryptonian since there’s no longer any Krypton to speak of. Faced with a destiny that means he’ll never truly belong anywhere, he makes the decision to be earth’s greatest hero. Imagine the deep sadness you’d feel if you spent most of your formative years simply wanting to live a normal life: Work the farm for your folks, make your dad proud of you, play football, kiss the girl. Then you suddenly find out that not only will you never be able to do those things, but you’re actually an alien from a destroyed world. Your life up until now has been a beautiful lie.


    A man that can come from that level of heartbreak, who can still arrive at the decision to be a beacon of hope, and who wants to help us- in spite of ourselves- is a fascinating character. Reeve’s Superman had that mixture of kindness, sadness, the weight of his responsibilities, a genuine curiosity about mankind, a love for what we can be, and a desire to be a friend to us even when all we seem to want to do is nuke each other.


    So when we talk about those films getting Superman right, we’re not saying that we want a campy real estate mogul Lex Luthor, a cartoonish oaf like Otis, a bumbling over-the-top slapstick portrayal of Clark Kent, or a giant plastic Superman S that can be used as a net in the new films. We’re saying we want a hero that decides to do great things, and does so with pride, despite all of the pain in his heart. That’s what a hero does. You’ve instead chosen to focus almost entirely on the pain, and the weight of his responsibility.


    While other artists have given us a hero whose desire to help is bittersweet, you've given us an alien that comes off as simply bitter.


    The sad part is that there’ve been glimpses of a more noble Kal-El in your two films. Yet, by and large, you’ve suffocated his more positive qualities with your decisions from the director’s chair. You’ve under-emphasized what makes Superman great, while shining a spotlight on what you seem to think makes him “cool" to the kinds of people who think Superman is boring.


    So many iterations of the character have embraced what a powerful symbol for good Superman is.


    There are plenty of badass anti-hero types out there for fans who don't care for Superman to follow. Stop trying to turn Superman into one of them.


    When I decried “Man of Steel,” many folks told me that the character was a work in progress in that film. I was promised that we’d see the real Superman, the genuine hero, in 2016 when “Batman v Superman” came out. The sad part is, it looks like this year I will see the crusader that still stands for Truth, Justice, and The American Way; The hero who’s old-fashioned sense of Right and Wrong often puts him at odds with the world around him; The man who’s unbreakable will pits him against his own allies; The guy who’s not afraid to be seen as square in an increasingly cynical world, because that’s just who he is. But his name won’t be Clark Kent. It’ll be Steve Rogers.


    Yes, the folks at Marvel somehow magically figured out a way to make their Boy Scout character work, while you’ve gone and turned Superman into Batman-Lite. That’s a shame, because you are currently the custodian of one of the greatest fictional characters ever created, and you’re squandering him. It's also a shame because I didn't grow up loving Captain America, but now I have no choice but to root for him since he's seemingly the closest I'll get to seeing Superman on the big screen.


    All fans such as myself can hope for is that you decide to start emphasizing more of what makes him an inspiration and less on how conflicted and distrustful you think he should be. We've awarded your two Superman films with mediocre-to-terrible reviews, and your second one has failed to live up to its box office promise- yet you may still be blind to what you're doing wrong.


    People love seeing heroes be heroic; Not brooding about what it means to be a hero, or if humanity deserves a champion like Superman. At a time when our world is so fractured, and so filled with terror, we need a hero that wants to lift our spirits and say, "It's going to be okay. You can do this." Let Batman be the dark, conflicted hero, and just please allow Superman to be the guiding light in a murky, complex world.


    The world needs Superman, and you've been keeping him from us.


    Sincerely,


    A Friend

  12. #12
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Deadline April 8, 2016:
    ‘Batman V. Superman’ Likely To Cross $300M Early Next Week
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony D'Alessandro
    UPDATE, 12:19 PM: Warner Bros’ Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice is now looking like it will come in lower with a decline of 50%-55% for $23.1M-$25.65M, which is just shy of the three-century mark with a running cume through its third weekend of $296.4M-$298.9M. Now, Warners wasn’t expecting the Zack Snyder film to cross $300M this weekend, but rather during CinemaCon this coming week. I hear that the magic number internally which will really make Warner execs truly happy is $800M.

    Variety MARCH 16, 2016:
    Why ‘Batman v Superman’ Is Still a High-Stakes Bet
    Quote Originally Posted by James Rainey
    In an era in which comic-book heroes dominate the box office, “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” might appear like a sure bet. Warner Bros.’ March 25 release gives fans arguably the two biggest superheroes in the fantasy constellation, serving up Ben Affleck, one of the biggest stars of his generation, as the Caped Crusader, and Henry Cavill as the Man of Steel. At the helm is Zack Snyder, the director celebrated for creating the surprise hit “300.” And the studio’s crack marketing team, known for sparing no expense, is going full tilt on its promo blitz.


    The formidable intellectual property that Warners is deploying — exciting the collective memories of multiple generations of fans — inspires enormous good will and curiosity about what comes next for (as Lex Luthor would say) the Bat of Gotham and the Son of Krypton. But it also means that fans will react viscerally to characters they feel they own, expecting to have old sensibilities affirmed, even as they anticipate being dazzled by a fresh new take.


    Ratcheting up the stakes is the fact that “Batman v Superman” serves as the ambassador for a whole new generation of films from Warner’s DC Entertainment unit — 10 pictures over the next five years — that are supposed to lift up Warner’s lackluster film slate and super-charge results into the foreseeable future.


    “They have the chance to come out with all these other movies,” said media analyst Jessica Reif Cohen of Bank of America/Merrill Lynch. “But it makes the situation much harder; harder to win an audience, harder to market, if this one doesn’t work. … It’s pretty critical.”


    The stakes have been thrown into high relief by the blockbuster success of crosstown rival Marvel Studios. The Disney subsidiary’s last six films have averaged $875 million at the global box office. If Warners could get just halfway to Marvel’s consumer products results, DC could add $150 million to Time Warner’s profits annually, a WB exec has said.


    “It would be a slight exaggeration to say everything is riding on this film,” said Doug Creutz, an analyst with Cowen and Co. “But if they can’t make this sale to audiences, then they have a huge problem. They have told Wall Street they are going to grow earnings at Warner Bros. If you can’t make that franchise work, then you can’t achieve that goal.”


    While expressing optimism about the film, Warner Bros. execs have tried not to push expectations any higher.


    With a production cost of at least $250 million and added global marketing costs easily topping $150 million, the movie would have to gross $800 million to recoup its investment, if it were reliant just on box office (though the film will also benefit from substantial TV, merchandising and other receipts). Studio insiders consider the $800 million figure inflated.


    Current tracking suggests a robust opening of at least $120 million-$140 million when the movie launches on about 4,000 screens in the U.S. One media analyst, who asked not to be named, said that given the costs and need to launch a series of future films, “anything under $1 billion in worldwide box office will be a disappointment.”


    Months prior to the premiere, Affleck conceded the high stakes in an interview with Variety. “I think there is a ton of pressure on it,” said the actor, whose selection to play Batman initially rankled some diehard fans. “I mean I would be bulls—ing you to say there isn’t.”


    Affleck expressed optimism the film will succeed, as did Greg Silverman, the studio’s president of creative development and worldwide production. “This film is really important to the fans,” said Silverman, “and we feel a responsibility to make sure they get what they deserve: a great film about great characters they care about as much as we do.”


    “Batman v Superman” originally was slated for release last July, but in early 2014, Warner Bros. Entertainment chairman Kevin Tsujihara pushed the movie off eight months, allowing for script revisions and other changes. Studio insiders feel that the delay helped make the film better.


    Tsujihara knew the calendar shift would hurt the studio’s 2015 results and, indeed, without the cinematic crusaders driving revenue, Warners suffered its worst year in recent memory, dragged down by films like “Jupiter Ascending” and “Pan” (which each lost more than $100 million) and “Man from U.N.C.L.E.” This year, it hopes, marks its comeback.


    Eddy Von Mueller, a senior lecturer in the Film and Media Studies department at Emory University, said that DC has tended to produce films that lean more toward “engagement” with the world, in contrast with the more purely escapist fare produced by Marvel. Von Mueller, who has written extensively about special effects and superhero films, said that if the gritty tone of “Batman v Superman’s” trailers carries throughout the two hour, 31 minute film, “It could be a tougher sell to audiences.”

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    986

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    With a production cost of at least $250 million and added global marketing costs easily topping $150 million, the movie would have to gross $800 million to recoup its investment, if it were reliant just on box office (though the film will also benefit from substantial TV, merchandising and other receipts). Studio insiders consider the $800 million figure inflated.


    Current tracking suggests a robust opening of at least $120 million-$140 million when the movie launches on about 4,000 screens in the U.S. One media analyst, who asked not to be named, said that given the costs and need to launch a series of future films, “anything under $1 billion in worldwide box office will be a disappointment.”
    It's closing on that $800 million mark. It has made Worldwide $783,485,542 so far. Doubtful that it will reach that $1 billion mark.
    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...perman2015.htm

  14. #14
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Are Hollywood Blockbusters Losing Their Punch at China’s Box Office?
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Frater
    The second-week decline in the global box office of “Batman v Superman: The Dawn of Justice” was an unpleasant surprise for Warner Bros. But its vertiginous drop in China, the world’s second-biggest movie market, was even more brutal, and may mark a rude awakening for not only the Burbank studio but for Hollywood in the Middle Kingdom.


    The dueling-superheroes movie appeared to have a lot going for it, including a Friday day-and-date release on half the screens in the nation. But after suffering an 85% drop on its second Friday — placing fourth behind a trio of Chinese movies and “Zootopia” — the film was unsentimentally dumped by China’s exhibitors. At $94.9 million after 19 days of release, it is certain to finish below the $100 million mark, cuming less than last year’s clunky “Terminator: Genisys” ($113 million).


    In sorting through the debris to find out what went wrong, it’s easy to blame the film itself; after all, “Batman v Superman” was savaged by the critics. But there are other factors at play. In 2015, despite a sensational spring during which “Jurassic World” ($229 million), “Avengers: Age of Ultron” ($240 million) and “Furious 7” ($380 million) dominated the Chinese box office, Hollywood films’ gross revenue in China grew by only 26%, while that of Chinese films improved by 67%. Local movies wound up with a 61% market share in 2015, while the year before, Hollywood films had the majority share, also at 61%.


    There are many reasons for the trend in a territory where box office is routinely manipulated by the government, with practices that include blackout periods for foreign films; simultaneous releases of major titles, with an eye toward cannibalization; and official ticket-buying schemes to boost local titles.


    Yet the Chinese box office is growing so fast — by 49% last year and by 50% in the first quarter of 2016 — that every major release should be breaking some kind of record. But there’s still debate as to whether “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” at $125 million, was a hit or a miss. And Hollywood-China co-production “Kung Fu Panda” was a clear disappointment in the popular animation category, taking in $147 million. Only Disney Animation’s “Zootopia,” which has minted more than $230 million and established a new Chinese box office record for an animated feature, seems to have fulfilled the market’s growing promise. The title is showing such good legs that regulators have granted it an extra month of release.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel
    with practices that include blackout periods for foreign films
    Could that only have happened to Batman v Superman? The movie was so dark even the theater blacked out!! HAHAHAHA

  16. #16
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    THR:
    Box Office: The Verdict for 'Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice'
    The tentpole is almost at the end of its run at the worldwide box office, where it's the No. 7 superhero movie of all time to date, not accounting for inflation; in North America, though, it won't catch up with 'Deadpool.'
    Quote Originally Posted by Pamela McClintock
    The verdict is in: Zack Snyder's Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice will end up as the No. 7 comic book movie of all time at the worldwide box office to date, not accounting for inflation.


    Through Sunday, BvS — which is all but done with its run — has grossed $862.9 million globally, including $325.1 million in North America (37.7 percent of its total) and $537.8 million internationally (62.3 percent). It's likely to finish up in the $875 million range when all is said and done, not enough to change the order.


    The picture is different in North America, where BvS currently ranks as the No. 11 comic book movie, again not accounting for inflation. It could overtake Guardians of the Galaxy ($333.2 million) to rank as No. 10, and possibly Spider-Man 3 ($336.5 million), but it won't catch up with the recent Deadpool ($361.8 million). Overseas, it's the No. 7 superhero title.


    In terms of 2016 titles to date, BvS trails behind Disney's Zootopia, ($931.4 million and counting).


    Since BvS' launch in late March, there's been plenty of debate about the movie's performance, and its steep drop-off following a record-breaking opening of $166 million domestically, a best for the month of March.


    Warner Bros. is steadfast in proclaiming the tentpole, starring Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill, an enormous victory, saying it successfully launches the DC cinematic universe. (The next outing is director David Ayer's Suicide Squad on Aug. 5., while Snyder is in the midst of shooting the first Justice League.)


    BvS, costing at least $225 million to produce before marketing, has grossed notably more than Snyder's Man of Steel, which first introduced Cavill as the newest superman. Released in 2013, Man of Steel took in $668 million globally and $291 million domestically.


    "This is fantastic result, by any measure," said Warner Bros. domestic distribution chief Jeff Goldstein.


    Some box-office analysts are more circumspect, noting that Dawn of Justice won't get to $900 million, much less $1 billion.


    "Still, outside of Christopher Nolan's two Dark Knight movies, and Tim Burton's Batman films when you adjust for inflation, this is the highest-grossing property in DC's bullpen thus far. It tops Man of Steel by more than $200 million," says analyst Jeff Bock. "So yes, BvS successfully relaunched DC's cinematic universe, but they are nowhere near Disney/Marvel in terms of critical reception and box office prowess. One can only hope that bigger and better is still on the way."


    Another insider says to become a member of the billion dollar club requires "a great release date, great reviews and solid social media buzz," a trifecta BvS failed to achieve.


    BvS was originally supposed to open May 6, but relocated to the Easter corridor when it was revealed that Captain America: Civil War would open on the first weekend in May.
    Inquisitr:
    Zack Snyder On The Outs With DC, Warner: New ‘Justice League’ Boss Could Be Coming
    Quote Originally Posted by Aric Mitchell
    While the rumored-to-cost $450 million for shooting and marketing BvS fared better at the box office in terms of pure gross, it did the vast majority of its business in its opening weekend and crashed hard among a sea of bad critiques from both professional film critics and movie audiences alike.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Ultimate Edition Trailer is Out!


  18. #18
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Batman v Superman (SPOILER DISCUSSION)

    Batman v. Superman v. Hillary At The 37th Annual Razzie Awards
    Quote Originally Posted by Jude Terror
    Proving once again that Warner Bros can’t seem to do anything right with their superhero movie universe, even when it comes to doing everything wrong, Batman v. Superman has once again failed to live up to expectations. First, the movie failed to secure nominations in every category of the 2017 Razzie Awards. And then, to make matters worse, it didn’t even win the most Razzies, tying Hillary’s America with just four awards each. What a disappointment!


    Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice earned awards for Jesse Eisenberg as Worst Supporting Actor, “Ben Affleck & His BFF (Baddest Foe Forever) Henry Cavill” for Worst Screen Combo, and as a whole in the categories of Worst Remake, Rip-Off, Or Sequel and Worst Screenplay. Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party, on the other hand, not only took the top spot of Worst Picture, but also earned the prestigious insults of Worst Actress for Becky Turner, Worst Actor for Dinesh D’Souza, and Worst Director for D’Souza and Bruce Schooley.


    In the one remaining category, Worst Supporting Actress, Kristin Wiig won for her work on Zoolander 2 while Mel Gibson won the Razzie Redeemer Award.
    Twitter:
    Follow the journey and saga of the "Visionary" who made all this happen. #ZackSnyder

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •