Batman Madness

[Drtooth]

The internet spoils every movie. I don't see why more studios don't try to keep things more secret. It does seem like something that would come out eventually, no thanks to insiders leaking information. But the announcement came from WB themselves. If the movie leaves everyone unimpressed because they're just expecting things (part of the reason we just don't enjoy movies like we used to), they only have themselves to blame.

Sigh... to think... Hitchcock bought up all the Psycho novels he could and directly told everyone who saw it to not blab about the ending. Now we have the entire script of a film leaked.

And yeah. Tim Allen as Braniac. Now I really don't see why MOS gets so much flack. Superman Lives would have been a horrible movie that would make Batman and Robin look like an 80's Frank Miller Batman comic. I can't recall, but that could have been the one where Brainiac had a sidekick who was (and this is word for word) "a gay R2D2 with Attitude."

And they say Tim Burton lost it all when he did Alice in Wonderland (or something).

 

[Drtooth]

Jeez...

Read the comments on this one...

Wow. Even after the Ben Affleck thing, this film is already the worst thing ever, apparently. One "genius" claims something about not wanting to see the movie after hearing one sentence.

Seriously. I changed my mind. I don't think we should have anymore Superman movies if everyone's going to p*** and moan over the darn thing, all the while pretending that the butt-pulleriffic "classic" Superman movies were great. Could you imagine if any of those were made today? The internet would be spewing venom from Superman's new found Time Travel capabilities and the fact Lex Luthor has hair. What a freaking nostalgia filter.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I don't think we should have anymore Superman movies if everyone's going to p*** and moan over the darn thing, all the while pretending that the butt-pulleriffic "classic" Superman movies were great. Could you imagine if any of those were made today? The internet would be spewing venom from Superman's new found Time Travel capabilities and the fact Lex Luthor has hair. What a freaking nostalgia filter.

Well I agree that no matter what, there would be fans who complain. I really don't have much respect for the canon Nazi, nitpicking fans anymore. Shatner said it right, they need to get a life, lol.

I wasn't amazed by Man of Steel. It really could have been a lot better. Cavill and Shannon are good actors, but I just felt like they were given very little to work with. The over use of CGI show off wasn't as bad as Bayformers, but it does feel like Synder would like it to be and that worries me, lol. And btw despite my avatar, lol, I was too young for the original Superman movies and don't have too much nostalgia for my part, at least not as much as the original fans. I just think they have a better balance of character moments and action for me. They were written for a larger audience, not just comic book fans. Whereas Man of Steel was clearly targeted towards a specific demographic.

 

[Animal31]

Actually Luthor didn't have hair in the "classic" movie, it was always wigs. Otis even was arranging them in one scene. I did grow up with the originals, and will admit the sequels always got slightly worse than the last one, but Christopher Reeve will always be THE Superman...

The other thing I wanted to point out is I agree with Drtooth that if those movies were released in this age that they would have been ripped apart by the critics, but back then, kids didn't care. We weren't as "technical" as they are now, Superman could fly and that was good enough for us. We didn't need to know about the yellow sun's effect on a Kryptonian, or even question obvious inconsistencies from one movie to the other. The audience these days I feel read way too much into technicalities and spend less time just enjoying the movie.

 

[CensoredAlso]

The audience these days I feel read way too much into technicalities and spend less time just enjoying the movie.

Audiences in general are going through a teenage stage of rejecting what they think is baby stuff and wanting to at least seem more grown up.

 

[Drtooth]

I wasn't amazed by Man of Steel. It really could have been a lot better. Cavill and Shannon are good actors, but I just felt like they were given very little to work with. The over use of CGI show off wasn't as bad as Bayformers, but it does feel like Synder would like it to be and that worries me, lol. And btw despite my avatar, lol, I was too young for the original Superman movies and don't have too much nostalgia for my part, at least not as much as the original fans. I just think they have a better balance of character moments and action for me. They were written for a larger audience, not just comic book fans. Whereas Man of Steel was clearly targeted towards a specific demographic.

Superman is a hard character to get down. It's not like making a Superman movie is so easy that there haven't been the massive misfires and false starts trying to re-establish the franchise. scroll down to see the massive horrible films that we almost got... and frankly we would have had a franchise already if people just sucked it up with Superman Returns. Batman's actually a piece of cake. Just don't do "Batman and Robin." Other than that, we're talking about a character over 70 years old that has since been Flanderized and generalized. Even the writers of the Justice League cartoon didn't use him that much until they had an angle.

The film everyone says they wanted would have been this. A 2 hour long Lois and Clark episode with lampshade hanging and nod and wink jokes (ones that were already stale since the 50's), making it far closer to a comedy than an action film. Yes, the film people wanted would have sucked so much more than what we have, and no one wants to own up to it.

As for the originals, flaws and all, 2 of them are good. Not as great as everyone says they are, but good. The second one was ruined by the jerks who made the third one, but had the potential to be something great. But I sat through Superman 3 and I could make all the snarky comments about how awful it was, but it's one of the worst movie's I've ever seen. It has a plotline that makes Superfriends look dark an edgy by comparison. EARLY Superfriends. I'm not bothering with the fourth at all. And the worst part is, some of those Superman reboots would have been even worse than Superman 3. Superman Lives proves the existence of God by not being made. The documentary on it looks like a good film, though.

Actually Luthor didn't have hair in the "classic" movie, it was always wigs. Otis even was arranging them in one scene. I did grow up with the originals, and will admit the sequels always got slightly worse than the last one, but Christopher Reeve will always be THE Superman...

No one should ever be the end all be all. I wonder how fans of George Reeves felt about Christopher. Actually, Chris is essentially the only thing I really liked about the older films. But I've enjoyed most of the other actors who played him. If anything, Superman Returns's problem was trying to emulate everything about those movies, even the actor who played Supes.

But their portrayal of Lex Luthor always bugged me. He seemed kinda... cartoonish than a real threat. Almost like he was the non-threatening gag villain that shows up just before the BIG villain comes along. Worked nicely in the second film, but not so much the first.

The other thing I wanted to point out is I agree with Drtooth that if those movies were released in this age that they would have been ripped apart by the critics, but back then, kids didn't care. We weren't as "technical" as they are now, Superman could fly and that was good enough for us. We didn't need to know about the yellow sun's effect on a Kryptonian, or even question obvious inconsistencies from one movie to the other. The audience these days I feel read way too much into technicalities and spend less time just enjoying the movie.

Not so much that, but the buttpulls in the older movies were ridiculous. Mad Magazine was right. The only reason why they had that lame "circle the Earth to turn back time even though he wasn't supposed to" was only done because they couldn't kill off Lois at the risk of not having a second film.

Now, I know Superman is a character defined by buttpulls. Kryptonite, the ability to fly... those were all created outside of the comics because of problems that popped up during production of outside media. But, really... a random emblem throwing power? We have people still complaining about Superman killing someone in a stressful choice situation where he wasn't even happy that he did it. If he through that emblem at them, everyone in the theater would be laughing it up.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I wonder how fans of George Reeves felt about Christopher.

As far as I can tell, my parents liked both of them.

If anything, Superman Returns's problem was trying to emulate everything about those movies, even the actor who played Supes.

For my part I saw nothing of Reeve in Superman Returns. It was laughable to call that a sequel, lol.

But their portrayal of Lex Luthor always bugged me. He seemed kinda... cartoonish than a real threat. Almost like he was the non-threatening gag villain that shows up just before the BIG villain comes along. Worked nicely in the second film, but not so much the first.

Are you referring to the original films or Superman Returns (I lost track, lol)? If you mean the originals, I understand. Gene Hackman even said in the making of documentary he didn't think he was cut out to play a villain so he played up the humor. And there are times when it works (the second half, I agree, lol) and times when it's just kinda awkward, hehe.

If you're referring to Superman Returns, I barely remember what Spacey did with the role. In fact someone must have given me the infamous forgetful kiss because I barely remember most of that movie, lol. Just that I thought Lois Lane was ridiculously young.

 

[Animal31]

Okay, you got me on the emblem thing, I never understood that either. He also told Lois that the "shell game" he was doing in Superman II was a game he played as a child, with who, he was raised on Earth?!?!?

Personally, I thought Gene Hackman was a great Lex Luthor for what the movie was, it wasn't meant to be a dark film. Spacey was nothing more than a Hackman clone, nothing of his own in the character at all. Rooth played a great Reeve Clark Kent, but failed in his Superman (Wasn't crazy about the suit either, S was too small). And I see what you're saying about George Reeves versus Christopher Reeve, but there is a difference. Where Christopher's portrayal was a timid Clark Kent, George's Clark Kent was as intimidating to the bad guys as Superman was. Great for television, but two totally different worlds where movies are concerned. It's like comparing Adam West's Batman to Keaton's.

Let's face it, as long as they make them, we'll watch them. But I think everyone has a favorite that all other will fail in comparison to.

 

[jvcarroll]

Well I agree that no matter what, there would be fans who complain. I really don't have much respect for the canon Nazi, nitpicking fans anymore. Shatner said it right, they need to get a life, lol.

I wasn't amazed by Man of Steel. It really could have been a lot better. Cavill and Shannon are good actors, but I just felt like they were given very little to work with. The over use of CGI show off wasn't as bad as Bayformers, but it does feel like Synder would like it to be and that worries me, lol. And btw despite my avatar, lol, I was too young for the original Superman movies and don't have too much nostalgia for my part, at least not as much as the original fans. I just think they have a better balance of character moments and action for me. They were written for a larger audience, not just comic book fans. Whereas Man of Steel was clearly targeted towards a specific demographic.

Meh, I don't think judging fans is a good strategy. These alpha-fans help create the hype that sells these films in the first place. That said, I don't think MOS was written for the fanbase at all. It wouldn't have been as polarizing if it had been. Also, they actually avoided Snyder's usual stylish slowmotion effects and he really pulled back on his use of CG when compared to his other films. I loved the film and agree that it fell short in some areas. They needed to better connect viewers to the characters beyond Clark Kent. They also needed to give Superman an iconic patriotic moment like they did with the last film when he saved the airplane during a baseball game. I also wish this follow-up focused just on the world of Superman. It's too soon for Batman.

That said, I'm still not sold with Affleck's Batman. He is a name with brand-recognition, but that name doesn't sell theater tickets. At least, he doesn't as an actor. Ever. It's not because he was a lousy Daredevil or that he tanked nearly every franchise he's been associated with. Truth. It's because he has no on-screen charisma and that's why I'm not crazy about his being Batman. I'm sure he'll try his best and the director will shoot the film in such a way to accommodate that, but we probably won't get something as compelling as we would have with another actor in the cape. Hollywood has really weird reasons for making decisions. This is one that I just don't get. Someone hasn't done their homework. Casting criticisms are usually baseless, but they are firmly-founded in this case. There are plenty of other really good 40-ish name actors who would jump at the chance to play Batman. I don't think Ben made anyone's short list. We'll see. I'm willing to give it a chance. That's the decision that's been made and I like Batman. I just kind of hope he sprains his ankle before shooting and gets replaced by Michael Fassbender, Josh Brolin, Karl Urban or any number of better applicants. LOL!

 

[Drtooth]

Off topic, regarding Bayformers... the CGI was the least of the film franchise's problems. In fact, I'd wager to say the CGI was probably the best thing in the films. Not to mention it would be impossible to recreate giant robots in anything but CGI... and they tried.

Shudder....

Back ON subject... I have no idea this is a rumor or not, but it came out that Ben wasn't even their first choice. There was someone else (GAH! I forgot) that was passed over. I'm willing to have an open mind... but at this point I want them to recast Batman just so they can say Ben was a red herring. At least have some element of surprise to the film.