Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby No Surprize » Thu Jul 02, 2015 10:43 pm

YoungJRNYfan wrote:THOR: THE DARK WORLD Director Calls Working With MARVEL 'Particularly Wrenching'

http://www.newsarama.com/24996-thor-the ... ching.html

Good to see WB/DC going the opposite direction and taking care of their directors in the process. To get director's like Snyder, Ayer and even Affleck, the studio has the DCUniverse in the best interest of allowing their director's more control over their vision.


The link explained nothing in particular and I bet he's not complaining about his bank account. Pussies, it's what's wrong with America now.
"Steve "The Riffmaster" Clark"

My generations "Jimmy Page"
User avatar
No Surprize
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 4:55 am
Location: Captiva Island,Florida

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:38 am

No Surprize wrote:I don't care about Mad Max movies. I don't care who is directing it or how many years they were in development. To me they are nothing but Fast and Furious in the desert with Australian accents. The whole concept is lame.


Since that's not the concept of the first film, at all, it makes me wonder if you really watched it. Also, Beyond Thunderdome is split between Bartertown and the desert refuge of the children. The pursuit finale is a shorter one than in Road Warrior.

"Fast & Furious in the desert" is a woefully inaccurate label to peg the Mad Max saga with.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:41 am

No Surprize wrote:
YoungJRNYfan wrote:THOR: THE DARK WORLD Director Calls Working With MARVEL 'Particularly Wrenching'

http://www.newsarama.com/24996-thor-the ... ching.html

Good to see WB/DC going the opposite direction and taking care of their directors in the process. To get director's like Snyder, Ayer and even Affleck, the studio has the DCUniverse in the best interest of allowing their director's more control over their vision.


The link explained nothing in particular and I bet he's not complaining about his bank account. Pussies, it's what's wrong with America now.


I don't think it's just him. Whedon let on about studio meddling, too. Patty Jenkins walked away from Thor: The Dark World, too. They say she was fired, but there was obviously more to it. The worst thing that can happen to the Marvel films is that they all have a homogenized look to them. Fortunately, the two Captain America films evaded that.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:33 am

Image
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:41 am

"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sat Jul 04, 2015 4:45 am

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Sat Jul 04, 2015 6:42 am

^F'ing rad, yo!

The hype machine is rolling. SDCC is almost here. Zack even mentioned he originally proposed a post-credits MoS scene that involved something being delivered to Wayne Manor.

Also, they seem to have confirmed Metallo is not the big baddie in BvS.

Hall H might be a shambles after the WB panels...
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:52 am

I'm glad Snyder is bringing that aspect of his thinking back up. When he made his Man of Steel rounds in 2013, he said that numerous times on how he wanted an end credit scene in Man of Steel that showed Kryptonite being sent to Wayne Manor to set Batman up in some capacity or another.

Affleck has done some recent interviews as well and he said Snyder approached him about Batman when he was just finishing up Argo, which was around late 2012 or so. Man of Steel released June 2013 so it's great to know Snyder had the seeds planted in some form or fashion about the DCCUniverse.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Sun Jul 05, 2015 1:01 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:I'm glad Snyder is bringing that aspect of his thinking back up. When he made his Man of Steel rounds in 2013, he said that numerous times on how he wanted an end credit scene in Man of Steel that showed Kryptonite being sent to Wayne Manor to set Batman up in some capacity or another.

Affleck has done some recent interviews as well and he said Snyder approached him about Batman when he was just finishing up Argo, which was around late 2012 or so. Man of Steel released June 2013 so it's great to know Snyder had the seeds planted in some form or fashion about the DCCUniverse.


The full quote from EW.com...

It all started with an off-handed remark from Snyder to Chris Nolan and David S. Goyer about a potential easter egg. "I said, 'What about at the end of [Man of Steel] we do a scene where there's a crate full of kryptonite delivered to Wayne Manor. Everyone was like... Okaay. Once you say it out loud it's a problem because you can't unsay it," says Snyder. And thus, Batman v Superman was born.

Sounds like a throwaway comment. Vastly different from the structured multi-arc universe Marvel has gradually unfolded. Bats vs Supes feels half-assed because that's precisely what it is. Imagine if Marvel made Iron Man and then the next film was The Avengers? That's pretty much what WB/DC is trying to pull here. It's the cinematic equivalent of jumping from first base to homeplate. With any luck, audiences will have enough self-respect to blow the rape whistle and the movie bombs.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:14 am

Ben Affleck:

However, the most interesting nugget on all this comes from Ben Affleck, who reveals that Batman perhaps has a good reason to have a bone to pick with Superman in the forthcoming sequel. “One of the things I liked was Zack’s idea of showing accountability and the consequences of violence and seeing that there are real people in those buildings,” he said. “And in fact, one of those buildings was Bruce Wayne’s building so he knew people who died in that Black Zero event.”


2016 needs to hurry the hell up...
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:19 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Sounds like a throwaway comment. Vastly different from the structured multi-arc universe Marvel has gradually unfolded. Bats vs Supes feels half-assed because that's precisely what it is. Imagine if Marvel made Iron Man and then the next film was The Avengers? That's pretty much what WB/DC is trying to pull here. It's the cinematic equivalent of jumping from first base to homeplate. With any luck, audiences will have enough self-respect to blow the rape whistle and the movie bombs.


The thing is, to me, MoS packed enough content for two movies without feeling overstuffed. Contrast that with Iron Man 2, which feels like not enough goes on to wipe away the notion that it's a rush job (which they admitted, since it came out exactly two years after the first movie). Plus, Iron Man 2 shamelessly indulged the "your father fucked over my father, so I'm coming to fuck you up" trope, and it was the first time we got the "heroes vs. army of robots/drones" battle, which the MCU continues to employ as its final act (Avengers, Thor 2, Avengers: AoU).

The only other character in BvS that I think will get any kind of serious screen time is Diana/WW, and we'll probably see her more as the latter than the former. I think we're only going to glimpse Aquaman and Cyborg.

Though Batman also appears in Suicide Squad (probably a flashback), another solo film for him is a few years away, and I'm fine with that. WB knows the Nolan trilogy's legacy is a substantial one, even if it isn't connected.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:21 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:Ben Affleck:

However, the most interesting nugget on all this comes from Ben Affleck, who reveals that Batman perhaps has a good reason to have a bone to pick with Superman in the forthcoming sequel. “One of the things I liked was Zack’s idea of showing accountability and the consequences of violence and seeing that there are real people in those buildings,” he said. “And in fact, one of those buildings was Bruce Wayne’s building so he knew people who died in that Black Zero event.”


2016 needs to hurry the hell up...


See, it's all coming together. Shit went down, and somebody thinks somebody should pay for it.

Whereas, wait for it, Tony Stark has been held accountable for next-to-nothing, not the least of which is the creation of Ultron. The battle ends, they slap him on the ass, and he goes on (another) vacation. D'oh!
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:28 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
YoungJRNYfan wrote:I'm glad Snyder is bringing that aspect of his thinking back up. When he made his Man of Steel rounds in 2013, he said that numerous times on how he wanted an end credit scene in Man of Steel that showed Kryptonite being sent to Wayne Manor to set Batman up in some capacity or another.

Affleck has done some recent interviews as well and he said Snyder approached him about Batman when he was just finishing up Argo, which was around late 2012 or so. Man of Steel released June 2013 so it's great to know Snyder had the seeds planted in some form or fashion about the DCCUniverse.


The full quote from EW.com...

It all started with an off-handed remark from Snyder to Chris Nolan and David S. Goyer about a potential easter egg. "I said, 'What about at the end of [Man of Steel] we do a scene where there's a crate full of kryptonite delivered to Wayne Manor. Everyone was like... Okaay. Once you say it out loud it's a problem because you can't unsay it," says Snyder. And thus, Batman v Superman was born.

Sounds like a throwaway comment. Vastly different from the structured multi-arc universe Marvel has gradually unfolded. Bats vs Supes feels half-assed because that's precisely what it is. Imagine if Marvel made Iron Man and then the next film was The Avengers? That's pretty much what WB/DC is trying to pull here. It's the cinematic equivalent of jumping from first base to homeplate. With any luck, audiences will have enough self-respect to blow the rape whistle and the movie bombs.


Marvel has successfully built their movie franchise their way. Good for them, but this isn't about comparison. I'm looking forward to seeing DC do it their way and structure their movie-verse in a completely different blueprint than what we've seen unfold from Marvel. That's the point. Marvel isn't DC and DC isn't Marvel. Lets keep it that way. The last thing I want to see is another shared universe repeat the same march to the same drums. Nobody has any idea how this could potentially unfold so hoping a film bombs just to stir the pot is disappointing to read. DC has BvS coming out and has SSQuad hot on its trails next year. I'm highly optimistic.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:46 am

verslibre wrote:
YoungJRNYfan wrote:Ben Affleck:

However, the most interesting nugget on all this comes from Ben Affleck, who reveals that Batman perhaps has a good reason to have a bone to pick with Superman in the forthcoming sequel. “One of the things I liked was Zack’s idea of showing accountability and the consequences of violence and seeing that there are real people in those buildings,” he said. “And in fact, one of those buildings was Bruce Wayne’s building so he knew people who died in that Black Zero event.”


2016 needs to hurry the hell up...


See, it's all coming together. Shit went down, and somebody thinks somebody should pay for it.

Whereas, wait for it, Tony Stark has been held accountable for next-to-nothing, not the least of which is the creation of Ultron. The battle ends, they slap him on the ass, and he goes on (another) vacation. D'oh!


Consequences in the MarvelU doesn't exist. It's all bubblegum, tongue in cheek nonsense geared towards families and children that brush over the mindless violence taking place on screen that audiences refuse to acknowledge. Talk about raping the viewers? DC is building a serious tone with their pallet and as divisive as it may be in the longrun, I feel we'll get a more complex, mythological explanation to these powerful characters that explains a more compelling reasoning as to why these beings exist in our world and the baggage that comes with that from not only a human physiological standpoint, but also a gateway to these other mythical and Greek worlds such as Thymescia to the depths of fiery hell of Apocalypse.

Guys like TNC and Monker don't have to like it. So be it, but I'm hoping they can be won over. DC needs to win a lot of people over, there's no question and it's no secret. If not, so be it. I'm stoked, lol.
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:44 am

Anybody see Terminator 5 yet?
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby Memorex » Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:15 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Anybody see Terminator 5 yet?


Yes, but I moved away from CA before it was over.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:29 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:Anybody see Terminator 5 yet?


Genisux? Not me. I'm not going near that thing.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby Monker » Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:36 am

See, it's all coming together. Shit went down, and somebody thinks somebody should pay for it.


Sorry, but that seems like such a crappy premise for a movie. Unless there is something more then, "that was my building with my employees in it," then it doesn't compare with saving the world...and of all people, Batman should know that.

It makes no sense, and it's stupid.

Whereas, wait for it, Tony Stark has been held accountable for next-to-nothing, not the least of which is the creation of Ultron. The battle ends, they slap him on the ass, and he goes on (another) vacation. D'oh!


Stark holds himself accountable...which is what resulted from Scarlet Witch's vision. And, the entirety of that accountability has not even been shown yet.

And, there lies the whole problem with BvS. Avengers has spent years and many films to show you the differences and conflects between the Avengers. The audience knows VERY well how Captain American and Iron Man conflict. The "civil war" has been brewing from the beginning. DC has shown us NOTHING about why Superman and Batman would be fighting each other. The audience has NOTHING invested in their conflict.

Consequences in the MarvelU doesn't exist.


Yes, they do. You just ignore it in favor of what DC is trying to do. I spelled it out for you before. Quicksilver - dead. Hulk - betrayed and in hiding. Iron Man - on hiatus due to Ultron and his vision. Over and over again 'consequences' show up. You just want it to be "oh, no, civilians were in that building when it was destroyed!" because that is what you believe DC is doing.

It's all bubblegum, tongue in cheek nonsense geared towards families and children that brush over the mindless violence taking place on screen that audiences refuse to acknowledge.


Whatever. They are not doing anything any different then any other action movie...including your precious Nolan Batman movies

I feel we'll get a more complex, mythological explanation to these powerful characters that explains a more compelling reasoning as to why these beings exist in our world and the baggage that comes with that from not only a human physiological standpoint, but also a gateway to these other mythical and Greek worlds such as Thymescia to the depths of fiery hell of Apocalypse.


That's interesting because one of you two said in this thread something like, "the audience already knows who Batman is" in response to me saying they are not giving enough time to explain where this cranky old fart is coming from and why he would be fighting Superman.

The bottom line is you want DC to combine Act 1 with Act 2 and somehow make a epic characters out of it. It doesn't work...especially if they want to build such an in-depth mythos as you are talking about. I mean, they are going to introduce Wonder Woman in what seems like an important role, and THEN have her solo movie. That is just screwed up. But, I think she is just there for T&A anyway. It's become pretty obvious.

Guys like TNC and Monker don't have to like it. So be it, but I'm hoping they can be won over. DC needs to win a lot of people over, there's no question and it's no secret. If not, so be it. I'm stoked, lol.
[/quote]

If they did it right, I would care. But, it is just soooo obvious that all they are doing is rushing into their version of Avengers because they see how successful Marvel and they want some of that cash, too. This has the same appeal to me as Freddy vs. Jason, Alien vs Predator, King Kong vs Godzilla. It even shares the same generic title, Batman vs Superman.

And, it is not me and TNC that needs convinced. It is those who are not into comic books, or genre movies. They need to convince the casual movie goer who wants to see a summer movie and doesn't care about all of this crap. Are they going to spend their $100 to take their family to see BvS, CA: Civil War, something else?

Right now, I think it will get the 100million dollar opening weekend from genre fans. But, if it doesn't get top notch reviews, it will not be as big as even Guardians of the Galaxy. I do NOT believe it's a sure thing that BvS will be the biggest movie next year, or even next summer.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Mon Jul 06, 2015 4:09 am

But, I think she is just there for T&A anyway. It's become pretty obvious.


Amazing. It all makes sense now. ImageImage
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:30 am

Monker wrote:
See, it's all coming together. Shit went down, and somebody thinks somebody should pay for it.


Sorry, but that seems like such a crappy premise for a movie. Unless there is something more then, "that was my building with my employees in it," then it doesn't compare with saving the world...and of all people, Batman should know that.

It makes no sense, and it's stupid.


You forget that that's not the entire movie. And it's a perfectly acceptable catalyst for Batman to show up and see what caused the destruction and why members of his company fell victim to the chaos. Do you think Age of Ultron was some complex machine or was it just another battle movie that followed the beats of the first Avengers, and also happened to introduce new characters?

Monker wrote:Stark holds himself accountable...which is what resulted from Scarlet Witch's vision. And, the entirety of that accountability has not even been shown yet.


The way it will be "dealt with" is Cap getting shot at the end of Civil War. :lol:

Monker wrote:And, there lies the whole problem with BvS. Avengers has spent years and many films to show you the differences and conflects between the Avengers. The audience knows VERY well how Captain American and Iron Man conflict. The "civil war" has been brewing from the beginning. DC has shown us NOTHING about why Superman and Batman would be fighting each other. The audience has NOTHING invested in their conflict.


Two of the most iconic comics characters, on the big screen together for the first time. Batman. Superman. Plus Diana Prince, aka Wonder Woman. That's the investment, dude. SDCC is next week. Let's wait for reactions to the panels and new footage, possibly an advance screening of the next trailer. It'll be trending everywhere.

Monker wrote:
Consequences in the MarvelU doesn't exist.


Yes, they do. You just ignore it in favor of what DC is trying to do. I spelled it out for you before. Quicksilver - dead.


No, that was Whedon's cheap way of trying to make the movie "darker." Killing off the character that's a mirror of Fox's Quicksilver (Evan Peters), who was in DoFP and will be in Age of Apocalypse. He was a throwaway. He dodged everything in the movie and suddenly he couldn't dodge bullets. He could have pushed himself and Hawkeye clear away.

Monker wrote:Hulk - betrayed and in hiding.


Forced plot complication. A Banner-Romanoff romance must have sounded hilarious on paper, so I'm not sure why they actually went with that, since a connection between she and Barton had already been insinuated. But lo! Suddenly Hawkeye has a...family?! Huh? While I did like the interlude on the farm, that was just...weird.

Monker wrote:Iron Man - on hiatus due to Ultron and his vision. Over and over again 'consequences' show up.


Not the first time (Iron Man 3), and again, he'll be back in action with no explanation as to why he suddenly feels he should be back in the thick of things. Like I said, he goes on vacation. Fury and his buddies slap him on the ass and he goes and sits on an island (which he probably owns) and sips fruity drinks served in glasses with little umbrellas and self-analyzes.

Monker wrote:Nolan Batman movies


I know, those movies are awesome, huh? I love the cinematography in those films.

Monker wrote:That's interesting because one of you two said in this thread something like, "the audience already knows who Batman is" in response to me saying they are not giving enough time to explain where this cranky old fart is coming from and why he would be fighting Superman.


A solo Batman film is just a few years away. I think it's cool they're not doing another reboot from the ground up just yet. Look at the mess the Spider-Man franchise has become. People have chilled on one of the best characters ever because they keep stopping and starting over.

Monker wrote:The bottom line is you want DC to combine Act 1 with Act 2 and somehow make a epic characters out of it. It doesn't work...especially if they want to build such an in-depth mythos as you are talking about. I mean, they are going to introduce Wonder Woman in what seems like an important role, and THEN have her solo movie. That is just screwed up.


Heh. Let's see. Black Widow was introduced in a film (Iron Man 2, in what appears to be a semi-important role. Then she's in three more films — Avengers; Captain America: The Winter Soldier; Avengers: Age of Ultron — in what are obviously very important roles, and yet, she has not had her own solo movie. And yes, fans and non-readers alike would like a solo Black Widow movie. The reason Marvel added a Captain Marvel movie to their slate is because they caught wind of the Wonder Woman film. They beat DC to the superteam punch (because George Miller's Justice League movie was abandoned), but they realized they're not going to beat DC to the first solo super-female film, so they grabbed one of their second-tier characters and shoved her in there. Captain Marvel, once known as Ms. Marvel, is literally one of the more obscure Marvel characters, i.e. nobody gives a shit about her, but they're willing to chance a movie using the momentum of all the other movies.

It's all fine and dandy, I just want the Doctor Strange movie to kick ass. I don't want them to water down the occult aspects of the character and his surroundings. They also have to find a director for Black Panther, since Ava DuVernay passed on the project.

Monker wrote:But, I think she is just there for T&A anyway. It's become pretty obvious.


Dude, halt the anti-DC bullshit. Who's there for T&A? I'll give you a hint. Trust me, nobody has complained. So you're going to be the first guy? :lol:

Image
Image
Image
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby Monker » Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:03 am

verslibre wrote:You forget that that's not the entire movie. And it's a perfectly acceptable catalyst for Batman to show up and see what caused the destruction and why members of his company fell victim to the chaos.


Oh, so Bruce Wayne is so stupid that he doesn't know about the alien threat that almost destroyed the world and how Superman saved it. He doesn't have time to watch the news? Batman, with all of his high tech gadgets is clueless about what happened and has to confront Superman. Yeah, that definitely sounds incredibly lame and stupid

The way it will be "dealt with" is Cap getting shot at the end of Civil War. :lol:


No, that would horrible writing. He'll be shot 2/3 of the way through the movie and Bucky will take his place for the finel 1/3.

Two of the most iconic comics characters, on the big screen together for the first time. Batman. Superman. Plus Diana Prince, aka Wonder Woman. That's the investment, dude. SDCC is next week. Let's wait for reactions to the panels and new footage, possibly an advance screening of the next trailer. It'll be trending everywhere.


Sorry, but people in general do not care about all that as much as you think.

"Snakes on a Plane" was 'trending' for how long? How well did that help sell tickets?

No, that was Whedon's cheap way of trying to make the movie "darker." Killing off the character that's a mirror of Fox's Quicksilver (Evan Peters), who was in DoFP and will be in Age of Apocalypse. He was a throwaway. He dodged everything in the movie and suddenly he couldn't dodge bullets. He could have pushed himself and Hawkeye clear away.

Monker wrote:Hulk - betrayed and in hiding.


Forced plot complication. A Banner-Romanoff romance must have sounded hilarious on paper, so I'm not sure why they actually went with that, since a connection between she and Barton had already been insinuated. But lo! Suddenly Hawkeye has a...family?! Huh? While I did like the interlude on the farm, that was just...weird.


It really doesn't matter what your opinion is of it, those were consequences. And, there are others but you guys refuse to see them because they were not written for a DC movie.

[quote[
Monker wrote:Nolan Batman movies


I know, those movies are awesome, huh? I love the cinematography in those films. [/quote]

The first one was great the last two were no better than most other superhero movies.

A solo Batman film is just a few years away. I think it's cool they're not doing another reboot from the ground up just yet. Look at the mess the Spider-Man franchise has become. People have chilled on one of the best characters ever because they keep stopping and starting over.


And, yet you call Jurassic World a reboot disguised as a sequel. It's the same damn thing here. The fact that they are not Dark Knight movies means it is a reboot.

Heh. Let's see. Black Widow was introduced in a film (Iron Man 2, in what appears to be a semi-important role. Then she's in three more films — Avengers; Captain America: The Winter Soldier; Avengers: Age of Ultron — in what are obviously very important roles, and yet, she has not had her own solo movie. And yes, fans and non-readers alike would like a solo Black Widow movie. The reason Marvel added a Captain Marvel movie to their slate is because they caught wind of the Wonder Woman film. They beat DC to the superteam punch (because George Miller's Justice League movie was abandoned), but they realized they're not going to beat DC to the first solo super-female film, so they grabbed one of their second-tier characters and shoved her in there. Captain Marvel, once known as Ms. Marvel, is literally one of the more obscure Marvel characters, i.e. nobody gives a shit about her, but they're willing to chance a movie using the momentum of all the other movies.


Wow, thank you for admitting that Wonder Woman has been reduced to the level of a third string character like Black Widow. I didn't realize that you had so little respect for a character like Wonder Woman that you would compare her to someone nobody had even heard of prior to Iron Man 2. But, you're right, that's how little respect DC has for her and that she is only there for T&A. The film IS titled "Batman vs Superman"...so to have her add anything more than a body would not be adding much to the plot.

And, you are wrong about Captain Marvel. Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) was a Kree soldier. Ms. Marvel came about in the events that led to his death and her transformation from Carol Danvers to Ms Marvel. I think you are buying into propaganda when you guess about why she is getting a movie. IMO, the fans were demanding it and it made sense to do as a way to further tie in the Kree into the rest of this universe. In addition, her story really is perfect to move to film.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:03 pm

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:You forget that that's not the entire movie. And it's a perfectly acceptable catalyst for Batman to show up and see what caused the destruction and why members of his company fell victim to the chaos.


Oh, so Bruce Wayne is so stupid that he doesn't know about the alien threat that almost destroyed the world and how Superman saved it. He doesn't have time to watch the news? Batman, with all of his high tech gadgets is clueless about what happened and has to confront Superman. Yeah, that definitely sounds incredibly lame and stupid


No, he does know about it, which is why he's coming to confront this new "alien god" and all that jazz. Stop trying so hard. :lol:

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:The way it will be "dealt with" is Cap getting shot at the end of Civil War. :lol:


No, that would horrible writing. He'll be shot 2/3 of the way through the movie and Bucky will take his place for the finel 1/3.


No, THAT is shit writing. And I was joking. We've no idea if he'll really be shot like in the comics. The movies have not been 100% faithful to the source movie. (In the comics, Tony Stark didn't create Ultron.)

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:Two of the most iconic comics characters, on the big screen together for the first time. Batman. Superman. Plus Diana Prince, aka Wonder Woman. That's the investment, dude. SDCC is next week. Let's wait for reactions to the panels and new footage, possibly an advance screening of the next trailer. It'll be trending everywhere.


Sorry, but people in general do not care about all that as much as you think.


No, YOU don't care, and we get that. Are you having trouble feeding all the parts of that horse into the wood chipper?

Monker wrote:"Snakes on a Plane" was 'trending' for how long? How well did that help sell tickets?


You can file that one under "Pointless Aside." My point was that it will be a much-hyped, much-communicated event, i.e. the Hall H panel(s), and more information will be conveyed thus as a result. You dig?

Monker wrote:It really doesn't matter what your opinion is of it, those were consequences. And, there are others but you guys refuse to see them because they were not written for a DC movie.


Apparently, my opinion does matter, because you're still here, arguing. :wink:

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:I know, those movies are awesome, huh? I love the cinematography in those films.


The first one was great the last two were no better than most other superhero movies.


You're in the minority on that one — especially where The Dark Knight is concerned — and you know it.

Monker wrote:And, yet you call Jurassic World a reboot disguised as a sequel. It's the same damn thing here. The fact that they are not Dark Knight movies means it is a reboot.


Nobody is saying Ben Affleck's Batman is the same guy Nolan's Batman was. And somehow, in some way, nobody is having an issue understanding that, either.

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:Heh. Let's see. Black Widow was introduced in a film (Iron Man 2, in what appears to be a semi-important role. Then she's in three more films — Avengers; Captain America: The Winter Soldier; Avengers: Age of Ultron — in what are obviously very important roles, and yet, she has not had her own solo movie. And yes, fans and non-readers alike would like a solo Black Widow movie. The reason Marvel added a Captain Marvel movie to their slate is because they caught wind of the Wonder Woman film. They beat DC to the superteam punch (because George Miller's Justice League movie was abandoned), but they realized they're not going to beat DC to the first solo super-female film, so they grabbed one of their second-tier characters and shoved her in there. Captain Marvel, once known as Ms. Marvel, is literally one of the more obscure Marvel characters, i.e. nobody gives a shit about her, but they're willing to chance a movie using the momentum of all the other movies.


Wow, thank you for admitting that Wonder Woman has been reduced to the level of a third string character like Black Widow.


Don't be a moron. That wasn't my point. And stop moving the goalposts. Idiots do that. I countered you, and all you can do is come back with the sissy la-la retort "Thanks for lowering Wondy to Widow!" You're crabbing like a bitch about Wonder Woman being introduced first without appearing in her own solo film — though it's literally the NEXT item on the docket — after a female Marvel character has figured prominently in four movies and they still won't give her one. So the DCCU is going to be ahead of the MCU on that. You're like all the Marvelites at SHH and CBR who gave the MCU a clean pass but have to gripe about All Things DC with the fury of a wombat with Tourette's. I sincerely hope you don't lose any sleep over any of this.

Monker wrote:I didn't realize that you had so little respect for a character like Wonder Woman that you would compare her to someone nobody had even heard of prior to Iron Man 2. But, you're right, that's how little respect DC has for her and that she is only there for T&A. The film IS titled "Batman vs Superman"...so to have her add anything more than a body would not be adding much to the plot.


The lengths you go to. Wow. Truly pathetic.

Monker wrote:And, you are wrong about Captain Marvel. Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) was a Kree soldier. Ms. Marvel came about in the events that led to his death and her transformation from Carol Danvers to Ms Marvel. I think you are buying into propaganda when you guess about why she is getting a movie. IMO, the fans were demanding it and it made sense to do as a way to further tie in the Kree into the rest of this universe. In addition, her story really is perfect to move to film.


Look at your Wiki-fied ass go! Vroom! Vroom! No, the fans weren't demanding it. You cannot overlook (or maybe you can, since you say you're not a comics reader and only watch the movies) that the problem with Marvel is that Marvel has no real equivalent of Wonder Woman OR Supergirl. DC has Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Batwoman, Batgirl (those two are not the same person), Huntress, Zatanna, and so on. The closest two characters of Marvel's that can compete are Sue Storm and Jean Grey (Marvel Girl/Phoenix). The problem is the rights to make movies with those characters belong to Fox, so they're fucked.

They could have (and probably should have) planned a movie around Janet Van Dyne (The Wasp), who was a major Avenger and abused spouse of Hank Pym (Giantman/the first Antman/Yellowjacket), or at least a Wasp-Yellowjacket movie, but instead Janet is going to be a peripheral character in Ant-Man. They've fast-forwarded to the Scott Lang version of Antman (or Ant-Man, if you prefer to write it that way). They could have planned a Vision & Scarlet Witch adaptation. Or something. Marvel is avoiding tackling any of the heavy shit I'd like to see them use, like the legendary Tony Stark-alcoholism storyline.

Okay, this is going in bold:

The announcement of a Captain Marvel movie was a purely reactionary move after the reveal of Wonder Woman on Warner's slate. And you can take THAT to the bank, amigo.
Last edited by verslibre on Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Mon Jul 06, 2015 1:50 pm

Monker wrote: But, I think she is just there for T&A anyway. It's become pretty obvious. But, you're right, that's how little respect DC has for her and that she is only there for T&A. The film IS titled "Batman vs Superman"...so to have her add anything more than a body would not be adding much to the plot.


I love when Monker posts. It just gives us something to easily debunk until Comic Con :lol:

‘Batman V Superman': Wonder Woman Is ‘Gateway Drug’ To Justice League
“She (Wonder Woman) plays a super-important part. In a lot of ways, she’s the gateway drug to 
the rest of the 
Justice League.”


http://screenrant.com/batman-v-superman ... ce-league/

Also, the film isn't just titled Batman V Superman. You left a huge piece of the title out of the equation within' your onslaught of cherry-picking, chief. The title is called Batman V Superman: DAWN OF JUSTICE, as in the "Justice League" which Wonder Woman plays a huge part in assembling.

As for tits and ass, it's a shame what Marvel did to Black Widow. Not only has she become a fan favorite over the past few films (let alone being a TOTAL BADASS to boot) she now has been resorted to nothing but Bruce Banner's sex-toy who never, ever appears on any Marvel merchandising because Marvel is so scared to put her in the spotlight because she's a woman. Meanwhile, DC just released the first EVER picture of the Trinity on the cover of Entertainment Weekly. In many ways, that's a historic cover. Guess who's smack dab in the middle and headlining?

Image

Image
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:34 am

The Superman actor promises expansion of world created in ‘Man of Steel'

“There’s plenty of time for individual Superman sequels,” the actor says. “He’s a tough character to tell. People like the darker vigilante. I think it speaks to the human psyche more easily rather than the god-like being that we can’t really understand. Once we have a more expansive universe we can delve more into the character of Superman and tell more stories.”
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:50 am

YoungJRNYfan wrote:Meanwhile, DC just released the first EVER picture of the Trinity on the cover of Entertainment Weekly. In many ways, that's a historic cover. Guess who's smack dab in the middle and headlining?


You mean you don't agree with whatshisface who insists she's there for T&A only and is being completely dissed by WB? :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:55 am

‘Batman v. Superman’ Scene Descriptions Surface, Brainiac Planned for the Future

Zack Snyder who revealed that Metallo was once considered to be a villain in Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice in the early stages of development, also teased another iconic Superman villain for future movies: “I remember talking about ‘What’s the next villain?’ ‘We can’t do another alien invasion.’ Brainiac was definitely down the road."


I won't post the scene descriptions. 8)
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Tue Jul 07, 2015 3:28 am

Dude! Stop reading spoilers. March will be here before you know it. :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby Monker » Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:18 am

verslibre wrote: it's a perfectly acceptable catalyst for Batman to show up and see what caused the destruction and why members of his company fell victim to the chaos.


No, he does know about it, which is why he's coming to confront this new "alien god" and all that jazz.


Make up your mind. Either he knows these things, or he doesn't. Either way, it's a dumb-ass premise for a movie.

No, that would horrible writing. He'll be shot 2/3 of the way through the movie and Bucky will take his place for the finel 1/3.


No, THAT is shit writing. And I was joking. We've no idea if he'll really be shot like in the comics. The movies have not been 100% faithful to the source movie. (In the comics, Tony Stark didn't create Ultron.)


No, it's not. It's the dramatic event in the middle of the third act that provides the catalyst for Bucky to become a hero rather than an antagonist. And, that would set him up to being in the third Avengers movie - in place of Captain America.

As for being shot...it doesn't matter. Captain America will die. How it happens is irrelevent.

No, YOU don't care, and we get that. Are you having trouble feeding all the parts of that horse into the wood chipper?


No, most people don't spend so much time in forums discussing these things. They just want to spend some money on entertainment. Those are the people who BOTH Marvel and DC need to capture to have these huge ticket sales. Marvel has done that. DC has yet to prove they can beyond TDK.

Monker wrote:"Snakes on a Plane" was 'trending' for how long? How well did that help sell tickets?


You can file that one under "Pointless Aside." My point was that it will be a much-hyped, much-communicated event, i.e. the Hall H panel(s), and more information will be conveyed thus as a result. You dig?


it doesn't make any difference. Hype doesn't get $1 Billion in sales. And, again, most people don't even know what ComiCon is let alone who is premiering what.

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:I know, those movies are awesome, huh? I love the cinematography in those films.


The first one was great the last two were no better than most other superhero movies.


You're in the minority on that one — especially where The Dark Knight is concerned — and you know it.


No, I don't know that. I think the general opinion is that "Dark Knight Rises" set a bar that the other two did not reach. And, it was how the villans were chosen, written, and portrayed. Scarecrow was good, but Bane was almost lame...but neither were even close to the Joker...and he took that movie to a special place.
Monker wrote:And, yet you call Jurassic World a reboot disguised as a sequel. It's the same damn thing here. The fact that they are not Dark Knight movies means it is a reboot.


Nobody is saying Ben Affleck's Batman is the same guy Nolan's Batman was. And somehow, in some way, nobody is having an issue understanding that, either.


That has nothing to do with what I said. It's not a Dark Knight movie - therefore it is a reboot no matter what. Even if you had Nolan in there, they way the third movie ended would FORCE a reboot. Or, as you may say, a reboot disguised as a sequel.

Don't be a moron. That wasn't my point. And stop moving the goalposts. Idiots do that. I countered you, and all you can do is come back with the sissy la-la retort "Thanks for lowering Wondy to Widow!" You're crabbing like a bitch about Wonder Woman being introduced first without appearing in her own solo film — though it's literally the NEXT item on the docket — after a female Marvel character has figured prominently in four movies and they still won't give her one. So the DCCU is going to be ahead of the MCU on that. You're like all the Marvelites at SHH and CBR who gave the MCU a clean pass but have to gripe about All Things DC with the fury of a wombat with Tourette's. I sincerely hope you don't lose any sleep over any of this.



Oh, grow up. You made the comparison. If you are going to compare Wonder Woman and Black Widow then you either have to lower Wonder Woman to a third string superhero, or raise Black Widow to the A list. If you don't do one or the other, you have no point. And, since you obviously don't want to - you have no point because the two are not really comparable...and your bombastic reaction to my post is proof enough of that.

Look at your Wiki-fied ass go! Vroom! Vroom! No, the fans weren't demanding it.


You are wrong again. first, I mentioned Captain Marvel in this thread a few weeks before her movie was announced. Second I read an interview with Kevin Fiege where he said Black Panther and Captain Marvel were selected based on fan input and how well they fit into what they had already done and had planned.

So, you going about and waiving your fists and posting things in bold really doesn't mesh well with reality.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby verslibre » Tue Jul 07, 2015 11:55 am

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:"It's a perfectly acceptable catalyst for Batman to show up and see what caused the destruction and why members of his company fell victim to the chaos."

"No, he does know about it, which is why he's coming to confront this new 'alien god' and all that jazz."


Make up your mind. Either he knows these things, or he doesn't. Either way, it's a dumb-ass premise for a movie.


You need to reset the electrodes on your neck, Frankie. Those statements don't cancel each other out. They don't contradict each other.

Here, maybe this will help you out:

Man of Steel director Zack Snyder has spoken out about his film's very controversial ending, noting that its consequences will be a major factor in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.

"I was surprised because that’s the thesis of Superman for me, that you can’t just have superheroes knock around and have there be no consequences," Snyder told EW when asked about the movie's destruction-heavy conclusion.

According to Snyder, the consequences of that ending will be a key piece of the story in Dawn of Justice, and will serve as part of Batman's motivation to take down the Man of Steel.

Batman actor Ben Affleck echoed the director's sentiment, saying: "One of the things I liked was Zack’s idea of showing accountability and the consequences of violence and seeing that there are real people in those buildings. And in fact, one of those buildings was Bruce Wayne’s building so he knew people who died in that Black Zero event."


http://ap.ign.com/batman-vs-superman-dawn-of-justice/90670/news/batman-v-superman-bruce-waynes-very-personal-reaso

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:No, THAT is shit writing. And I was joking. We've no idea if he'll really be shot like in the comics. The movies have not been 100% faithful to the source movie. (In the comics, Tony Stark didn't create Ultron.)


No, it's not. It's the dramatic event in the middle of the third act that provides the catalyst for Bucky to become a hero rather than an antagonist. And, that would set him up to being in the third Avengers movie - in place of Captain America.


Blah. When Bucky becomes Cap, it'll be at the tail end of a movie (denouement), when he dons the suit and they call "Cut!" Then he'll have his own movie. They may do the same for Arno Stark, but RDJ hasn't announced he's stepping down from milking that phat Marvel cash cow.

Monker wrote:As for being shot...it doesn't matter. Captain America will die. How it happens is irrelevent.


Is that so? I'm glad you're not doctoring the script. We'd probably see Steve get depressed over Peggy all over again and down a bunch of pills.

No, Cap — the symbol of America, the "living legend," being shot — you know, what happened in the comic, the same one of which copies reportedly traded for up to $1000 the week of its release — would be much more dramatic than his getting hit by a street sweeper driven by a guy doing a Tommy Chong impression with a roach clip.

Monker wrote:Those are the people who BOTH Marvel and DC need to capture to have these huge ticket sales. Marvel has done that. DC has yet to prove they can beyond TDK.


Not worried about it. The Trinity is nearly here.

Monker wrote: Hype doesn't get $1 Billion in sales.


No, worldwide ticket sales equal $1B, but "some hype don't hurt, da old man say." We'll see what happens in nine months.

Monker wrote:And, again, most people don't even know what ComiCon is let alone who is premiering what.


I literally laughed aloud when I read this. I don't which remote corner of backwater USA you reside in, but I'm surprised you have access to the Internet over there. You've no idea how wrong you are. The San Diego Comic Con, aka SDCC, is forever ingrained in the bedrock of pop culture as of years ago. When major news networks cover it, when you hear it referenced by Letterman and Jon Stewart, when Metallica chooses to stage a concert in the Gas Lamp Quarter the week of SDCC, when freakin' Conan O'Brien is going to do a bunch of shows this week in San Diego during Comic Con...yeah, more people know of it than you think. People from as far away as Oz and Japan come to this thing. Downtown San Diego is transformed into a geek mecca. Events in the Gas Lamp and across town take place concurrently (some of it actually irks the Con organizers, because they attract people who weren't able to get into the main event). San Diego has been trying to keep SDCC from leaving for another city because the week of the event is the single biggest revenue draw of a twelve-month cycle for the city. I could go on, but you have a number of search engines at your fingertips. Use 'em.

Monker wrote:
verslibre wrote:
Monker wrote:The first one was great the last two were no better than most other superhero movies.


You're in the minority on that one — especially where The Dark Knight is concerned — and you know it.


No, I don't know that. I think the general opinion is that "Dark Knight Rises" set a bar that the other two did not reach.


Nope, a lot of people think Rises didn't quite meet the line TDK set. Rises is the most ambitious of the three movies, but it's the most flawed. The Dark Knight is regarded as the overall best of the trilogy by most, though many people (just not as many) prefer Begins.

Monker wrote:...but neither were even close to the Joker...and he took that movie to a special place.


And there you go.

Monker wrote:That has nothing to do with what I said. It's not a Dark Knight movie - therefore it is a reboot no matter what. Even if you had Nolan in there, they way the third movie ended would FORCE a reboot.


Overstating the obvious. Nobody said this Batman is the same as Nolan's. Because he isn't. Heck, he's older. Yes, this is all reboot territory. Man of Steel was the inaugural event. The new DCCU begins there.

Monker wrote:Oh, grow up. You made the comparison.


No, I showed which character is the T&A queen, thanks to Marvel. That nice close-up of her ass that Whedon gave you in Avengers? Yeah. That's right. ScarJo is T&A girl. That's why I wrote what I wrote (read it again), and posted the pix. :lol:

Monker wrote:If you are going to compare Wonder Woman and Black Widow then you either have to lower Wonder Woman to a third string superhero, or raise Black Widow to the A list. If you don't do one or the other, you have no point.


Are those goalposts a bother to move around during a mighty wind?

Monker wrote:...and your bombastic reaction to my post is proof enough of that.


"I'm Bombastman!" :lol:

Monker wrote: Second I read an interview with Kevin Fiege where he said Black Panther and Captain Marvel were selected based on fan input and how well they fit into what they had already done and had planned.


Don't believe everything you hear. Feige is a channel for Marvel Entertainment's film division through which everything is filtered. He has input, yes, but he's more a spokesman. Captain Marvel is one of the second-tier characters they have to go with, because, as I said, the first-tier women — Sue Storm, Black Cat, Jean Grey and all the rest of the mutants — are locked up at Fox. And Wasp? I don't know WTF they're doing with her in Ant-Man, but I have a feeling I won't like it when I see it. I'm not even sold on buying a theater ticket to that one.

Monker wrote: So, you going about and waiving your fists and posting things in bold really doesn't mesh well with reality.


Says the guy who makes self-contradictory statements, shows ignorance of certain characters and concepts, and loves to argue for the sake of arguing when the horse's corpse is on its way to the glue factory. :lol: :lol: :lol:
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Re: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice THREAD

Postby YoungJRNYfan » Tue Jul 07, 2015 10:52 pm

Monker wrote:
And, again, most people don't even know what ComiCon is let alone who is premiering what.


I can't. I just...




....I can't :lol:
User avatar
YoungJRNYfan
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests