Monker wrote:[quote="YoungJRNYfan" When we are discussing DC characters (Superman's "flaws" vs. Batman's), and you go and inject Marvel insults, it absolutely indicates you have some emotional issues towards Marvel.
If you think I only brought Spidey up to insult Marvel then you don't get the point. I don't read Marvel and I have no emotional issues towards them. That's just fanboy jibberish you are subtly instigating. You must have missed the dig on Batman...all in the defense of my boi Supes. That was the point.
YOU brought up the fact that Superman is a more relatable character than Batman because he is more "human" and a person would have to be pretty fucked up to related to Batman.
Yeah, your point? You brought up some stuff in response that wasn't true to what you were implying and I debunked it with showing some stuff that went against what you were trying to argue, which always turns into something completely irrelevant and head-scratching essays.
"Normal" does not make a character relatable - flaws do.
Good thing, because Superman is far from normal. The sole purpose to MoS was to make Superman relatable to the audience. That was their main adjective. When somebody is relatable, they have human value. They go through hardships and insecurities. In MoS, Clark was insecure and was in search of himself. It had a father/son story and Goyer even brought up most of his experiences with his own step-son for dialogue. People can relate to that and when people relate to something, they see the flaw in it. Superman is a flawed character, without question and a good writer will exploit that in his character.
That is how stories are written. Sure, there may be some underlying theme of "Superman is an alien that we can't trust". However, the first act of any story is to introduce the hero (or, "heroes" in this case) as a relatable character. Along with that, flaws are shown that the hero has to overcome. Then he struggles to overcome those flaws, with the help of the various friends he meets and tools he is given.
You're giving me a headache. Your stringing together sentences that ramble and passing it off as something that sounds important. It's called trying too hard.
..get the audience to care about Batfleck in the same way is so much stuff that people are not going to get it all and see it all as another "Alien vs. Predator" type thing.
You know nothing of how the audience is going to react because nobody has a clue in how this is going to unfold both story and plot wise. You're blowing hot-air out of your wazoo.
Therefore, in the first 1/3 of the movie, all of this has to happen. Then the confrontations with Luthor, or whoever his underlings are, will start happening...he will get Batfleck on his side, Wonder Woman at some point will join...probably after a failed confrontation with a lesser villan (probably not Luthor). Then, there will be a build up to the final confrontation with Luthor.
Now we're getting into lousy fan-fiction. You can't help but talk yourself right into stuff that is completely irrelevant. What you said above has been written one million times over on the internet and other forums. This may not be so predictable as you might think.
That is how these stories are written. Cripes, go and look at MoS....or any of these movies - it is how they are written.
MoS was an origin story. Snyder admitted that they needed to be handcuffed to that source material and tell that story first and get it out of the way. He said with BvS, the cuffs are off and they have more freedom to explode both Superman and Batman's universe's in more creative ways than one and go balls to the walls with this DCEU coming into play.
Most people probably feel caring too much is a strength - not a weakness.
I beg to differ. I bet most people would say caring too much opens yourself up for vulnerability to other people's agenda's. It's a double-edged sword.
What George is saying is he would do the exact opposite...find/invent something that Superman DOES NOT care about - but everybody else does, including the audience. THAT would be a flaw. In fact, it would create an internal conflict because he normally DOES care.
You're right! Maybe they should give him a Super-kid and get caught up in a love-triangle and not care enough to know or show up in court or else one of the worlds most famous psychopath's would get off scott-free without much fight. Now that's flaws baby!
No, they TRIED to.
You're doing this again ---------------->
Oh, please, he didn't look upset at all...not like he was going to snap anybody's neck or anything. From what I remember, it seemed like he was almost joking about it with the general.
What a way to joke. Destroying a 12 million dollar piece of military hardware is not an action done by somebody who isn't upset in the slightest. It's not like the Government was trying invade his privacy or anything. Ever approach somebody and have that "knock it off" vibe? That was the kind of mood Supe's was in. He was pleading his case and the scene ended with uncertainty of trust between Superman and the Government. Hardly a buddy-buddy, ha-ha talk. You should pick up on this subtle stuff, Mr.Observer. It's pretty obvious what that scene was.
No, I'm acting like BvS should have been one or two movies later to provide more of this back story in a manner that the audience could more easily digest.
It's Batman. It's Superman....for the first time. That's ALL you need to digest and then you let the movie take it from there. I know you're use to Marvel's way of telling stories in a way to allow kids to understand since they make up the majority of that audience, but with BvS's audience, it doesn't need to be spoon-fed to digest no matter how bad you keep wanting to beat that dead horse. You need to give the audience more props dude and stop insulting their intelligence. The hype alone will give the audience everything they need to feast on and buy that movie ticket.
