DC Extended Universe THREAD

[verslibre]

It doesn't mean shit. How would they be fourth-rate while still ahead of Fox? They haven't made a billion dollar CBM. DoFP was expected to make that, and it fell far short. Like a quarter of a billion short.

Did any other X films come close to that? I assumed DOFP would earn around the same much as First Class.

First Class didn't even gross as much as Batman Begins. Just one of those deals where people went "meh, another one" and found out about it later.

DoFP made 748 million, but it took a while to get there and they needed it to hit somewhere over 800M to get into box office profit.

[Monker]

Why is Squad going to fall flat?

Because the entire film looks like shit.

You know what says otherwise? The trailers' combined views on YouTube: in excess of 80 million views. That's right. Don't believe me? Go look. The movie looks great, btw. Don't worry, I'll let you know how it is.

This is what I mean...You are using YouTube hits as evidence that people want to go see the movie. You have no idea WHY those hits are there. IMO, they are probably there because the buzz went out about how stupid the Joker looks and how horrible this movie is going to be. So, having so many hits proves to me that the movie is REALLY going to suck...and people know it.

How will Apocalypse outsell BvS when there's not a ton of buzz for it

Because it actually looks like a good film. You sit on your ass and let how well something is trending determine how you believe a film will do...but you don't realize that trending and "buzz" could mean anything, including a large number of people arguing how shitty a movie looks.

The movie is not generating the buzz it should be. It's a fact. As one of the three biggest CBMs this year, it's the least anticipated.[/quote]

So what. Nobody expected Deadpool to be where it is, either. You are way too wrapped up in this buzz feed bullshit stuff.

First Class is the best X-Men movie, so you're flat-out wrong.

I can't be "wrong", because it's a matter of opinion. I prefer the original first two X-Men movies over the last two movie...But, the new one looks better than all of them.

But, whatever...my question still stands: If all these movies outsell BvS, what does it mean for WB/DC? It makes DC and WB look like fourth rate hacks. And, yes, I do believe it could happen.

It doesn't mean shit.

I bet WB doesn't see it that way. They didn't invest in BvS for it to be the least popular CBM of the summer.

How would they be fourth-rate while still ahead of Fox? They haven't made a billion dollar CBM. DoFP was expected to make that, and it fell far short. Like a quarter of a billion short.

[/quote]

You are assuming Apocalypse won't sell. I am saying if it does, then ALL other studios outdid WB this summer...and it makes them a fourth rate studio for CBMs.

[verslibre]

It doesn't mean shit.

I bet WB doesn't see it that way. They didn't invest in BvS for it to be the least popular CBM of the summer.

"Of the summer." Is the end of March summer? I thought was spring. Yes, I do believe BvS is not a summer film. March 26. Uh-huh.

Suicide Squad comes out in August. Now that might be "the least popular CBM of the summer," behind Civil War and Apocalypse. Maybe.

How would they be fourth-rate while still ahead of Fox? They haven't made a billion dollar CBM. DoFP was expected to make that, and it fell far short. Like a quarter of a billion short.

You are assuming Apocalypse won't sell. I am saying if it does, then ALL other studios outdid WB this summer...and it makes them a fourth rate studio for CBMs.

I'm going by DoFP's performance. Some advance reviews are also using the "overstuffed cast" rhetoric. Apocalypse could definitely make more than DoFP — in fact, it needs to, they've spent more on it — but a billion buckeroos? That's totally up in the air.

[verslibre]

Apokolips!

According to Upproxx.com, “the Iceland locations will likely be standing in for some sort of alien planet, likely mega villain Darkseid’s hellish Apokolips. Iceland is known for its otherworldly, volcanic landscape, after all.”

http://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2016/02/23/justice_league_film_to_be_shot_in_iceland/

[YoungJRNYfan]

Awesome!


OFFICIAL: Supergirl season two renewed on the CW:
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/12/su ... renewed-cw

[Monker]

When Stark finally pipes up after letting Ross do his thing and complains about "who's dumping coffee grounds" in the sink, he throws up the holo-pic of Spencer for everyone gathered to see. He explains and proclaims that kid's casualty, as informed by his own mother at MIT, is the reason at the very least they need to sign the Accords. Yes, his PTSD continues to plague him, but that's not what he cites, nor his split from Pepper, as the main-vein reason they need to be put in check. Maybe you missed that while you were smearing nacho cheese over your eyelids.

Sure, he is trying to guilt trip the rest of the team into following him...manipulation and control.

But, that is not HIS only reason for wanting to have the accords. The internal struggle that he is dealing with is his motivation.

You mistake his regret for the arrogance that really drives him. He's always been arrogant. If he were truly regretful, he wouldn't have brought Peter Parker, a high schooler, into the mix for shits and giggles. Everything to Stark is a means to an end. He saw the end, and he want and grabbed some more means. You're just making excuses to prop up Stark.

Oh, stop it. Spiderman was brought in for the same reason Wonder Woman was brought in - to set up a solo movie.

Are you for real? Rogers gives his nutshell reasoning at the table. It's barely a couple sentences long. He says the Avengers should remain private so that they're where they're needed. Otherwise, they could be needed somewhere and not be there. He EXPLAINS why he doesn't feel the Avengers should be under U.N. control. He doesn't need to go beyond that. It's a perfectly compact, thorough explanation. Rogers knows what's it like to be a government puppet, and he clearly doesn't wish to be one again. Captain America ultimately stands for freedom. DUH.

But, again, that's not what is motivating him. The speech at Peggy Carter's funeral is explaining exactly what is going on inside of CA.

Stark thinks everyone should do what he says, and why he says. Which is sign the Accords. Thanks for finally agreeing with me.

Stark wants control of the Avengers and thinks he is their leader. Rogers wants to be true to himself and his values...and becomes the true leader because of it. They are contrasting characters - which is good writing, good story telling, and they made good use of it in the movie....unlike BvS, which fumbles time after time.

The Bucky revelation is a Hail Mary, just like Turan wrote.

No, it's not. It's good story telling. It was foreshadowed several times...you just didn't see the full scene. As I have said, the movie was all about revenge. Zemo's manipulation was all about revenge. Black Panther was all about revenge. Even the accords could be seen as the people's revenge against the Avengers. So, having Bucky kill Stark's mother and fill Stark with a desire for revenge was the perfect climax to bring into the final act. Black Panther talks about allowing revenge to eat away your soul and that he was not going to allow that to happen to him...and in contrast you see Iron Man with Captain America's shield in his chest smashing the reactor. Iron Man allowed revenge to consume him...he lost everything, almost all of the former avengers, even Black Panther. Who is left? Spiderman and Vision?

I didn't see the "full scene"? Says who?

Me...and you, and anybody else who saw the movie. If you reread my quote I said it was foreshadowed...you just didn't see the full scene. To explain it in baby-talk, they had a scene shown several times in the movie where Bucky runs a car off the road. He then goes to the car, opens the trunk, and takes a suitcase. That is the end of the repeated scene. In the end, they repeat it, except they add the reveal that it is Stark's parents and Bucky let's his father die, and murders his mom.

You're overemphasizing a BASIC revenge motive as high art.

No, I'm not. I am explaining that this theme ran through the entire movie. It wasn't a "Hail Mary" tacked on at the end to desperately achieve some drame...like snapping the villein's neck at the end. The end was obviously written first, and everything else in the movie built up to that moment, the fight scene, and Black Panther's words of wisdom at the end. THAT is good story telling.

Iron Man is the one who is not super. He just has a suit. Captain America and Bucky are "super"...they got it from a test tube.

Somebody give Monker the Captain Obvious Award already. He deserves it. For clarification, when I refer to superpowers, I mean the kind Scarlet Witch, Superman, Spider-Man and Green Lantern possess/wield, not enhanced strength, stamina and endurance. Which are nice, too. Wolverine has all that, but his super-healing ability is a superhuman quality. That's the difference. Captain America is not impervious.

Ah, well, I essentially quoted the first Avenger's movie. So, you must be in some other universe.

I'll tell you exactly why Iron Man didn't use the full arsenal in his suit to take down two ground-based guys, shield or no shield: because they didn't WRITE it that way. I guess you're not smart enough to realize that. Otherwise Bucky would've lost that arm a lot sooner.

Wow.

People thought Cap would die. Or Bucky would die.

I thought it was possible for CA to die, but never Bucky. However, I do like this ending better. The Avengers are no more and is basically operating the same as SHIELD. Coulson even implied that fact in the last SHIELD episode. But, whatever, you are just critiquing to critique...and that's fine.

Or War Machine (as hinted at in the trailer) would die.

Yeah, so? I never said, or thought, he would.

But nobody died. Once again, they took the "Quicksilver" of the film, that being Rhodey, the "least valuable player," and they fucked him up. At least in this case, it did happen in the comics and he walked again thanks to Stark's tech.

Yeah, and I don't mind so much at all. What 'died' is the Avengers as a group. But, of course, you don't recognize that.

He is there for the same reason Wonder Woman was in BvS....to set up his own movie and eventually his part in the Infinity War. You are hypocrite if you critique this but praise Wonder Woman's part in BvS.

YOU are the hypocrite here. You're the one who ragged on the DC films and waxed on about good storytelling and bad storytelling and films overstuffed with characters.

And, I also said that Marvel could now get by with it because the audience is invested in the phase one movies, or even phase two now. They don't need a to tell a bunch of backstory for CA or IM...the audience already knows and is invested in those characters. So, they can afford to introduce Black Panther - and do a good job of it. Or, use it as the launch for Spiderman - and they did a good job of that, too.

DC failed at the very basics because there was not enough time to tell the story, and get the audience invested in all of these characters all at once. That is why BvS is so fucked up. And, it's not just me saying it...a lot people are. I just don't need some paid reviewer to tell me what plainly obvious. The last review that RWF posted is exactly my POV, and what I have been saying since BvS was announced.

And, you are still a hypocrite if you praise Wonder Woman and critique Spiderman.

You even said you read that Spider-Man had an entire half-hour devoted to him to set him up.

That is an absolute lie. I said his total screen time was about a half hour.

Well, I don't know where you read that, but you were wrong there, too. The scene that gives us Parker is actually pretty cheesy. The next time we see him, it's in Berlin. He's there as an asset — both Stark's and the studios' — more so than story point, and you know it.

His "story point" is comic relief...as is Ant-Man's. That is not something bad...having a character that is always down to Earth and relatable no matter what is pretty basic. That is why you have R2D@ and C3PO in every Star Wars movie, for example.

Wrong again. They didn't really WANT to fight. None of them did. The point is this was all manipulation and dividing the Avengers and putting one side against the other.

Wait...what? Manipulation? Somebody manipulating the heroes from behind the scenes? You're talking about Lex, right? [/quote]

No, I'm talking about a well written and cast villein, not Lex.

IMO, it's Black Panther who stole the show. I couldn't get enough of BP. His suit's awesome. He had the moves and the claws. They should've left Spidey out and given him more time.

Black Panther was great and had a big part in the movie to explain the vengeance theme that ran through the movie. But, if they would have eliminated Spiderman, my guess is they would have added more Ant-Man for comic relief.

There was enough Ant-Man as is. BP's role got edited up, down and sideways to accommodate the inclusion of Spider-Man. At one point, they thought Sony wasn't going to let them use him.[/quote]

Dude, I'm saying having more Ant-Man is good or bad. I'm saying that is what they probably would have. I think it works perfectly the way it is and there is no need to remove Spiderman. I think most people would slap you for saying that...and call you a hypocrite for praising Wonder Woman.

[Monker]

Awesome!


OFFICIAL: Supergirl season two renewed on the CW:
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/12/su ... renewed-cw

In other words: Moved from CBS (essentially "canceled") to a network where lower ratings are OK.

But, hey, if you like it, good for you!

[verslibre]

Awesome!


OFFICIAL: Supergirl season two renewed on the CW:
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/12/su ... renewed-cw

In other words: Moved from CBS (essentially "canceled") to a network where lower ratings are OK.

But, hey, if you like it, good for you!

I swear, can you ever talk and NOT sound like a douche?

[YoungJRNYfan]

Monker's name suits him well. It reminds me of something you would see floating in a toilet Kidding aside, he's like MR'S version of 'The Comic Book Guy' from The Simpsons, but only if it has the letters "D" or "C" in it. That or he just can't stomach the fact that he sometimes, God forbid, could be totally wrong about something so he is constantly hedging his arguements (that's what I respect about TNC. He mis-read and gaffed on a debate and stood up like a man and owned it. Monker could never do that.) He said Supergirl wouldn't even last 1 season, only to see it pick up more episodes along the way. It's obvious when something as innocent as a Supergirl television show is eating at Monker because he was totally wrong about its life expectancy so he has to resort to doing what he does best: spin it in the most negative way imaginable to make his mistake look good

In all seriousness though, the CW is where SG belongs anyhow. Many, including myself, were shocked that a network like CBS would take on a show like SG since they are a network that caters to different audiences. Plus, the crossover show with the Flash did really big numbers, so that showed that universe can crossover and that's what the fans of those show want to see, so to be apart of the same network and be close in proximity to shows like Arrow and the Flash only feels RIGHT.


Speaking of cancelations, Agent Carter has officially been dumped by ABC.

[verslibre]

Monker is anti-DC to the bone. He'll place his head next to the jamb and bang the edge of the closet door against himself over and over before he'll admit a good movie exists under the DC mantle. I bet he has an entire folder full of Nolan-Batman hate that's so dense, he uses it for a paperweight.

[YoungJRNYfan]

..and those folders containing those documents are probably labeled "The DC META FILES" Monker IS Lex Luthor. Taking down the DCEU one post at a time.

[Monker]

Monker is anti-DC to the bone. He'll place his head next to the jamb and bang the edge of the closet door against himself over and over before he'll admit a good movie exists under the DC mantle. I bet he has an entire folder full of Nolan-Batman hate that's so dense, he uses it for a paperweight.

You're wrong. In the old thread, I said positive things about the TDK movies...though I think the Joker is what made those movies popular. And, no where near as critical of MOS as the others here...but I know you two WAY over rate it.

If WB/DC get off their ass, fires Snyder, and starts making good movies, I wouldn't be on their ass so much. As it is, BvS deserves allof the critique - not just from me. Anybody who understands anything about story telling should have seen it coming. You can't catch up to Marvel in one movie - that is impossible.

[The_Noble_Cause]

First Class didn't even gross as much as Batman Begins. Just one of those deals where people went "meh, another one" and found out about it later.

Why are we comparing an X-Men movie to a Batman movie? Inarguably, First Class was a step up from Brett Ratner's X3.

[Monker]

In all seriousness though, the CW is where SG belongs anyhow. Many, including myself, were shocked that a network like CBS would take on a show like SG since they are a network that caters to different audiences. Plus, the crossover show with the Flash did really big numbers, so that showed that universe can crossover and that's what the fans of those show want to see, so to be apart of the same network and be close in proximity to shows like Arrow and the Flash only feels RIGHT.

Exactly....It was never going to make in on CBS. It just isn't a network type of show. It was never going to work there...and it was struggling for ratings. Now you can get it on CW. If you like the show, good for you. It will probably have to survive with a lower budget, but at least you'll get something.

Speaking of cancelations, Agent Carter has officially been dumped by ABC.

Never watched it. The only "superhero" show on watch on TV is Agents of SHIELD

[YoungJRNYfan]

Affleck on the set of Wonder Woman:

[verslibre]

First Class didn't even gross as much as Batman Begins. Just one of those deals where people went "meh, another one" and found out about it later.

Why are we comparing an X-Men movie to a Batman movie? Inarguably, First Class was a step up from Brett Ratner's X3.

Those two movies invite comparison:

Both were movies that rebooted franchises that people had grown skeptical of.

Both movies were so good that a lot more people got into them after their theatrical runs.

Both movies were made for roughly the same amount of money (Begins was a little less).

Inarguably, First Class was a step up from Brett Ratner's X3.

Inarguably, First Class was a step up from everything before it. The key was no Bryan Singer.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Those two movies invite comparison:

Both were movies that rebooted franchises that people had grown skeptical of.

Both movies were so good that a lot more people got into them after their theatrical runs.

Both movies were made for roughly the same amount of money (Begins was a little less).

First Class was a prequel by the same creative team who had done all the prior X Films (produced by Donner, Singer). Hell, it even included a Hugh Jackman cameo. Batman Begins isn't comparable at all really. Begins didn't even keep the Elfman score. Total clean slate.

Inarguably, First Class was a step up from everything before it. The key was no Bryan Singer.

Bryan was still there. Just not directing.

[verslibre]

Those two movies invite comparison:

Both were movies that rebooted franchises that people had grown skeptical of.

Both movies were so good that a lot more people got into them after their theatrical runs.

Both movies were made for roughly the same amount of money (Begins was a little less).

First Class was a prequel by the same creative team who had done all the prior X Films (produced by Donner, Singer). Hell, it even included a Hugh Jackman cameo. Batman Begins isn't comparable at all really. Begins didn't even keep the Elfman score. Total clean slate.

Inarguably, First Class was a step up from everything before it. The key was no Bryan Singer.

Bryan was still there. Just not directing.

The movie doesn't resemble Singer's previous two, aesthetically speaking. It has a lot more energy. The action is MUCH better. Fassbender's Magneto leaves Gandalf in the dust.

Singer's a producer, and he contributed to the story, but there are four other writers on that thing (if you don't count Vaughn). It's just a better movie every which way but loose, and I totally passed on it while it was in theaters because I was sick of the whole mutant shtick. First Class got me interested again (the two Wolverine movies didn't do shit for me). DoFP was supposed to be this mondo flick and it fell short. Yeah, I blame Singer.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Singer's a producer, and he contributed to the story, but there are four other writers on that thing (if you don't count Vaughn). It's just a better movie every which way but loose, and I totally passed on it while it was in theaters because I was sick of the whole mutant shtick. First Class got me interested again (the two Wolverine movies didn't do shit for me). DoFP was supposed to be this mondo flick and it fell short. Yeah, I blame Singer.

I liked DOFP alot, but it was lazy to bring back Stewart, McKellen, and to make Jackman the main character. They should have just stuck with the First Class.

[verslibre]

I liked DOFP alot, but it was lazy to bring back Stewart, McKellen, and to make Jackman the main character. They should have just stuck with the First Class.

That, and the finale — both past/future — were telegraphed long before we got around to them.

[verslibre]

Exactly....It was never going to make in on CBS. It just isn't a network type of show. It was never going to work there...and it was struggling for ratings. Now you can get it on CW. If you like the show, good for you. It will probably have to survive with a lower budget, but at least you'll get something.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2016/05/13/heres-why-supergirls-move-to-the-cw-is-the-win-win-scenario-it-deserved-all-along/

[Abitaman]

And I can guarantee that the 3rd go round of Spidey will go over better than the 3rd go round of Superman went over.

I don't know about that, but I do know I liked what I saw in the short time Spidey had on screen. ALREADY better that the UNamazing movies. But his time was to short, so only a Spidey movie will tell.
Being better than Superman? Maybe Superman Returns.

[verslibre]

Sure, he is trying to guilt trip the rest of the team into following him...manipulation and control.

Thanks for finally agreeing with me. It wasn't so hard now, was it?

But, that is not HIS only reason for wanting to have the accords.

Spencer is the catalyst. I already said that.

Oh, stop it. Spiderman was brought in for the same reason Wonder Woman was brought in - to set up a solo movie.

That’s the third big screen incarnation of Peter Parker in less than 15 years, too. However you perceive Wonder Woman, she was long overdue.

Are you for real? Rogers gives his nutshell reasoning at the table. It's barely a couple sentences long. He says the Avengers should remain private so that they're where they're needed. Otherwise, they could be needed somewhere and not be there. He EXPLAINS why he doesn't feel the Avengers should be under U.N. control. He doesn't need to go beyond that. It's a perfectly compact, thorough explanation. Rogers knows what's it like to be a government puppet, and he clearly doesn't wish to be one again. Captain America ultimately stands for freedom. DUH.

But, again, that's not what is motivating him. The speech at Peggy Carter's funeral is explaining exactly what is going on inside of CA.

Those lines originate directly from Cap’s spiel in the comic, except virtually all their impact was lost by having Sharon recite them. That was nearly a facepalm moment for me (I know it had no such effect on you).

As for what “motivates” Cap, this sums it up perfectly:

“For as long as I can remember…I just wanted to do what was right. I guess I'm not quite sure what that is anymore. And I thought I could throw myself back in and follow orders, serve. It's just not the same.”

(The Winter Soldier)

“[Tony, you chose to do that.] If we sign this, we surrender our right to choose. What if this panel sends us somewhere we don't think we should go? What if there's somewhere we need to go and they don't let us? We may not be perfect but the safest sands are still our own.”

(Civil War)

Oh, hey, let’s not forget:

"I know I'm asking a lot, but the price of freedom is high, it always has been, and it's a price I'm willing to pay. And if I'm the only one, then so be it. But I'm willing to bet I'm not."

We can move on from that now.

Stark thinks everyone should do what he says, and why he says. Which is sign the Accords. Thanks for finally agreeing with me.

Stark wants control of the Avengers and thinks he is their leader. Rogers wants to be true to himself and his values...and becomes the true leader because of it. They are contrasting characters - which is good writing, good story telling, and they made good use of it in the movie....unlike BvS, which fumbles time after time.

Again, thanks for agreeing with me, your side-swipe at BvS notwithstanding.

Me...and you, and anybody else who saw the movie. If you reread my quote I said it was foreshadowed...you just didn't see the full scene. To explain it in baby-talk, they had a scene shown several times in the movie where Bucky runs a car off the road. He then goes to the car, opens the trunk, and takes a suitcase. That is the end of the repeated scene. In the end, they repeat it, except they add the reveal that it is Stark's parents and Bucky let's his father die, and murders his mom.

Talk about a hot load. It’s a Hail Mary and I’m not alone in that view. Pretty cool of Bucky to not bother wearing his mask on that assignment, either — so there can be NO DOUBT.

You're overemphasizing a BASIC revenge motive as high art.

No, I'm not. I am explaining that this theme ran through the entire movie. It wasn't a "Hail Mary" tacked on at the end to desperately achieve some drame...like snapping the villein's neck at the end. The end was obviously written first, and everything else in the movie built up to that moment, the fight scene, and Black Panther's words of wisdom at the end. THAT is good story telling.

If that’s all it takes for you, you might like the remake of Pete’s Dragon. I hear they wrote the end first.

Ah, well, I essentially quoted the first Avenger's movie. So, you must be in some other universe.

Don’t worry, Homer, the context is dead center and wearing a top hat. Your attempts to rebut/refute always reveal a straw man. The fact remains that if the scene had been revised to de-nerf Iron Man, he’d have neutralized them both with any given combination of stun-based weapons at his disposal. Steve’s in maximum condition, but he’s not indestructible. His duds aren't constructed of vibranium mesh like BP's are. (Bucky shot him up in TWS, remember?)

I'll tell you exactly why Iron Man didn't use the full arsenal in his suit to take down two ground-based guys, shield or no shield: because they didn't WRITE it that way. I guess you're not smart enough to realize that. Otherwise Bucky would've lost that arm a lot sooner.

Wow.

Indeed. Go review Iron Man, Iron Man 2 and both Avengers, etc. Reacquaint yourself with everything he’s capable of.

I thought it was possible for CA to die, but never Bucky. However, I do like this ending better. The Avengers are no more and is basically operating the same as SHIELD. Coulson even implied that fact in the last SHIELD episode. But, whatever, you are just critiquing to critique...and that's fine.

That's one hand I won't bet on. Tony put Ross on hold and didn’t take one look at the contents of Steve’s parcel and toss it in the bin. That means Steve’s already over it, and Tony’s getting over it. Don’t be surprised if the next Avengers movie opens with them all meeting at Starbucks to hash things out over a round of soy lattes on Tony.

Yeah, so? I never said, or thought, he would.

“Yeah, so” War Machine is lying inert on the ground, with Tony hunched over him with that look on his face. It was obvious something heavy’d just gone down. You thought they were doing Iron Yoga?

What 'died' is the Avengers as a group. But, of course, you don't recognize that.

Pssssh. Only until the beginning of Infinity War, if that. Don’t be surprised if a post-scene in Black Panther shows Tony, Steve, Sam and Rhodes (with an assist from Stark’s tech) doing the funky chicken. Stakes? What stakes?

And, I also said that Marvel could now get by with it because the audience is invested in the phase one movies, or even phase two now. They don't need a to tell a bunch of backstory for CA or IM...the audience already knows and is invested in those characters. So, they can afford to introduce Black Panther - and do a good job of it. Or, use it as the launch for Spiderman - and they did a good job of that, too.

Batman needs less of an introduction than any of those characters. Wonder Woman’s movie is coming soon. (Why do I have to keep saying this?) JL cameos are exactly that. The movie’s objective was to present the Trinity in action. Mission accomplished.

DC failed at the very basics because there was not enough time to tell the story, and get the audience invested in all of these characters all at once. That is why BvS is so fucked up. And, it's not just me saying it...a lot people are. I just don't need some paid reviewer to tell me what plainly obvious. The last review that RWF posted is exactly my POV, and what I have been saying since BvS was announced.

WTF are you talking about? “Not enough time.” The ENTIRE movie = Superman and Batman and odds, with Wonder spice. There aren’t thirteen characters. Intro, flashback, present day. Luthor manipulates. Title bout. Warehouse smash-up. Doomsday. Denouement. What did you FAIL to understand in all of that?

And, you are still a hypocrite if you praise Wonder Woman and critique Spiderman.

Firstly, I already proved you to be the real hypocrite here. For such a wannabe shill, go buy some Disney stocks already. Secondly, I don’t like the way Spider-Man was shoehorned into the movie because he deserves better — and because, more importantly, Black Panther stole the freakin’ show, anyway. The movie has a grip of characters. Spider-Man is Marvel’s Batman. They don’t need to put in any extra effort to sell him.

You even said you read that Spider-Man had an entire half-hour devoted to him to set him up.

That is an absolute lie. I said his total screen time was about a half hour.

Same difference. That amount of time is what set him up for the MCU. Baby talk for you.

I think it works perfectly the way it is and there is no need to remove Spiderman. I think most people would slap you for saying that...and call you a hypocrite for praising Wonder Woman.

Says the hypocrite.



“I can do this all day.”

[Monker]

Oh, stop it. Spiderman was brought in for the same reason Wonder Woman was brought in - to set up a solo movie.

That’s the third big screen incarnation of Peter Parker in less than 15 years, too. However you perceive Wonder Woman, she was long overdue.

Neither of those facts change the fact that both Spiderman and Wonder Woman were brought into their films for the same reason....to introduce them for a solo movie.

But, again, that's not what is motivating him. The speech at Peggy Carter's funeral is explaining exactly what is going on inside of CA.

Those lines originate directly from Cap’s spiel in the comic, except virtually all their impact was lost by having Sharon recite them. That was nearly a facepalm moment for me (I know it had no such effect on you).

Probably 90% of the audience doesn't know what is said in the comics. And, normally when things are brought in directly from the comics, you hold it up as a good thing.

As for what “motivates” Cap, this sums it up perfectly:

“For as long as I can remember…I just wanted to do what was right. I guess I'm not quite sure what that is anymore. And I thought I could throw myself back in and follow orders, serve. It's just not the same.”

(The Winter Soldier)

“[Tony, you chose to do that.] If we sign this, we surrender our right to choose. What if this panel sends us somewhere we don't think we should go? What if there's somewhere we need to go and they don't let us? We may not be perfect but the safest sands are still our own.”

(Civil War)

Oh, hey, let’s not forget:

"I know I'm asking a lot, but the price of freedom is high, it always has been, and it's a price I'm willing to pay. And if I'm the only one, then so be it. But I'm willing to bet I'm not."

You took three different scenes from two different movies...so it really doesn't sum it up, does it? If you take the speech at the funeral, that sums it up.

Stark thinks everyone should do what he says, and why he says. Which is sign the Accords. Thanks for finally agreeing with me.

Stark wants control of the Avengers and thinks he is their leader. Rogers wants to be true to himself and his values...and becomes the true leader because of it. They are contrasting characters - which is good writing, good story telling, and they made good use of it in the movie....unlike BvS, which fumbles time after time.

Again, thanks for agreeing with me, your side-swipe at BvS notwithstanding.

Do you not see and understand how Marvel set this up? You have two different characters who come at leadership from two different angles, and the rest of the Avengers caught in the middle. That is contrasting characters causing drama just by interacting with each other. There is no need to force anything...it happens naturally.

Me...and you, and anybody else who saw the movie. If you reread my quote I said it was foreshadowed...you just didn't see the full scene. To explain it in baby-talk, they had a scene shown several times in the movie where Bucky runs a car off the road. He then goes to the car, opens the trunk, and takes a suitcase. That is the end of the repeated scene. In the end, they repeat it, except they add the reveal that it is Stark's parents and Bucky let's his father die, and murders his mom.

Talk about a hot load. It’s a Hail Mary and I’m not alone in that view. Pretty cool of Bucky to not bother wearing his mask on that assignment, either — so there can be NO DOUBT.

It's NOT a 'hail mary' act of desperation. Everything built towards that scene. The movie is very skillfully designed that way...it's a series of plays that started at their own 20 yard line to end in the climax of a touchdown. No 'hail Mary" was needed.

If that’s all it takes for you, you might like the remake of Pete’s Dragon. I hear they wrote the end first.

Then they know what they are doing, and I probably will like it.

"CHARLES DICKENS, in a note now lying before me, alluding to an examination I once made of the mechanism of “Barnaby Rudge,” says — “By the way, are you aware that Godwin wrote his ‘Caleb Williams’ backwards? He first involved his hero in a web of difficulties, forming the second volume, and then, for the first, cast about him for some mode of accounting for what had been done.”

I cannot think this the precise mode of procedure on the part of Godwin — and indeed what he himself acknowledges, is not altogether in accordance with Mr. Dickens’ idea — but the author of “Caleb Williams” was too good an artist not to perceive the advantage derivable from at least a somewhat similar process. Nothing is more clear than that every plot, worth the name, must be elaborated to its dénouement before any thing be attempted with the pen. It is only with the dénouement constantly in view that we can give a plot its indispensable air of consequence, or causation, by making the incidents, and especially the tone at all points, tend to the development of the intention." -- Edgar Allan Poe, "The Philosophy of Composition" http://www.eapoe.org/works/essays/philcomp.htm

Before you start arguing how wrong Charles Dickins, Edgar Allan Poe, and William Godwin are, I think you should read the link above on how Poe explains how he wrote "The Raven".

I'll tell you exactly why Iron Man didn't use the full arsenal in his suit to take down two ground-based guys, shield or no shield: because they didn't WRITE it that way. I guess you're not smart enough to realize that. Otherwise Bucky would've lost that arm a lot sooner.

Wow.

Indeed. Go review Iron Man, Iron Man 2 and both Avengers, etc. Reacquaint yourself with everything he’s capable of.

No, 'wow' as in you can say that about anything. "I'll tell you why Superman broke Zod's neck. It was written that way." "I'll tell you why Pa Kent got sucked up in the tornado. It was written that way." "I'll tell you why Superman died in BvS. It was written that way." "I'll tell you why the world is riding around the Sun on the back of a giant turtle. It was written that way."

That's one hand I won't bet on. Tony put Ross on hold and didn’t take one look at the contents of Steve’s parcel and toss it in the bin. That means Steve’s already over it, and Tony’s getting over it. Don’t be surprised if the next Avengers movie opens with them all meeting at Starbucks to hash things out over a round of soy lattes on Tony.

Oh, I'm sure they already have the ending of the Infinity War written.

I think YJ wrote about death and rebirth. That is essentially what is going on here with the Avengers. And, yes, I would expect that to be part of the Infinity War.

Yeah, so? I never said, or thought, he would.

“Yeah, so” War Machine is lying inert on the ground, with Tony hunched over him with that look on his face. It was obvious something heavy’d just gone down. You thought they were doing Iron Yoga?

Sorry, but I never believed he was dead. See Death and Rebirth above. It's part of the Hero's Journey...over coming something like paralysis makes him an even greater hero.

What 'died' is the Avengers as a group. But, of course, you don't recognize that.

Pssssh. Only until the beginning of Infinity War, if that. Don’t be surprised if a post-scene in Black Panther shows Tony, Steve, Sam and Rhodes (with an assist from Stark’s tech) doing the funky chicken. Stakes? What stakes?

I would expect it to show something about Doctor Strange, Guardians 2, or maybe a reveal of Captain Marvel...which would be the best.

Batman needs less of an introduction than any of those characters.

You are just flat out wrong. Batman is supposed to older and grisly. Nobody knew that Batman.

Wonder Woman’s movie is coming soon. (Why do I have to keep saying this?)

So, it's OK to completely ignore her character in BvS, because she gets her origin story after the fact? Another of those stupid, "You'll understand Wonder Woman after you see her movie and then this stuff in BvS will make sense..." Come on.

JL cameos are exactly that.

They are not even really cameos. Hawkeye in Thor 1 is a cameo. JL in BvS is simple 10sec fuzzy blips. They are more like Easter Eggs than cameos.

The movie’s objective was to present the Trinity in action. Mission accomplished.

No, the movie's objective was obviously to make money and it barely accomplished that. For the story, it was to, I don't know...make a mess of the DCEU, I guess.

WTF are you talking about? “Not enough time.” The ENTIRE movie = Superman and Batman and odds, with Wonder spice. There aren’t thirteen characters. Intro, flashback, present day. Luthor manipulates. Title bout. Warehouse smash-up. Doomsday. Denouement. What did you FAIL to understand in all of that?

The first 2/3 of the movie is jumbled boring mess that is completely rushed and does not make much an introduction to the third act at all.

You even said you read that Spider-Man had an entire half-hour devoted to him to set him up.

That is an absolute lie. I said his total screen time was about a half hour.

Same difference. That amount of time is what set him up for the MCU. Baby talk for you.

That is true. But, your original post made it sound like you thought I said the encounter in Parker's house lasted a half hour and set up Spiderman for the rest of the movie.

[YoungJRNYfan]

Neither of those facts change the fact that both Spiderman and Wonder Woman were brought into their films for the same reason....to introduce them for a solo movie.

Disagree. Wonder Woman and this Spider-Man aren't used in the same ways whatsoever. Both have solo-films coming up, but they weren't used to introduce those solo films. I wouldn't even go that far for Spidey. The overall consensus from fans is that Spidey was thrown in as Marvel's way of saying "Oh yeah, we didn't forget, here's Marvel's Spider-Man, not Sony's!" I would say CW sets up a character like Black Panther's solo film. Everywhere I see, people are most excited for Black Panther while they just enjoyed Spidey's appearance for what it was.

Wonder Woman on the other hand was left seen as a major culprit when it comes to the formation of the Justice League, which in turn, has a huge significance on the DCEU. Though Wondy's film is coming up, nothing in BvS set her solo film up. As of now, we don't know where Wonder Woman could be heading. All we know is that she will work with Bruce to find the others and that points to the bigger DCEU story, not necc Wonder Woman's solo. Whatever happens in Wondy's movie could lay even more groundwork to the connected story. We're going to have to wait and see.

You are just flat out wrong. Batman is supposed to older and grisly. Nobody knew that Batman.

Batman needs no introduction. Snyder's Batman at the core is the same Batman EVERY movie director took reference from when it comes to things we have seen before. Snyder gave us a straight adaption of the DTKReturns Batman (so did Burton; so did Nolan) but Snyder added elements of a comic book Batman when it came to his fighting style more than anything and that's what fans wanted to see (as well as an 'Arkham' fighting style.)

Hell, Affleck's Batman isn't even the first "old" Batman we got. Keaton's Batman, in appearance, is a little older and Bale in TDKRises is at the end of his career; old and broken.

Even TNC pages back said no matter WHAT, Batman is Batman and will always be Batman. You're just critiquing to critique.

So, it's OK to completely ignore her character in BvS, because she gets her origin story after the fact? Another of those stupid, "You'll understand Wonder Woman after you see her movie and then this stuff in BvS will make sense..." Come on.

Everybody understood Wonder Woman. There was nothing confusing about her role in BvS and everybody loved her part in the film (thus, fans looking forward to her film.) Batman V Superman will make more sense later on NOT because of Wonder Woman or any character for that matter, but the overall story in what wasn't supposed to be clear, like Flash's warning. It's not like Snyder put those things in there for things to be clear and he failed as a director to tell that story. It's there because it's meant to confuse you because what's happening in Batman's dreams is essentially another movie or parallel Universe. It was meant to be set up this way.

They are not even really cameos. Hawkeye in Thor 1 is a cameo. JL in BvS is simple 10sec fuzzy blips. They are more like Easter Eggs than cameos.

The JL in BvS are cameo's. Easter Eggs are used in movies for the audience to "pick out" and spot if they have a witty eye. Kind of like an "Easter Egg Hunt" if you will. Eggs are HIDDEN and it's up to the children to find the eggs.

The Justice League'ers weren't meant to be found. Snyder specifically made it a point to show they existed in the DCEU and that they will have an impact on future films. He brought them to us. The "Easter Eggs" in those scenes were the logo's specifically designed for them to show who they were. Those were Easter Eggs. Fans were meant to pick up on that if they noticed it. It wasn't thrown in your face. It was subtle, thus, an Easter Egg. You just don't understand the difference.

No, the movie's objective was obviously to make money and it barely accomplished that.

You can say this for every movie ever created. It's no different than Marvel crossing their T's and dotting their I's by shoehorning Spidey in CW or putting Stark in his solo film. They know fans will pay money to see it.

For the story, it was to, I don't know...make a mess of the DCEU, I guess.

It's been known what DC's approach is. They are deconstructing their universe. The scenes like Flash's warning wasn't meant to solve an issue or be an answer to anything. Instead, we are left with questions about what really is happening and does a Multiverse exist in the DCEU? What does it all mean? Snyder orchestrated it that way and it worked. It served its purpose. Nothing is clear, nor is it supposed to be but that's what BvS set up. A story not even close to being answered.

[verslibre]

That’s the third big screen incarnation of Peter Parker in less than 15 years, too. However you perceive Wonder Woman, she was long overdue.

Neither of those facts change the fact that both Spiderman and Wonder Woman were brought into their films for the same reason....to introduce them for a solo movie.

Blah, blah, blah. This is how you backpedal when Marvel follows suit. "Batman and Superman AND Wonder Woman? Then we need Iron Man and Cap AND Spider-Man!"

Diana's role is integral to BvS. She appears throughout the film. She is one of DC's three most famous characters, and she's a founding JL member. Spider-Man was never an original Avenger. Peter is introduced in CW in a scene that reeks of a coda to principal photography. Apart from that, he's in the green screen airport battle — and a super-quick post-credits scene. Spider-Man's MCU branding smacks much more "promotional" than Diana's in BvS could ever be.

Those lines originate directly from Cap’s spiel in the comic, except virtually all their impact was lost by having Sharon recite them. That was nearly a facepalm moment for me (I know it had no such effect on you).

Probably 90% of the audience doesn't know what is said in the comics. And, normally when things are brought in directly from the comics, you hold it up as a good thing.

Hence why I said that change likely had no effect on you. The words had no impact like when Steve said 'em. The audience was waiting for the next fight, anyway. Doesn't change that fact that Cap ultimately stands for freedom and isn't going to let himself be leashed again. You don't get it.

You took three different scenes from two different movies...so it really doesn't sum it up, does it? If you take the speech at the funeral, that sums it up.

The words had no impact like when Steve said 'em. The audience was waiting for the next fight, anyway.

Do you not see and understand how Marvel set this up? You have two different characters who come at leadership from two different angles, and the rest of the Avengers caught in the middle. That is contrasting characters causing drama just by interacting with each other. There is no need to force anything...it happens naturally.

It's ALL painfully obvious to the average bear, Boo Boo. If you put a crayon sketch of a square and a triangle in a nice frame, it doesn't alter the appearance of either shape. The contrast between Tony and Steve was apparent before the MCU existed. Everything I pointed out sits on the same level of clarity.

It's NOT a 'hail mary' act of desperation. Everything built towards that scene. The movie is very skillfully designed that way...it's a series of plays that started at their own 20 yard line to end in the climax of a touchdown. No 'hail Mary" was needed.

There just happened to be a security cam on a patch of lonely road. TWS just happened to not be masked. He just happened to mug for the camera. It's a Hail Mary. The only thing it was designed to do was make two guys fight over one guy's friend. No foreshadowing of their reconciliation was necessary, either. They already showed the first step before Rogers' break-in at the Raft.

Before you start arguing how wrong Charles Dickins, Edgar Allan Poe, and William Godwin are, I think you should read the link above on how Poe explains how he wrote "The Raven".

At least spell Dickens correctly. I'm a Poe fan, so I've no reason to criticize his approach nor any other established writer's. You, OTOH...

Wow.

Indeed. Go review Iron Man, Iron Man 2 and both Avengers, etc. Reacquaint yourself with everything he’s capable of.

No, 'wow' as in you can say that about anything. "I'll tell you why Superman broke Zod's neck. It was written that way." "I'll tell you why Pa Kent got sucked up in the tornado. It was written that way." "I'll tell you why Superman died in BvS. It was written that way." "I'll tell you why the world is riding around the Sun on the back of a giant turtle. It was written that way."

"Wow," looks like Monker needs more baby talk. Yeah, it was written that way — to nerf! Because Iron Man MkI (now a long time ago) took on Iron Monger. He's punched "normal" humans and sent them spinning through the air like tops. Briefcase-Iron Man caught Ivan Vanko's energy whips (which sliced a car in half like cheese mere moments earlier) and used them against him. So two super-athletes — who still aren't quite superhuman — just take him down? Notice how Cap could only beat Spider-Man (who is superhuman) by using his inexperience against him. Yet Iron Man has various projectile weapons and repulsors. He may not have been trying to kill Cap, but he definitely wanted to do something to Bucky — and Cap, the soldier, might've even been driven to kill Tony to save Bucky. Because if that's not where the movie was headed at its conclusion, then it was just a big spectacle.

Oh, I'm sure they already have the ending of the Infinity War written.

Well, I would FUQQING hope so since they have all the source material right there in front of them.

Sorry, but I never believed he was dead. See Death and Rebirth above. It's part of the Hero's Journey...over coming something like paralysis makes him an even greater hero.

Like Superman's sacrifice at the hands of DoomZod? Or are you going to unfurl your His death was unearned! flag?

Batman needs less of an introduction than any of those characters.

You are just flat out wrong. Batman is supposed to older and grisly. Nobody knew that Batman.

No, I'm not. His origin is unchanged (and they'll probably retain his well-known Miller origin, too). You're grasping at straws. Plus, Batman got a full intro in BvS to the point now they can make a full-on Bat solo again sans origin (I smell a parallel here, there's an upcoming origin-free Spidey movie), whether they go forward or back in his chronology (they'll probably do both). Ben already has the script.

Also, you need a quick grammar lesson. Batman was not supposed to be grisly. That word means "disgusting, horrible, bloody, repulsive." Like "his grisly murder," etc.

The word you want to use is grizzled, i.e., "a grizzled soldier." Don't quote famous authors and then make such a sloppy grammatical goof.

JL cameos are exactly that.

They are not even really cameos. Hawkeye in Thor 1 is a cameo. JL in BvS is simple 10sec fuzzy blips. They are more like Easter Eggs than cameos.

Travis already got to you with this one. I guess, uh, "you didn't see the full scene." See, the Flash appears TWICE in the film. The SECOND time you see him is in the security footage (which is not "10sec" long, nor a fuzzy blip). Those JL cameos are cameos regardless of the source. We didn't just glimpse a trident or a chrome torso. Those would be Easter eggs.

That is true. But, your original post made it sound like you thought I said the encounter in Parker's house lasted a half hour and set up Spiderman for the rest of the movie.

It doesn't change the fact that you were jabbering and exalting a movie that you had not seen.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Batman needs no introduction. Snyder's Batman at the core is the same Batman EVERY movie director took reference from when it comes to things we have seen before. Snyder gave us a straight adaption of the DTKReturns Batman (so did Burton; so did Nolan) but Snyder added elements of a comic book Batman when it came to his fighting style more than anything and that's what fans wanted to see (as well as an 'Arkham' fighting style.)

Agreed. Batman, like James Bond or Santa Claus, needs no introduction. I know Snyder was inspired by Miller, but I thought Affleck was a pretty traditional Batman (except for the fact that he brands people like cattle).

This is another reason why I thought Batman Begins was fairly unnecessary (same with Hanibal Rising, Casino Royale, and the new Han Solo prequel. Ugh). Prequels are soo lazy.

[RedWingFan]

This thread makes me think that somewhere on the internet, there's a thread about Battlefield Earth being a better movie than Star Wars.

[YoungJRNYfan]

Opinions are crazy and the nature of beasts. Nobody should have differing ones. There is an absolute to everything and everybody should think and feel the same about popular trends The only thing this thread shows is that forums and message boards are used correctly. The CBM genre and its fanboys kind of remind me of Journey fans in a weird way. This place was about as dysfunctional as anything I've ever seen in its prime and it was bands like Journey that gave crazy fanbase's a purpose. Division and flame wars ensued because of polarizing forms of entertainment. The CBM genre is different in ways but the same flamewars ignite within' a form of passion. As "nerdy" as it is, comic book legends and folklore are near and dear to pop culture and we're seeing that issue play out, especially when the two biggest companies in the industry are battling to remain afloat and bounce off one another. Movie studios follow trends. It's a natural progression aimed at creating money making franchise's. It's the fans job to get crazy with it. Social media in general are reminiscent of why you log onto and get involved in message boards to begin with. To debate, criticize, troll and have a topic of polarizing discussion.

Oh, and I've never watched one Star Wars movie. Ever. I never got into it. All that hype for TFA's did nothing for me. That probably makes me an asshole but I don't need somebody to tell me how good it was for them to get me to watch. 'Tis what it 'tis.

[verslibre]