I know where it hasn't been...


UP BEN AFLUCKS ASS!!!!

I think it's pretty clear what that suit was, who wore it, and what it signifies if you've read Death in the Family and/or The Dark Knight Returns...especially with Superman's line that "the bat is dead".

In fact, the movie's visuals/scenes and dialogue reminded me so much of TDK that they should have just made a straight-up film adaptation of TDK. (Maybe they didn't want to pay Frank Miller royalties for the movie?)

I think the animated adaptation proved that it's not a good idea. I think it lost a lot in transition to movie form. Also, it would have to be set in the 80s, so that could not work for a Man of Steel sequel. And finally, there really isn't a way to make that story a set up for the Justice League.

Just got back from the movie today. Was okay in that it entertained me while I watched it, and now the aftermath is somewhere between "meh" and whatever. I don't have the mental energy to actively hate a movie, just that it didn't leave anything memorable with me. I'm glad I wasn't the one who paid for the ticket, though :D.

Hilariously enough, Ben Affleck as Batman/Bruce Wayne was some of the better parts of the movie. Definitely an improvement over Bale. The actual B vs S bit of the movie turned out to be anticlimactic and boring as hell...and the way it ends and they make up is the stupidest thing ever.

Also funny how they tried to be apologising for all the issues people had with Man of Steel, but then repeated them anyhow. The same destruction porn as before, but this time, there was always some throwaway line beforehand like "Oh, they landed on an abandoned island now!" or "Oh, it is night now, so the office building is empty!" (so no possible casualties).

Oh, and they crammed WAY too much universe-building into it. It would be fine if it was subtly done, and didn't interfere with the main story of the movie itself, but that wasn't always the case here. SEVERAL times throughout the movie they just randomly inserted a scene that had absolutely nothing to do with anything in the movie at all, and would just serve to confuse everything by creating weird plot threads that never get understood, and then never get resolved. The kind that makes me WANT their movies to fail because they're taking it for granted that this one will be so great that OF COURSE there're going to be follow-ups where all this is explained.

I actually forgot that they made an animated version of DKR; thanks for reminding me, I'll have to check it out.

It ain't cognitive dissonance, it's just being a fan of batman. POW! BLAM! Take that bad guy! SLAM! OWW!

"Gal Gadot ad-libbed the smirk Wonder Woman does as she battles Doomsday in the climax." - Imdb trivia

I love little bits of stuff like that. The kiss at the end of Edge of Tomorrow was unscripted as well.

I really don't see why. Batman realised that he's about to kill a man who was just trying to protect his mother. He basically realised he's become closer to the guy shot his parents, than the Batman who was supposed to prevent such things from happening. That's why he throws the kryptonite spear away with such disgust. And Superman... isn't that who he's always been, the man trusts people, gives people a chance to do better? He wouldn't be much of Superman if he didn't see that change in Batman and didn't give him a chance.

I guess I just didn't see it portrayed like that. To me it just seemed like "My mother was Martha too! I guess you're just a person with a mother like me, lets be friends!"

And as for the Superman in this universe, I've had to explain to myself, and understand that this isn't the same character I've known since childhood as "Superman"- instead he kills people, is all mopey and morose, doesn't seem to have been instilled with the same values by his parents (even in this one he has a conversation with his mother where she essentially goes "Save people, don't save people, do whatever YOU want to do"), so I can't make any judgements as to what Superman does...

To me it was pretty clear. This is a character driven movie, and that driving character is Batman. It's really about his character arc, that starts with him already older, bitter, and disilusioned (like I said here), and goes on driving him over the edge, up to this point when he really is saved from himself at the very last moment.

I don't mean it to be in any way offensive (one of my friends had pretty much the exact same problem with it you described), but maybe you should watch the movie again (at least once it's on DVD). There really is much more to this movie, at least character-wise, than people give it credit for, and I think more than people were expecting, which is why they didn' pay attention where it counts and are left complaining about things they just didn't get.

Yeah, it's not like the comics Superman at all... oh, wait. Seriously, how many times are we going to have to go over the fucking Zod thing? It's really not like there was any alternative. How many times does this need to be explained?

And isn't this exactly right? It has to be what he wants to do. What he feels is the right thing to do. Not due to some sense of debt or obligation. It's a legitimate argument. At the very least it's a legitimate argument to make. Again, it's just complaining about the movie daring to actually raise some questions about the character, rather than just follow a tired cliche of a always smiling Superman with no issues or human doubt. If Superman has an arc here, it's emobodied by those two conversations with his parents (or rather his mom and the memory of his father). It's easy to be a hero when everyobody loves you for it and when there is no downside to your actions. But this isn't the silver age universe. There are going to be poeple that hate him, and there are going to be consequence to everything he does. If he can't deal with that, or doesn't think it worth it, it's best he quit the superhero thing. He doesn't, and in the end face the ultimate consequence. If that's not Superman enough for some people because he doesn't smile enough, I really don't know what to tell you.

I can accept it's not a movie to everyone's liking. Not cheerful superhero fun, which is all some people want. But I think a lot of people badly misjudge this movie simply because it's not what they want.

Sorry if I get a bit to "ranty" about this. I just really liked it, and the negative reception, and the often misplaced criticism bother me, maybe more than it should.

*babark shrugs*
I'm probably not going to be watching the movie again, even if the reason I didn't get it was that I was "watching it wrong". If the meaning was as you say, perhaps they could've inset or contrasted or flashed to the bit with the gunman firing and splattering the pearls when killing Bruce's parents (God knows they showed that bit over and over and over and over, might as well have done it there) to make it more apparent.

You don't need to explain it at all. I was just giving it as an example of how this Superman is not the same character as has been popularised in the collective consciousness- I've certainly not consumed all Superman media there is, I'm not a comic book fanatic, my three favourite superhero characters are the 3 most well known (Superman, Batman and Spiderman). The only Superman media I've consumed are the movies, some cartoons, a couple issues of the comics, and the novelisation of the Death and Return of Superman (which I actually enjoyed, despite the negative reception the whole bit has gotten). I'm sure there are several comics over the years where Superman ended up killing people, that wasn't my point at all. I was simply saying that this incarnation is too vastly different from the one most people are used to to make judgements like "Superman trusts people and gives them a chance to do better, right?"

I'm probably not the best target of your rant :D. I'm not very knowledgeable on the subject, and was quite ambivalent towards the movie.

I actually loved how dark it was and yes, it was absolutely a Batman movie with some Superman thrown in for a good measure. However, I just felt like both Batman's and Superman's motivations were extremely weak and the titular conflict, lasting for like 10 minutes, was contrived beyond belief and thrown in there just so it can be in the title. ("I don't like Batman because he's a vigilante! As opposed to me since I am ... Well ... Okay, I will shut up now." "I don't like Superman because he's a powerful vigilante! Wait I ... Okay, nevermind, I'll be over here." Yeah, I know, collateral damage, totally something Batman never in his life had to face, right? :-P)

I think the movie spent far too much time on things which didn't really serve much to improve it (Lex, Doomsday) as opposed to parts that could have been interesting (Batman's investigation, perhaps building up Superman's personality into somebody who actually has a reason to care that there's a guy fighting crime in Gotham, etc.) - I think the movie would have been much better if the titular conflict was the only thing it explored, but actually explored it properly as opposed to do the half-arsed job it did.

That said, I digged Wonder Woman.

As in you "digged" Wonder Woman ;)
I completely forgotten that Zod at one point looked like M-Bison from Street Fighter

O_o

I won't pretend it's a perfect movie. I do agree that SUperman's motivations could have been done better, as far as his initial animosity towards Batman goes. On Batman's end however I think it's done pretty much perfectly. The thing is, he is supposed to be wrong. And the reasons he gives out loud are not the real reasons, at least not in full. It's really about what Alfred says- the feeling of hopelessnes that drives good men cruel. Batman was, despite all his training and resources powerless to dave people in Metropolis during the fight with Zod. And that pushed him over the edge, the edge of decades of a never ending fight against crime, that never produced much of a final result, and seen him loose people like Robin and who knows who else. Superman is his Moby Dick. He is his chosen foe, he piled all his rage and hate on that impossible enemy. It's not really about saving the world from Superman, that just sounds better. It's really about Batman needing to punch someone really hard. To either prove to himself there nothing stronger than him, or dying trying. His talk with Alfred about being older than his father ever was etc. pretty much confirm he's got a deathwish. People who complain about Bruce not being entirely rational miss the fact that that's exactly the point.

Well the Box-Office Numbers certainly took a hit in the second weekend:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4173

Yes, to be fair, I did find Batman a fair bit more believable than Superman. But I guess my complaint is kind of part of the bigger problem I mentioned - how the movie's time was distributed. I guess you'll see a lot of complaints about Batman's irrationality stemming from him traditionally being portrayed as a very rational character - and while there were some hints of him being irrational, like the bat branding burned on his victims and the conversations you mentioned, I think more focus on the conflict could help establish this a bit better. And then Wonder Woman would show up and tell them they should be friends and they would shake hands and kids would rush in and start dancing, it would be wonderful.