Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ahtman wrote:
So now it is up to critic rating to determine whether a movie gets a sequel? How did Grown Ups get a sequel then? It was reviewed worse than any of these.

Because Grown Ups was hilarious?

Plus Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, and Kevin James are fairly reliable names for the marquee.
Notice how rarely you see David Spade or Rob Schneider mentioned as part of the movie.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
So now it is up to critic rating to determine whether a movie gets a sequel? How did Grown Ups get a sequel then? It was reviewed worse than any of these.

Because Grown Ups was hilarious?

Plus Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, and Kevin James are fairly reliable names for the marquee.
Notice how rarely you see David Spade or Rob Schneider mentioned as part of the movie.

But entertainment was not the standard given, only how critics responded, which in this case was with venom and hate.

I am going to go with "Critics hate fun" for $10 then, Ahtman.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I am going to go with "Critics hate fun" for $10 then, Ahtman.

From the looks of it a few audience members feel that way too.

 Ahtman wrote:
I love that we are at the point where we act like $700 million is a pittance. If it makes you feel any better Batman Begins only made a paltry $350 million, so god only knows why they green lit a sequel to such a disaster.

For what it's worth, had Batman Begins and its profits come after a superhero movie as successful as The Dark Knight, it probably wouldn't have gotten a sequel either.

 Fafnir wrote:
For what it's worth, had Batman Begins and its profits come after a superhero movie as successful as The Dark Knight, it probably wouldn't have gotten a sequel either.

Actually it would, as it usually does, depend on the cost to return ratio.

Other movies that didn't crack a billion dollars that are, or did, getting sequels:

Captain America ($370)
Thor ($449)
Iron Man ($585)

The Amazing Spider-man made over $700 million, like Man of Steel, and is getting a sequel but no one seemed to question why. The idea that if a film doesn't break the billion dollar barrier it is a failure is a fairly silly idea.

Huh. Well maybe it has something to do with DC only knowing how to make good Batman movies then. Because good god, they seem to have problems with everything else.

Just pull out all the stops already, and give us a damn good Sandman movie. Or HBO series. I'll take either, really.

Frankly, it wasn't DC having inconsistency at all...they gave Chris Nolan the helm andhe kicked arse with it. This is presumably why he was producer for Man of Steel.

The guy makes fantastic films. They brought in other, less amazing people for Green Lantern and Superman Returns. That's all there is to it.

 Ahtman wrote:
I love that we are at the point where we act like $700 million is a pittance. If it makes you feel any better Batman Begins only made a paltry $350 million, so god only knows why they green lit a sequel to such a disaster.

Agreed, how could they have greenllit the Dark Knight after Begins bombed like that.

And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.

 Fafnir wrote:
And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.

It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.

 Fafnir wrote:
And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.

But the main reason it was panned by half the critics was that it was actually a Superman the Comic movie, not a Christopher Reeve movie.

It has a 77% rating with audiences. So it didn't bomb and wasn't panned by the majority of people actually paying money to go see it.

Agreed. I think its the first movie I really liked this year.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.

It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.

Well said!

It is possibly also worth noting that NL3 really hates MoS, and, well...

People are talking about what deserves and doesn't deserve a sequel?

We live in a world where C.H.U.D II exists.

Now shut up.


Man of Steel was a decent movie. Batman: TDK was far better, but that was mainly due to Ledger's amazing Joker performance (and an excellent story). MoS was better than Batman vs. Bane, though.

But dude, Carniverous Humanoid Underground Dwellers is a documentary! It had to have a sequel. The truth is out there!

 Alpharius wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.

It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.

Well said!

It is possibly also worth noting that NL3 really hates MoS, and, well...

I've never said that.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Notice how rarely you see David Spade or Rob Schneider mentioned as part of the movie.

"What's the matter Spade? Nobody love you?"

Wonder who is gonna play batman and wonder if they are going to reboot batman or what? Bale could come back and they essentially could tie them in, who knows

http://popwatch.ew.com/2013/07/23/ryan-gosling-batman-superman/?hpt=hp_t3

 Ahtman wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.

It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.

Batman Begins only scored a 70 on Metacritic, IIRC. And I maintain that it was better than that. With some perspective, critics probably would rate it higher now. But if you look, I believe it got a lot of complaints about being "too dark," "not fun," etc.

I agree with you about people's relationship with the character being different than with Batman. Batman's always been a little more mutable, or at least people have been more open to other interpretations of the character. I remember an interview with Grant Morrison in which he and the interviewer agreed that someone could probably do a "gay disco Batman" and somehow make it work. Joel Schumacher tried and failed, but the point remains. They had to break some Super-eggs to make this new omelet, and some viewers were really, really attached to those eggs for whatever reason.

IMO, another major factor with MoS reviews is the director. Some critics just have it out for the guy and view him as the second coming of Michael Bay. His career has certainly been spotty, but IMO both Mos and Watchmen were really solid efforts that involved some tricky material. I figure Nolan could have made exactly the same Superman film and it probably would have been bumped up to a 70 right alongside BB just because he's more in favor with critics.

 pities2004 wrote:
Wonder who is gonna play batman and wonder if they are going to reboot batman or what? Bale could come back and they essentially could tie them in, who knows

http://popwatch.ew.com/2013/07/23/ryan-gosling-batman-superman/?hpt=hp_t3

Bale has said in the past that he's done with Batman, but that doesn't mean he'd say no to the right amount of Dough.

But considering how they ended that Batman franchise, it wouldn't make a lot of sense.

 gunslingerpro wrote:

 ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:
three weeks planning

Batman says in it that he had been working on artificial Kryptonite for years. Batman's real superpower is planning ahead.

So his main superpower is having an unfair advantage in prep time, and making good use of it?

Superman has taken batman apart many more times than batman has beaten him.

Show your work.

Kay.

Out of the 8 times they have faced off in the comics, superman has won 6 and drawn 1(Babel).

Hush: Batman breaks his hand punching superman, then tries to take hostages, while ADMITTING he has no chance.

Superman: King of The World: Batman fails miserably, using kryptonite and prep and has his throat nearly crushed before being saved by green lantern and others.

Sacrifice: Batman's much vaunted anti-superman plans all fail when supes goes rogue, and gets beaten to near death.

Lex Luthor:Man of Steel : Batman gets annihilated by superman, even with both kryptonite and prep

Superman/Batman #2: Batman is nearly killed by future supes, only saved by the past superman

Red Son: Batman is beaten handily by superman's allies, despite all his prep

------

Batman won in DKR, but with help from green lantern, kryptonite and an already weakened supes

-----

Babel is a wash because it was not batman's plan, but ghul's. In addition, batman's plan resulted in a rock that ENHANCED superman's powers.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

It's pretty difficult to argue with Imhotek's man-crush on Supes, but I'm gonna try. Here, Imho, let me break it down: Batman ALWAYS carries a piece of Kryptonite in one of his pouches. Superman knows this and is okay with it, in case he ever loses control, he knows Batman is the one guy capable of taking him down. Do you see any other DC hero carrying Kryptonite with Superman's blessing? You don't? Huh. Maybe it's because Superman has acknowledged Batman's superiority and ability to get the job done, if it ever comes to that. Superman's biggest fear is losing control. Who do you trust to stop you if that happens? Oh yeah...the one guy who can beat you, but who you trust to do so only if 100% necessary.

Batman confesses in Hush that superman is stronger. Nowhere does superman 'acknowledge batman's superiority'. Superman gives batman the responsibility because he trusts that batman has the best chance. See my above list for cases where batman has failed miserably to deal with supes, despite the talk of his planning and kryptonite.

You left out:

Superman Annual #3 (by Jurgens and penciller Dusty Abell; Superman attempts to rid the world of nuclear weapons, but is instead killed by Batman at the government's behest. The plot was the inverse of Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, and contains homages to that story.)

 kronk wrote:
You left out:

Superman Annual #3 (by Jurgens and penciller Dusty Abell; Superman attempts to rid the world of nuclear weapons, but is instead killed by Batman at the government's behest. The plot was the inverse of Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, and contains homages to that story.)

True.

Makes it 6:2:1 (W/L/D) for supes.

 kronk wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:
Wonder who is gonna play batman and wonder if they are going to reboot batman or what? Bale could come back and they essentially could tie them in, who knows

http://popwatch.ew.com/2013/07/23/ryan-gosling-batman-superman/?hpt=hp_t3

Bale has said in the past that he's done with Batman, but that doesn't mean he'd say no to the right amount of Dough.

But considering how they ended that Batman franchise, it wouldn't make a lot of sense.

Yeah, I think you back up the Brinks truck for him, and tell him that he's a great actor and that other scripts/roles will always be there for him. But in the meantime, wouldn't it be fun to put on the suit again?

He's still the Bruce Wayne/Batman that current audiences know. Changing the actor again so soon risks taking things down the Schumacher path. Nolan (and Snyder) have said that the DK movies took place in their own universe. So then this would be an alternate universe in which Bruce also looks a lot like Christian Bale. It doesn't need to have perfect continuity.

Superman just punches gak. Batman actually uses his brain.

Batman won in DKR, but with help from green lantern, kryptonite and an already weakened supes

It was Green Arrow, not Green Lantern.

Babel is a wash because it was not batman's plan, but ghul's. In addition, batman's plan resulted in a rock that ENHANCED superman's powers.

Uhm, no. Ras Al Ghul stole Batman's contingency plans to defeat the different members of the JLA and used them. The rift of mistrust this created between Batman and the other members is a huge element of the story and sets up following JLA stories; it is a key element to the story. Also, the synthetic Red Kryptonite enhanced Superman's senses to the point of being completely paralyzed. He couldn't control what he was hearing, seeing, et al to the point where he was getting all the stimulus at once and his brain was shutting down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rubiksnoob wrote:
Superman just punches gak. Batman actually uses his brain.

And Warhammer ripped off Warcraft, Blizzard should sue.

 rubiksnoob wrote:
Superman just punches gak. Batman actually uses his brain.

This shows a distinct ignorance of Superman, the man who built a machine that could transport the entire planet into the Shadow Zone in case of emergency, from scratch mind you, and forgot he built it because that was just a side project to things like curing cancer. Seriously, his mind just works on an entirely different level from humans. It's why he's held as the ultimate "canon-sue".

He tends to "just punch gak" because he tends to want to just get fights done with. And even then, he's holding back. He rarely actually fights at full capacity out of fear.

IF Clark wanted Bats gone, he'd never see it coming.


And that's coming from someone who used to buy every Bat Family book and never touched Supes outside of crossover events.

Screw Justice League, I'd watch a Kingdom Come movie. That would be awesome.

This seems appropriate here.