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.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Bland as anything. One decent shot of his anti superman armour. It's a reminder that the film about the most overdone hero vs hero fight in DC is being released. I'm gonna reserve judgement on this one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/17 11:12:01
Don't have high hopes for this. It is a blatant attempt to play catch up with Marvel. If they'd just stuck with Superman and Batman and then evolved from there, it may have worked, but shoe horning the rest of the Justice League into the film is going to be a mess unless it's done via some kind of end credits preview montage.
Having the league show up would be weird since the Superman movie and that voice over seem to imply the world simply didn't Have super heros before he came out of the phone booth. They need a more gradual ramping up. Also new light bulbs. Man it's dark in there.
Looks like my earlier comment was irrelevant, I was assuming the link in the OP was for the 22 second teaser that just showed the suits.
This trailer actually looks decent in so much as the tone/style of the film, so my already-high hopes for it stand. The Iron-bat armour looks cool, and the whole thing looks like it takes the feel of The Dark Knight as inspiration for Batman, so they can't realy go wrong there.
can anyone fill me in on something?
how it is possible for batman to stand up to superman?
short of having kryptonite I don't see anything batman could do.
usernamesareannoying wrote: can anyone fill me in on something?
how it is possible for batman to stand up to superman?
short of having kryptonite I don't see anything batman could do.
usernamesareannoying wrote: can anyone fill me in on something?
how it is possible for batman to stand up to superman?
short of having kryptonite I don't see anything batman could do.
Batman is the wiley veteran...
If any humie has a chance to stop someone like Superman... it's Bruce.
usernamesareannoying wrote: can anyone fill me in on something?
how it is possible for batman to stand up to superman?
short of having kryptonite I don't see anything batman could do.
Flashman wrote: Don't have high hopes for this. It is a blatant attempt to play catch up with Marvel. If they'd just stuck with Superman and Batman and then evolved from there, it may have worked, but shoe horning the rest of the Justice League into the film is going to be a mess unless it's done via some kind of end credits preview montage.
The available information currently points to Supes and Bats in starring roles, with WW in a supporting role. Aquaman is in (probably as a cameo) and so is Ray Fisher, but maybe not as Cyborg yet. Flash isn't in it, and GL apparently even hasn't been cast yet, so he won't be in it. Is it *really* that crammed?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- Marvel *HAD* to do all those setup films just because Joe Six-Pack isn't as familiar with Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, etc. as he is with Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. Marvel sold off the movie rights to their tier 1 properties, and so they had to spend time introducing and elevating the properties they had available to them.
-Do we really need another Batman origin film to set up JL? We really just need to get introduced to Affleck in the role and his personal Batman style and gear, right?
-Do we really need a WW solo film to explain who she is before her appearance in BvS? Note that she *IS* getting a solo film before JL, although that enterprise is in a bit of flux right now.
-Do we really need a Flash solo film first, given the TV series already explaining the character and concept (albeit not the same actor) to audiences?
-Do we need a GL do-over origin film so soon, or do you just reboot it with a another actor in JL and avoid calling attention to the other film? -Do you spend time and resources on Aquaman and Cyborg films now, or do you introduce the characters in JL, give them some chances to steal some scenes, and build on that with future films?
I think WB's approach is sound. The JL really starts with "the trinity," and BvS and the WW film seem aimed squarely at getting that established and right. Meanwhile, Suicide Squad will help set up the world of the villains...which is quite different than the "set up villain, knock down villain" approach that Marvel has taken.
Personally, I'm really looking forward to the DCCU films, in part because they seem to promise less formulaic filmmaking, and a less jokey, cartoony tone.
Marvel has a family. DC has a pantheon. Marvel movies can be fun and flaky. DC movies are stuck dealing with issues like "what does it mean to be a god?"
Manchu wrote: Marvel has a family. DC has a pantheon. Marvel movies can be fun and flaky. DC movies are stuck dealing with issues like "what does it mean to be a god?"
That's nicely put. And then you have Batman thrown into the mix as the mortal among gods, and perhaps in the role of a bridge between the mortals and immortals. Or perhaps as the conscience of the gods?
Personally, I think the conflict in BvS is set up nicely by the events in Metropolis. Batman is a character highly focused on protecting individual lives from smaller threats, which is fitting for someone created by the death of two particular people. On the other hand, you have Superman as a character more devoted to global threats, which is fitting for someone created by the death of an entire planet.
These two men could easily have *very* different viewpoints about what went down in MoS. A little nudge might be all it takes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/17 17:17:38
Yeah, that's probably how Morrison viewed him in his pantheon-styled JLA run. And come to think of it, Morrison's DC One Million Batman made his home on Pluto.
Flashman wrote: Don't have high hopes for this. It is a blatant attempt to play catch up with Marvel. If they'd just stuck with Superman and Batman and then evolved from there, it may have worked, but shoe horning the rest of the Justice League into the film is going to be a mess unless it's done via some kind of end credits preview montage.
-Do we really need a WW solo film to explain who she is before her appearance in BvS? Note that she *IS* getting a solo film before JL, although that enterprise is in a bit of flux right now.
IMHO, Yes. Outside of the US, Wonder Woman hasn't really been a thing since Linda Carter. I can't see the current Wonder Woman film being released before BvS (it hasn't even started shooting yet) or did you mean the follow up JL movie?
WW hasn't really been a thing here since Linda Carter, either. The first run in New 52 was critically acclaimed and sold okay but the current run is not doing so well in either respect.
The Azzarello/Chiang run was epic, IMO. Best WW stuff in years, and maybe ever. It was a huge loss when those two left that book. I'm not even faulting the Finches, although their work hasn't grabbed me at all. It was going to be a tough act to follow for just about anyone.
I thought Thor 2 was a snoozer, but at times I was struck by how much Jaime Alexander resembles Diana as drawn by Chiang. It might have been nice to have her for the WW role, but then my concerns about Gadot don't relate to her looks but her acting ability. And I'm not sure that Alexander is the next Meryl Streep either. So.
Mmmm... nah. Nothing about the themes of the JLA or the characters involved necessitates gritty mc grit grit tonality. To date, the most well Superman movie is fairly light-hearted, with a not insignificant amount of camp.
Comparatively, Winter Soldier was far more "family friendly" then Man of Steel was, despite doing a much better job at presenting mature themes.
gorgon wrote: I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- Marvel *HAD* to do all those setup films just because Joe Six-Pack isn't as familiar with Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, etc. as he is with Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. Marvel sold off the movie rights to their tier 1 properties, and so they had to spend time introducing and elevating the properties they had available to them.
I don't know. I think the difference between Marvel and DC is the "tiers" of characters. For most of the general public, there is a wide gulf between DC's first and second tiers, such that everybody has heard of Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman, with the Flash and Green Lantern coming in just behind. But the second tier of DC? Probably unknown to most people. On the other hand, for Marvel, the distance between Tier 1 and 2 is very short and often fluid. Over the years, 1s have to drifted down to 2, and 2s have gone up to 1, and back and forth, so that more of the Marvel characters are a bit more in the public knowledge as they've waxed and waned in popularity, but not as firmly entrenched as DC's big three. Everybody knows Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman, But there are a lot of people who know about Iron Man, while others know Thor, others know X-Men, others know Spiderman, others know Captain Americs, others know the Hulk, etc. I think there is a greater awareness of Marvel's stable of characters, but not as much knowledge about all of the names, where there is less awareness of DC's stable, but greater knowledge of the biggest names in it.
I think I may have rambled a bit there and possibly even confused myself with what I was trying to say.
Something else to add, is that Marvel did have to make the movies to establish the characters, because they weren't really established yet, so they had a clean slate to work from for most of them. DC, on the other hand, will have to labor under the shadows of what has come before. For many, Christopher Reeve will always be Superman. Adam West, Michael Keaton, or Christian Bale will always be Batman. Linda Carter will always be Wonder Woman. And so on. Of course, now, RDJ will always be Iron Man, Samuel L. Jackson will always be Nick Fury, etc.
I'm not even sure what I was trying to say there, either. It's late for me, sorry, past my bedtime.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
The tier thing, that poses some interesting questions. I mean, a lot of people know who Aquaman is but that knowledge is also colored by the idea that he is not very interesting/kind of absurd. So is he still Tier 1?
The greater awareness of Marvel characters is sort of the product of Disney's huge investment. Eight years ago, Iron Man was practically nobody.
, this one looks good!
