MAJOR UPDATE~~~Superman/Batman film

[Captain Talavar]

Quote:

On the heels of the worldwide success of "Man of Steel," director Zack Snyder is bringing together the two greatest Super Heroes of all time—Batman and Superman—for the first time on the big screen. The announcement was made today by Greg Silverman, President, Creative Development and Worldwide Production, and Sue Kroll, President, Worldwide Marketing and International Distribution, Warner Bros. Pictures.

What do you think, folks? The sequel to Man of Steel will actually bring Superman and Batman together, simultaneously rebooting Batman in the process. I'm excited to see what the new Batman will be like, and who will be cast in the role.

Source.

MAJOR UPDATE: Ben Affleck is the new Batman!!!
(SOURCE)

[Mister Tony Stark]

No thanks. I don't need neck snapping Superman or a movie with him and BatGod fighting and BatGod winning in what will probably be a stupid fight. ******** TDKR and Frank Miller in general.

PS We get this s**t and still no Wonder Woman movie.

[Vartox]

I'm excited!

[Melkitty8]

This is awesome!!!

[Captain Talavar]

Mister Tony Stark

No thanks. I don't need neck snapping Superman or a movie with him and BatGod fighting and BatGod winning in what will probably be a stupid fight. ******** TDKR and Frank Miller in general.

PS We get this s**t and still no Wonder Woman movie.

I "love" how every refers to him as neck-snapping Superman now, as if that defines who he is and how he generally handles a situation. You can tell people really paid attention to the movie when all they do is refer to that. rolleyes

[Wally_West]

I'll believe it when I see it.

[Captain Talavar]

Wally_West

I'll believe it when I see it.

It's not just a rumor, if that's what you're thinking. It's official. The only way it's not happening is if it gets shut down or stalled in pre-production, and I honestly don't see that happening.

[Mister Tony Stark]

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

No thanks. I don't need neck snapping Superman or a movie with him and BatGod fighting and BatGod winning in what will probably be a stupid fight. ******** TDKR and Frank Miller in general.

PS We get this s**t and still no Wonder Woman movie.

I "love" how every refers to him as neck-snapping Superman now, as if that defines who he is and how he generally handles a situation. You can tell people really paid attention to the movie when all they do is refer to that. rolleyes

Of course it doesn't define who Superman is or how he handles situations. WHICH IS THE REASON WHY MAN OF STEEL'S NECK SNAPPING SUPERMAN IS THE ANTITHESIS OF WHO SUPERMAN REALLY IS. The Superman Vs The Elite showed the real Superman, the Superman who would save AND protect us(borrowing the idea from Mark Waid.)

MoS's necksnapping Superman was void of joy, whimsy, and hope. He leaves thousands upon thousands of people to die in Metropolis while he deals with the machine over the uninhabited Indian Ocean. And he never goes out of his way to save people in his fight with Zod until the end where he's supposedly given no choice. No choice....more like lazy writing. And they expect me to want to see round 2 of this with a new Batman? And it's inspired by the vastly overrated TDKR? No thanks.

[Captain Talavar]

Mister Tony Stark

MoS's necksnapping Superman was void of joy, whimsy, and hope.

It wasn't about joy, whimsy, or hope. It was about establishing why Superman doesn't kill, and perhaps more importantly, showing people that knowing the right thing to do in a situation is not easy. One of the most persistent criticisms I see from Superman haters is that they don't like how he always does the right thing, and how that makes him boring. What the film showed, and this scene being one of the big reasons, is that "doing the right thing" is really, really hard when you're not sure what "the right thing" is in a situation. Throughout the film, we're shown a Superman who wants to do the right thing at all times, but there's inner conflict because knowing what that is is difficult.

Quote:

He leaves thousands upon thousands of people to die in Metropolis while he deals with the machine over the uninhabited Indian Ocean.

Between the way it was manipulating gravity and the weird tentacle things it made to fight off Superman, I doubt the military could have stopped it. Said machine was actually was was causing those people to die, by the way, and threatening to kill everybody. Said machine was also creating a gravity field around Zod's ship, which was preventing anything from getting near it, including the ship they needed to crash in order to send them to the Phantom Zone.

Quote:

And he never goes out of his way to save people in his fight with Zod until the end where he's supposedly given no choice.

I'll agree that this bugged me too. In fact, I think it would have made the last part that much more powerful, if we were shown that Superman was trying to save people left and right. Still, I'll have to see the film again and pay close attention to the fight to get a full grasp of it.

Quote:

No choice....more like lazy writing.

That's not quite fair. The world of the film and the real world behind the scenes of the film are different contexts and you're talking about both like they're the same thing. It's not like Superman was thinking, "Zod's almost going to kill that family! If only I was written better!" In the scene as it was written, he didn't have a choice. Zod was going to keep going until he was dead. Could it have been written differently? Of course. But don't mix up contexts.

Quote:

And they expect me to want to see round 2 of this with a new Batman?

They have to use a new Batman. Nolan's trilogy is over. That story had a definitive ending. That ending would become a joke if they didn't reboot, kind of like how Friday the 13th Part 4 is clearly not The Final Chapter. Plus, if they're going to exploit the novelty of seeing Batman and Superman in a movie together, there's no way they'd use John Blake. It has to be Bruce Wayne. That means reboot.

Quote:

And it's inspired by the vastly overrated TDKR? No thanks.

Except it's not. Snyder specifically said they're not adapting that story. They simply used a quote from it as part of the build-up to the announcement logo. Yes, the bat symbol is similar to Frank Miller's design (though not nearly exact), but Superman's S symbol is similar to the Earth-Two design, and we didn't get an Earth-Two Superman with this movie did we?

[Mister Tony Stark]

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

MoS's necksnapping Superman was void of joy, whimsy, and hope.

It wasn't about joy, whimsy, or hope. It was about establishing why Superman doesn't kill, and perhaps more importantly, showing people that knowing the right thing to do in a situation is not easy. One of the most persistent criticisms I see from Superman haters is that they don't like how he always does the right thing, and how that makes him boring. What the film showed, and this scene being one of the big reasons, is that "doing the right thing" is really, really hard when you're not sure what "the right thing" is in a situation. Throughout the film, we're shown a Superman who wants to do the right thing at all times, but there's inner conflict because knowing what that is is difficult.

You're right. Man of Steel wasn't about joy, whimsy, or hope...and it should have been. More than anything else, Superman should be about hope. We have a man who can fly, destroy buildings with his fists or eyes, and who can move faster than the eye.....and what does he do with all of this power? He protects those who can't protect themselves. He is selfless and never uses his powers for personal gain. He's what humanity should aspire to be and can be if they just freaking try. And that's what should have gone into Man of Steel.

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

No choice....more like lazy writing.

That's not quite fair. The world of the film and the real world behind the scenes of the film are different contexts and you're talking about both like they're the same thing. It's not like Superman was thinking, "Zod's almost going to kill that family! If only I was written better!" In the scene as it was written, he didn't have a choice. Zod was going to keep going until he was dead. Could it have been written differently? Of course. But don't mix up contexts.

One, of course he doesn't think about being written better because he's a fictional character who doesn't break the fourth wall. Two, it IS lazy writing and here is why: we're supposed to buy it's snap his neck or nothing. He can't fly off with Zod or spin him around or hell...fall backwards on to his back to the heat vision goes straight up. They wanted to put him in a either or situation and thought "This should do it!" It's either lazy or sloppy, take your pick.

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

And they expect me to want to see round 2 of this with a new Batman?

They have to use a new Batman. Nolan's trilogy is over. That story had a definitive ending. That ending would become a joke if they didn't reboot, kind of like how Friday the 13th Part 4 is clearly not The Final Chapter. Plus, if they're going to exploit the novelty of seeing Batman and Superman in a movie together, there's no way they'd use John Blake. It has to be Bruce Wayne. That means reboot.

My point was that I don't want a rebooted Batman already, not that I wanted Bale or Gordon Levitt to play the Bat. I'm Batted out. And yes, I know he's DC's cash cow so they're going to ride him into the ground so I'm outta luck.

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

And it's inspired by the vastly overrated TDKR? No thanks.

Except it's not. Snyder specifically said they're not adapting that story. They simply used a quote from it as part of the build-up to the announcement logo. Yes, the bat symbol is similar to Frank Miller's design (though not nearly exact), but Superman's S symbol is similar to the Earth-Two design, and we didn't get an Earth-Two Superman with this movie did we?

Read what I said. I did not say based on TDKR, I said inspired by. Two different things. Also:

io9

Yup. Batman's speech from The Dark Knight Returns. Snyder said the movie won't be an adaptation of this graphic novel... but it will be inspired by it. The crowd lost their s**t.

http://io9.com/theyre-doing-a-superman-batman-movie-but-thats-not-851711013

[Captain Talavar]

Mister Tony Stark

You're right. Man of Steel wasn't about joy, whimsy, or hope...and it should have been.

I think I made it pretty clear that I was talking about that scene specifically. As for the whole movie, there were moments of joy and hope in there. Maybe not a whole lot of whimsy, but frankly, I don't think that's a requirement. If this was Captain Marvel we were talking about, I'd totally see your point. That's a character who, unlike Superman, hasn't shown himself to be really versatile and adaptable. However, Superman can run the gamut from being serious and realistic to campy and colorful and ridiculous. I think it's silly to impose such strict tonal limitations on the character, as if he's required to always resemble, say, the Chris Reeve movies.

Quote:

One, of course he doesn't think about being written better because he's a fictional character who doesn't break the fourth wall. Two, it IS lazy writing and here is why: we're supposed to buy it's snap his neck or nothing. He can't fly off with Zod or spin him around or hell...fall backwards on to his back to the heat vision goes straight up. They wanted to put him in a either or situation and thought "This should do it!" It's either lazy or sloppy, take your pick.

The point I was making is, it seemed like you were breaking through the fourth wall from the other side. I know in the novelization, it was elaborated on a bit: Zod wasn't just sitting limp in Superman's grip. He had all he could do to hold him there, and had no leverage to really move him away.

Quote:

My point was that I don't want a rebooted Batman already, not that I wanted Bale or Gordon Levitt to play the Bat. I'm Batted out. And yes, I know he's DC's cash cow so they're going to ride him into the ground so I'm outta luck.

So, you're saying you're tired of Batman in general? I suppose that's reasonable.

Quote:

Read what I said. I did not say based on TDKR, I said inspired by. Two different things. Also:

io9

Yup. Batman's speech from The Dark Knight Returns. Snyder said the movie won't be an adaptation of this graphic novel... but it will be inspired by it. The crowd lost their s**t.

http://io9.com/theyre-doing-a-superman-batman-movie-but-thats-not-851711013

Except he never said it would be inspired by it. There's video of the announcement online. Watch it for his exact words. What he was trying to say was that the dialogue from that book was used to excite the crowd and reveal the Batman connection. And while I love io9, they're not always reliable. This is the same site that ran the rumor that Krypton would not be destroyed as if it was a fact.

[Mister Tony Stark]

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

You're right. Man of Steel wasn't about joy, whimsy, or hope...and it should have been.

I think I made it pretty clear that I was talking about that scene specifically. As for the whole movie, there were moments of joy and hope in there. Maybe not a whole lot of whimsy, but frankly, I don't think that's a requirement. If this was Captain Marvel we were talking about, I'd totally see your point. That's a character who, unlike Superman, hasn't shown himself to be really versatile and adaptable. However, Superman can run the gamut from being serious and realistic to campy and colorful and ridiculous. I think it's silly to impose such strict tonal limitations on the character, as if he's required to always resemble, say, the Chris Reeve movies.

I disagree. There was nothing joyful or hopeful about the film. I suppose that people Metropolis can hope Superman won't engage Zod in a battle that destroys the city.

Anyway, it's fun how you got campy, colorful, and ridiculous from joyful, whimsical, and hopeful. The only two that could even come close is whimsy and colorful...even then, they're not really the same. Also, please explain how you can't have a serious Superman without hope or joy or whimsy. Both can be in the same movie.

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

One, of course he doesn't think about being written better because he's a fictional character who doesn't break the fourth wall. Two, it IS lazy writing and here is why: we're supposed to buy it's snap his neck or nothing. He can't fly off with Zod or spin him around or hell...fall backwards on to his back to the heat vision goes straight up. They wanted to put him in a either or situation and thought "This should do it!" It's either lazy or sloppy, take your pick.

The point I was making is, it seemed like you were breaking through the fourth wall from the other side. I know in the novelization, it was elaborated on a bit: Zod wasn't just sitting limp in Superman's grip. He had all he could do to hold him there, and had no leverage to really move him away.

Put someone fighting you in that same headlock....someone of roughly the same strength. You have leverage. Hell, you have leverage even if they're stronger.

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

Read what I said. I did not say based on TDKR, I said inspired by. Two different things. Also:

io9

Yup. Batman's speech from The Dark Knight Returns. Snyder said the movie won't be an adaptation of this graphic novel... but it will be inspired by it. The crowd lost their s**t.

http://io9.com/theyre-doing-a-superman-batman-movie-but-thats-not-851711013

Except he never said it would be inspired by it. There's video of the announcement online. Watch it for his exact words. What he was trying to say was that the dialogue from that book was used to excite the crowd and reveal the Batman connection. And while I love io9, they're not always reliable. This is the same site that ran the rumor that Krypton would not be destroyed as if it was a fact.

He must have said at some time. You do realize that press talks to these guys after the panel too, right?

Slashfilm

Lest there be any confusion, this film is not an adaptation of Miller’s story. Snyder explicitly said “we’re not adapting this thing, but it is the thing that will help us tell that story.” So while the logo he showed on screen, pictured above, uses the bat logo design from Miller’s work, this won’t quite be a direct adaptation. The thing to take away is likely that there will be a conflict between Batman and Superman, and that it might not end well for Supes.

http://www.slashfilm.com/zack-snyder-will-direct-supermanbatman-movie-inspired-by-frank-millers-the-dark-knight-returns/

Try Googling it...a lot more sites besides i09 are saying it. And by the way, Snyder has repeatedly said he wants to do TDKR in film form. A MoS sequel inspired by it will probably the closest he gets.

[Captain Talavar]

Mister Tony Stark

He must have said at some time. You do realize that press talks to these guys after the panel too, right?

Slashfilm

Lest there be any confusion, this film is not an adaptation of Miller’s story. Snyder explicitly said “we’re not adapting this thing, but it is the thing that will help us tell that story.” So while the logo he showed on screen, pictured above, uses the bat logo design from Miller’s work, this won’t quite be a direct adaptation. The thing to take away is likely that there will be a conflict between Batman and Superman, and that it might not end well for Supes.

http://www.slashfilm.com/zack-snyder-will-direct-supermanbatman-movie-inspired-by-frank-millers-the-dark-knight-returns/

Try Googling it...a lot more sites besides i09 are saying it. And by the way, Snyder has repeatedly said he wants to do TDKR in film form. A MoS sequel inspired by it will probably the closest he gets.

I'm aware that press talks to them after the panel. And not once was that reported. Any site saying this is quoting what he said at the panel, and then reading too much into it. It should be clear that what he said refers to the idea of revealing Batman's presence in the film. At the most, he's alluding to the idea that they'll be in conflict. But there's nothing - NOTHING - so far which says the film will be inspired by TDKR. I use the internet too. I've seen the sites. Nothing's been said about it beyond that announcement and the official press release, which also never mentions being inspired by TDKR. No one has talked to Snyder about it since.

And again, that bat logo design is A) not the same as Miller's logo, and B) not an indicator of plot. I pointed out that the Superman symbol they used in Man of Steel closely resembles Earth-Two Superman, and you neglected to acknowledge that this in no way indicated that the film would be based on or inspired by said iteration of the character.

[Mister Tony Stark]

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

He must have said at some time. You do realize that press talks to these guys after the panel too, right?

Slashfilm

Lest there be any confusion, this film is not an adaptation of Miller’s story. Snyder explicitly said “we’re not adapting this thing, but it is the thing that will help us tell that story.” So while the logo he showed on screen, pictured above, uses the bat logo design from Miller’s work, this won’t quite be a direct adaptation. The thing to take away is likely that there will be a conflict between Batman and Superman, and that it might not end well for Supes.

http://www.slashfilm.com/zack-snyder-will-direct-supermanbatman-movie-inspired-by-frank-millers-the-dark-knight-returns/

Try Googling it...a lot more sites besides i09 are saying it. And by the way, Snyder has repeatedly said he wants to do TDKR in film form. A MoS sequel inspired by it will probably the closest he gets.

I'm aware that press talks to them after the panel. And not once was that reported. Any site saying this is quoting what he said at the panel, and then reading too much into it. It should be clear that what he said refers to the idea of revealing Batman's presence in the film. At the most, he's alluding to the idea that they'll be in conflict. But there's nothing - NOTHING - so far which says the film will be inspired by TDKR. I use the internet too. I've seen the sites. Nothing's been said about it beyond that announcement and the official press release, which also never mentions being inspired by TDKR. No one has talked to Snyder about it since.

And again, that bat logo design is A) not the same as Miller's logo, and B) not an indicator of plot. I pointed out that the Superman symbol they used in Man of Steel closely resembles Earth-Two Superman, and you neglected to acknowledge that this in no way indicated that the film would be based on or inspired by said iteration of the character.

Forget the logo. I could care less about the logo. Look at the quote in the Slashfilm article. They're quoting that 'Snyder explicitly said “we’re not adapting this thing, but it is the thing that will help us tell that story.”'

You're saying that they made that up wholesale? They never said he said it specifically DURING the panel. There's no chance this quote is after the panel? You seem awful sure.

[Captain Talavar]

Mister Tony Stark

Captain Talavar

Mister Tony Stark

He must have said at some time. You do realize that press talks to these guys after the panel too, right?

Slashfilm

Lest there be any confusion, this film is not an adaptation of Miller’s story. Snyder explicitly said “we’re not adapting this thing, but it is the thing that will help us tell that story.” So while the logo he showed on screen, pictured above, uses the bat logo design from Miller’s work, this won’t quite be a direct adaptation. The thing to take away is likely that there will be a conflict between Batman and Superman, and that it might not end well for Supes.

http://www.slashfilm.com/zack-snyder-will-direct-supermanbatman-movie-inspired-by-frank-millers-the-dark-knight-returns/

Try Googling it...a lot more sites besides i09 are saying it. And by the way, Snyder has repeatedly said he wants to do TDKR in film form. A MoS sequel inspired by it will probably the closest he gets.

I'm aware that press talks to them after the panel. And not once was that reported. Any site saying this is quoting what he said at the panel, and then reading too much into it. It should be clear that what he said refers to the idea of revealing Batman's presence in the film. At the most, he's alluding to the idea that they'll be in conflict. But there's nothing - NOTHING - so far which says the film will be inspired by TDKR. I use the internet too. I've seen the sites. Nothing's been said about it beyond that announcement and the official press release, which also never mentions being inspired by TDKR. No one has talked to Snyder about it since.

And again, that bat logo design is A) not the same as Miller's logo, and B) not an indicator of plot. I pointed out that the Superman symbol they used in Man of Steel closely resembles Earth-Two Superman, and you neglected to acknowledge that this in no way indicated that the film would be based on or inspired by said iteration of the character.

Forget the logo. I could care less about the logo. Look at the quote in the Slashfilm article. They're quoting that 'Snyder explicitly said “we’re not adapting this thing, but it is the thing that will help us tell that story.”'

You're saying that they made that up wholesale? They never said he said it specifically DURING the panel. There's no chance this quote is after the panel? You seem awful sure.

That quote isn't from after the panel. That quote is from the panel. Watch the video. Here, I'll post it for you so you can see for yourself:

http://youtu.be/F205NTr04-k

He is clearly talking about trying to find something cool from the comics to hype up the big announcement, and that quote from TDKR is what they went with. He didn't want to just say "we're doing World's Finest next" or "the sequel is going to have Batman in it", he wanted to use something from the comics (in this case dialogue) to just hint at it a bit before the logo came up. He's not talking about "that story" being TDKR, he's talking about the idea of Superman and Batman together, and maybe the idea of Superman and Batman being in conflict. That's it.