Batman v Superman - Now with spoilers and plot discussion!

[Purple]

Purple, you have no right to expect to enjoy things you don't care about and are too unmotivated to learn about.

Of course I do. If I am to be expected to pay to see a movie than I have every right to also expect that movie provide me with an enjoyable experience. If I care about the character or not is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion.

After all, as far as the people selling this stuff are concerned my money is as good as yours. And if my money is than so is my opinion.

[Elheru Aran]

But how are you going to know whether the movie is even to your taste at all if you refuse to do anything but look up the very title?

And more to the point: If you want movies that are more to your taste, would not you prefer to not waste your money on movies that you don't enjoy, and by your ticket purchases help finance the studios that DO make movies that you enjoy, in the hopes that they would make more?

[Purple]

I don't need to know anything about the character to achieve that. All I have to do is wait a week or so to see the reviews before I decide if I want to buy a ticket. Or, you know, ask someone whos been to watch it.

[Batman]

Purple, you have no right to expect to enjoy things you don't care about and are too unmotivated to learn about.

Of course I do. If I am to be expected to pay to see a movie than I have every right to also expect that movie provide me with an enjoyable experience.

No. You do not. You pay to see movie X. The theatre shows you movie X. They fulfilled their end of the deal. Figuring out if you'd like or even want to watch X is not the theatre's job.

[The Romulan Republic]

The Marvel movies have always been a nice balance of fun and seriousness.

I'm totally up for a grander, more operatic take on superheroes as BvS was attempting to do, but for fucks sake, a smile every now and then wouldn't hurt. But really, the main problem with the movies was trying g to cram in one film what Marvel did over 5-6. Overall I enjoyed it though, I'd give it a 7/10. I'll give the Ultimate Cut a go.

You can fit a lot of material into a good film if you have a good writer/editor (sadly, Batman v Superman felt like a very clumsily edited film to me).

Likewise, you can introduce an entire universe/build an entire team in one film (the first X-Men basically did, and is generally regarded as a success I believe).

However, its fair to say that this film was basically at least three or four major stories in one- it was a Superman II/Death of Superman film, a Batman origin film, a Batman vs Superman film, and a Justice League origin film in one.

I think, for one thing, that the film might have worked a little better if we'd had a standalone Batman film before this. Or spent a bit more time on who he was before Metropolis. Because we get this very dark Batman, who's honestly a little hard to sympathize with sometimes, and while we get hints that he was a different man before Metropolis, and before the Joker, we don't really see that much. And we get these sort of out of context glimpses of his past.

[Purple]

Purple, you have no right to expect to enjoy things you don't care about and are too unmotivated to learn about.

Of course I do. If I am to be expected to pay to see a movie than I have every right to also expect that movie provide me with an enjoyable experience.

No. You do not. You pay to see movie X. The theatre shows you movie X. They fulfilled their end of the deal. Figuring out if you'd like or even want to watch X is not the theatre's job.

What does the theater have to do with it? They are just the resaler like a grocery store. The people who are to heed the opinions of paying customers are the ones producing the product being sold. And that's the film studios.

[Batman]

And how does that change anything? The studios say they'll give you movie X. They deliver movie X. Again, that X is not the movie you wanted isn't the studio's problem.

[Simon_Jester]

Purple, you have no right to expect to enjoy things you don't care about and are too unmotivated to learn about.

Of course I do. If I am to be expected to pay to see a movie than I have every right to also expect that movie provide me with an enjoyable experience. If I care about the character or not is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion.

After all, as far as the people selling this stuff are concerned my money is as good as yours. And if my money is than so is my opinion.

If you are too lazy and unmotivated and stupid to do independent research before deciding whether or not to pay for something...

Then as far as the people selling this stuff are concerned, you are a sucker they can get money out of whether you like their product or not. Your opinion doesn't matter at all to them, because you don't actually have one. All you have is whining after the fact about how you didn't like something for reasons a fool could have spotted coming IF they'd tried.

[Purple]

If you are too lazy and unmotivated and stupid to do independent research before deciding whether or not to pay for something...

I would advise you to actually read the thread instead of writing your own narrative. I have no response to your oversight beyond that.

And how does that change anything? The studios say they'll give you movie X. They deliver movie X. Again, that X is not the movie you wanted isn't the studio's problem.

Of course it is. If I look up a review, decide it's not for me and than do not buy a ticket than that is money they do not get. Simple as that.

This is why you see niche products branching out to a wider audience all the time as opposed to pandering to their fan base. I am part of that wider audience. You might not like it because as a fan you'll see your bellowed works pulled away from their source to pander to non-fans. But that's what's going to happen and what does happen all the time. It's why they are making god dam Dawn of War into fucking Starcraft. Can't help it. It's the market at work.

[Elheru Aran]

If you are too lazy and unmotivated and stupid to do independent research before deciding whether or not to pay for something...

I would advise you to actually read the thread instead of writing your own narrative. I have no response to your oversight beyond that.

And how does that change anything? The studios say they'll give you movie X. They deliver movie X. Again, that X is not the movie you wanted isn't the studio's problem.

Of course it is. If I look up a review, decide it's not for me and than do not buy a ticket than that is money they do not get. Simple as that.

This is why you see niche products branching out to a wider audience all the time as opposed to pandering to their fan base. I am part of that wider audience. You might not like it because as a fan you'll see your bellowed works pulled away from their source to pander to non-fans. But that's what's going to happen and what does happen all the time. It's why they are making god dam Dawn of War into fucking Starcraft. Can't help it. It's the market at work.

So, you admit that you do look up reviews. So why the fuck are you talking like looking up some information about a movie before you go to see it is such a bother that your lazy ass can't be moved to do it? It doesn't much matter whether you look up the information before the movie comes out or after, you spend the same amount of time either way.

...you do know we have this thing called "the internet" that will tell you everything you need to know if you go to this place called "google", right?

If I cared enough to look this stuff up AND remember it I would not need to look it up to begin with.

[Terralthra]

Folks, it's Purple. The collective board's discourse would be massively improved if everyone collectively agreed to ignore their posts.

[Purple]

So, you admit that you do look up reviews. So why the fuck are you talking like looking up some information about a movie before you go to see it is such a bother that your lazy ass can't be moved to do it? It doesn't much matter whether you look up the information before the movie comes out or after, you spend the same amount of time either way.

You and I have a very different view of this conversation than.
I'll just break it down for you from my perspective:

1. I complained that movies these days are too dark.
2. You replied "Marvel is lighter than DC".
3. I replied "That means nothing to me because I don't care enough about comics to know which comes from marvel and which comes from DC."
4. You said "Look it up."
5. I replied "Won't matter because I don't care enough to remember and it will all get mixed up anyway because I just don't care."

And this is true. Not just because I don't give a dam about the characters but because I don't care enough to remember which is which in your post. I had to look it up and read what you wrote just to compose this reply. What do you think I am supposed to do? Bookmark that post and look it up every time a movie comes out?

That's the entire point.

The entire point I was making is that as a metric for good vs bad in movies for me the Marvel vs DC divide is meaningless. I newer said I do not use other ways of acquiring the information I need. And why would I not? That's just stupid assumptions on you guys's part.

I really do not see how any of you could have come to such a frankly bizarre assumption.

---

I keep being just completely confounded by how you people can make absolutely bizarre assumptions and spin a simple comment into a whole tangent based on this insanity of your own making and than blame me for it! I mean what the actual fuck people?!

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't think you can even close to universally say that Marvel is lighter than DC. That's certainly true of the main Marvel and DC films as a whole in the last decade or so, but going back, the old Christopher Reeve Superman was pretty light and campy, for example (and let's not get started on the '60's Batman series), while in more recent times, X-Men (comics are Marvel, even if the film rights are licensed to Fox) can get pretty serious and grim at times (not many superhero movies open in Nazi death camp).

As a very general rule of thumb, at least in modern times-Batman=dark, Superman=light to slightly dark, X-men=serious but not grimdark (unless its Deadpool, in which case its dark but utterly removed from seriousness), and MCU films=all ages popcorn flicks.

[Crown]

I have seen the Ultimate Cut (multiple times). Ask me anything.

[Crazedwraith]

Is there more to their reconciliation than 'our mothers have the same name'?

[Crown]

Is there more to their reconciliation than 'our mothers have the same name'?

The best way to answer this is there are two types of insertions in the Ultimate Cut;

1. Brand new scenes
2. Same scenes with a little bit more (your milage will vary)

This plays out just the same as in the original cut but there is a little bit more of all their scenes together (and other scenes which are influenced by it). So in short; no different but the movie does better at showing Batman's redemption overall.

[Simon_Jester]

Even without that... the answer, Crazed, is "yes," I think.

The "our mothers have the same name" thing was just enough to give Batman pause, enough to make him stop before impaling Superman with the kryptonite spear and actually listen to him. Batman wanted Superman dead, but was willing to hear him out now that he had him in a situation where he could be sure Superman was beaten (huge chunk of kryptonite onna stick, right in front of Supes' face).

And that momentary pause is enough time for Lois to show up, for Clark to explain himself, for Batman to realize that Superman was only attacking him because his mother was a hostage, and that this whole vendetta is in fact a stupid mistake engineered by a third party who seeks both their downfall.

[Crown]

I just realised that I will not recommend the Theatrical Cut (which I went to see multiple times at the Cinema) to anyone anymore.

[FaxModem1]

Does Luthor make more sense as a character in regards to his motivations and actions, especially regarding alien technology?

[Crown]

Does Luthor make more sense as a character in regards to his motivations and actions, especially regarding alien technology?

Lex's manipulations and machinations are laid bare (gives Lois a great more to do too). There's no ambiguity in the Ultimate Cut, Lex is pulling all the strings.

I suspect you're asking about Doomsday in the second part right?

[FaxModem1]

Does Luthor make more sense as a character in regards to his motivations and actions, especially regarding alien technology?

Lex's manipulations and machinations are laid bare (gives Lois a great more to do too). There's no ambiguity in the Ultimate Cut, Lex is pulling all the strings.

I suspect you're asking about Doomsday in the second part right?

Yes, it seemed out of nowhere and a bad idea on Lex's part in the theatrical cut.

[Crown]

Does Luthor make more sense as a character in regards to his motivations and actions, especially regarding alien technology?

Lex's manipulations and machinations are laid bare (gives Lois a great more to do too). There's no ambiguity in the Ultimate Cut, Lex is pulling all the strings.

I suspect you're asking about Doomsday in the second part right?

Yes, it seemed out of nowhere and a bad idea on Lex's part in the theatrical cut.

Hmm.. there is literally one line that was cut out of the TC that's inserted back into the UC that adds more that scene, but I never understood people's problem with that at all. Doomsday was on a countdown to be birthed, Lex could have aborted at any point if Superman can back with Batman's head or Batman had killed Superman and lastly Lex genuinely thought he could 'control' Doomsday "blood of my blood" (which he was wrong about).

Doomsday was literally if all else fails, do this for Lex.

[Crazedwraith]

Mostly I was annoyed that the Kryptonian ship could A) berth an unholy abomination to begin with, b) had only fingerprint security, that can be fooled by chopping them off and sticking them over yours. 3) only has an 'are you sure?' prompt for creating illegal, banned, unholy abominations.

I maybe forgetting if Lex had to do a lot more jury rigging to get that happening.

[Elheru Aran]

Mostly I was annoyed that the Kryptonian ship could A) berth an unholy abomination to begin with, b) had only fingerprint security, that can be fooled by chopping them off and sticking them over yours. 3) only has an 'are you sure?' prompt for creating illegal, banned, unholy abominations.

I maybe forgetting if Lex had to do a lot more jury rigging to get that happening.

How much time had he been able to work on that ship? It almost seemed like it'd only been a matter of a few weeks or so. That is one complaint I have, I didn't feel like the movie communicated the passage of time very well...

[Crown]

Mostly I was annoyed that the Kryptonian ship could A) berth an unholy abomination to begin with, b) had only fingerprint security, that can be fooled by chopping them off and sticking them over yours. 3) only has an 'are you sure?' prompt for creating illegal, banned, unholy abominations.

I maybe forgetting if Lex had to do a lot more jury rigging to get that happening.

A) Never bothered me. Man of Steel clearly set up that this universe Kryptonian technology is based heavily on genetic manipulation and not crystals; there was 9ft tall Kryptonina on Zod's crew, he was clearly engineered plus of course the whole genetic predetermination birth control thing.

B) Yeah but this was just a scout ship that was thousand's of years old. It wasn't something that they would have considered top secret. I kinda looked at it like their version of the ISS versus say a nuclear submarine.

C) He had Zod's override command key to get all that done; could be the supreme general of all armed forces in Krypton had special leeway if he could justify it for security reasons.