Author
|
Topic: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Read 284681 times)
|
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15158
|
It can totally work. The guys making it and the suits funding it just have to not be secretly ashamed of the whole genre.
|
|
|
|
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335
|
The answer is simple: these characters "don't work" until someone comes along who can make them work. There is no character in DC or Marvel's canon who could categorically cannot be in a film and be enjoyed by mainstream audiences. Every character is locked up until a screenwriter, director and actors comes along with a key.
I sort of agree, but then I think about characters like Wonder Woman and Green Lantern. Green Lantern's ability is that if someone shoots a round bomb at him he creates a green ping pong paddle and hits it back at them. His weakness is the color yellow. To me this says comedy film, or at least a film with a humorous side. He's a little goofy, even for a movie like Avengers. His super power is being ridiculous. I get that you can not make his weakness yellow and make him create magical machine guns instead of ping pong paddles, but then it's not really the classic Green Lantern any more. He's then just a guy who can create anything. And then there is Wonder Woman. She is basically just a weak Superman who is female. Also she has an invisible plane and lasso of truth. She's pretty fundamentally ridiculous, but also boring. I struggle to think of anything interesting about her beyond the fact that she's female. She's like Paris Hilton - Paris Hilton is famous just for being Paris Hilton. Wonder Woman is well-known because she is Wonder Woman, but her character brings very little to the table. With a character like Spider-Man you have fundamental stuff to draw on. He has some fun powers, the whole "with great responsibility" thing, he's a teenage with typical teenage problems. His origin has been retold a few times but those fundamentals are mostly fixed. Wonder Woman (and Green Lantern) are much less consistent. Wonder Woman is an Amazon, she's made out of clay, she's the daughter of Zeus. She's a peacenik, she's a feminist...there's not much through-line to her character, in the end she's just got a recognizable costume.
|
vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
|
|
|
Tannhauser
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4436
|
That's why a movie comes along that explains how she got the invisible plane, the lasso and her strength. Again, they did it with Thor, they can do it with WW. Maybe it's not an invisible plane, maybe it's a stealth jet. Audiences (barely) bought a carrier that flies thru the air and turns invisible, they'll buy a single plane. Maybe the lasso isn't magical, maybe it's Amazonian tech. "Hey we got this guy tied up with a carbon-fiber lasso, might as well program it to make him tell the truth."
Marvel knew Thor was a tough sell because he's a god of Asgard. Instead they made it so that Asgard is just technologically advanced and the primitive humans considered them gods. It worked.
|
|
|
|
Raguel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1413
|
Does WW even have an invisible plane in the comics? She flies last time I read a WW comic so I don't see the point of even including it.
|
|
|
|
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3888
|
There are many versions of all of these characters in the comics. DC reinvents them all the time. If you go back to the 50s, 60s and 70s comics, the Batman shown in that era, he hasmore in common with the modern Riddler than the modern Batman.
|
2020 will be the year I gave up all hope.
|
|
|
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42629
the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring
|
The problem so far with the Superman lead-in to a Justice League film is that it's ashamed of the character and the genre. "Man of Steel" tried so hard to show that it's "grown-up" and in the process just killed all the fun out of it. I disagree with what you said. Vehemently. For all its attempt at a grittier Superman who kills when necessary, I thought it got the character just right for a modern-day audience. I don't think it tried hard to show that it was grown up - I just thought it tried to inject some actual drama and character growth into what is a very static iconic character.
|
|
|
|
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740
|
I sort of agree, but then I think about characters like Wonder Woman and Green Lantern.
Green Lantern's ability is that if someone shoots a round bomb at him he creates a green ping pong paddle and hits it back at them. His weakness is the color yellow. To me this says comedy film, or at least a film with a humorous side. He's a little goofy, even for a movie like Avengers. His super power is being ridiculous.
I get that you can not make his weakness yellow and make him create magical machine guns instead of ping pong paddles, but then it's not really the classic Green Lantern any more. He's then just a guy who can create anything.
And then there is Wonder Woman. She is basically just a weak Superman who is female. Also she has an invisible plane and lasso of truth. She's pretty fundamentally ridiculous, but also boring. I struggle to think of anything interesting about her beyond the fact that she's female. She's like Paris Hilton - Paris Hilton is famous just for being Paris Hilton. Wonder Woman is well-known because she is Wonder Woman, but her character brings very little to the table.
With a character like Spider-Man you have fundamental stuff to draw on. He has some fun powers, the whole "with great responsibility" thing, he's a teenage with typical teenage problems. His origin has been retold a few times but those fundamentals are mostly fixed.
Wonder Woman (and Green Lantern) are much less consistent. Wonder Woman is an Amazon, she's made out of clay, she's the daughter of Zeus. She's a peacenik, she's a feminist...there's not much through-line to her character, in the end she's just got a recognizable costume.
Actually, the original Green Lantern's weakness was wood, not the color yellow. And Wonder Woman originally was just as strong as the original Superman (Superman became stronger and more ridiculous over time), and she also had telepathy, ESP, astral projection and a bondage theme both with the lasso and with her propensity for ending up tied up or shackled herself. The invisible plane didn't come until later. By the way William Marston, the creator of Wonder Woman, is quite a character himself. He's the inventor of the lie detector and lived in a polygamous relationship with two women.
|
Over and out.
|
|
|
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590
|
Nothing wrong with a strong woman who likes being tied up.
|
~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
|
|
|
Phildo
|
Not very strong, then, is she?
|
|
|
|
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590
|
Don't make me get into BDSM psychology....
|
~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
|
|
|
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472
|
Don't make me get into BDSM psychology....
Please do, that sounds like fascinating discussion.
|
"See? All of you are unique. And special. Like fucking snowflakes." -- Signe
|
|
|
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11840
|
I like the idea of the polygraph being invented by a polymath polygamist, and resolve never to look it up so as to avoid disappointment.
I choose to imagine the original prototype being made entirely out of polyester.
|
"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson "Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
|
|
|
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536
|
There are many versions of all of these characters in the comics. DC reinvents them all the time.
This. As others have said, they can make it work if they take it seriously. The audience will follow along. That includes the neckbeards who invariably only like one specific depiction of that character, and probably the one few others know about. There's a different between loving a character and being open minded enough to love the brand (which requires understanding the difference ) The problem so far with the Superman lead-in to a Justice League film is that it's ashamed of the character and the genre. "Man of Steel" tried so hard to show that it's "grown-up" and in the process just killed all the fun out of it. I disagree with what you said. Vehemently. For all its attempt at a grittier Superman who kills when necessary, I thought it got the character just right for a modern-day audience. I don't think it tried hard to show that it was grown up - I just thought it tried to inject some actual drama and character growth into what is a very static iconic character. And this. A slightly optimistic/niave Superman who still steps up and does the right thing. But without Richard Pryor or one dimensional cookie cutout boy from the last reinvention. They did well.
|
|
|
|
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15158
|
Green Lantern is an interesting case. If you strip away dumb shit like "his weakness is wood/yellow" and say, "This is a story about space cops who have magic rings that can do almost anything" and ask the question, "What keeps someone with a magic ring from being bad?" and "if the magic ring is only limited by your imagination, but when you first get it your imagination is kind of limited" those two things might make for an interesting story when you put them together. (E.g., on question 1: why isn't everyone Sinestro? and on the second, "what gives you enough imagination to actually use a ring like that?")
It's all a matter of thinking of what's essential and not essential. Weakness to yellow or whatever is non-essential.
|
|
|
|
NowhereMan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7353
|
Plus it gives an interesting tension with Batman if you're looking at a JL movie. On the one hand you've got the ultimate vigilante with a moral code who's unashamedly doing what he thinks is right and fuck anyone that disagrees. On the other hand you've got someone working within the system that's been empowered by the law but also clearly shows how external and 'alien' that kind of system is to those it's enforced on. So you can get a healthy bit of back and forth with GL criticising Batman for working outside the law and Batman questioning where the right to set laws comes from that makes GL any better.
Ultimately though I think the point about DC movie producers and directors being a little embarrassed by the spandex is true and they're looking for movies that either try and cover the whole cape thing up with grittiness or just go 'fuck it' and ignore plot and acting in favour of spectacle. Thing is I don't think the Dark Knight style gritty atmosphere would work particularly well for a team up movie, especially taking into account the characters that would be teaming up. DC heroes have always been more archetypal and super while Marvel focused a bit more on relatable figures. Either way can make for an entertaining story but the threat for a JL type team up would require something huge. Any pretence at realism would have to go out the window, although at the same time making it cartoonishly silly would kill the drama.
|
"Look at my car. Do you think that was bought with the earnest love of geeks?" - HaemishM
|
|
|
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15158
|
JL Batman cannot be Nolan Batman.
He's got to be the "smarter than you, more motivated than you, more driven than you, no matter whether you're from Krypton or have a magic ring" Batman: someone who lives in a world where magic powers are possible but where human will still has a chance to trump those powers.
It's one reason I'm glad that over the years DC slowly came to recognize that Lex Luthor is almost as interesting a villain for Batman as he is for Superman. Because they might actually have some points of sympathetic connection. I gather Luthor is joining the Justice League in the comics soon, which is a pretty interesting twist. Not that I'm gonna read it, given that it's the nu52 DC with all of its stupidity and ugliness, but still.
|
|
|
|
Tannhauser
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4436
|
I was snowed in yesterday so I caught a lot of a Batman movie marathon. Under Burton, Bats was part of a dark circus of bizarre characters. Keaton's mostly understated role helped ground some of this Wonderland fantasy. Not grim and gritty. Kilmer's Batman was looking for love and maybe trying to heal from his childhood trauma. Who better to help than a psychiatrist girlfriend? Clooney's Batman was, well Clooney hamming it up a bit. His Batman was the most 'normal' Batman, he publicly worked with the cops and reached out to a troubled Robin. Of course the movie was ass but Clooney wasn't bad.
Everyone knows the Nolan version and for many it's the iconic Batman. Not me. Grim and gritty get tiresome and three movies was probably one movie too long. Or maybe it's because each movie was so long, that third one was ponderous with a capital P.
Anyway, after much wandering, my point is this. The world can take a new version of Batman without shitting itself. Make him like the JLA Morrison Batman and I'll be happy. He's supposed to be 'The World's Greatest Detective', lets see it.
|
|
|
|
MediumHigh
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1982
|
I never found Nolans batman films grim or gritty. I can say that about Rises more than Knight and Begins is too nonchalant to be anything. For example without the Joker the only real moral squandry is the fake fallout between fox and bruce over the nsa wet dream project. And its only grimy dew to the implications, beyond that the machine isn't really explored, fox quiting out of moral outrage seems kinda off coming from the same man who hands and develops military grade hardware to the questionably sane. At least Rises goes into the depth of despair, sees a man broken and a city lose hope. Sigh in a lot of ways Nolans films did more damage than good to batman.
|
|
« Last Edit: January 26, 2014, 07:49:20 AM by MediumHigh »
|
|
|
|
|
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536
|
Well, it depends on whether you think of Batman has the costumed hero or Batman as the normal guy with a lot of money, motivation and training. Nolan's Batman didn't have some of the genius deduction I personally had gotten used to (felt like Alfred carried that role more than Bruce). It also didn't have basically-an-asshole-all-the-time Batman thing either (I feel like Arrow does that better). And it lacked a whole bunch of other things people would associated with Batman from some era of the comics.
But it did go into the plight of the man well.
I didn't much care for Rises. As a movie, it had some of the same problems of Dark Knight (pacing, length, editiing) but without Heath Ledger to offset the issues. But at least it did try to remind us about the difference between the cowl and the man, by forcing them to be separate for so much of the movie. Like Tony Stark/suit of armor.
These kinds of comic book movies can't really please ardent fans of the comic itself, especially since even that community sub-divides. But, the foundation of the characters can make for good movie going experiences. They have all the hallmarks of summer seat-filling movies, and come with the benefit of having to spend slightly less attention on establishing a story from scratch.
|
|
|
|
sickrubik
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2967
|
These kinds of comic book movies can't really please ardent fans of the comic itself, especially since even that community sub-divides.
Sure it can, but that part of the contract relies somewhat on the movie viewer. I'm a huge bat-nerd, and love the three Nolan films. They are going to be inherently different, if only because someone else is writing him. The characters, as we've pointed out, change to various degrees when there are different writers through the years. A movie version is just one more change.
|
beer geek.
|
|
|
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536
|
Right. But you're open minded to love the franchise and the individual takes on it. I'm similar with Star Trek. For me, if someone tries to take the franchise seriously, that's good enough for me, even if it means reinventing pieces of it.
I was more talking about the neckbeards.
|
|
|
|
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42629
the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring
|
I was more talking about the neckbeards.
Fuck them in their tiny batholes.
|
|
|
|
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3888
|
We're keeping in mind who will be playing Batman, right?
|
2020 will be the year I gave up all hope.
|
|
|
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223
|
I must be the only person on this board that didn't much care for The Dark Knight. I mean The actors were fine but the plot was a ridiculous "The Jokers is so clever that everyone does exactly what he wants then to do even if doing so is retarded because he is such a genius" by a person that saw too many screenings of SAW. It's dark and depressing to be dark and depressing. Hell my sister saw it and we had a big discussion afterwords with my entire family agreeing that the thing was boring as fuck. If you don't by into the premise that the Joker is so clever and amazing, and none of us did because it requires everyone bar the Joker to be acting like idiots for no good reason at all, the movie was crap.
And frankly, The growl voice of Batman became tiresome and ridiculous though the movie.
I loved Batman Begins but this one, no.
|
Hic sunt dracones.
|
|
|
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3888
|
The Batman growl from the last trilogy was - by far - the worst part of it for me. I thought it was a joke when he started doing it in the first movie and was sure it'd be dropped.
|
2020 will be the year I gave up all hope.
|
|
|
sickrubik
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2967
|
We're keeping in mind who will be playing Batman, right?
I don't have the Affleck hate gene.
|
beer geek.
|
|
|
MediumHigh
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1982
|
I hate Begins its such a nothing film. If you skipped Begins for Knight or Returns you wouldn't miss anyrhing.
|
|
|
|
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223
|
I don't have the Affleck hate gene.
I don't either. Granted he has been in some awful films but he did solid work in them. I'm willing to wait and see how he does.
|
Hic sunt dracones.
|
|
|
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306
|
Really, he's the perfect Bruce Wayne, no one can believe he is Batman.
Did we make that joke already? Whatever I'm going with it!
|
and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
|
|
|
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240
|
I hate Begins its such a nothing film. If you skipped Begins for Knight or Returns you wouldn't miss anyrhing.
Whut ?
|
"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
|
|
|
sickrubik
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2967
|
|
beer geek.
|
|
|
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590
|
This could be a level of comedic performance never before seen.
|
~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
|
|
|
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3888
|
Oh, I get it... it is a live action parallel of The Super Hero Squad Show.
Irons as Alfred is intersting casting, at least. But Eisenberg? With Afleck as Bats and Eisenberg as Luther, Cavill is going to look imposing as heck. So will Amy Adams, though.
|
2020 will be the year I gave up all hope.
|
|
|
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536
|
Wierd. But when I think Arrow and I think what's on the rest of CW and I think the audience they're shooting for, it kinda makes sense. Even if it makes me feel old as dirt. We're keeping in mind who will be playing Batman, right?
I don't have the Affleck hate gene. I kinda get it but I don't feel it myself. I didn't hate Daredevil and don't think he'd necessarily do a bad job as Batman. I just need to unthink all the things I did like about Nolan's trilogy. And by way of interesting coincidences...
|
|
|
|
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740
|
I don't hate Affleck but when I think Batman, I think at least brooding. I can't see Affleck effectively brooding. Even Keaton managed to brood. This cast is starting to remind me of the cast of Batman & Robin.
|
Over and out.
|
|
|
|
|