Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

1356748

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,305
    Forum Member
    Naa_KwaKai wrote: »
    Oh dear. This movie is already sounding like a hot mess with all the casting controversies and now this? lol

    I think the opposite, the delay is a positive sign. At least this shows that they're taking their time with it rather than rushing it out, which is what i thought they were doing when they announced the 2015 date.
  • Naa_KwaKaiNaa_KwaKai Posts: 1,883
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CJClarke wrote: »
    I think the opposite, the delay is a positive sign. At least this shows that they're taking their time with it rather than rushing it out, which is what i thought they were doing when they announced the 2015 date.

    But why have they not put out a Flash or Wonder Woman movie in the meantime? They could have put out a Flash move this year and a Green Lantern next year. They seem really hesitant and I wouldn't be surprised if MOS gets cancelled.
  • JasonJason Posts: 76,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    To be honest, i always thought the release date of next year was quite a rapid turnaround for such a major film. Just been reading that there are rumours that Affleck has been injured in some fashion which is the real reason it's been pushed back.
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,326
    Forum Member
    ^ the alleged Affleck injury would've set it back a few weeks, and it may have played a part.

    WB press release:
    ...moved to May 6, 2016, allowing the filmmakers time to realize fully their vision, given the complex visual nature of the story. The decision was made following the shift of the start of production to second quarter of this year.
    It beggars the question did they not realize the 'complex visual nature' would require an extra year right from the off?

    Much of the rest of this PR puff piece was an attempt to drum up interest in the film's release date replacement - yet another Peter Pan film (how many does the world need?).

    No surprise that more time is needed I suppose, but this is not looking good at the moment.
  • lordo350lordo350 Posts: 3,634
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pushed back so they can realize their vision? Pushed back because they've seen the script and it sucks, more like.

    I mean, come on. This is Batman and Superman in the same movie! Yet everywhere I go online, all people are doing is criticising it! This should be the movie that EVERYONE wants to see. Instead, they've seemingly done everything they can to make people dread it.

    First, there was the lukewarm reaction to Man of Steel, a film made with sound intentions but just seemed to fail to enact them. Then, they announced Ben Affleck was to play Batman. Sure, they got maximum press for this announcement, but I can't help feeling that's the main intention behind it. I don't want to judge before we see the guy play the role, and I hope he's really good and respect him as a Director, but come on. Was he the only actor they could find to play Batman?

    Finally, of course, the announcement of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, which the internet exploded with. Right now, I'm not sure what the future holds for this movie. It's all over the place; an intriguing project that smacks of studio interference, creating the most money and press being the highest target for them as opposed to making an actual good movie.

    This delay may be good news. They may take this extra time to properly tidy up this flick, get Wonder Woman out of it, and focus on what should be an amazing story between Batman and Superman. But, all I see here is them looking at Avengers 2 and Star Wars 7 and thinking they have no chance in hell of beating either of these movies; after all, they no doubt want this movie to rival the Avenger's takings. All this delay will allow is more time for them to try and shove as much into this movie that they can; after all, this year delay is just giving Marvel even more time to get itself further in the lead, with no single DC movie until 2016!!! Expect it to be called the Justice League before they're done.

    I really, really want to be excited for this flick. But the greed behind it is just too apparent, and to be honest I'm very meh about it.
  • KarisKaris Posts: 6,380
    Forum Member
    lordo350 wrote: »
    I really, really want to be excited for this flick. But the greed behind it is just too apparent, and to be honest I'm very meh about it.

    Me too, but you only have to look at who's writing and directing and producing this thing to hold out any hope of it being decent and /or intelligently written.

    I'm sure they're all getting huge pressure from the high ups with the cash but even still Goyer couldn't write a credible ending to a Jack and Jane book...
  • MotthusMotthus Posts: 7,280
    Forum Member
    BBC article on Batman Vs Superman new release date says that its now going to be released on the same day as the untitled Marvel film in 2016 which could mean a possible geek overload!
  • Naa_KwaKaiNaa_KwaKai Posts: 1,883
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It beggars the question did they not realize the 'complex visual nature' would require an extra year right from the off?

    THIS. John Campea from AMC wonderfully sums up this question (13:10):
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgj7bCnqUDM
    To be honest, i always thought the release date of next year was quite a rapid turnaround for such a major film. Just been reading that there are rumours that Affleck has been injured in some fashion which is the real reason it's been pushed back.

    The Ben Affleck rumour is completely false and 2 years is not exactly a rapid turnaround, again wonderfully explained by editor of AMC theatres John Campea(06:24): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgj7bCnqUDM
    Pushed back so they can realize their vision? Pushed back because they've seen the script and it sucks, more like.

    This.
    Then, they announced Ben Affleck was to play Batman. Sure, they got maximum press for this announcement, but I can't help feeling that's the main intention behind it. I don't want to judge before we see the guy play the role, and I hope he's really good and respect him as a Director, but come on. Was he the only actor they could find to play Batman?

    They brought Ben Affleck to play Batman for secondary reasons - firstly, Nolan approached Affleck to direct Man of Steel (before he turned it down) so there's a feeling that he will have some creative control. We already know that he has brought on his Argo writer Chris Terrio to "tidy up the script". Also, it's rumoured that a condition of the casting was to let Ben Affleck make whatever movie he wants. If anything, he's doing WB a favour.
    I'm sure they're all getting huge pressure from the high ups with the cash but even still Goyer couldn't write a credible ending to a Jack and Jane book...

    He's a hack and Nolan rightly fired him for Dark Knight.
  • trayhop123trayhop123 Posts: 886
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ben has done some superb movies ,,,,,,, my only problem is his range

    i think this is gonna be a stretch for him ,,,,,,,,,,, the problem is im not scared of him

    batman has to be intimidating to thugs ,,,,,,,

    where is he gonna pull that controlled anger from ?

    he'll nail bruce wayne , i have every confidence ,,,,,,, but batman ???????
  • KarisKaris Posts: 6,380
    Forum Member
    trayhop123 wrote: »
    he'll nail bruce wayne , i have every confidence ,,,,,,, but batman ???????

    I don't know where all this anger for him is coming from.

    I very clearly remember the backlash for Keaton and look at how hugely successful he was, not to mention how well liked his Batman was.

    I think it's just too early to judge, especially as we don't know what kind of Batman he'll be.

    Mind you, I felt the same way about Adrianne Palicki as Wonder Woman (and look how that turned out).
  • Naa_KwaKaiNaa_KwaKai Posts: 1,883
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Karis wrote: »
    I don't know where all this anger for him is coming from.

    I very clearly remember the backlash for Keaton and look at how hugely successful he was, not to mention how well liked his Batman was.

    I think it's just too early to judge, especially as we don't know what kind of Batman he'll be.

    Mind you, I felt the same way about Adrianne Palicki as Wonder Woman (and look how that turned out).

    I remember thinking that Dark Knight Rises was going to be horrible because they cast Anne Hathaway as Catwoman. Not only is Dark Knight Rises my favourite cinema experience to date but Anne Hathaway stole the show! I was ashamed. I'm sure Ben Affleck will be great, if anything it's Zack Snyder we should be worried about. What a hack.
  • KarisKaris Posts: 6,380
    Forum Member
    Naa_KwaKai wrote: »
    I'm sure Ben Affleck will be great, if anything it's Zack Snyder we should be worried about. What a hack.

    Now THIS is something we can ALL agree on!
  • trayhop123trayhop123 Posts: 886
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    i have no anger for ben , if you read my post properly i praise him ,,,,,,,,, i just haven't seen him in any role so far where he is believably intimidating

    dont post me in the ''afleck haters camp'' , when im clearly not

    im just concerned ,
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,305
    Forum Member
    Naa_KwaKai wrote: »
    if anything it's Zack Snyder we should be worried about. What a hack.

    Snyder is a decent enough director, especially when it comes to comic book adaptations (Watchmen is one of the best comic book adaptations ever if you ask me, and 300, whatever your thoughts on it, is undoubtedly extremely faithful to the source material), it's when he's a screenwriter that he goes off the deep end. Sucker Punch was abysmal, it was like a 12 year old fanboy's wet dream.

    If the reports are true that Affleck has got his Argo screenwriter Chris Terrio in to rewrite the script, then that gives me hope.

    To be totally honest, i really don't think there's anything to be worried about. Batman is Warner Bros golden goose, and they know what happens if they kill it (Hello, Batman & Robin!), so i'm sure they wont want to risk that debacle again where the Batman brand becomes poisonous for another 8 years. And it's not just the Batman brand that they've got riding on this, it's the Superman and the entire DC brand too.
  • trayhop123trayhop123 Posts: 886
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    good post cjclarke m8 ,,,,,,,, your right they have a huge amount riding on it
  • StrakerStraker Posts: 79,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pushed back a year in the hope we`ll have come around to Affleck`s casting by then.

    Err.....no.
  • StrakerStraker Posts: 79,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CJClarke wrote: »
    Watchmen is one of the best comic book adaptations ever if you ask me...

    Watchmen is the Blade Runner of this generation. Underappreciated in it`s time, it`s reputation will only grow.
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,326
    Forum Member
    CJClarke wrote: »
    Snyder is a decent enough director, especially when it comes to comic book adaptations
    Very much agreed. I thought Watchmen and 300 were both splendid in their own way, and Snyder too much of a high-stylist to be deemed a hack (style being something the true hack director generally avoids).
    CJClarke wrote: »
    To be totally honest, i really don't think there's anything to be worried about.
    Good to be optimistic of course, but the thing is WB are acting like they're worried. I wonder if all this reshuffling would've happened if MoS had done better box-office as many thought it might. They're obviously well-invested in this new DC universe, but maybe MoS proved not to be the start they wanted.
    CJClarke wrote: »
    Batman is Warner Bros golden goose, and they know what happens if they kill it (Hello, Batman & Robin!), so i'm sure they wont want to risk that debacle again where the Batman brand becomes poisonous for another 8 years. And it's not just the Batman brand that they've got riding on this, it's the Superman and the entire DC brand too.
    True, amidst all this they have to get Batman right. Screw him up and it's all over.

    On the plus side - Wonder Woman. Get her right and it's a huge advantage. The superhero genre definately needs more female input and audiences are currently eager for female action roles ('Smaug & Catching Fire). She's part of what makes all this possible chaos so alarming. At the centre are three dynamite characters.
  • Naa_KwaKaiNaa_KwaKai Posts: 1,883
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    trayhop123 wrote: »
    i have no anger for ben , if you read my post properly i praise him ,,,,,,,,, i just haven't seen him in any role so far where he is believably intimidating

    dont post me in the ''afleck haters camp'' , when im clearly not

    im just concerned ,

    We're not...your concerns are reasonable, I personally think he will be great.
  • circlebro2019circlebro2019 Posts: 17,560
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    so much moaning

    snyder: watchmen boring, 300 great, sucker punch ok, MOS brillaint. so i am happy for him to stay on

    goyer-batman begins great,did he work on mos? if so great again, blade great. not a hack lol

    affleck-gets too much hate, i am sure his oscars will give him comfort, a great addition

    i am glad it is delayed by 1 year, it has gone from mos2 to mos2-batman cameo - mos2-justice league. they need time to make it all work and not be a rush job

    i have faith it will be enjoyable.
  • MotthusMotthus Posts: 7,280
    Forum Member
    So Jesse Einsberg has been cast as Lex Luther and Jeremy Irons is Alfred.Two great bits of casting!
  • DandemDandem Posts: 13,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Jesse Eisenberg eh? Fascinating. I can't picture him as Lex Luthor myself, so I'll be looking forward to seeing him in the role.
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,326
    Forum Member
    Irons is a fine choice. Not sure about Eisenberg.

    Then again, he's no stranger to playing sinister corporate goliaths menacing society (The Social Network).
  • pburke90pburke90 Posts: 14,756
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Eisenberg? No, no, no!

    Should have been Heisenberg himself, Bryan Cranston. Eisenberg is too young to be playing Luthor, and he already plays the same type of character in every performance he gives. I think he's a terrible choice.
  • necromancer20necromancer20 Posts: 2,548
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'm shocked to learn that Jesse Eisenberg is 30, the exact same age as Henry Cavill :o

    I always assumed Eisenberg was in his early 20's until today. With regards to the casting itself, I'm fine with it. I'm not too bothered, probably because I'm not really invested in this Batman vs Superman project.
Sign In or Register to comment.