|
|
Post by Thai Ladyboy on Mar 26, 2016 21:00:46 GMT -6
The irony is that back when they were teasing it, people were up in arms about Ben Affleck being Batman and Gal Gadot being too thin to be Wonder Woman. Now it seems like the consensus is that they were the only good things about Batman v Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by mh on Mar 27, 2016 18:10:49 GMT -6
The irony is that back when they were teasing it, people were up in arms about Ben Affleck being Batman and Gal Gadot being too thin to be Wonder Woman. Now it seems like the consensus is that they were the only good things about Batman v Superman. a couple of guys i work with really liked it but said it was like a buildup to a second movie and had no basically suspense. no suspense? i'll wait for it on netfliks |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 4:18:44 GMT -6
It's interesting, critics are slamming it like crazy, but I'm seeing posts by comic fans who were a-hating before it was released, but now saying it aint that bad. Better than Man of Steel and pleasantly surprised. I think it could go either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Babu Baboon on Mar 29, 2016 6:28:31 GMT -6
I've got to admit I'm more curious than I was before. I still don't know that I'd see it in a theater. That's as opposed to Tran's Fantastic Four that I wouldn't care to watch even if it ere free.
The critics must be having some effect, though. I read that it has the biggest Friday to Sunday drop off in cinematic history. Then again, with the amount of advanced ticket sales and the size of the Friday box office, there'd have to be a big drop off.
|
|
|
|
Post by mh on Mar 29, 2016 10:02:38 GMT -6
The critics must be having some effect, though. I read that it has the biggest Friday to Sunday drop off in cinematic history. Then again, with the amount of advanced ticket sales and the size of the Friday box office, there'd have to be a big drop off.
i really doubt it will have "legs". on the surface "batman vs superman" just sounds so cool. a childhood dream. but it's liable to be a second week dropoff similar to "jonas brothers: the 3d concert experience"! y'know i think they should have used the flash from the tv series. not that he is that great a choice (too young, not blonde, not interesting looking, etc), but why not try a little continuity for once? one of the many reason marvel is kicking dc's butt |
|
|
|
Post by Babu Baboon on Mar 29, 2016 14:52:06 GMT -6
It would have been great if they had used Grant Gustin instead of that hipster doofus Ezra Miller. The Flash series is great funb ut Zach Snyder hates fun, hope, and joy.
|
|
|
|
Post by mh on Mar 29, 2016 19:18:52 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 21:07:52 GMT -6
Current Critis score at Rotten Tomatoes: 29%
Current Audience score at Rotten Tomatoes: 72%
That's quite the difference. As to the drop off, it's being attributed to being Easter, or something. Apparently people are more "solemn and religious". Latest reports are, after Easter Monday, it's almost made $500 million worldwide and will likely end up making a profit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thai Ladyboy on Mar 30, 2016 11:06:37 GMT -6
Finally got around to seeing it. It doesn't seem as bad as the reviews make it out to be. It's not Dark Knight, Avengers or Deadpool. But it's watchable and doesn't deserve the comparison to Fantastic Four.
Except for Eisenberg's Lex Luthor. That was cringeworthy. I don't have any opinion on Eisenberg's acting ability, but the whole "oh look I'm twitchy and crazy and stuff" bit worked fine for Ledger's Joker but for Luthor it just feels forced and comical.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thai Ladyboy on Mar 31, 2016 5:31:43 GMT -6
Watched it for the 2nd time. Man, they messed up by revealing Doomsday and Wonder Woman in the trailers. If they only exercised the same amount of restraint as Marvel did (or even something similar to what Disney did with The Force Awakens), the movie might have had a lot of OH SHIT moments.
As it turned out, all of those scenes with Diana being all mysterious and stuff lacked the necessary impact, because we all know she's Wonder Woman. Think of how it would have felt like seeing her first appear with her shield and sword if people didn't know Wonder Woman will be in the film. Or even Doomsday's appearance. Would have blown people's minds the first time Luthor said his name.
I mean, it's not like they needed to announce those things beforehand just to drum up hype - it's Batman and Superman in the same film, people would have checked it out regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Babu Baboon on Mar 31, 2016 6:16:02 GMT -6
They give way too much away in the trailers these days. It would have been so much better to let that be a surprise.
I also read that Bryan Cranston was originally considered for Lex Luthor. That should have been a no-brainer.
|
|
eddie
Junior Member
Posts: 59 
|
Post by eddie on Apr 6, 2016 19:42:16 GMT -6
It failed because of Super-baby's daddy with the weird stalker vibe, a bad script with another lame Lex Luthor real estate scheme, and a debt carried over from Tim Burton's Superman that affected the profit margin This is dead on. The problem is Warner Bros. didn't recognize this, they assumed it failed because it didn't have the tone of Batman. |
|
eddie
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by eddie on Apr 6, 2016 19:43:31 GMT -6
The irony is that back when they were teasing it, people were up in arms about Ben Affleck being Batman and Gal Gadot being too thin to be Wonder Woman. Now it seems like the consensus is that they were the only good things about Batman v Superman. Gadot was great, Affleck seemed like he was Affleck dressed as Batman (which I guess he was). |
|
eddie
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by eddie on Apr 6, 2016 19:47:45 GMT -6
I thought Batman Vs Superman was an ok movie and that's a disappointment, should have been a great movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Babu Baboon on Apr 8, 2016 17:29:41 GMT -6
From The Hollywood Reporter:
Warner Bros. Mulls Releasing Fewer Films as 'Batman v. Superman' Stalls
With Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, has Warner Bros. finally turned a corner?
After an abysmal run of expensive under-performers, including Jupiter Ascending, Pan and In the Heart of the Sea, the studio launched its effort at a Marvel-style film universe with the DC Comics movie that had been touted as proof the regime installed in 2013 and headed by chairman and CEO Kevin Tsujihara was getting on track.
But a dizzying 69 percent plunge that followed its $166.1 million domestic opening ($422.5 million worldwide) means Batman v. Superman is not a clear win.
Some competitors say the film may turn a profit but hardly will be the money gusher studios hope for when they pour massive resources into making a giant tentpole with a big star — with a budget in this case said to be in excess of $300 million, and Ben Affleck.
"The biggest problem," says the head of a rival studio, "is that it is not turning [DC] into Marvel. The audience has communicated, as have the critics." One agent notes BvS likely won't get to $1 billion despite launching the universe with "two of the most iconic characters in history." Pointing out that Jurassic World pulled in $1.67 billion globally, he continues, "you can't tell me Batman v. Superman is so much less valuable."
Several sources say Warner Bros. executives were convinced they had the goods with BvS and were shocked when negative reviews began pouring in. Now, with DC movies dated through 2020, the outcome has led to a flurry of rumors that the studio will make adjustments — maybe add a new producer? — rather than allow BvS director Zack Snyder to proceed with the two-part Justice League.
But other sources say the studio has no such plans. One says the filmmakers naturally will evaluate what went wrong with BvS, but when it comes to Justice League, "we're not going to take a movie that's supposed to be one thing and turn it into a copycat of something else."
Warners could have some bright spots this year. Suicide Squad (Aug. 5) might be the fan hit the DC universe needs. The studio will have a potential draw for adults with Eastwood's hero pilot pic Sully (Sept. 9). And on Nov. 18, Warners will launch what seems its surest four-quadrant bet, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.
But, notes analyst Steve Birenberg of Northlake Capital Management, "Time Warner has some work ahead, and it would be helpful if the next movie in the DC relaunch were more widely praised."
It really shouldn't be this hard for the suits to figure out where they went wrong. Fans have.
www.change.org/p/warner-bros-boot-zack-snyder-off-of-justice-league
|
|
