Early impressions start rolling out for Batman v. Superman

Status
Not open for further replies.
You haven't provided a single specific example of why Bale's Bruce was better though. You're just shooting down what other people are using to show that Keaton's Bruce had some depth to him. For the record I don't hate Bale's Bruce, but his Bruce is only solid in Batman Begins and then his Bruce becomes a one-dimensional plank of wood in the sequels while every other character upstages him.

You're talking nonsense, did you fall asleep during the sequels especially TDKR?
 
You need to relax. Luckily there is an iteration of the character for everyone. A lot of people prefer the Keaton movies. A lot of them prefer the Nolan movies.

It really boils down to what your expectations are from what you want to see in these types of movies.
I'm fine with people preferring Keaton. But him being a better Bruce is too ridiculous for me to take seriously considering how 1 dimensional he was. Anyways, we're shitting the thread with this argument.....
 
Because Bruce is truly aware that the world around him is fake and that the real world is far more violent and unhinged and he uses both of his personas to fit in accordingly. nolan verse had the same idea with Alfred wanting Bale to do more of what Keaton was doing...fit into the phoniness.

eh, that might be the idea behind it, but it doesn't play off as well in execution (for me at least). Bale's Bruce feels like he's putting up a facade; Keaton feels like he's uncomfortable in his own skin and in a bit of a daze.
 
I'm sure the cast will be fine. I'm worried about the script and director. I just can't trust Snyder to make anything really good. The closest he's come is the directors cut of Watchmen but he always seems to manage to fuck up a film in some way.

I will try and remain optimistic.
 
Aren't early impressions always almost exclusively positive ?

Yeah but this is more than just a few people. In fact I've been hearing it from multiple sources so far that this is a top tier CBM, up there with the best.

Also even from the NY chief of Variety:

elhHRFa.png


Plus our very own Vernendus and Penguin had positive reviews round up:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198767495&postcount=8348

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198744411&postcount=8117
 
This movie needs the equivalent of the racing thread on the other side. Just keep all the bickering in one place please. It's only gonna get worse when one side is right.
 
The haters backed off of Gal pretty early on after the initial furor died down.

No hate on Gal but she would honestly be last person I would want to play as Wonder Women.

I'm still very hesitant on her playing as Wonder Women, but who knows she could be very great.
 
In the comments:
can't wait to see it, marvel doin it for money, DC doin it for pleasure.

Because rushing a team up movie from which to spin off a crapload of spin offs to make a movie-verse like marvel, isn't doin' it for money...

In all seriousness though, first reactions are almost always more positive than when it properly releases, so i will remain sceptical.
 
No hate on Gal but she would honestly be last person I would want to play as Wonder Women.

I'm still very hesitant on her playing as Wonder Women, but who knows she could be very great.

The last person I'd want to play Wonder Woman would be like... I dunno, Anna Faris. Or Rosie O'Donald.
 
I'm glad to hear its doing well. I'm really hoping this somehow changes people's perception on MoS (which I still defend), since it addresses the fallout of Zod/Supes.
 
Those are some good impressions. I'll admit I've been skeptical but if this movie is done well it will be some top tier CBM. Getting excited now.
 
I'm glad to hear its doing well. I'm really hoping this somehow changes people's perception on MoS (which I still defend), since it addresses the fallout of Zod/Supes.

Just because this is seemingly a better movie doesn't make MoS any better. That movie was bad and will always be bad. It just might be a more necessary watch to fully grasp the context of this movie... maybe.
 
I really had no doubts that Affleck was going to be the definitive Batman/Bruce Wayne because that bar is not high.

Keaton is fun, but Burton, Haam and Skarren had no real concept of the character. They got Bruce Wayne wrong in the very first shot he appears (walking behind Vicki and Knox making amused faces as they criticized his art collection). Their idea of him being "troubled" is him preferring to sleep hanging upside down like a bat, which was just fucking weird. I know opinions are mixed on this, but I don't like the idea that there even is a Bruce Wayne. I like Batman to be Batman all the time, and Bruce Wayne when he's pretending for other people. There definitely was a Bruce Wayne in Burton's Batman.

Kilmer was really flat in the role. It was almost as if he was just doing a Keaton impression, and I think as much as Schumacher wanted to do his own neon version of Batman, he was still leaning hard on Burton's films and sensibilities in Batman Forever.

Clooney... lol.

Bale's Batman had the best films, but could never be considered definitive. It was an adaptation where the central premise was "put this character in the real world and make him fit". Batman is obsessively driven towards being the Batman. He's a genius polymath who has mastered dozens of disciplines to hone himself into a weapon against crime. Batman Begins tells a Coke Zero version of that story. Bale's Batman is dumb, only fights with lumbering Keysi blows and, for two films, wants desperately to quit being Batman so he can crank out kids with his childhood sweetheart.
 
You're talking nonsense, did you fall asleep during the sequels especially TDKR?

I've been thinking about this lately and I have to agree with him...Even Bale admitted to being "surprised" with Ledger's performance as the Joker and thought he should have explored the broken nature that both Wayne and the Joker share...I'm paraphrasing here, of course.
 
Different movies with different expectations. Nolan's movies were thrillers about what drives a man to put on a bat costume. The trilogy were movies with a more character driven plot that pushed characters to their next scenes, sometimes correctly in way of their MO and others by (mostly) using convenient plot devices to get them to the next scene. this is why i have disdain for the Nolan movies. They put in good work into character building and then betrayed them with horrible screenwriting so ultimately, the means didnt justify the end.

'89 and Returns took pride in being able to have a dark tone yet still have fun with the source material and retain much of a comic book feel. They were meant to be spectacles first and foremost and not intended to be some deep seeded psychiatric look into these characters. With that being said, Keaton recognized then in interviews that there was something wrong with Bruce and he made the most he could with the material which did take the time to provide insight in way of dialogue (that batcave scene i mentioned was a glimpse into this). This was never intended to be a look into what drove him to being Batman. By the beginning of the movie, he WAS Batman. With that said, Keaton displayed a contained rage about him across both films. This is why i say it was a nuanced performance. It's in his eyes, his actions, and not explicit exposition.

While Bale had a more character driven performance, it is questionable if it was even a successful one. Again, even Bale himself attested that it wasn't so there's that.
Keaton did not have a contained rage at all, he just played a happy go round playboy. And Nolan's Batman trilogy is far superior to Burtons. Bale saying he didn't do as good of a job as he wanted to doesn't diminish him being better than Keaton's 1 dimensional performance. Bale is one the premiere actors of his generation, him not being satisfied doesn't mean it's better than whatever Keaton at the time came up with.

I agree that the script didn't give Keaton as much to work with, but that doesn't justify his performance which wasn't even great as Bruce let alone a standout.
 
In the comments:

Because rushing a team up movie from which to spin off a crapload of spin offs to make a movie-verse like marvel, isn't doin' it for money...

In all seriousness though, first reactions are almost always more positive than when it properly releases, so i will remain sceptical.

To be fair DC are not even rushing it though. Compare the movie universe line ups:

1) Iron Man
2) Incredible Hulk
3) Iron Man 2
4) Thor
5) Captain America

**Avengers**

1) Man of Steel
2) Batman V Superman
3) Suicide Sqaud
4) Wonder Woman

**Justice League: Part 1**

1 film less in DC universe in build up to team up.

tumblr_nrrhnc9yEt1tlxbdgo3_500.gif
 
Seph's view is one of the most ridiculous opinions I've ever heard, especially as he saw Bale as 1 dimensional and nuanced Keaton as having depth (...).

How was he 1 dimensional? All his scenes with Alfred. His scene with Harvey at dinner is how you portray a nuanced bruce playboy. Rachel scenes. I don't know how the hell someone can say 1 dimensional for 2 and 3 considering Bruce is a different character in both movies.

The Bruce/Alfred scenes in Begins are probably the only solid time I thought Bale's Bruce felt like a real character at all. So if you're going to argue using Bale's performance in Begins then I'll definitely concede to you there, because there he's decently written and has an actual character arc. I think his Bruce sucks in the sequels though. The Rachel/Bruce scenes in Dark Knight are honestly kind of bad (it also didn't help that Bale and Maggie Gyllenhaal had zero chemistry together on screen). I don't remember a single thing about the Bruce/Dent scenes beyond his "I believe in Harvey Dent" scene mostly because I was focusing more on the (way better written) Harvey Dent character.

I'll just give one example of why I like Keaton's Bruce a little better than Bale's. Look at the scene where Bruce first tries to tell Vicki that he's Batman. Bruce straight up struggles to let the words "I'm Batman" come out of his mouth because that's a fucking huge bombshell to drop and it leaves him open emotionally. Ever try telling a secret to someone you care about and suddenly fumble over your words a bit? That made Keaton's Bruce feel a bit more human and in my opinion gave him a little depth because it felt like he was still a conflicted person internally (maybe I'm digging a little deep there, admittedly). Meanwhile, in Batman Begins, Bale has a line all conveniently queued up and ready to go right after Rachel asks Batman what his real name is. (Yes, technically he's Batman and not Bruce in that scene but it's a "Bruce" moment). That didn't really feel natural or convincing to me.
 
I will say, it does hurt one's ego to hear their opinions kind of dismissed outright or lumped into one... aren't all early impressions usually positive.

Doesn't mean couldn't have legit enjoy it!

Have you seen it and given impressions on it here? If so, could you give me a link? I thought your Deadpool review/impressions turned out to be very accurate, so i'd be interested in what you thought about this film, provided that you didn't spoil much.

Edit: Nevermind, found a link to it at the top of the page.
 
I honestly would take impressions from fans with a grain of salt.

I mean wasn't there a time where fans thought the prequels of Star Wars were good? Not to say the impressions are 100% wrong because they could be right.
No. Never. We knew from the moment we walked out of Episode I that something was wrong.
 
Agree withe everything except in bold. The blurred lines of facade vs reality is made clear when you watch him have dinner with Vale, for example, then watch him dance with Selina in returns. One "Bruce" is real while the other isn't. Dude sat in his cave alone and socialized only when he had to.

While I definitely see your point, I think the film(s) may be inconsistent on this point. There are sequences where Bruce is alone and not The Batman, particularly in Batman.

Most of his socializing in Batman is with Vicki Vale, whom he pursues openly.
 
A great example of "contained rage" would be Bale in the penthouse following Rachel's death, with his suit shed across the floor, simmering over his failure without blowing up into hysterics about it.

Nothing about Keaton's performance in '89 was even close. Even during his "I made you, you made me" speech to Joker in the bell tower, he sounds completely cool about it. There's his pretend freak-out in Vicki's apartment when Joker shows up, but that's what it sounds like (and is): someone just playing pretend.
 
My main concern is the writing.

Yeah, this has me the most worried. It's the same writer (David Goyer) from Man of Steel, which had some stilted-ass dialogue. And from the BvS trailers, it sounds like the trend continues: Lex's "three-syllable word" quip, "tell me, do you bleed," "you've never met a woman like me," so many eye rolls in such a short amount of time. Maybe the story will be good, but I'm afraid that dialogue is gonna keep knocking me out of the movie. My only hope is Terrio, who's also billed as a writer, but that hope dwindles further with every trailer I see.

On the plus side, I have such low hopes for this movie that it can only meet my expectations or exceed them. Only going up from here!
 
Have you seen it and given impressions on it here? If so, could you give me a link? I thought your Deadpool review/impressions turned out to be very accurate, so i'd be interested in what you thought about this film, provided that you didn't spoil much.

Yes he's seen it. He says it's a legit good movie. He gives a review in the DC Cinematic thread.
 
To be fair DC are not even rushing it though. Compare the movie universe line ups:

1) Iron Man
2) Incredible Hulk
3) Iron Man 2
4) Thor
5) Captain America

**Avengers**

1) Man of Steel
2) Batman V Superman
3) Suicide Sqaud
4) Wonder Woman

**Justice League: Part 1**

1 film less in DC universe in build up to team up.

tumblr_nrrhnc9yEt1tlxbdgo3_500.gif

You need that extra movie though, everyone knows 5 is the magic number. Where would MCU be without Incredible Hulk? How would they even be able to recognize which actor is Bruce Banner?
 
To be fair DC are not even rushing it though. Compare the movie universe line ups:

1) Iron Man
2) Incredible Hulk
3) Iron Man 2
4) Thor
5) Captain America

**Avengers**

1) Man of Steel
2) Batman V Superman
3) Suicide Sqaud
4) Wonder Woman

**Justice League: Part 1**

1 film less in DC universe in build up to team up.

tumblr_nrrhnc9yEt1tlxbdgo3_500.gif

If the trailers are anything to go by, I think DCCU movie #2 ends with a big superhero team up
 
Yeah, this has me the most worried. It's the same writer (David Goyer) from Man of Steel, which had some stilted-ass dialogue. And from the BvS trailers, it sounds like the trend continues: Lex's "three-syllable word" quip, "tell me, do you bleed," "you've never met a woman like me," so many eye rolls in such a short amount of time. Maybe the story will be good, but I'm afraid that dialogue is gonna keep knocking me out of the movie. My only hope is Terrio, who's also billed as a writer, but that hope dwindles further with every trailer I see.

On the plus side, I have such low hopes for this movie that it can only meet my expectations or exceed them. Only going up from here!

Goyer only did a very very early draft (which is why he has a credit, typically the writer who completes the first draft is guaranteed a credit). What's on the screen is 90-95% Terrio.
 
No. Never. We knew from the moment we walked out of Episode I that something was wrong.

You know this ain't true.

Large numbers of fans took quite awhile to arrive at the current narrative. There is no shortage of published autopsy on the phenomenon, even. MULTIPLE books documenting the arc of grief following a Star Wars movie not being very good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom