Has nothing to do with Batman Begins. Rumour is that there's a sequence in the extended edition.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Batman v Superman Spoiler Thread: Don't believe everything you read, Son
- Thread starter N7Commander95
- Start date
- Status
that luthor's party scenes were so silly. I thought whole point of going as Bruce was to gain access without arousing suspicion. Yet when Luthor point blank provides an invitation to his lab Bruce doesn't take him up on it. Instead they have Bruce not competently creating a distraction and instead getting caught by both Mercy and Diana in the short trip down the stairs. Clark would probably have caught him too if not directed by the plot to play God in Mexico. Each scene was one WTF after another
Smallville used that theme too
Finally saw the movie and was very very surprised in a good way.
The fact that I don't care about a killing superman and a killing batman, as I take these movies as brand new timeline and takes on the heroes.
Also say what you want,the villains are an infinity more credible and frightful than anything marvel ever came up with. There's real menace and stakes in those movies.
On another level I kind of like the whole "sups killed thousands, I'm gonna stop him" from bats. It's funny after the whole debate of a killing superman in the first movie. It's like oh there was a problem with collateral damages in Superman? Let's build a movie on that then.
But in the end that's what superheroes would look like in real life. Not the miracle like fights in most marvel's with barely collateral damage. It's refreshing.
The god/human aspect of the movies, should we accept superheroes doing as they want, is way clearer that way and very interesting.
Older and gritty Batman is truly the best. Best Batman adaptation so far, truly impressed with Affleck. And the movie did a good job at introducing future heroes and bad guys.
The biggest downside is Lois Lane, hated the character..
The fact that I don't care about a killing superman and a killing batman, as I take these movies as brand new timeline and takes on the heroes.
Also say what you want,the villains are an infinity more credible and frightful than anything marvel ever came up with. There's real menace and stakes in those movies.
On another level I kind of like the whole "sups killed thousands, I'm gonna stop him" from bats. It's funny after the whole debate of a killing superman in the first movie. It's like oh there was a problem with collateral damages in Superman? Let's build a movie on that then.
But in the end that's what superheroes would look like in real life. Not the miracle like fights in most marvel's with barely collateral damage. It's refreshing.
The god/human aspect of the movies, should we accept superheroes doing as they want, is way clearer that way and very interesting.
Older and gritty Batman is truly the best. Best Batman adaptation so far, truly impressed with Affleck. And the movie did a good job at introducing future heroes and bad guys.
The biggest downside is Lois Lane, hated the character..
NeOak
Member
Jeremy Irons does a perfect sarcastic Alfred. The guy was great.
Someone failed at trolling by writing that
Barf
Someone failed at trolling by writing that
That's how they caught El Diablo
That's not how Rotten Tomatoes works. A 29 TOMATOMETER means 29% of critics rate it 59% or less. So maybe a bunch of them are just a bit below the 70% floor you're setting.
Grinchy
Banned
Plus, the nuke is able to follow a target that is changing directions/velocities/accelerations with no problem whatsoever. Not only did I think that the nuke was incredibly stupid, but it was also incredibly pointless.
They float up to space, get nuked, Doomsey lands back on Earth stronger than ever, and Supes has to float around in space to recover his strength. But in the end, the fight continues exactly as it was before the nuke. It was just a waste of 5 minutes. It really didn't add anything. It just felt like padding.
Discotheque
Banned
Thats rotten basura which misleads so many people
The average rating on that site as well is around a 5/10 which is actually fair imo. I sometimes disagree with low reviews but in this case that's a fitting score.
29% isn't the aggregate rating. It's how many critics thought it was "Good" or recommend you even watch it.
Technically I feel like that's an even lower bar to pass, but still you should know what that rotten tomatoes number really is.
If we're talking ratings, personally I put it at a solid 8/10.
Yeah, it was subtle but it was there. Instead of saying something like "Don't kill me, I need to save Martha" it was a I'm going to die but "save Martha."
It's been mentioned a few times now, but it seems destined that Clark's growth at the end of the movie where he realizes his place and more importantly realizes his mortality, he'll grow into Superman prime (at least that's the hope). Something Cavill and Snyder have said as well.
Maybe it was put it to give a way to show Superman taking the fight to space like fans complained, but also to take Superman out so that Doomsday could come back to Earth and get the other two involved in the fight. Should've made a bigger deal of him recovering. They showed his eyes light up, and then he come crashing down a minute or so later.
You mean 71% rated it 59% or low? Ok, let me rephrase, this movie is mot as bad to be less than 6/10., I think the user review is more accurratte.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I love how box office is only a measure of how good the film is if you liked it.
Grinchy
Banned
yeah it really felt like there was more planned for that segment, but then they started editing this 2+ hour behemoth and said fuck it.
I think they should have cut the whole segment of Lois and the scepter. She had no logical reason to toss it in the water and no logical reason to go back for it. That whole thing was another waste of time. They could have fleshed out the nuke part instead.
I was watching it and thinking, what the hell is the point of her being there. It was awkward seeing her drown and Superman have to rescue her... only to go into the water and then have Lois rescue him. But then I realized they kinda need to force a way to have her there for Superman to say goodbye (which I did really think was needed).
Also, you need to have that panel from Death of Superman where Lois is cradling Superman's body... I'm not sure how I would've done it, but there probably is a much better way of doing it without having it like MOS where Lois just shows up at the train station after Zod dies.
Poodlestrike
Banned
It did add that they had to use kryptonite to kill Doomsday. If a nuke didn't to it, not conventional weapon on earth would.
I still don't feel like you get it. Rotten Tomatoes isn't a measure of quality, it's a measure of consensus. 70% Fresh doesn't necessarily mean that anybody thought it was a 7/10. Could be that 70% of audience (* that vote on Rotten Tomatoes; could include people who never even saw it) thought it was a 6/10... or that that percentage all thought it was a 10/10. On RT, either of those cases would produce the same score. The correct way to interpret RT scores is to say things like "critics generally disliked it, but audiences generally liked it".
There's always user reviews to fall back to. It's not like those are heavily manipulated by dedicated fanbases even before they see the movie.
This movie certainly deserves a second viewing (for those that liked it or are boderline there) Theres a lot of info to soak in, I just went to an imax (first time, great expierence, I still hate 3D) and I apreciate the movie even more abd there is a lot of small images that are placed there for a reason,like there is a dream of Bruce were they show an Image of Superman (is basically the image of an angel wearing superman colors). This is a movie I will watch in DVD with the director commemtary on. (Does MoS has this?)
I think movie user review even out, for every fanboy giving it a 10 you will have a hater giving it a 0.
I think movie user review even out, for every fanboy giving it a 10 you will have a hater giving it a 0.
WrenchNinja
Member
The latter
I think that is exactly what makes them completely unreliable. It sure works both ways, but it's foolish to just assume they will cancel each other out.
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
Should have been 2 movies. BvsS and SvsB. Same story from 2 Perspectives, with only the climax sharing a similar yet unique pace and finale. Yes, I know the challenges involved with the process.
Movie in a nutshell:
This is hilarious, more so for me as I got out of the cinema like 15 minutes ago and among the many many many many many things that bothered me about this movie, the reason for Batman's about face was near the top of the list. Suddenly the 1000's of deaths no longer matter and he mentions "failing him" at the funeral.
so bad
Poodlestrike
Banned
Are you saying the writing isn't bad or that it isn't from Terrio.
Explain to me why is foolish to think both sides extremes dont cancel each other out?
Movie is all over the place (just like this post).
Not a Superman fan, but the character (and Lex) deserves better.
WTF-moments abound, but WTF happened while Bats was decrypting the data device...? There was also one WTF-scene with WW that I cannot remember... Supes not knowing about the bomb...? WTF!?!
Who is LL refering to in the end: "The one who is coming" or some shit?
DC needs to get their shit together or the White Portuguesa is gonna sink and not even Aquaguy will be able to save them.
Not a Superman fan, but the character (and Lex) deserves better.
WTF-moments abound, but WTF happened while Bats was decrypting the data device...? There was also one WTF-scene with WW that I cannot remember... Supes not knowing about the bomb...? WTF!?!
Who is LL refering to in the end: "The one who is coming" or some shit?
DC needs to get their shit together or the White Portuguesa is gonna sink and not even Aquaguy will be able to save them.
Are you serious with this? The only way they could cancel each other out is if you assume there are the exact number of trolls giving 10/10s and 0/0s (or any other score) for the exact same reasons. It is actually a pretty dumb assumption to make.
Unless you have a detailed breakdown of every single user score and the reasons behind each particular score you can't claim they are cancelling each other out and what's left is an honest representation of "real" scores.
And on top of that, if they do exactly "cancel each other out" (highly unlikely), that would still be a 5 on average on their part, which also influences the total average when including the sane people.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Shit writing. I don't really think it's defensible as being outright shit, whatever issues it might have.
Though the Knightmare is apparently right out of Goyer's draft, so idk, could be not-Terrio as well, depending.
Yeah, there's that too.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Even if they are not the same exact numbers of fanboys and trolls (which I dont think they are) the total average you will get will still be a percentage close the presented score, basically a margin of error, unless the vast majority of user review scores are from trolls and fans (which I dount it)
Case in point, if the user review were so unreliable, you wouldnt had 3 different sites with very similar user review numbers.
Numbers canceling each other out have a neutral effect, they dont become a 5.
Ghaleon mentioned something in another thread that I still can't believe I hadn't noticed until it was pointed out to me, and it is the lynchpin for why their conflict feels so unsatisfying.
Batman and Superman never fucking talk.
They both have problems with each other. We spend a great amount of time on Batman's hang-ups with Supes, and we get a bit dedicated to showing why Superman doesn't like Batman. Superman is dangerous. Batman is Brutal. Got it.
But they never communicate that to each other. Superman crashes Batman's car to threaten him, while Batman mumbles a threat back. Then the next time they meet up is, Superman is trying to get Batman to help him find his mom, while Batman is making rants about 'bravery' and how Superman 'isn't even a man', which has nothing to do with what the film has been building up toward (Batman's fear of Superman posing a danger).
And this isn't a nitpick or grumbling about the lack of comic book faithfulness. This is writing 101: The central narrative conflict gets resolved by the end of the movie. This is a conflict, especially Batman's side, has been built up for over an hour and a half and not only does it never get resolved, it doesn't even get addressed by the characters. They just stop fighting because something else was happening, but the problems that kicked off their issues still exist unchanged. It's very transparent that the the film was so eager to get to them fighting and teaming up, it just made up reasons for why that would happen and forgot that it had to connect it with the rest of the movie, so you have Bruce being angry that Superman is a danger, then he's ranting about bravery and being a 'real man', then he's cool with Superman because he recognizes that he has a mom like him and is therefore a person, while Superman just flat out drops his issue with Batman, never to be brought up again.
Having such sloppy handling of your narrative threads and not forming your story into a cohesive whole is something that is widely considered bad, bad writing.
The closest thing that happens with this is that Batman decides NOT to brand Lex for some reason, and it's implied this new kinder and gentler approach is a result of Batman's interaction with Superman. But that makes no sense. Batman didn't even know at any point that Superman had that as his problem with Superman, and his initial fear of superman never had anything to do with his brutality per se. It was his anger and his 'fuck it' attitude. Nothing Superman did was a call to inspiration for being a better hero. So I can grant that this tiniest portion of resolution to Batman's character conflict is here, but it's utterly disconnected from the movie's narrative development.
You are saying nonsense things. Imagine a case:
Two people see the movie for real, both enjoy it, rate it 10. 98 fanboys go to war, split evenly, 49 vote 100 and 49 vote 0. The "true" average would be 10, but the fanboy war means there are 51 votes for 10 and 49 votes for 0: averaging, therefore, 5.1.
We leave it as an exercise to the reader to explore other ratios of true voters to saboteurs.
Also I don't know why you think a fanboy war wouldn't take place on two review aggregate sites simultaneously, consisting of the same "combatants".
Zack Snyder just wanted to have some fun with the character! Which is why Jimmy Olsen gets shot in the head by a terrorist and Mercy Graves dies in a suicide bombing. That's fun, right? So fun.
No, it wont' be a percentage close to the presented score unless you can tell me with certainty the exact distribution of those votes, which you can't. What percentage of the total reviews is enough to call it a margin of error?
BvS in RT had 110k reviews (sitting at around 9.8) before it was even out anywhere. It is sitting at 187k reviews right now. 59% of the reviews is a significant amount, unless you want to claim that those reviews should be taken into account and are representative of an honest opinion, which again, is a pretty dumb assumption to make.
59% unreliable votes is a pretty significant number to say almost definitively that the score pool is tainted, but if you still want to believe it, be my guest.
I coming from the premises that fanboys and trolls votes are null and this cancel each other, fanboy war can take place in different web pages but for 3 different sites having similar review scores means that the actual user review is not that far off.
KOMANI
KOMANI
Hahaha, ok guys. I guess I'm in the minority. I guess it makes sense for Superman to hear Alfred through Bruce's ear piece, but not hear a bomb in a chair. I also love how there are no witnesses to the bombing, except Superman, yet everyone already knows it was a bomb.
Or the constant reminder of God this and God that. Or how Devils come from the sky but then it becomes the opposite at the end of the movie, just so LL's lines make some sort of sense.
This movie was bad.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Saw this on twitter...
The movie was average, but you brought the war to us..!
Poodlestrike
Banned
This relies on a fundamental misreading of the conflicts and the characters. Bruce's conflict is over his feelings of helplessness, that his legacy is going to amount to nothing, and that he feels threatened by Superman's existence. All three of these things are resolved by the end. The Martha moment is the start of his turnaround, not the end of it. If Superman hadn't sacrificed himself to save the world, who knows what might have happened? Maybe the next day Bruce takes another swing at it.
Why would the bomb make any noise at all out of the ordinary sounds he'd hear coming out of an electric wheelchair?
And what on earth else would it be but a bomb?
Why do you expect Lex Luthor's self-evidently crazy ramblings to hold up to critical scutiny? This is a man who created a worldview in which it is necessary for the powerful to be evil so he can excuse his father, who he both despises and venerates.
That's not a misreading at all, I just don't expand that to include all the reasons why he feels fear against superman's power. That he makes Batman's dick feel tiny in addition to being a danger doesn't contradict anything I said. The point is that Batman's issue with Superman's existence itself as a danger isn't resolved.
Besides, you're kind of digging the hole deeper. If you're saying Batman is fundamentally unchanged, then that makes it all the clearer that the movie's narrative arc is incomplete and BvS has accomplished nothing as far as the characters of the film are concerned.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Um, no.
The point is that there are 3 issues propelling Batman's desire to kill Superman: inadequacy (this super powered being comes out of nowhere, makes him feel small; resolved by a) beating his ass and b) the Martha moment shocking him into seeing him as just a person with powers), legacy ("if this super-being comes along, what good am I," again addressed by the realization that he's just a person), and finally the semi-rational fear of Superman. This is mostly a rationalization constructed to justify his feelings resulting from the previous two motivations; once they're gone, this would be weakened considerably, but even if it wasn't, Superman turns around and dies for the planet, thus making it clear that there was nothing to fear from him at all.
Batman IS fundamentally changed by the events of the second half AS A WHOLE. You don't get the cut off the ending of the movie and turn it into a gotcha.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked