-
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
Agreed. Marvel in particular have relied on the whole "Good guys vs. bad guy and his army of _________" for far too many films now that's just flat-out boring. The best final fights in these superhero movies for me tend to be the ones where it's the hero(es) versus a single villain.
1. I'm pretty sure of all of superman's villains, doomsday is one fans don't particularly care if you reinvision.
2. The lack of faithfulness to the comics is a tiring complaint to deal with. Tell me, what was the last villain that you've seen to be completely faithful to their comic book depiction. Ultron was made by hank pym, the winter soldier had ussr associations, Ronan was something different, so was the TDK's joker, tim Burton's joker didn't kill Bruce's parents, etc etc. But, when people say those portrayals work or don't work, it's never "It's not the true comics portrayal" is never the core of the argument.
No comic:movie translation is ever 1:1 and no one gives a shit because...
3. The point isn't just to make a faithful movie. In fact, that goal is firmly secondary. The goal is to make a good movie. If you feel diverging from the source material will yield a better product, you should do it.
4. Even if you consider being faithful to the source material paramount, it's more important to be faithful to the spirit of things than the literal content. You can keep doomsday role as Superman's antithesis consistent while also messing with his characterization.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
I would have been ok with that as well. To me the biggest issue and drawback is him. Didn't like his entrance even though I was trying to keep an open mind. Everyone else did a great job though.
Very possible this could be done in a sequel.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
If Doomsday had personality, he shouldn't be made whatsoever. That's taking away the essence of what he is in large way.
You know, that argument comes up for any major change in a comic book movie.
"You can't give Peter organic webshooters! They are part of his character in a large way!" or "You can't not make Ra's al Ghul have a lazarus pit!" or you can't just have the Joker wearing make up or have Lex Luthor not be bald and...
Again, like in point 2, it's a tiring argument that has been proven wrong again and again. People focus on some character detail, however minor, and say that if that character detail is missing then the character is simply wrong or ruined or having missed the 'essence' of them.
Until they see the movie without those elements and realize it works. Or maybe they in particular don't because they're that married to that one aspect, but the population in general doesn't care because they're good characters. But for the most part, those who grumbled about TDK's joker being ruined because his skin wasn't authentically chemically whitened realized how silly they were being.
Because that's all that matters in the end, whether a good story is being told. If you think literally lacking is a personality, a character, is literally the only way that Doomsday can be done....well, I disagree. And if there ever comes a day where we get a genuinely good writer/director team who decide to tackle the Doomsday storyline and decide that Doomsday is one aspect they want to change, then they'll do that, and make something wonderful, and you'll realize that Doomsday DOESN'T have to be personalityless afterall. In this case, seeing is believing, and no amount of argument from me will disprove that. We just have to wait on someone who has the opportunity to write a DD story that does that.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
No it isn't. Your point 2 is like comparing apples with oranges. Doomsday is that character and making him have a personality means you need a different villain. What you're asking is doing what happened to Lex, which most people universally hate, which is to drastically change him. All those other characters still had the large essence of what makes them who they are from your examples. Doomsday wouldn't.
It's not a good idea.
Actually, you don't know what my idea is. I didn't say anything except "give him some measure of a personality". You don't know of what how or what I mean by that, so how can you possibly know that my interpretation veers off from the comics?
So yeah, your reaction is pretty much in line with what I mean. It's a you won't believe it until you see it sort of thing. So I'm not going to try to convince you of anything because words don't help here. You'll just see it works if and when someone makes it work.
And second, there are plenty of instances where writers give a character a different personality and people love it. Go look at Tony Stark, for example. Look at Brainiac. Heath Ledger's joker was very different in personality (and therefore character) than most incarnations, and Hackman's Lex Luthor, or the animated series Mr. Freeze and.... Look, the list goes on and on. You need look no further than comics themselves, who constantly revise characters all the time.
Like I said, I won't argue with you. All you need to do is look at comics in general and you'll see for every praise of some act of faithfulness, there will be a celebration of character innovation.
I mean I agree with you which is why I find the X Men movies very enjoyable despite them straying away from source material same for the Nolan trilogy.
It's more important to make a good movie but when you use an IP and its characters you have to retain some of the traits that make them who they are. Nolan's Joker is still Joker (one of many interpretations), Singer's Charles Xavier is still Charles..
If they made a Doomsday that didn't fight and just schemed like Ultron/Luther and also had conversations with Superman, couldn't evolve and didn't really phase Superman physically... that's pretty much not Doomsday. You might as well create a new villain instead. And I personally don't care for Doomsday. Doomsday is just a living weapon/threat that serves as a plot device which is why he usually gets featured in stories with other villains who are doing the real scheming. Doomsday is more of a force of nature... like the shark in Jaws or the alien in Alien. He's not meant to be a character you can talk with or reason with.
It's more important to make a good movie but when you use an IP and its characters you have to retain some of the traits that make them who they are. Nolan's Joker is still Joker (one of many interpretations), Singer's Charles Xavier is still Charles..
If they made a Doomsday that didn't fight and just schemed like Ultron/Luther and also had conversations with Superman, couldn't evolve and didn't really phase Superman physically... that's pretty much not Doomsday. You might as well create a new villain instead. And I personally don't care for Doomsday. Doomsday is just a living weapon/threat that serves as a plot device which is why he usually gets featured in stories with other villains who are doing the real scheming. Doomsday is more of a force of nature... like the shark in Jaws or the alien in Alien. He's not meant to be a character you can talk with or reason with.
roflwaffles
Member
Does anyone care about Doomsday? He has one claim to fame and he's a nothing character, just something for DC fanboys to jizz over because it reminds them of something they claim they read 20 years ago.
I have never thought about this before but damn, has this ever been tackled in a meaningful way in the DC universe?
Doesn't Doomsday have a personality in the comics? He's a cruel monster who enjoys killing things. He actively seeks out things to kill.
The Doomsday in BvS doesn't seem to have any kind of agency. He might as well have been a giant gun.
Watch the Batman Animated Series episode "Old Wounds".
The Doomsday in BvS doesn't seem to have any kind of agency. He might as well have been a giant gun.
Watch the Batman Animated Series episode "Old Wounds".
Yeah, that's what I mean. I mean, when people say "He has no personality", it's typically hyperbole.
Literally no personality would be an inanimate object. Like, Superman vs a meteor. Meteor's have no personality. If it has a personality, then it is essentially a character, no matter how poor or shallow.
BvS's Doomsday has some of that. He seems to have an angry/hateful expression towards everything, coupled with some measure of curiousity, given how he just looks at what the helicopters are going to do instead of running or fighting them on sight, which makes sense since he's literally just born.
Well, that's not what I was thinking exactly.
My idea was, and I'm just spitballing here, is that you just give a sympathetic reason to Doomsday's existance. Like, the Kryptonians didn't just make it forbidden because of the destructive capability, but also because it'd be immoral to do make something like that in itself.
My idea was that Doomsday is just in an incredible amount of pain. He's born flailing around, because he doesn't know whats wrong, until he gets his hands on someone and accidentally kills them (This might as well be Mercy, gives her a more purposeful death scene than what she got). For a moment, that pain is relieved, and he gets one seconds peace, before it comes back again.
And that's it. It gives a reason why Doomsday wants to kill every damn thing he sees, he still has hatred toward the living things around him, Superman still has to kill him, he still gets to kill superman, literally the entire movie is the same other than the slight alteration that he as a reason to kill that can make you pity him.
That's just one way to do it, and I'm not even gonna say it's the best way...but that's still Doomsday. That's the essence of his character.
I think a few of y'all are really reaching with this Doomsday thing. What you really wanted was a villain with some sense of character but with so many things already going on it wouldn't have fit. Now you're asking to have another major character on top of everyone else. Then expect some sort of mini arc or something to make him compelling. Lex was the villain here, Doomsday was a tool. Like KG Beast before him. A gun. You weren't meant to connect with him anymore than you would Batman's voice modulator. It's just a thing that existed merely to smack Clark and Diana around while Bruce does flips and shit in the background.
KonradLaw
Member
Batman should have been running around the destructin around him to get that lance insted of Lois.
Oh well. I still enjoyed the movie overall, but it could have been so much better. So many problems. But the biggest ones for me is weak (if any) motivation of Lex and most of all Superman himself. I liked Eisenberg as Lex, but I had no clue why the hell was he doing all that shit really.
By far the biggest problem was Superman. To me for the movie to work it has to evoke some sort of emotions. If you don't make your character crack jokes and be funny, you need to make me care about him somehow. MoS didn't made me care about him and neither did BvS. Batman was great, but half the movie was Superman. Which felt empty and indecisive. And this was the most damaging thing for BvS.
If he was sympathetic the whole thing would work. It might not have ended as good movie, but it would be enjoyable one. Look at Ant Man. It's not really a good movie. Paper thin story and absolutely terrible and incompetent realization of heist movie trope. And yet it still ended up enjoyable because the lead hero was sympathetic and fun to follow around. He charmed this movie into being fun. Meanwhile Superman had two movies and still ended up being utterly bland. More like a force nature than real character.
This is what I was going to say as its one of the only solo aquaman things i've read but i really enjoyed what i've read so far. Even addresses a lot of misconceptions of him.
As someone who has no idea about Comics, I absolutely loved Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. Definitely my favorite parts of the movie, apart from the action scenes. He was just...fun. Over-the-top, cheesy, villiany. Really one of the only villians in super hero movies in general I didn't forget about 5 minutes after the credits. Also helps that every other character was a moping sack of tears, so seeing him haming it up so much was a welcome change of pace.
Loved the action in the last third. Was kind of confused, sometimes mildly bored during the other parts of the movie. Nothing really that pissed me off though - except of Lois Laine. Jesus fucking christ, how many times can you play th damsel in distress in one movie. The fact that she herself throws away the spear (I was literally facepalming), only to then try to get it back 5 minutes later and that she THEN manages to fucking drown herself while doing that only to have Superman save her one more time was almost comical.
Loved the action in the last third. Was kind of confused, sometimes mildly bored during the other parts of the movie. Nothing really that pissed me off though - except of Lois Laine. Jesus fucking christ, how many times can you play th damsel in distress in one movie. The fact that she herself throws away the spear (I was literally facepalming), only to then try to get it back 5 minutes later and that she THEN manages to fucking drown herself while doing that only to have Superman save her one more time was almost comical.
direct_quote
Member
Saw it today and I can say I enjoyed the movie more than Spectre. Yah the editing in the first half of the movie was bad, but the movie kept my interest throughout (as opposed to Spectre where I just wanted it over).
I didn't think he was great, but I'm glad he wasn't as super obnoxious as I thought he would be from the trailers. They dosed him out in good enough doses for me not to get sick of his shtick.
Saw this movie a 3rd time because cousin was in town and she wanted to see BvS.
Some extra notes that I didn't notice before:
*There's no "It's time you learned what it means to be a man" line in the movie.
*There's no shot of the Batmobile exiting the Batcave like there was in one of the videos.
*There's no scene of horses riding in the desert that was also in trailers.
*There are in fact 3 crosses lined up in the shot where everyone is posing after Superman's death. In case the Biblical reference wasn't obvious enough.
*I am surprised I didn't realize that Luthor had actually flipped the painting in his house at the end scene. That somehow escaped my mind because for some reason I always imagined the image of the devil right side up.
*I can officially not unsee the CIA in the JL logos anymore lmao!
*Notice even more editing issues this time around. The worst one is still the WW stuff during the build up to the climax scene. There's a scene of Gal Gadot presumably entering her hotel lobby and seeing the news on TV. Then we go back to the Luthor/Batman/Superman stuff, then we go to Gal Gadot in her room looking at JL stuff for a good while, back to the climax stuff and then back to Gal in the plane. Man that's just so infuriatingly bad and cuts the pacing of the climax at its knees 3 times. All you needed was the scene of her in the plane.
*They should've moved the Batman steals Kryptonite from Lex corp and Batman work out scene to later on in the movie and then transitioned straight into him planting the spear and lighting the Bat symbol. That would've led into the showdown very nicely. Instead what happens in the movie is that Batman takes a break from his work out to look at JL stuff which makes you believe he isn't 100% focused on taking on Superman.
*Scene of him visiting his parents grave the first time and him having that man bat dream was not needed. He does it again later on so the first time was 100% pointless.
*Did not need scene of Kryptonite extraction in the Indian ocean.
*Alfred makes a comment about the bat branding by saying something like "is it a new rule?" The bat branding thing is definitely something new and not something he used to do before otherwise it wouldn't be reported in the news. That's what Alfred meant when he said it all changed when Superman appeared and it turned Bruce cruel. Still no talk about Batman wasting fools though.
Random stuff but theater was packed and there were a group of kids with family near me. Kids kept asking when Batman was going to show up. Then the scene with the Batman intro happened which is shot like a horror scenes and those kids never spoke again... LMAO! They got super scared during that scene and then they jumped out of their seats during the man bat scene.
My opinion hasn't changed on the movie but I still feel sad. This movie could've been great but instead it's trying to do too many things at once and doesn't excel at any one particular thing. This is all on top of the F grade editing.
Some extra notes that I didn't notice before:
*There's no "It's time you learned what it means to be a man" line in the movie.
*There's no shot of the Batmobile exiting the Batcave like there was in one of the videos.
*There's no scene of horses riding in the desert that was also in trailers.
*There are in fact 3 crosses lined up in the shot where everyone is posing after Superman's death. In case the Biblical reference wasn't obvious enough.
*I am surprised I didn't realize that Luthor had actually flipped the painting in his house at the end scene. That somehow escaped my mind because for some reason I always imagined the image of the devil right side up.
*I can officially not unsee the CIA in the JL logos anymore lmao!
*Notice even more editing issues this time around. The worst one is still the WW stuff during the build up to the climax scene. There's a scene of Gal Gadot presumably entering her hotel lobby and seeing the news on TV. Then we go back to the Luthor/Batman/Superman stuff, then we go to Gal Gadot in her room looking at JL stuff for a good while, back to the climax stuff and then back to Gal in the plane. Man that's just so infuriatingly bad and cuts the pacing of the climax at its knees 3 times. All you needed was the scene of her in the plane.
*They should've moved the Batman steals Kryptonite from Lex corp and Batman work out scene to later on in the movie and then transitioned straight into him planting the spear and lighting the Bat symbol. That would've led into the showdown very nicely. Instead what happens in the movie is that Batman takes a break from his work out to look at JL stuff which makes you believe he isn't 100% focused on taking on Superman.
*Scene of him visiting his parents grave the first time and him having that man bat dream was not needed. He does it again later on so the first time was 100% pointless.
*Did not need scene of Kryptonite extraction in the Indian ocean.
*Alfred makes a comment about the bat branding by saying something like "is it a new rule?" The bat branding thing is definitely something new and not something he used to do before otherwise it wouldn't be reported in the news. That's what Alfred meant when he said it all changed when Superman appeared and it turned Bruce cruel. Still no talk about Batman wasting fools though.
Random stuff but theater was packed and there were a group of kids with family near me. Kids kept asking when Batman was going to show up. Then the scene with the Batman intro happened which is shot like a horror scenes and those kids never spoke again... LMAO! They got super scared during that scene and then they jumped out of their seats during the man bat scene.
My opinion hasn't changed on the movie but I still feel sad. This movie could've been great but instead it's trying to do too many things at once and doesn't excel at any one particular thing. This is all on top of the F grade editing.
Lord_Byron28
Member
Yeah I liked some of the hallucination sequences with both Batman and Superman. I understood what Snyder was trying to do. He wanted to explore the character's psyche versus characters usually telling their feelings to someone else. However, he also had to introduce Lex, Doomsday and the JLA on top of Batman. When he decided to take on all of those plot points he should've pulled back from those scenes. Especially since a lot of them were redundant. Why have a Batman dream sequence where everything goes wrong when he tries to steal the Kryptonite, then 5 minutes later show him getting it no problem? The Batman vs. Superman showdown should've happened closer to midway through the film.
I get the final "showdown" scene and how both of their mothers are named Martha. I also feel Bruce had him pegged as a God this entire time. When he saw Lois and heard about his mother it showed to him that he was a human. However, it was rather sudden and they were way too quickly buddy-buddy. The "I'm a friend of your son's" light hearted jib rubbed me the wrong way especially since only 5 minutes before that the entire film was focused on him plotting to kill her son. If the showdown between BvS was altered so that they squared off and afterwards became allies a bit earlier in the film then they could've had time to really work together, Superman and Batman discuss the idea of a meta human team based on Batman's findings, Superman and WW scenes, more build up to the big showdown where Lois and Martha get captured and a better Doomsday fight as well. I feel that would've given a lot better pay off to the death of Superman storyline on top of everything else going on in the film. Although we'll see how this DCU goes. It's apparently a lot larger then we realize and there are a lot of different directors working on films for the DCU with little overhead from Snyder, so there is that hope. It's also been said that Doomsday will be discussed and elaborated further on in JL pt. 1.
I disagree. You need the e-mail scene to show Bruce and Diana know about other meta humans. Otherwise the graveyard scene doesn't make sense where Bruce says the two have to find the JL members, which ties into the Flash time travel scene and later the Lex ding ding ding scene. The editor couldn't really put it anywhere else which ties into your next point.
Bruce is also seen analyzing and weaponizing the kryptonite in the workout scene, which I thought showcased well that he has the brains and the brawn as Batman. (Notice how Alfred is absent who fixes his gadgets throughout the film.) When he's behind his computer, you can see he's looking at Lex's stolen files which I believe has a folder named Kryptonite or something in that direction. Lex wanted to share his own research on Kryptonite. Bruce only accidentally looked at the metahuman folder while doing his own research. Then he sent the mail to Diana, which meant Diana's scene had to come after this scene.
You could make a point they could have showed Bruce clicking on the JL folder right after he got the drive decrypted, but I think the cut they went with works better because Bruce is absolutely determined to kill Superman, so much that it clouds his judgment to thoroughly analyze Lex's files. By placing the Diana scene before the titular battle, it also shows Diana's struggle. Bruce did share with her in the end and more as she now knows about other meta humans. She probably opened her computer to find out what's happening with the alien ship, since you see she's checking an article about the electricity jumping around the ship before she opens her inbox. If anything, the cut to her leaving on the plane was unneeded. Why did she suddenly change her mind when the plane is about to take off? How can a plane take off when there's an alien ship releasing energy and causing power outtages around the city? I assume she's taking the airport in the vicinity. It doesn't make sense. At least the e-mail made sense if you take the rest of the film into account like I mentioned above.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Imagine if Berlanti was made the head of DC CU.
Get either him or Riba on it.
Get either him or Riba on it.
Holundrian
Unconfirmed Member
That's how it starts.The fever.The rage.The feeling of powerlessness.That turns good men... cruel.
SkylineRKR
Member
I agree with a lot of criticism here. The editing and thus pacing flat out sucks.
I loved the visuals, music, fighting choreography (its levels above Nolanverse), pissed Bruce (seriously, I like Batfleck)... pissed Alfred (Irons was great).
Batman is almost like a bad guy in this. I freaking loved that. Superman has his mother captured, Batman doesn't know and he fights dirty too, he's out for the kill. I freaking loved the showdown. I wish the build up to it was better written and better done, and that the fight was longer. Lex Luthor was not only miscast, his script was dog shit as well. The way he tricks eachother into fighting is badly done and convoluted.
And about the whole Martha thing, I'd remove that from the script. I would just like Doomsday or Lex Luthor to arrive, and Batman realizing he's been had and actually be used by a bad guy. Which would force them to combine their powers. I would drop the i'm a friend thing too, it was too quick after wanting to finish Supes off.
Just maybe, the extended cut has more scenes to it that sort of forge a friendship or fill in some plot holes, how the fuck does Lois Lane know to gamble her life for the staff? I don't think she was informed?. There are also better explanations to cast Bats stuggle with Superman aside. His vision showed that there are threats mortals cannot deal with, he then sees Diana, Aquaman etc and starts to realize they are in fact a necessary evil. This is why Doomsday should appear before their bout is finished, so that he comes to terms with the existence and need of Superman. Its better than Martha his way the fuck out of there.
But consider me hyped for an Affleck solo Batman movie.
I loved the visuals, music, fighting choreography (its levels above Nolanverse), pissed Bruce (seriously, I like Batfleck)... pissed Alfred (Irons was great).
Batman is almost like a bad guy in this. I freaking loved that. Superman has his mother captured, Batman doesn't know and he fights dirty too, he's out for the kill. I freaking loved the showdown. I wish the build up to it was better written and better done, and that the fight was longer. Lex Luthor was not only miscast, his script was dog shit as well. The way he tricks eachother into fighting is badly done and convoluted.
And about the whole Martha thing, I'd remove that from the script. I would just like Doomsday or Lex Luthor to arrive, and Batman realizing he's been had and actually be used by a bad guy. Which would force them to combine their powers. I would drop the i'm a friend thing too, it was too quick after wanting to finish Supes off.
Just maybe, the extended cut has more scenes to it that sort of forge a friendship or fill in some plot holes, how the fuck does Lois Lane know to gamble her life for the staff? I don't think she was informed?. There are also better explanations to cast Bats stuggle with Superman aside. His vision showed that there are threats mortals cannot deal with, he then sees Diana, Aquaman etc and starts to realize they are in fact a necessary evil. This is why Doomsday should appear before their bout is finished, so that he comes to terms with the existence and need of Superman. Its better than Martha his way the fuck out of there.
But consider me hyped for an Affleck solo Batman movie.
GeorgioCostanzaX
Member
Which is why I'm actually pretty hyped for Infinity War since it's the Russo Bros not Whedon. I love the dude for his whitty dialogue and structure but you could kind of tell he was overwhelmed with the brainless action in the third acts of both Avengers films. I can't even complain there too much though because he had a great way of gently brining you back to reality with the Vision vs Ultron bit right at the end.
Probably posted a million times already but i what is the explanation for the village "murder" and the Superman blaming in the beginning? Those shot people surely all had bullet wounds. I know the bad guys had "special" Whiz-Kid Lex bullets but did i miss how they described what these bullets did??
Only explanation for me is that they made holes into the people which looked like Superman laser-eye killed them and the bullets then disappeared/dissolved but even that would be shaky.
Only explanation for me is that they made holes into the people which looked like Superman laser-eye killed them and the bullets then disappeared/dissolved but even that would be shaky.
Also was the woman who testified paid off by Lex?
Poodlestrike
Banned
You're assuming that anybody saw the bodies at all, other than Lois. All most people know is, Superman showed up, later they found out that the warlord's guys were dead, and then people started getting slaughtered by the government. Maybe after he incapacitated the Warlord they just started killing each other.
Ah, then i got that wrong. The bit with the government was a bit confusing and i quickly forgot. But why special ammo at all then?
SJRB
Gold Member
So Lois Lane has something to do in this movie, basically.
Some of the mercenary leader's men were PMC troops from LexCorp, and those troops use ammunition produced by LexCorp. So by taking the bullet home Lois discovers that Lex Luthor was behind the assault and subsequential framing of Superman.
Because that's what happened - by taking out the mercenaries, a balance shift happened and nearby villages got slaughtered by government troops. Superman swooping in to save Lois resulted in the death of hundreds. At least, that's what everything thinks happened. Superman of course only took out the leader, but the rest of the world doesn't know that. All they know is Superman swooped in, a mercenary stronghold got wiped out and that resulted in a genocide [I suppose it was genocide?] in nearby villages. Ultimately all of it was provoked by Lex Luthor who was trying to make Superman look bad. He knew Superman would come for Lois.
It's a bit contrived and the movie does a pretty bad job of explaining all of this, mostly because things happen so fast and it's so fragmented throughout the movie. But the concept is solid.
I understood that.
But i didn't get that right. Probably didn't listen good enough at the court room scene.
Thanks.
the concept is stupid because snyder also inserted jimmy olson/cia agent in there who blew the mission, triggering the shooting, then the lexcorp agents started killing before superman even got on the ground. why anybody would blame superman instead of the usual cia/american intervention interests is illogical.
Uh, because Superman was proven to be there. Come on, dude, the film has enough genuine issues without actually nitpicking.
SJRB
Gold Member
Sure, but remember the entire desert sequence got shredded. Apparantly the extended edition has more context on this.
I'm pretty sure the PMC troops were planning on shooting up the place anyway, since the whole point of the operation was to frame Superman. I'm not sure how Jimmy Olsen even fits in, or what him working for the CIA has to do with anything, since it's never mentioned again anywhere.
exactly, snyder just tossed in that jimmy olsen/cia thing because he thought it was cool or whatever, even though it completely conflicts and undermines whatever concept he was trying to set up.
The problem is they don't make it explicit that the CIA is suspicious of Luthor.
There's no way he ever worked for the Planet if he was a CIA plant. Seemed like he and Lois didn't even know each other in the scene they showed. There's a still in the art book of Lois and him talking next to a car in the desert and even from the looks of that one still it appears it's of them talking for the first time and Jimmy telling her what the plan is. Just doesn't seem like something they even considered doing character wise if they were just going to kill him. Last second they decide to give him a name. I'd be more than thrilled if they just leave his name drop out of the DC so we can get Jimmy in later movies.
This is Awesome!! Booyah Begins
I'm not going to lie, I would laugh until the end of days, but still be thoroughly entertained if WB just retooled all the remaining DC movies into Affleck Batman and His Amazing Friends.
I just hope they all have mom's named Martha.
I must admit, Bruce was nowhere near as sneaky as he should have been, was a bit reckless. I wonder if it's due to his older age, less patience maybe? Silly, I know.
That's dope but we all know Batgod would whoop these freaks just like he whooped Superman.
This is Awesome!! Booyah Begins
This is Awesome!! Booyah Begins
I'm pretty sure at this point Batman v anything is tainted.
slightconfuse
Banned
Despite the fact is was 4 movies in one. I really,enjoyed it espcially the batman parts.
Wish we for him going into lex,corp instead of some of the other stuff in the middle.
A good step up from man of steel.
Zack Snyder needs to read a comic from somewhere outside of 1985-1995
Wish we for him going into lex,corp instead of some of the other stuff in the middle.
A good step up from man of steel.
Zack Snyder needs to read a comic from somewhere outside of 1985-1995
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked