Did you just resort to "no u"?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
I enjoyed Batman v Superman more than Civil War, who is with me?
- Thread starter TheDanger
- Start date
- Status
Did you just resort to "no u"?
Prime crotch
Banned
More_Badass
Member
Tried and failed IMO
Those whole "is Superman a force for good, do we need a Superman", the whole driving force of the first half of the movie, that was touted as the philosophical core of the story? Dropped out of the movie entirely and really served less as a means to talk about Superman and more to set up the the explosion at Congress and show how much of a mastermind Lex is
Like they literally have Superman here ready to talk about his beliefs and ideals to the world...and the movie eschews that for a big explosion. I think that says a lot of what the movie was really concerned about.
It is
The problem with BvS is that it's too good.
L
Lord Virgin
Unconfirmed Member
Well, this thread went as expected. "lol. u dumb, WB/Marvel sux, ur opinion is bad'' But I would actually like to have a conversation about it to see things from another perspective sooo:
Dreams? There was only one and showcased the worst possible outcome of what Bruce feared. It added to our understanding of why this guy is so paranoid.
Parademons.
Luthor gained access to the ship in order to learn more about Krypton. He learned a lot from the AI and knew how to create this monster. He needed Zod’s corpse and the ritual of creating Doomsday required a blood sacrifice, hence him cutting his hand.
In his very first scene he talks about how they used to wave flags at tyrants and if the Senator wanted to avoid her own children having to do the same, they needed to be able to ‘protect’ themselves (the Senator telling him he could call it protection, but she knew better than that). Later on the helipad he said no one was there to save him from his own father, so if there is a God he can’t be all good etc. His motivation are in one way or another the same as Bruce’s: fear. Except Luthor is more unhinged and from what we know probably mind-controlled at some point by Darkseid.
How is that exactly? This is basically the smartest live-action Lois we have and she is basically a detective figuring shit out before everyone else.
Flash.
Not yet.
‘’Hi, my name is Wonder Woman.’’ Sure. Also, I highly doubt that. Unless you were paying 0 attention, I have a very hard time believing this kind of stuff. ‘’My audience was confused’’ Very anecdotal.
If you did not like Eisenberg as Luthor; fair enough. But terrible dialogue? Disagree with that, if anything the dialogue was one of the better aspects of the movie.
Because his cut (the 3 hour version) got positive feedback from test screenings. This cut was very recent and the test screenings for it were mixed to negative. He was also the one who went to WB on how to build this DCEU.
I'm going to elaborate on this later when I can sit down and spend some time on it but for now...
Look, I really really liked BvS and think it's far better than its given credit for but I've seen a lot of defenses for its plot and character motivations that are flat out wrong. On that same token but on the opposite end are people tearing down the plot and character motivations that are flat out wrong or missed the point. The latter is harder to prove because of all the 3rd grader shit slinging and the easy defense of "I got it but it was still bad" but I definitely see it.
I also won't argue Civil War is a great movie (and even better movie which I thought it was) but it has some issues too. A lot of which I see being ignored because, well, reasons. I don't know.
I'm conflicted however. I do want to elaborate on all of this but feel it's pointless to do in this thread but I also really don't want to add another BvS thread to the mix. There's so many already. I don't know. I'll think about it.
Look, I really really liked BvS and think it's far better than its given credit for but I've seen a lot of defenses for its plot and character motivations that are flat out wrong. On that same token but on the opposite end are people tearing down the plot and character motivations that are flat out wrong or missed the point. The latter is harder to prove because of all the 3rd grader shit slinging and the easy defense of "I got it but it was still bad" but I definitely see it.
I also won't argue Civil War is a great movie (and even better movie which I thought it was) but it has some issues too. A lot of which I see being ignored because, well, reasons. I don't know.
I'm conflicted however. I do want to elaborate on all of this but feel it's pointless to do in this thread but I also really don't want to add another BvS thread to the mix. There's so many already. I don't know. I'll think about it.
I mean, even I have some positive opinions on BvS.
I just acknowledge that outside of those few highlights it's shit everywhere else.
I haven't seen CW yet so I don't really have any thoughts on it.
The largest irony being that BvS ends up resorting to the dumbest possible "CG explosions and destruction" climax, which seems to be the very thing those people are insulting MCU films for, while Civil War completely forgoes said style of climax in favour of a small scale fight.
Nope just making an assessment. Because according to the poster i quoted its just so unbelievable that someone could possibly like a movie they didn't that the other person must be delusional and actively trying to convince themselves that the movie is good, instead of just accepting that people have different opinions or even trying to discuss those opinions. "Delusional" is the most dismissive bullshit anyone can pull.
I like it too. Makes me feel like an anomaly here, lol.
1) Batman Begins is actually about Batman
2) Dark Knight is kind of boring when Joker isn't on screen
3) Batman is like the 4th most important character in his own movie in Dark Knight
4) Bale's Batman voice gets out of control in the sequels, in Begins its mildly decent
5) The plot of Dark Knight kinda falls apart from the car chase on. The third act is weak as hell.
6) Bale and Maggie Gyllenhaal have zero on-screen chemistry, it doesn't help that Gyllenhaal looks 50 next to Christian Bale
7) Gotham in Begins looks more like a dreary city that's near death, while Gotham in TDK looks like a normal city.
8) The ending of Dark Knight is some of the most forced shit ever just to make a psuedo tragic ending.
I'm a bit nitpicky about Dark Knight, and I still really love the movie, but on subsequent rewatches Batman Begins feels like the more tightly put together movie from start to finish while The Dark Knight has fantastic moments that feel mostly held up by Ledger's performance. Also, Batman Begins has the best ending of any superhero movie ever.
Prime crotch
Banned
I actually love that scene, it shows instead of telling; Superman's by simply existing causes unintended consequences to those surrounding him. Plus it's a great twist from comedy to offbeat tension.
PadWarrior
Member
I like it as well. The only Mcu movie I'm not fond of is iron man 3.
Dash_Riprock
Member
Why is it so hard to admit that a movie you liked is bad? Is the opinion of others really that important to some people?
I like Batman Forever. I will fully admit it was a bad film and will not defend its many, many faults but I still liked it and will never pretend that I don't. Why can't people do the same with BvS?
Opinions can be shit too.
Like BvS.
I can admit when I like bad movie.
I liked the TASM.
Given I've seen posters smugly imply that people didn't like BvS because they're simply too dumb to understand it, I feel entirely ok with dismissing those people as being quite up their own ass.
I haven't seen Civil War, so I can't say, but BvS was a mediocre movie. It wasn't garbage, but it wasn't good either.
I'd say you don't even have to be nitpicking to see why BvS is a middling, slightly above average at best, movie. It's four films smushed together, but even worse, it has genuinely compelling concepts that it fumbles to execute. Any one of the four movies BvS tries to be is worthy of a film on its own:
Man of Steel 2: There is enough meat on the bones of a film revolving around the fallout of the battle of Metropolis as seen in Man of Steel. How Clark/Superman, and the supporting cast and world deal with a god among us is really interesting stuff. You could have introduced those concepts and Lex Luthor very comfortably, and allowed them adequate breathing room, and by the end of the film, the characters in the movie, and the audience itself, would ideally have an answer to the question, "Does the world need a Superman?" (Spoiler: the answer should be, "Yes, we do.")
Batman Batfleck Movie: BvS was basically Batman's movie, but all it succeeded in doing was making you yawn whenever he wasn't on screen. A single, solo Batman movie, perhaps setting up Bruce/Batman's issues with Superman without them battling just yet, but teasing a future conflict after the JL movies were released. I thought Affleck was decent as Batman, but to be fair, he's the best part of a mediocre movie. Much like Wonder Woman, I'm waiting to see a film revolving 100% around both of them before I judge Affleck and Gadot in the roles.
Dawn of Justice: yet another movie stuffed into BvS. If you want an idea of how a Dawn of Justice movie could have played out, watch the awesome DC animated movie, Justice League: War. It's such a kickass, entertaining version of how the leaguers meet, and form the JL. It's really, really good.
The final and forth movie stuffed into BvS I won't go into too much detail, and I don't want a giant spoiler tag block of text, but it revolves around how the film concludes. That storyline is not earned in any way, shape, or form, and would have served better as a single film released after the first JL movie, and the "real" film version of Batman v's Superman or, The Dark Knight Returns. It's worthy of its own movie, and maybe even a follow up dealing with the aftermath.
Zak Snyder is obsessed with iconic imagery and beautifully composed shots, but he doesn't seem to give one fuck about bridging those pretty pictures together with a cohesive story where plot points are allowed to breathe, an emotional and physical stakes are clear and impactful. Spectacle is nice, but spectacle that actually has weight behind it is excellent. BvS was like a kid banging action figures together in the living room. Ultimately, I didn't care about anyone on screen, or what happened to them.
I'd have not blamed DC if they had taken their time to establish their cinematic universe, instead of trying to shove it into a single movie. Four movies, over the course of the next 4-5 years would have worked so much better, I think.
I'd say you don't even have to be nitpicking to see why BvS is a middling, slightly above average at best, movie. It's four films smushed together, but even worse, it has genuinely compelling concepts that it fumbles to execute. Any one of the four movies BvS tries to be is worthy of a film on its own:
Man of Steel 2: There is enough meat on the bones of a film revolving around the fallout of the battle of Metropolis as seen in Man of Steel. How Clark/Superman, and the supporting cast and world deal with a god among us is really interesting stuff. You could have introduced those concepts and Lex Luthor very comfortably, and allowed them adequate breathing room, and by the end of the film, the characters in the movie, and the audience itself, would ideally have an answer to the question, "Does the world need a Superman?" (Spoiler: the answer should be, "Yes, we do.")
Batman Batfleck Movie: BvS was basically Batman's movie, but all it succeeded in doing was making you yawn whenever he wasn't on screen. A single, solo Batman movie, perhaps setting up Bruce/Batman's issues with Superman without them battling just yet, but teasing a future conflict after the JL movies were released. I thought Affleck was decent as Batman, but to be fair, he's the best part of a mediocre movie. Much like Wonder Woman, I'm waiting to see a film revolving 100% around both of them before I judge Affleck and Gadot in the roles.
Dawn of Justice: yet another movie stuffed into BvS. If you want an idea of how a Dawn of Justice movie could have played out, watch the awesome DC animated movie, Justice League: War. It's such a kickass, entertaining version of how the leaguers meet, and form the JL. It's really, really good.
The final and forth movie stuffed into BvS I won't go into too much detail, and I don't want a giant spoiler tag block of text, but it revolves around how the film concludes. That storyline is not earned in any way, shape, or form, and would have served better as a single film released after the first JL movie, and the "real" film version of Batman v's Superman or, The Dark Knight Returns. It's worthy of its own movie, and maybe even a follow up dealing with the aftermath.
Zak Snyder is obsessed with iconic imagery and beautifully composed shots, but he doesn't seem to give one fuck about bridging those pretty pictures together with a cohesive story where plot points are allowed to breathe, an emotional and physical stakes are clear and impactful. Spectacle is nice, but spectacle that actually has weight behind it is excellent. BvS was like a kid banging action figures together in the living room. Ultimately, I didn't care about anyone on screen, or what happened to them.
I'd have not blamed DC if they had taken their time to establish their cinematic universe, instead of trying to shove it into a single movie. Four movies, over the course of the next 4-5 years would have worked so much better, I think.
so many little things that made it special for me, the simultaneous
burial
L
Lord Virgin
Unconfirmed Member
That is cold man.
I would say I'm a DC fan. For every Marvel trade I have about a dozen DC. I have pretty much every movie and animated movie on DVD or blu-ray. I can not in good conscious say that BvS is better or even possible of being more enjoyable to watch than Civil War. BvS is not a good movie plain and simple.
DC fans should not defend that piece of trash. We've gotten masterpieces like the Batman Nolan trilogy and Richard Donner's Superman we don't need to defend Snyder's bullshit.
DC fans should not defend that piece of trash. We've gotten masterpieces like the Batman Nolan trilogy and Richard Donner's Superman we don't need to defend Snyder's bullshit.
Primethius
Banned
BvS was only better than Civil War in one metric. It gave us the better Rotten Tomatoes review thread.
To me it seems like a lot of the BvS haters want to have it both ways. They try and say it's confusing and have all these questions but then when people answer them it's "Oh, I understood all that, it's just bad."
That's what frustrates me about this argument. It'd be completely different if a lot of people really did admit they were confused and the argument was that the movie wasn't understandable to a lot of people, but instead the entire argument runs in circles eating its own tail.
Yeah, pretty much. Even a couple of old friends told me I didn't get what Snyder was doing. Really surprised me.
I haven't seen anybody say the movie is confusing.
The movie does not make sense is not the same as the movie being confusing.
L
Lord Virgin
Unconfirmed Member
Just wait for Justice League, that will be glorious.
Donner Superman is awful though and does not hold up at all. Nostalgia is one hell of a thing.
BassForever
Member
I get its opinions and all, but I really can't understand how someone can objectively say bvs is better then civil war in anyways as a film or as a story.
Zack Snyder is an avant-garde artist who people just don't understand. Let me tell you about Sucker Punch
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
Hell no. I don't mind you saying you like BvS but this is where the line is crossed. (Superman 1 at least)
Dash_Riprock
Member
When people says its confusing, they mean the editing and pacing.
The plot is something a 12 year old came up with (or in this case, a 50 year old man with the mind of a 12 year old).
L
Lord Virgin
Unconfirmed Member
Fight me!
Tbf I saw those movies years later after seeing a lot of other comicbook movies. Safe to say had I seen it as a child I would have probably fallen in love with them as well. But seeing as that was not the case...booo those movies.
Why can't folks who enjoyed BvS just admit it's a bad movie? You can have fun with a bad movie.
I really enjoyed Speed Racer. Yet you don't see me grabbing my sword and shield when someone points out it's many faults. Take a lesson from Cleveland sports fans on how to deal with supporting bad things.
I really enjoyed Speed Racer. Yet you don't see me grabbing my sword and shield when someone points out it's many faults. Take a lesson from Cleveland sports fans on how to deal with supporting bad things.
So they mean the editing and pacing while they're usually asking questions about the plot? Ok...
Basically this. A movie can be bad and you can still like it. I like Batman & Robin (because it's bad) and I like the Matrix sequels - but I'll never pretend the Matrix sequels are on the same level as the original.
Everything I've read about Zack Snyder and comic books make it seem like he's a fan of 90s edgy comic book bullshit, and it shows.
I think you mean script. The plot for both movies was essentially the same. One hero dislikes the methods of another. Unassuming bad guy pushes buttons to make them both fight. Cool but worthless character cameos.
Editing greatly affects plot.
Yeezus H. Christ
Banned
The editing makes a fairly simple plot much harder to understand than normal because it jumps around all over the place.
This isn't rocket science.
The methods don't really come into Civil War at all. The trailers implied it would, but it's only a background element.
understanding the film's plot and also understanding that the movie is a confusing mess aren't mutually exclusive ideas
the movie feels extremely chopped up (which it is), but it's not like the plot and message is hard to understand because it lacks any semblance of subtlety. the viewer can still parse what's going on in a movie and realize that it's not exactly done gracefully or clearly.
what's the most confusing and hard to understand is some of the choices made by snyder, terrio and goyer
BVS seemed more ambitious but failed in execution.
Civil War played it safe, like a few other recent blockbusters. Sometimes it's better to be safe than sorry when it comes to mainstream audiences, sadly.
Both weren't as forgettable as Thor 2.
(So was the Flash scene real or a dream, because the movie does not make it clear. I'm assuming the former since Batman wouldn't know what Flash's costume would be yet, no?) And uh... the Martha bit was questionable.
Civil War played it safe, like a few other recent blockbusters. Sometimes it's better to be safe than sorry when it comes to mainstream audiences, sadly.
Both weren't as forgettable as Thor 2.
It was the same for BvS. The actual Batman and Superman fight had nothing to do with their opposing methods or ideologies.
Glass Shark
Banned
Usually I am really good at just letting people have whatever opinions they want about movies, games, TV, books, and other entertainment and just accepting the fact that people are different and like different things.
My only exceptions are BvS and Destiny. If you like either of those things you are a garbage person and you have a garbage life.
My only exceptions are BvS and Destiny. If you like either of those things you are a garbage person and you have a garbage life.
What did he mean by this?
Member
Civil War and BvS are eerily similar movies. It really creeps me out
Dash_Riprock
Member
Hollywood calls it "High Concept."
But yeah, basic plots are the same. But the script is where Civil War stands above BvS
- Status