What about at the banquet, or when he starts putting the gummi Bears in the dudes mouth.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Batman v Superman Ultimate Cut |OT| - Men are still good (out now)
- Thread starter Ahasverus
- Start date
What about at the banquet, or when he starts putting the gummi Bears in the dudes mouth.
wasn't it a jolly rancher?
Discotheque
Banned
if he has a problem with finger-wagging and a timer clock of all things what makes you think he'll like something as off-kilter as that perverse jolly rancher scene? lol.
Alienous really wanted a bigger more physically imposing Luthor similar to the DCAU Luthor. Eisenberg was never going to work for him because the idea spearheading the DCEU interpretation is that he is the exact opposite of Superman. Which does not lend itself well to even having the same personality as other more modern takes on Luthor. It's not a bad thing but it was basically a giant middle finger to people who wanted that.
Damn that is SAVAGE!!!!
ReplacementPelican
Member
Yeah, pretty much. There's such a tribalism to it, I actually like the majority of superhero movies because I've enjoyed superheroes since I was a kid. I don't need to pretend it's high-art or has more meaning than another company, it's just some fun stuff to watch for a few hours.
I read this as though it was said by Napoleon Dynamite.
That aside, it guess I just didn't believe anyone would be so pedantic and reactionary at a jab. The whole Martha thing is a joke, some people just get upset because they like the movie. There's no 'point' that people are missing, we all get it, it's just framed stupidly in the movie. Then again, you also seem to dislike the idea that 'trolling' is just posting a provocative comment, something you clearly did with the whole 'Marvel =/= subtlety' digression. Gosh.
That scene was definitely weird.
Mr. PlayStation
Member
Ok so I haven't seen the entire ultimate cut from start to finish. But I managed to see a few scenes. So BatVSupsGaf correct me if I am wrong:
The senator during the congressional hearing, she was actually there to reveal the lies that's been spreading to make Superman bad and reveal the real criminal who's Luthor, am I right? But Luthor knew that the senator had already figured that out, so he planned to send in Wayne Enterprise employee who is left crippled during the opening scene. And Luthor blows up his wheel chair. But in the theatrical cut, we are getting the impression that the crippled person actually blows himself up.
And one more thing, when Bats says he's having Luthor transferred to Arkham Asylum and that he still has his friend(s). Is he referring to Robin? What if Robin is actually become the redhood and Robin gets captured by Bruce in that universe and is sent to Arkham Asylum for treatment is now treating others in there(just a theory). Also in this scene, is Luthor actually trying to threaten Batman that he will reveal Batman's true identity, but no one would believe him as he's insane and not fit to stand trial?
Also why is Luthor so hell bent in killing Superman and Batman?
The senator during the congressional hearing, she was actually there to reveal the lies that's been spreading to make Superman bad and reveal the real criminal who's Luthor, am I right? But Luthor knew that the senator had already figured that out, so he planned to send in Wayne Enterprise employee who is left crippled during the opening scene. And Luthor blows up his wheel chair. But in the theatrical cut, we are getting the impression that the crippled person actually blows himself up.
And one more thing, when Bats says he's having Luthor transferred to Arkham Asylum and that he still has his friend(s). Is he referring to Robin? What if Robin is actually become the redhood and Robin gets captured by Bruce in that universe and is sent to Arkham Asylum for treatment is now treating others in there(just a theory). Also in this scene, is Luthor actually trying to threaten Batman that he will reveal Batman's true identity, but no one would believe him as he's insane and not fit to stand trial?
Also why is Luthor so hell bent in killing Superman and Batman?
Discotheque
Banned
he hurt his hand when he cut it lol.
Cw tries to way hard to be serious with it's plot, but has none of the actual consequences on screen. It's just another marvel movie with some decent action scenes and Spider-Man. They should've focused on just the hulk if they wanted to go this route of accountability, would've set up ragnarok more, and the split could be over locking banner away. Then you don't have to act like the several minutes of film devoted to the avengers explicitly saving almost everyone didn't exist. The SnyderCU said fuck that noise, for better or worse, real stakes and consequences.
"You flew too close to the sun" he got emotional because he was going to finish Zod's intent of killing Superman, but the measure was really extreme (Doomsday). It was the point of no return. That's what I got from it.
cr0w
Old Member
To be fair, this is a quote from Lolita.
"She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita."
What are the "real" consequences and stakes in BvS? What are the fake ones in Civil War?
Worse. Most definitely worse. Whatever "real consequences" come from Snyder's approach just makes Superman and Batman either look completely apathetic or just like fucking assholes who are nearly impossible to root for.
Mr. PlayStation
Member
I felt the same too
He's monologuing, it's supposed to be terrible. It's why he laughs, then stops himself.
When I saw it in the TC, I took it was "He actually thinks Kryptonians are beautiful / has an affection for them".
Maybe cutting his hand just really smarts.
But, like, who gives a shit? What is the actual point? That's what I don't get - there's nothing there except rambling, and we know he an ramble already by that point in the movie.
OK, so explaining how the jab doesn't make sense is pedantic and reactionary, I was apparently upset at the comic, and last but not least I was trolling because I returned the jab. Any more assumptions or is this just it?
Tbf, BvS was outright cruel to his characters, the only ones I thought were risk free were Batman and Wonder Woman. I legit thought Martha was going to bite it. CW has the biggest stakes in a Marvel movie thought, its ending was not pretty at all. The only criticism I can direct at CW is the shoehorned Spider-Man which creates some script problems. It's a very well rounded movie so no need to put them against one another.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
He's a spoiled rich kid who just cut his hand open with a large knife.
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
Heh I don't mind a Lolita reference every now and then.
It's supposed to be terible why? Why, Terrio?
ReplacementPelican
Member
That's about the long and short of it, yeah.
I didn't want to reply in earnest because a lot of people 'bait' with posts like that. Sorry if it offends you but that's how I took it.
But he has the steel nerve to stare down Doomsday who almost flattened him against the wall like it's nothing?
I feel like "it's supposed to be terrible'' is the ultimate thesis of most BvS defenders. Batman is supposed to be a terrible person. Superman is supposed to be a terrible hero.
"It was terrible, that's why it's masterful", go the fans.
Discotheque
Banned
The airport scene from Cap 3 really doesn't make sense to me still to this day. But it's also the best scene too so I aint mad. Like I get why Superman is meeting up with Batman, all the pieces are set for that. But here...they all put their costumes on to stroll into the airport in broad daylight to get transportation to another country.....
it's best not to nitpick these things, i remember not giving a shit as soon as spiderman showed up anyways. him and antman made that fight real fun.
it's best not to nitpick these things, i remember not giving a shit as soon as spiderman showed up anyways. him and antman made that fight real fun.
Thanks, great job.
ShutterMunster
Junior Member
None of those films would get financed today, btw.
I still feel like an Animated Series-style Lex Luthor, that powerful "perfect" American male type would have been interesting to see next to Cavil and Ben. Play him as an exceptional male, tall, handsome, and rich but still painfully insecure because he lives in world in which Superman exist.
They were fugitives, and needed a plane / take-off area. Stark knew they needed a plane / take-off area. So they both converge at the airport.
Discotheque
Banned
that's fine but the contrast of a shrimpy little dork opposite these alpha-males is also interesting imo. especially when he holds so much power over them in the film and even demeans them at the party.'
edit: yeah that aint gonna cut it Alienous. These people are more than resourceful enough to not have strolled out in public like that in order to get somewhere.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
He's pretty confident that superman was going to intervene. But he's also going slowly insane over the run time of the film. It's quite clear that you are interpreting everything in an unfavorable light because you don't like the film, while people that do like the film are interpreting the same scenes in other ways.
Dude
But no, we need more overbearing religious subtext. And you wouldn't need a physically imposing dude - you just need to play it straight. But no, Eisenberg had to go all Batman Forever Two-Face with the role.
What stakes in civil war exist? They're no longer friends? The end proves jail is nothing, they didn't even have a single shot of them struggling to break in to the raft. Cap physically beats iron man into submission, then send him a letter rubbing it in his face. And he drops a fucking airport terminal on 15 year old he just met. What happens? Gets vacation in the best country on the planet, harsh.
The SnyderCU is all about real world stakes. Clark can't mud stomp through buildings or use terrorist seeking missiles to stop threats. He can't even travel across the world with out repercussions. This extends to real people and how they connect with him. Religions have to change because of his existence, something never breached with Thor.
The mcu seems to be a world where everything is taken at an even keel, none of it truly surprising other than whether the government is in control of it or not.
Maybe he's a fan of the incredibles?
cr0w
Old Member
He's making an obscure artistic reference based on her name to make himself look intellectually superior, I suppose. He's very much an asshole millennial, which we've all run into, given where we're currently conversing.
Now is that Lex Luthor? No, it's not. Not traditionally. But his characterization is very accurate to what they were shooting for. I'd go so far as to say that this Luthor has Asperger's at the very least.
Did you see the UC? What did you think of it? I remember you didn't hate the TC.
Hey, I'm actually not on the Lex Luthor hate train here. It's certainly a strange incarnation of the character and not my first choice, but I think Eisenburg bizarrely pulls it off. My question wasn't a "Well, what about this then" as a criticism, but more just trying to make sense of the character.
Hell, you could argue that this inconsistency is part of his erratic nature. The same way he has trouble talking to a crowd of normal people, but he had no problem talking down to superman.
I'm sorry you feel that I'm not giving this characters or scenes an objective viewing just because of my dislike for the film as a whole, and I may be doing so in other places, but I don't mind Lex nearly as much as I do most things in here.
You know, before you even responded, I knew how this exchange would go. "What consequences were there in MCU" "These consequences" "Those don't count". And then you list consquences in BvS that could just as easily be dismissed. I disagree with ThreeDeafMutes assertion that I'm lost in my anti-fandom of the movie to the point where I am unable to interpret anything about the movie positively, but I certainly think of you in that spot with marvel.
I feel Lex's ready to die there.
I agree. I can see why they're compared so frequently but under the skin deep similarities, they're very different movies thematically.
Funny enough, both abandon their initial conflicts because both are (mostly) resolved by the end. Civil War stops caring about the Accords because they're ratified and the decision is made to make the Avengers fugitives from the law. BvS stops caring about whether or not Superman should act unilaterally or is a threat to humanity because Superman is dead so who cares anymore.
*erotically puts jolly rancher in atr0cious's mouth"
If you can't see how this plays into lex's father's abuse, then I don't know...
Discotheque
Banned
That was a note from Lex to prod at his insecurities. Lex knows exactly what he's doing with that one. Double meaning behind that note.
He left them with a boss who takes the 8 hour work day too seriously.
ShutterMunster
Junior Member
Well, I'm not against the religious subtext. I love it. I'm on record as saying this
Is the greatest frame of Superman ever put on screen. I am all for playing up the God angle. These things don't have to be mutually exclusive.
What's interesting about the panel you posted is that the dialog sounds like something BRUCE WAYNE would have said in the filmhe actually says similar sounding things. I like the idea of him being physically imposing because that's a part of the idea of the exceptional malea MAN'S MAN. He's 6'3+, broad shoulders, looks great in a suit. He is what every man in the world would love to be...except there's this dude named Superman...
But yeah, we're basically on the same page. What comic is that from?
Punching down but...it feels so good.
broncobuster
Banned
There are actual answers to the Lex and Doomsday questions. But as they aren't in the film, the relevance is uncertain and left to interpretation.
Lex wrote those letters.
Well, not personally. Or maybe he did. I want to know who he had design the justice league logos.
Lex wrote those letters.
Well, not personally. Or maybe he did. I want to know who he had design the justice league logos.
Lex Luthor: Man of Steel.
I imagine it's hard to read that and not hate what Eisenberg done with the role.
I found that speech useful for building Lex's motivations. Much of it is disjointed but I found it rather clear that his confusion in putting his words together are due to his fear and uncertainty of his own position in society, much of it being caused by the existence of Superman. He says something like "what is ultimate knowledge without ultimate power. Nothing....it's paradoxical." Lex is someone who believes he has knowledge and therefore should have power but feels he is powerless due to Superman.
ShutterMunster
Junior Member
I disliked what Eisenberg did because it reminded me too much of what I've seen Eisenberg already do. I don't think he's entirely unsuccessful in what he's trying to do with Lex but it isn't for me.