Tiberius Christ posted:

there is only one good batman(1989)

the rest are terrible except maybe the adam west one

Fire Barrel posted:

Why don't they make a modern Justice League movie in the style of 60s batman? Just make it a campy comedy full of one liners, bright colors, and silly costumes. Hell, maybe even have song numbers and poo poo.

dog buttz posted:

Pull out PULL OUT CLARK

*jizz fires into and out of lois' body like a .50 cal round, severing her spine*

Fluffy Bunnies posted:

By good I mean a lot of people generally enjoyed it and that it did well at the box office.

WampaLord posted:

Great job, OP, thanks for delivering on the piss jar situation.

gfanikf posted:

I was wondering if they had announced that already.

Serious Frolicking posted:

i think you will find that this is very grim and serious with lots of violence so it is for adults now

happyhippy posted:

All it took was some one with half a brain to aim and shoot at their loving legs (in case of Captain America) or not have a super bad guy just stand there and do nothing until its too late.

Young Freud posted:

Doesn't it also have a scene where Deadpool gets pegged?

paco650 posted:

He can snap regular ol' goon necks and shoot their cars with Bat-Missiles and run them over with his tank and drop them multiple stories onto pavement or into freezing gonorrhea Hudson River water or leave them dangling upside down from a gargoyle for unlimited hours until they have loving subdural hematomas, but apparently he's not allowed to kill any of the extremely dangerous, sometimes super-powered homocidal killers and megalomaniac crime lords because then comic book people would have to come up with original ideas instead of plumbing the concept holes of 80-year-old corpses.

Zzulu posted:

I'm watching the new daredevil show and I'm so tired of his No Kill Ever policy. He even refuses to kill people who are directly trying to cut his loving head off. I mean cmon son

Zzulu posted:

Daredevil is still good though, yall should watch it. I had no interest in Daredevil at all but that show is a good punchman show

Mel Mudkiper posted:

The Spirit exists

Lil Peeler posted:

, in the previews I saw a look like Superman had a bunch of guards. Why would Superman need guards? How do you assassinate Superman?

Zzulu posted:

Jesus had a beard, superman is not jesus

you idiot

Samuel L. ACKSYN posted:

batman would probably save a lot of lives, time, and effort if hed just kill the joker

Nckdictator posted:

FizFashizzle posted:

dude steel was loving bad

Neurosis posted:

Frank miller's tried to make dick grayson eat rats after dick's parents were killed and painted a whole room yellow to beat up hal jordan for no good reason and abused dick so much he became a bisexual psychopath.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Also if Lex's entire plan was to trick Batman and Superman into fighting why did he want to make Kryptonite weapons to kill Superman if the Kryptonite was necessary for Batman to Superman? Did he know Batman would know that he had Kryptonite and steal it to make the weapons and so the whole Kryptonite weapon plan was a diverson? If so wtf.

Shima Honnou posted:

The Russian guys are also the same low-level nobody crims that Batman was tracking in a side plot for literally half the movie, coincidentally.

Tenzarin posted:

mods knew

MrQwerty posted:

This movie sounds dumb as poo poo but totally serious

Mel Mudkiper posted:

Than why even bother with the Senator in the first place? It doesn't fit into his plan at all.

TLG James posted:

What was the loving point of a magic metal bullet that couldn't even make it through a small notebook.

Gatekeeper posted:

and I love how every comic book retard I know was always going on about how amazing Rorschach is but he's clearly not supposed to be someone you root for because he's a crazy monster hahaha fuckin nerds are garbage sometimes

Shaquin posted:

Blade was the last of the good comic book movies

Valko posted:

Ahem, Blade TWO actually.

Ron Paul Atreides posted:

Are you telling me this crap beat Avengers

Ron Paul Atreides posted:

oh right they track international now to inflate failure

LGD posted:

it's a total and complete mystery why people had "preconceived notions" about how a character who has had huge cultural resonance for nearly 80's should be handled

bring back old gbs posted:

Extended cut may actually be pretty bonkers if this is the sort of stuff they left out.

Otisburg posted:

i'm sure the 3 hour cut is going to solve every problem with the movie

Snowglobe of Doom posted:

The MCU films resolve themselves by killing/destroying the villains almost every time - Iron Man kills Stane/Iron Monger, Iron Man 2 blows up Ivan Vanko/Whiplash, Captain America implodes the Red Skull with the Tesseract, Guardians of the Galaxy vaporise Ronan, Ant-Man violently crushes Yellowjacket by sabotaging his shrinking equipment, etc etc.. They solve the supervillain problem by just making them go away because they're operating under standard comicbook/action movie rules where killing the irredeemable villain is framed as being good and right and justified. When Marvel superheroes complete their trials they look like this:

Just look at how loving smug they are. But because of the way the story was framed the audience feels like they totally earned it, and because the audience identified with these characters they also get a smugly Pavlovian reward when the movies conclude like this. Marvel films tell the audience "Superheroes are awesome and you're awesome for liking them!"

Man of Steel, on the other hand, chose not to operate under those rules. The protagonist here wasn't a charismatic plucky underdog who was using his unique skills to win the day, he was a guy who was uncertain about his place in the world and constantly questioning his actions, or whether he should act at all. The villain wasn't just a selfish guy hell bent on destroying his enemies, he was a nuanced "the end justifies the means" character who was trying to save his race. We didn't completely identify with the hero and we didn't completely hate the villain. Zod's death was more of a "suicide via Supercop", forced by his own volition onto a reluctant 'hero' rather than the triumphant victory over evil that Marvel films dish up, and that SUperman films also used to dish up. Superman II back in 1980 was operating under standard superhero/action movie rules so when he killed Zod that time he looked like this:

... but when the DCCU Superman kills Zod he looks like this:

MoS wasn't trying to be standard comicbook/action movie and it instead decided to question the cliched comicbook resolution by asking "What if you can't neatly make the problem go away? What if you don't get the triumphant happy ending? What if the good guy doesn't have all the answers just because he's the good guy?"

And those are some really good questions to ask in a movie, but on the other hand they're attacking some of the core assumptions that have been underlying the superhero genre for nearly 80 years now. The great majority of superhero comics/movies/Saturday Morning cartoons have operated under a Just World milieu where the hero deserved to win and the bad guy deserved to die and this was hardly ever questioned. (There's a whole lot of obvious exceptions to this but most of the general public probably wouldn't be familiar with them and they're vastly outnumbered by the cliched comicbook stories.) When Superman is forced to end Zod's reign of terror by snapping his neck and when Batman decides to kill dozens of mooks and these acts are shown as being morally ambiguous instead of being justified retribution then these stories are stepping outside the popular perception of the superhero genre. They're asking audiences to think about the genre rather than just leading them to the happy ending they usually get.

So yeah, Marvel did "do it right" in that they served up superhero movies that comfortably fit inside the superhero framework that has been fed to the general public over these last 70-odd years. DC decided to step outside that framework and ask whether those cliched superhero plots might have different consequences in the real world, and that's perfectly fine but there's going to be giant swathes of the general public disappointed that they didn't get the uplifting morally unambiguous costumed punchman film they were expecting, and there's also going to be a whole ton of diehard fans that will be upset that these films are daring to raise questions about the superhero genre instead of faithfully recreating it on the big screen. If people walked into Mos or BvS expecting a standard "Superheroes are awesome and you're awesome for liking them!" experience then they won't have been prepared for what they were going to get instead.

A GLISTENING HODOR posted:

Domestic weekend:



It's 6th of all time. But consider this: look at the loving title of the movie. Of course this was going to happen.

With almost universal negative word of mouth, I'm really interested to see if it has a 60%> drop in the second weekend.

Remember that Ang Lee's Hulk, Daredevil, and X3 weren't bombs. But the reviews and big weekend drop off scared away the studios.

A GLISTENING HODOR posted:

Please enjoy my new Punisher film where Frank Castle comes back from Iraq with PTSD and gunshots cause him to freak out and piss his pants and he spends the whole movie trying different combinations of meds and filling out VA benefits forms.

It's more accurate than the cheesy comics and the brutal reality portrayed in his scene where he falls through the cracks in veteran care and overdoses on heroin, I feel, really captures the character of Frank Castle.

oldpainless posted:

Eisenberg was god-awful as Lex Luthor and Jeremy Irons should have been used a hell of a lot more. Put him in every scene somehow including the end fight where he dispenses wisdom to all 3 of them.

Ivor Biggun posted:

Clark Kent: Twitch Streamer

hitchensgoespop posted:

EDIT: Does the superman die at the end of this movie? Im gonna watch it eventually but i dont really give a poo poo because all of DCs stuff so far has been terrible.

Rutibex posted:

couldn't they take basically any actress and scale her up via the same methods they used to scale down the Hobbits in LOTR?

hitchensgoespop posted:

Maybe you could have several versions of the same film, one where everybody had comically porportioned boobs and buts and crotch bulges, one where everyone had normal sized dadbods and one where no one was fat shamed and everyone was 250 pounds. Its 2016 ffs, with CGI we should be able to do these things

I would pay good money to see fat superheroes battle it out.

Lasher posted:

When I think of THE TICK the first thing that springs to mind is, "This isn't dark or edgy enough."

Ivor Biggun posted:

What does your heart tell you?

8-Bit Scholar posted:

I think J. Olsen was a girl in Man of Steel

bring back old gbs posted:

my biggest gripe with the saving scenes was the rooftop people. Does he just pull them up one by one? Or does he do what you do with little cousins, where you stick your arms out and they all try to latch on while you run around the yard? if he had like a giant net or something i could find it believable, idk. that part really bugged me. why not like push a huge boat around??? "borrow" Lex's yacht, and he "borrows" his mom in return basically sets up the entire movie.

Riotgrrill posted:

Good times, great memories.

hitchensgoespop posted:

I'm sure some goon will correct me but I'm sure that's gonna count as a flop.