Superman vs Batman

First topic message reminder :

Have I heard this right?

The new Superman film, will be him vs Batman.

Please confirm that this is a viscous rumour.

The Fourth Lion wrote:The only superhero movie ever worth watching was Kick Ass, and that's because it mocked the genre by showing it up to be as transparently ridiculous as it really is.

And it was funny.

Check out a film called "DEFENDOR" (that's what he calls himself) with Woody Harrelson. Funny and sad in equal parts.

the problem with Nolan's Batman films is IMO two-fold.

1) They're really very, very good. IMO The Dark Knight is a true master-piece, and probably the best film I've seen in the last ten years or so. This means that every other superhero film will be (to an extent) compared to them, and more often than not, found wanting.

2) Their very serious, gritty tone. This works really well, but has resulted in a lot of films attempting to take the same path and not be so successful. This is particularly true of superhero films, as ultimately it's not that easy to make a serious superhero film (by definition, it'll always be fairly unrealistic at best). Man of Steel is a good example of this: while a decent film, it's very hard to be all serious, realistic and gritty in making a film about someone who comes from another planet (looks just like us) and can fly. I would in fact suggest that apart from Batman, not many superheroes lend themselves to the Nolan tone (Batman having the obvious advantage of basically being a normal human being).

The Avengers of course was much more light-hearted, and worked (IMO) much better for it.

Other valid points have been made: certainly Robert Downey Jr was a perfect fit as Iron Man and made the whole franchise work.

MFC- i agree that nolans batmans are out on there own, but i wasnt really comparing man of steel to that. ive heard it be described from decent, ok, rubbish and im more the latter.

the likes of thor were better films than man of steel and thats a alien with super powers coming to earth. man of steel flew through the early parts not developing any characters, the fights secens were just all of a blur (which happened a lot), and dragged on and became boring in the end. its nowhere near the likes of iron man let alone nolans batman

you see, I thought Man of Steel was pretty good, though the final action scene was way too long. I would rank it roughly on a par with Thor. Yes the character development wasn't great, but I thought they had a decent go at it with Superman at least and explored some interesting possibilities (how Earth's powers would react to Superman for instance), albeit they could have done it more. Would definitely rank Iron Man above it, and the Avengers, while Nolan's batman films do stand alone, they are superb.

oh i also forgot the other annoying bit, they tried setting it in a real world environment, yet when aliens are attacking and threatening the whole world its left to one american general to help out. not a foreign diplomat anywhere to be seen. just leave it to this general and america because we sort all the world problems out    

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:someone mentioned that the man of steel and the dark knight films ain't linked . i hope that's wrong and they use that batman in the up  and coming film and the justice league . its suggested that batman comes out of retirement which goes along the same story as frank millers graphic novel   dark knight returns

They're not linked and it would be a bad move to link them.

Firstly as Ben Affleck is Batman/Bruce Wayne and not Christian Bale, if you had Christian Bale then okay maybe.

Secondly Nolan's films had a very different tone to them than the new universe will, Nolan had everything grounded and accounted for, yes the Bat in the 3rd film stretched it but in the universe you could believe it may happen, Superman in that universe wouldn't fit.

Thirdly, you seriously hamper potential for the new Batman, you've used up the league of shadows (could be great secondary/ villain group for Justice League to have to tackle) Joker, Scarecrow, Bane. All gone. Don't limit who Batman could face before its started really.

Finally, there's nothing to say it couldn't be a retired Batman/Bruce Wayne we're getting as Affleck is 2 years older than Bale is.

I've read rumours that Affleck's Bruce Wayne is much older than Bale's.

Also the UNIVERSE with TDK should not be linked in anyway. Nolan's films are in their own standalone universe. As Simply as Hodge put it Superman would not work in the Nolan-Universe.

Could be a similar age to Bale's Bruce Wayne in TDKR, but this would be Batman's starting point in this universe rather than the finishing point in the Nolan universe. you don't want to make this Bruce Wayne too old or he would be too old for stand alone films and have to be less prominent in JL films if they do sequels which I imagine they will want.

I wonder if this is going to be like the "Kingdome Come" booksif they are all older?

Now pushed back to May 2016 where it will go up against one of Marvel's unannounced projects. Which tbh I hope is Thor 3, I have a feeling Thor 3 will be big at the box office with the promise of Loki being heavily involved by the looks.

A little upset by the news that it has been pushed back. But if it gives them more time to do things right that I guess all is good. Still wondering though who Dwayne Johnson will be playing. My thoughts would be hopefully it is a superhero, someone like Lantern(Stewart) or Cyborg.

I've been a little upset since ben Affleck was announced as Batman

There should be an unwritten law somewhere that you've played a Superhero on screen (Regardless of franchise) you shouldn't be able to play another. Although I can't blame Daredevil solely on him, that was just a steaming pile of turd anyway

That means Chris Evans wouldn't have been Captain America though Gazzy, he is great in that role.

I think I could live with that tbh

Who else would you put in the role?

Jocelyn Wildenstein

hampo171 wrote:Who else would you put in the role?

I don't think it would be a particularly difficult role to fill, think the caracter is just cheesy and cliche, hardest thing about it would be getting whoever to work out enough like he did

hampo171 wrote:Who else would you put in the role?

I saw a couple of suggestions online such as Chris Pine or Aaron Eckhart for an older Steve Rogers. James Marsden could, although that goes against your rule as he did Cyclops. To fit a 'profile' I guess you could say Channing Tatum, can play an armed forces role (GI Joe) although back then may not have had enough exposure for a franchise like Cap same could be said about Josh Duhamel as well.

hodge wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Who else would you put in the role?

I saw a couple of suggestions online such as Chris Pine or Aaron Eckhart for an older Steve Rogers. James Marsden could, although that goes against your rule as he did Cyclops. To fit a 'profile' I guess you could say Channing Tatum, can play an armed forces role (GI Joe) although back then may not have had enough exposure for a franchise like Cap same could be said about Josh Duhamel as well.

Purleease, the guy was out-acted by Dwaine Johnson's beard. Tatum is truly awful and I'm at a loss as to why he's so popular. Would love to see Tom Hardy as some anti-establishment Superhero though. Loved the Lobo comic book series and there's a rumour that a film is in the pipeline although it's a bit too obscure to be a mainstream success.

I said to fit a profile, he fits the profile on stoney military guy. Not who I'd choose just that he fits.

Jesse Eisenberg has been cast as Lex Luthor. Very much an 'out-there' choice.

Jeremy Irons as Alfred. Can't see him bettering Michael Caine.

Terrible casting for Luthor. Should have been Bryan Cranston. If he doesn't end up being Gordon now I'm going to be rather annoyed.

No one will out do Caine as Alfred.

byran cranston would have been a good one, he's already proven he can do intelligent bald person who turns evil

its like they picking names from a hat and his was in there by mistake . to be fair he might do a ledger and knock the ball out the park . Craig Daniel another who wasn't fancied and had loads of internet stick but i got to be honest hes my favorite bond

He's not mine, total lack of charisma for me. He's been in decent bond films but he's not a great bond. Bronson was better for me but sadly the complete opposite of craig, goldeneye being the exception. Obviously I have connery as number 1

Pierce Brosnan is the best Bond, and Goldeneye is the best film.

Eisenberg is a very out there choice. I don't understand how people can say its a terrible choice when we haven't seen him as the character yet. It's daft saying that's a terrible choice, how do we know that?

Plus, the castings of Christopher Reeve and Michael Keaton were both heavily questioned when they were made and they turned out ok.

I agree I don't know how Eisenberg can be judged really before we know what type of Lex Luthor we're getting. I read somewhere that they want to make the characters of Luthor and Superman look similar in terms of age. Henry Cavill and Eisenberg are both 30 where Bryan Cranston is nearly double the age. Could be that they want Luthor as some sort of prodigy coming up in the world and as a so called saviour from an ailen. Could a 57 year old Cranston come off like that?

This is exactly what Superman needs, a good shake up. Breathes new life into the character.

There has been a story on a few websites today saying that Jesse Eisenberg will be playing Lex as street thug who is a self made billionaire by the time he was 18. He will be bald as well. I took this from an article on Digital Spy. It gives a brief outline of the story.

"The film will pick up after the events of Man of Steel, with Metropolis trying to rebuild following the collateral damage caused by the Superman and General Zod battle.

Luthor comes into contact with Ben Affleck's Bruce Wayne when the Gotham magnate arrives in Metropolis to help the city get back on its feet. The duo fail to see eye-to-eye - Luthor believing Wayne is a "trust fund baby" and Wayne seeing his rival as arrogant.

Luthor also believes that Superman is a threat and must be killed, while Wayne thinks the Man of Steel can co-exist with the human race."

When I first heard this film come out I was against it. Even if Bale was announced as Batman I still would've been against it. Superman needs to stand out alone.

See I loved Man of Steel. I could see the parallels between it and Batman Begins. The characters past and present intwined in the film. Both villans were part of the characters past (Well Zod before Kal El's arrival with Jor El) and were meant to test the characters physically and emotionally. There was even a reference to Luthor with the Lexcorp truck explodingand I was hooked. Now I think Cavill did the role justice and again was another DC masterstroke in casting. All the steam has been taken out of it now it has decided to incorporate a collaboration which now kills the momentum that the franchise has made. The sequel to MOS could've been similar to TDK an be the stronger film in the series. I would've assumed that the Nolan formula for DC is perfect. It focuses on the characters isolation and work so brilliant with it. See naturally I would've assumed that again Luthor would've been to the film what The Joker was to TDK. The villan that challenged the character mentally and then have Doomsday for the 3rd film.

DC had a winning formula and completely ruined it. They are not Marvel and the more they try the more they end up copying!

legendkillarV2 wrote:When I first heard this film come out I was against it. Even if Bale was announced as Batman I still would've been against it. Superman needs to stand out alone.

See I loved Man of Steel. I could see the parallels between it and Batman Begins. The characters past and present intwined in the film. Both villans were part of the characters past (Well Zod before Kal El's arrival with Jor El) and were meant to test the characters physically and emotionally. There was even a reference to Luthor with the Lexcorp truck explodingand I was hooked. Now I think Cavill did the role justice and again was another DC masterstroke in casting. All the steam has been taken out of it now it has decided to incorporate a collaboration which now kills the momentum that the franchise has made. The sequel to MOS could've been similar to TDK an be the stronger film in the series. I would've assumed that the Nolan formula for DC is perfect. It focuses on the characters isolation and work so brilliant with it. See naturally I would've assumed that again Luthor would've been to the film what The Joker was to TDK. The villan that challenged the character mentally and then have Doomsday for the 3rd film.

DC had a winning formula and completely ruined it. They are not Marvel and the more they try the more they end up copying!

I said the same earlier in the thread Legend.

"Thirdly, the rise of Marvel and their whole universe of films has re-invigorated the super-hero genre and I feel DC have now only realised that they need to try something similar without making it look like they are just copying the format."

The don't need to copy Marvel, they have strong enough characters and storylines that they can easily build their own 'universe'. I do think, however, we need to give Man of Steel 2 a break. It is getting a lot of flak at the moment, lets give it a chance and see how it pans out. We might be pleasantly surprised.

I think DC are trying to limit the amount of time Marvel really have the area overly to themselves by the fact they're bringing out 2 films a year and DC atm have one every few atm, once MoS2 comes out I expect Batman stand alones, Wonder Women, Green Lantern (unless an actual JL film comes first where they appear and same goes for Flash).

Thing is they're not letting each franchise build its own individuality before bringing the characters together, Iron Man had 2 films, Thor and Cap had one each. Black Widow featured pretty well in Iron Man 2, Hawkeye featured in Thor and pretty much everyone knows what Hulk brings anyway even without Hulk and The Incredible Hulk. All members of the team got some exposure at least before the team up for The Avengers where the villain was also well known before the film as well.

I think the DC cinematic universe will do well.... but will fail in comparison to Marvel who have set their universe up really well. Apparently Guardians of the Galaxy 2 is what Marvel are lining up for May 2016 to face Man of Steel 2, considering its building to Avengers 3 it could include Thanos in a fairly large role so could be a challenge somewhat.

I get tired of all the doommongerers on the internet, who seem as if they just want the film to fail just to say "I told you so!". I`ve reserved judgement on casting decisions as they`ve been announced because we don`t know the script or the story yet and we`ve not even seen a photo let alone a trailer! I trust that DC/Warner Bros know what they`re doing with the characters and am really excited about this film because they have a vision for the film. That`s what excites me the the most tbh, the fact that they have a vision. Too many fans have criticised DC`s approach saying Marvel has them chasing their tails and has them panicked. I don`t think DC should just try to copy Marvel`s approach. DC are doing it their way and I respect them for that.

A Superman/Batman film has never been done in live-action before. This is monumental and historic. DC/Warner Bros need to get it right and I`d rather they push back the release date and produce a 5* film than rush it and do it an injustice. This is huge and I think they understand that. Besides, Marvel studios doesn`t own all the rights to their characters and so I really doubt we would have a Guardians of the Galaxy film if Marvel had the rights to Spiderman or the X-Men. Marvel studios are having to make the best of a bad situation as they`ve taken secondary characters and made them successful film franchises. DC/Warner Bros have the rights to all their main characters and so can work on crafting a truly great cinematic universe.

Batman Vs Superman: Dawn Of Justice..... hmmmmm wonder what that could be hinting at

rick_dagless wrote:I wonder if this is going to be like the "Kingdome Come" booksif they are all older?

Let's hope so!

DC VS marvel . now that would be a good film   

ChequeredJersey wrote:Let's hope so!.

Or "Dark Knight Returns" esp as this would need Green Arrow

Problem in DC V Marvel would be, like most crossovers, no one can win.

rick_dagless wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:Let's hope so!.

Or "Dark Knight Returns" esp as this would need Green Arrow

Problem in DC V Marvel would be, like most crossovers, no one can win.

I would love it if the new film had Green Arrow in as well. He is a great character.

Womble wrote:I would love it if the new film had Green Arrow in as well. He is a great character..

it is a definite possibility, but as long as it is "Green Arrow" and not "Arrow"

rick_dagless wrote:

Womble wrote:I would love it if the new film had Green Arrow in as well. He is a great character..

it is a definite possibility, but as long as it is "Green Arrow" and not "Arrow"

Agreed