Robert Pattinson is now the new Live Action Batman.

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

But still I just wish DC movies were more like Alex Ross' comic books in terms of tone at the very least.

Yeah, see, you keep saying that but then the things you say would make a good movie are things that Ross would never have included in a thousand years

I never said it was good, I said it was only interesting. How would they pull of Batman getting Raped in Prison?

And yes in the end I would still prefer the Ross tone for DC then batman getting raped.

Even though he deserves it for usurping Superman as the face of DC and making everything grimdark

You're the one who seems to want everything to be grimdark homie.

IF the option is only Grimdark Seriousness or Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence, I choose the former. Because I take the idea of being a Superhero seriously. The whole with Great Power Comes Great Responsibility. It mabye be Grimdark but I can stomach grimdark stupidity better then what I saw in Shazam.

I just want the first half of Superman 1978 again. I want sweeping epic Orchestral Scores. I want it to FEEL heroic. I want this again:

interesting that you say that then post the theme from Justice League/Unlimited. A series of shows that swings wider on the "Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence" circle than the grimdark serious side.

Its dry humor and interactions. And as far as I remember, I didn't see Justice League having someone dance in front of a badguy to distract him. I mean yeah we had the Flash, but I had characters like Superman and Jjonn Jonzz to balance the goofy characters.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

But still I just wish DC movies were more like Alex Ross' comic books in terms of tone at the very least.

Yeah, see, you keep saying that but then the things you say would make a good movie are things that Ross would never have included in a thousand years

I never said it was good, I said it was only interesting. How would they pull of Batman getting Raped in Prison?

And yes in the end I would still prefer the Ross tone for DC then batman getting raped.

Even though he deserves it for usurping Superman as the face of DC and making everything grimdark

You're the one who seems to want everything to be grimdark homie.

IF the option is only Grimdark Seriousness or Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence, I choose the former. Because I take the idea of being a Superhero seriously. The whole with Great Power Comes Great Responsibility. It mabye be Grimdark but I can stomach grimdark stupidity better then what I saw in Shazam.

I just want the first half of Superman 1978 again. I want sweeping epic Orchestral Scores. I want it to FEEL heroic. I want this again:

interesting that you say that then post the theme from Justice League/Unlimited. A series of shows that swings wider on the "Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence" circle than the grimdark serious side.

Its dry humor and interactions. And as far as I remember, I didn't see Justice League having someone dance in front of a badguy to distract him. I mean yeah we had the Flash, but I had characters like Superman and Jjonn Jonzz to balance the goofy characters.

Justice League the animated series has an episode where Wonder Woman gets turned into a pig and Batman has to sing in a jazz club to save her.

The episode is called "This Little Piggy."

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

you know he's not a bad actor. Twilight sucked and it'll mark his career forever, but I've seen him in other things and he was acceptable. Harry Potter and the whatever of who cares he was good and the city of lost alphabets was neat.
And if its a tale from year-1 Batman, you cant tell me seeing him get the shit kicked out of him wouldn't quell some of those twilight hate-boners.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

But still I just wish DC movies were more like Alex Ross' comic books in terms of tone at the very least.

Yeah, see, you keep saying that but then the things you say would make a good movie are things that Ross would never have included in a thousand years

I never said it was good, I said it was only interesting. How would they pull of Batman getting Raped in Prison?

And yes in the end I would still prefer the Ross tone for DC then batman getting raped.

Even though he deserves it for usurping Superman as the face of DC and making everything grimdark

You're the one who seems to want everything to be grimdark homie.

IF the option is only Grimdark Seriousness or Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence, I choose the former. Because I take the idea of being a Superhero seriously. The whole with Great Power Comes Great Responsibility. It mabye be Grimdark but I can stomach grimdark stupidity better then what I saw in Shazam.

I just want the first half of Superman 1978 again. I want sweeping epic Orchestral Scores. I want it to FEEL heroic. I want this again:

interesting that you say that then post the theme from Justice League/Unlimited. A series of shows that swings wider on the "Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence" circle than the grimdark serious side.

Its dry humor and interactions. And as far as I remember, I didn't see Justice League having someone dance in front of a badguy to distract him. I mean yeah we had the Flash, but I had characters like Superman and Jjonn Jonzz to balance the goofy characters.

Justice League the animated series has an episode where Wonder Woman gets turned into a pig and Batman has to sing in a jazz club to save her.

The episode is called "This Little Piggy."

Justice League also had an episode of them in World War 2 fighting Nazis.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

But still I just wish DC movies were more like Alex Ross' comic books in terms of tone at the very least.

Yeah, see, you keep saying that but then the things you say would make a good movie are things that Ross would never have included in a thousand years

I never said it was good, I said it was only interesting. How would they pull of Batman getting Raped in Prison?

And yes in the end I would still prefer the Ross tone for DC then batman getting raped.

Even though he deserves it for usurping Superman as the face of DC and making everything grimdark

You're the one who seems to want everything to be grimdark homie.

IF the option is only Grimdark Seriousness or Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence, I choose the former. Because I take the idea of being a Superhero seriously. The whole with Great Power Comes Great Responsibility. It mabye be Grimdark but I can stomach grimdark stupidity better then what I saw in Shazam.

I just want the first half of Superman 1978 again. I want sweeping epic Orchestral Scores. I want it to FEEL heroic. I want this again:

interesting that you say that then post the theme from Justice League/Unlimited. A series of shows that swings wider on the "Goofy Quips and Lighthearted Irreverence" circle than the grimdark serious side.

Its dry humor and interactions. And as far as I remember, I didn't see Justice League having someone dance in front of a badguy to distract him. I mean yeah we had the Flash, but I had characters like Superman and Jjonn Jonzz to balance the goofy characters.

Justice League the animated series has an episode where Wonder Woman gets turned into a pig and Batman has to sing in a jazz club to save her.

The episode is called "This Little Piggy."

Justice League also had an episode of them in World War 2 fighting Nazis.

Exactly, it balanced out its darker moments with moments of levity, and that's why the show was so good.

The entire reason that people hate the Zach Snyer movies is because they don't do that.

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Justice League the animated series has an episode where Wonder Woman gets turned into a pig and Batman has to sing in a jazz club to save her.

The episode is called "This Little Piggy."

Justice League also had an episode of them in World War 2 fighting Nazis.

In which they don't really get into any of the atrocities the Nazis committed, instead simply having them as generic mooks riding giant armoured ferris wheels and being led by an immortal caveman. Don't think that really makes the point you were hoping it would make

 

[Cicada 5]

Okay, seriously, did the definition of grimdark shift in the last decade? Because apart from BvS, no DCEU has even come close to being grimdark.

Superman saved the day in Man of Steel in the end. It was either have Zod's necked snap or have him ravage the entire world. And it would be grim dark if it was the latter.

And all of it was accompanied by excessive amounts of death, destruction, and military bravado, because Zack Snyder can't take superheroes seriously unless they're killing and screwing eachother. Didn't he also want Batman to have been raped in prison? That dude is just perpetually trapped in the 90's.

The amount of destruction that occurs in MoS is not that much larger than most superhero films and is about on par with what we see in the Avengers movies.

And the "military bravado" amounts to nothing more than the soldiers helping Superman and not being useless canon fodder. You'll see actually military bravado in the Captain America films.

 

[Agema]

you know he's not a bad actor.

I think he's actually a very good actor.

Twilight has only determined his public fame because he's eschewed major movies since, so too few people have seen him do anything else. That would change if he took up some other big box office films.

Exactly, it balanced out its darker moments with moments of levity, and that's why the show was so good.

The entire reason that people hate the Zach Snyer movies is because they don't do that.

I think DCEU was born out of Nolan's Batman series, and thought that would be the right vibe to continue after it had worked for Nolan. I can also get it if it were a way of perhaps differentiating from Marvel's more comedic tone.

It could have worked: but unfortunately for them, I think the main problem boiled down to the fact that Zac Snyder is no Christopher Nolan.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

Okay, seriously, did the definition of grimdark shift in the last decade? Because apart from BvS, no DCEU has even come close to being grimdark.

Superman saved the day in Man of Steel in the end. It was either have Zod's necked snap or have him ravage the entire world. And it would be grim dark if it was the latter.

And all of it was accompanied by excessive amounts of death, destruction, and military bravado, because Zack Snyder can't take superheroes seriously unless they're killing and screwing eachother. Didn't he also want Batman to have been raped in prison? That dude is just perpetually trapped in the 90's.

The amount of destruction that occurs in MoS is not that much larger than most superhero films and is about on par with what we see in the Avengers movies.

And the "military bravado" amounts to nothing more than the soldiers helping Superman and not being useless canon fodder. You'll see actually military bravado in the Captain America films.

In Captain America: The First Avenger, sure its got a pulpy WWII feel to it and there's definately bravado to spare. Winter Soldier and Civil War? Not so much I find.

 

[twistedmic]

The amount of destruction that occurs in MoS is not that much larger than most superhero films and is about on par with what we see in the Avengers movies.

And the "military bravado" amounts to nothing more than the soldiers helping Superman and not being useless canon fodder. You'll see actually military bravado in the Captain America films.

I think what makes Man of Steel 'grimdark' is the fact that civilians actually died as a result of the destruction and weren't magically saved by the heroes. IT seems to me that the MCU, and other Superhero movies in general have an attitude similar to the 80's G.I. Joe cartoon where nobody gets killed and every pilot 'parachutes to safety'.
Remember that in BvS Bruce says thousands died in Metropolis, contrast that to the MCU where only 274 civilians died in the final battles over three movies (Avengers, Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron).
Even the Dark Knight trilogy, as dark as it got, didn't have a civilian body count that high.

PS- I, for one, don't consider Man of Steel to be grimdark. Serious, yes. More on the somber side than lighthearted and comedic, yes. But it wasn't excessively dark and brooding.

 

[Hawki]

But what sets it apart is simply this;

Superman. Does. Not. Give a fuck.

While other movies might make a passing mention of evacuating citizens. Or go the Avengers route and show the heroes either saving individual groups of people, or physically moving the fight somewhere else. The city in MoS is nothing but a backdrop for his fight with Zod. Clark never bats an eye at what he's smashing through, or smashing Zod into, or what he's getting smashed into by Zod. They aren't buidlings. Streets. Houses. They're bundles of cgi sticks and rocks to explode when someone goes flying through them.

The city, for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist. To Clark, to Zod, to the movie.

Which, in turn just makes Superman feel like a sociopath god-baby, with shitty parents that the movie ruined.

Oh goodie, this argument again.

The whole "Supes doesn't care" argument has to rely on ignoring 90% of the film that led up to this point, where everything Supes does is in service to humanity, even though it's the harder route (how easy would it be to join the kryptonians - blood before water and all that). And the entire point of the Zod fight is that Zod's dangerous, not just physically, but in terms of the ideology he represents. So either you show him how dangerous he is and have Supes struggle to hold his own (a struggle that would be undercut if he magically found time to keep popping off and saving people), or you reduce the threat of Zod so that Supes can have time to save people on the side while fighting the villains.

 

[Hawki]

or you have superman try and drag the fight away from the city

Either he'd fail miserably, or you'd undercut Zod as a threat. Take your pick.

and when zod specifically targets the city because he knows clark cares about it, have clark express An Emotion towards that. either during, or after it.

He doesn't target Metropolis because Clark cares about it, he targets it because he wants to wipe out humanity, because it's the only recourse left available to him (as he sees it). And Clark shows emotion before the fight (disgust), and at its end (desparation, grief).

or maybe not have the one time clark smiles in the movie be when he's sitting in his office as a news reporter, looking out over the 50% destroyed city he had a part in.

First of all, he does smile in the flight sequence.

Second of all, Clark's miserable through most of the film, and that's for good reason. That he smiles at the end is culmanative of his character arc, where he's finally found his place.

Third of all, saying Clark "had a part" in the destruction of Metropolis is like saying Peter is equally responsible for the train damage in Spider-Man 2. Or, if aliens invaded today, but were repelled, I'd understand that collateral damage is a thing.

like....maybe the last scene could have had him, as superman, helping clean it up? interacting with people? being nice?

I'll grant you this - I'll take such a scene over Supes destroying the drone.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

But what sets it apart is simply this;

Superman. Does. Not. Give a fuck.

While other movies might make a passing mention of evacuating citizens. Or go the Avengers route and show the heroes either saving individual groups of people, or physically moving the fight somewhere else. The city in MoS is nothing but a backdrop for his fight with Zod. Clark never bats an eye at what he's smashing through, or smashing Zod into, or what he's getting smashed into by Zod. They aren't buidlings. Streets. Houses. They're bundles of cgi sticks and rocks to explode when someone goes flying through them.

The city, for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist. To Clark, to Zod, to the movie.

Which, in turn just makes Superman feel like a sociopath god-baby, with shitty parents that the movie ruined.

Oh goodie, this argument again.

The whole "Supes doesn't care" argument has to rely on ignoring 90% of the film that led up to this point, where everything Supes does is in service to humanity, even though it's the harder route (how easy would it be to join the kryptonians - blood before water and all that). And the entire point of the Zod fight is that Zod's dangerous, not just physically, but in terms of the ideology he represents. So either you show him how dangerous he is and have Supes struggle to hold his own (a struggle that would be undercut if he magically found time to keep popping off and saving people), or you reduce the threat of Zod so that Supes can have time to save people on the side while fighting the villains.

or you have superman try and drag the fight away from the city

and when zod specifically targets the city because he knows clark cares about it, have clark express An Emotion towards that. either during, or after it.

or maybe not have the one time clark smiles in the movie be when he's sitting in his office as a news reporter, looking out over the 50% destroyed city he had a part in.

like....maybe the last scene could have had him, as superman, helping clean it up? interacting with people? being nice?

And maybe not have the kiss with Amy Adams be in front a backdrop of collapsing buildings and burning rubble.

Superman has super hearing, he can hear people screaming for help and being crushed and burned while he makes out with Lois Lane.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

PS- I, for one, don't consider Man of Steel to be grimdark. Serious, yes. More on the somber side than lighthearted and comedic, yes. But it wasn't excessively dark and brooding.

I don't know, it's the movie where Superman's father tells him that he should let children die to protect his anonymity. That's pretty damn dark.

 

[Hawki]

And maybe not have the kiss with Amy Adams be in front a backdrop of collapsing buildings and burning rubble.

Superman has super hearing, he can hear people screaming for help and being crushed and burned while he makes out with Lois Lane.

He can hear people calling out all the time, and yet he still works as a journalist. No-one seems to ask him to give it 100% 100% of the time.

PS- I, for one, don't consider Man of Steel to be grimdark. Serious, yes. More on the somber side than lighthearted and comedic, yes. But it wasn't excessively dark and brooding.

I don't know, it's the movie where Superman's father tells him that he should let children die to protect his anonymity. That's pretty damn dark.[/quote]

First of all, he doesn't say he should do it, he says "maybe." Second of all, it's clear in the context of the film that Pa Kent is in the wrong.