Well, Warner Bros. just released the first trailer for Batman V Superman and I thought... well, I thought it was awesome (check it out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwfUnkBfdZ4). I personally like how Zack Snyder and Co. are incorporating both Jor El's hopes for Superman and Pa Kent's fears in the movie judging by the trailer. There are some people who seem to love Superman and revere him like a god (like Jor El hoped); however, there are others who don't like Superman and appear to be rejecting him (Pa Kent's fears). That looks like a great storyline. Ben Affleck as Batman just looks amazing. Love both suits, especially the armored one. I loved "Man of Steel" and this just looks great!!! I can feel a great story coming along with action, awesome music (courtesy of Zimmer and Holkenborg), and some great dialogue (Chris Terrio)!!! :D

So, those are my thoughts on the trailer. What are yours? I'm curious to know!

There's a lot already going on in this thread:
Thread 188433

It was a TeaSe....

I want the 5.1 trailer to come out to see how it's mixed.
Hopefully well enough to get another "No Strings Attached"-esque edit.

Hopefully well enough to get another "No Strings Attached"-esque edit.

I dunno about that... the various voices pan from the left to the right and don't seem centered. Maybe the rear channels are music-only though.

Depends where the release comes from.

Different countries have different mixing. That movie-list forum has, at least, about 3 different country/regional suppliers.

Depends where the release comes from.

Really? I thought they just set the dialogue to be mixed a certain way regardless of language.

The Warner Bros encode in PCM is just stereo.
For all we know, the studio encode could have used mono stems like we've seen before and doubled them.

The multichannel release, who knows what happens.

We can't guess either.
Not even using any fancy algorithm using past releases as a basis.

We can't assume much using the given stereo encode, either.
Don't know what WB uses for their own internal encodes. Could be a very separate asset from what DCP trailers get.

---------- Post added at 04:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:17 PM ----------

One uploader edited one release of the Interstellar in a very different fashion than other trailers.

Looks quite good. I like Batman's suit with the eyes and all. Very cool. But does he have to sound like Iron Monger?! I didn't think he had a voice changer. I thought he just changed how he spoke naturally.

Also, why aren't DC doing an origins story for Batman? I know we all know his story, but it's a bit like the situation with Spidey. Where has Batman been all this time, and has nothing of any great significance happened that involves Batman before this movie happens??

I believe that a Batman film is coming down the line, but I'm not sure it'd be an origin story.

I'm not sure what to think about the trailer. As a teaser, it's great, and the statue reveal is quite interesting. But I do get a sense of hopelessness out of it. The Batman bits give the impression that Bruce will lose his humanity by confronting Superman or something like that.

One thing I'm sure about is that it certainly made a strong first impression; and even though the film is allegedly filled with JL characters, we only see the ones that are relevant to the story. I'm surprised that they resisted the urge to slap 5 second close-ups of Wonder Woman, Aquaman and the like, considering how desperate they are to launch their cinematic universe; but by doing so, they've implicitly stated that the movie is about Batman and Superman as rivals (and ultimately, allies), instead of billing this as 'Justice League 0.5' or something. For the first time in a long time, DC has convinced me that they know what they're doing.

i personally thought that this trailer was a bit awkward, maybe because it came out just after star wars trailer, it doesnt look very well made but we have 1 year to wait to see the finalized product.
I m happy to see a batman closer to the comics one, more buffed and maybe more tortured and angry.

I thought it was a much better trailer than either of the ones for Star Wars. The BvS teaser gave us a clear idea of what the movie is about, and also gave us interesting images. Both of the Star Wars teasers lack substance and are heavily geared toward nostalgia. The music, using dialogue from the previous films (or new, underwhelming lines) just doesn't tell me enough about the movie to make we want to go see it. A few random shots of scenery or action tells me nothing.

But, I've never liked Star Wars (the highest rated movie for me was A New Hope and I gave it a 7/10) and I definitely do not like JJ Abrams. I hated what he did with Star Trek, and I also think they have broken a cardinal rule by having the same director that did two Star Trek films also do Star Wars. The two franchises should never mix creatively. They are so different that it boggles my mind that they did that. It just further proves to me that Abrams was the wrong guy to tackle Star Trek in the first place.

Also, why aren't DC doing an origins story for Batman?

Nolan's TDK trilogy just finished not long ago. I don't think anyone would sit through another origins story for Batman this soon.
Honestly, I would sit through another Batman Begins clone in one setting this soon.
Certainly wouldn't pay or support it.

Surely, we'll get a 2 minute prelude for Batman, the same fashion we got one when Keaton did Batman.

Minor spoilers for plot points about Batman's origin for the film are below:

Well, we know from set footage that they are giving us a new version of the shooting of Bruce's parents. Jeffery Dean Morgan is playing Thomas, I'm not sure who is playing Martha. So at the very least they'll cover some of Bruce's origin. Not sure what else beyond the murders, though.

I've also attempted to edit out the dialogue in the trailer. However, there was some I wasn't able to get (around the middle of it with Lex and the crowd chanting). Could anyone else clean up the rest of it?

https://mega.co.nz/#!Cp5FlQhQ!8t9gzTauBn7JUDjgLyxhyr4nk_AsVIAeU1PYzz9 JXCc

Some people are speculating that the voice at the end of the trailer might not be Batman's.

I liked this trailer more than the Star Wars one. It's bleak, but what else would anyone expect from a movie called "Batman vs Superman"? If things weren't dire, they wouldn't be fighting. (And eventually teaming up.)

Not sure how I feel about it. I do think that Ben Affleck will be a good enough Bruce Wayne, not sure how he will be as Batman.

I kinda get the feeling that DC feels threatend by the whole MCU movies. Each character has their own story acrs + development (Iron Man, Captain America, Thor) and they tie the movies and the Avengers together really nicely (also, big bucks).

So right now, it kinda feels like they want to out do, or "copy" the succes of the Avengers movies. Nothing wrong with that of course, but they are going for dark/gritty and a clash of 2 of the most iconic super heroes. So it could go really well, or really bad.

This was just a teaser, doesn't show any action, just tries to give a sense of the premise of the movies. They did show the advanced batsuit in which Batfleck will fight Supes, but that was again, just a tease.

I HATE the fact, that they are making a trailer for a movie set to be released in 2016, by the time the movie is finally relevant, the hype will be all but gone I fear.

Every Nolan film has had a trailer a year in advance, do you consider his films failures? MoS had a trailer 11 months out before it came out. Lots of big Hollywood films (outside of Fox) have trailers 9+ months in advance, and I don't ever see it hurting those films.

And I don't think DC is copying Marvel. If they were, they'd be trying to duplicate them exactly and they're not. The difference between them is that Marvel has its own studio that is entirely dedicated to making comic book movies, which means they have the resources to make 2-3 films a year, plus handfuls of TV shows. WB is only one studio and has to manage the films they make. Up until recently, the big tentpole films for them were Harry Potter. Now that that's gone, they needed something to take its place. Announcing however many films they have coming in the near future is simply a way to focus their strategy and assure investors they have a plan to take the place of lost revenue after HP. With comic book movies doing so well in the last decade, they are a clear cut path to success.

Fanboy criticism of Superman Returns: "he didn't punch anybody!"

Fanboy criticism of Man of Steel: "he punched somebody!"

But seriously folks, why is it the fan community is fine with the re-inventions of Batman but not Superman. Today's Bats is not your father's or grandfather's 1960's-Adam West-Blam-Pow-Socko, 90's Gothic Knight or Nolan's Dark Knight. Now we're into Frank Miller territory and yet another take on Batman.

So why should Superman not evolve? He can't be the Supes of Richard Donner's Superman: The Movie, times and tastes have changed. Bryan Singer tried reviving Donner's version of the character with Superman Returns and that didn't resonate at all with the audience at large.

Or maybe its just fans are upset Superman stopped wearing his underwear outside his clothes.

Judging from the trailer, and some generally reliable leaks, there will be consequences to the Battle of Metropolis. Negative consequences, Batman being one, Luthor another and public opinion the third. Negative consequences are something the MCU have mostly ignored. (In the MCU all it takes to get everyone to safety is utter the magic phrase "Evacuate the city!" and poof everyone is out of harm's way. Chitauri sky whales only crash into empty buildings, SHIELD helicarriers fall out of the sky without hitting a single person and the Dark Aster happens to slam into a part of the city that's completely unoccupied.)

That's the kind of magic not even Stephen Strange could manage.

And if the rumors are true we'll get a General Zod/Kal-eL rematch in the third Superman film when Zod returns as Doomsday.

The problem I have with Man of Steel is that it's so dark - colorless, I mean. Superman's costume is the most colorful thing in the movie, and even that is a washed-out, unattractive dull grayish blue. It's boring. My eyes aren't drawn to anything on the screen.

And just look at how lame this poster is (). Not a single hint of anything except gray. Even Wonder Woman's poster () is devoid of any real color except for a uniformly metallic red.

I get that DC wants their movies to be "realistic", but they don't understand that the real world isn't made of black and gray only.


Negative consequences are something the MCU have mostly ignored. (In the MCU all it takes to get everyone to safety is utter the magic phrase "Evacuate the city!" and poof everyone is out of harm's way. Chitauri sky whales only crash into empty buildings, SHIELD helicarriers fall out of the sky without hitting a single person and the Dark Aster happens to slam into a part of the city that's completely unoccupied.)


Totally agree. It's getting to the point where I don't even care about big threats in the MCU anymore because everyone turns out fine in the end. I wonder how many civilians will die when Ultron sends a zillion copies of himself to level the city? Probably not many.

But then again, it's not like Man of Steel did a good job of this either. All of Metropolis was totally destroyed, leaving nothing but decaying skyscrapers and giant craters. It was rebuilt by the end of the movie though, somehow. What sort of consequence is that? It just tells the audience that there really weren't any, since everything turned out 100% fantastic for everyone in the end. And plus the only people who happened to almost get hurt during the terraforming were the two or three people Clark met at the Daily Planet.

That's the problem with making your goofy superheroes "realistic". If they want to be realistic, then stop focusing on making your colors dark and show that normal people are affected every day by what these costumed vigilantes do, for better or for worse. Wouldn't that sort of fallout be perfect for the Civil War in 2016? Marvel's already sort of dropped the ball on that by having virtually no civilian deaths or injuries in Iron Man 2, Thor 2, Cap 2, or even Avengers, but it's not too late for DC.

It looks like BvS is dealing with the aftermath of MoS, though. The entrance of the planet's first superpowered being is naturally the perfect opportunity to introduce Lex and have him stroke the fire of mistrust. And that naturally feeds into Wayne's inherent paranoia, which makes the the whole premise of them being at odds understandable.

Hopefully, the theme for DC's movies is that actions have consequences. Having superheroes around, while a very cool and awe-inspiring premise, also leads to vast amounts of chaos and destruction. This was definitely explored in MoS (though not very well, given Goyer was the writer), but hiring Terrio, who does not come from a comic book or genre background, hopefully means that these films will be meatier than something like Green Lantern. I love Nolan's Batman film and prefer them to 90% of most comic book films, but they are not perfect and not very complex. I'm hoping that WB has the nads to actually make an intelligent superhero movie (if that isn't an oxymoron).

I wonder how many civilians will die when Ultron sends a zillion copies of himself to level the city?

That's another thing I don't like about these movies.
They're too light, the danger is merely implied.

I don't need to see a Quentin Tarantino version of the movies.
Death by laser and being turned to ash is easy for all audiences these days. MPAA ratings can live with that.

But we need more innocent people dying.
Not that shadow crap in Iron Man 3.

We have all the cartoon series to have deathless environment.

At this point, we can just create fake cities with zero population for all the destruction to happen.
Or turn it into an intergalactic tournament. With cards.

The color palette of Man of Steel doesn't bother me, it works in the context of the film. And several of Marvel's films have had a fairly drab color scheme. That's one of the things many people noted about GoTG, there the colors really popped.

Oh, a lot of people died in Man of Steel and I think that will be one of drivers of B v S: Bats will see Superman are being irresponsible and Luthor will use the civilian casualties as a wedge issue in waging a public opinion war against Superman. And if DC is to distinguish itself from Marvel there must be fallout from the Zod/Superman fight. (And you hear those voices in the trailer and see it in the graffito on the statue.)

What seemed to upset the fans is that Superman didn't take the fight to some deserted corner of the planet. How would that conversation have gone?

"Zod, I know you're going to kill every human on the planet and rebuild Krypton on their ashes, but how about you abandon your post so that we can have a fistfight in the middle of the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah."

"Sure, Kal, however one super powered punch and we're in Salt Lake City, Reno or Boise."

"I know, but then we can say at least we tried."

That's comic book logic. Zod declared his intention of global genocide so what does it matter to him if a few thousand humans die before the terraforming is complete? In Zod's mind they're all ready dead. But I guess some fans wanted that fig leaf so they could ignore the consequences of what happens when Gods go to war. In fact that's what Batman says to Superman in The Dark Knight Returns: "We must not remind them that giants walk the Earth.”

I hope DC addresses the "real world" implications of what happens when Gods and Monsters walk among us. Then comic book movies will really have grown up.

Haha, I am only speculating, but I think Batman's voice sounds like that because he is in his robotic suit. For some reason, he has a robotic sound there. My guess is that he will have a different voice with his normal batsuit, but as I said, that's just my uneducated guess. XD

Well, DC is better off than Marvel in regard to Batman just showing up because the events of Man of Steel, in regard to Zod showing up, happen probably in a span of only 1-2 days. The invasion is so quick there would be no reason for Batman to be there. Besides, what could he do? I think that is what Snyder and Co. are playing with, which was the fact that Batman was helpless during the invasion. Jeremy Irons, Alfred, is stating how the feeling of powerlessness turns good men cruel, which seems to be relating to Batman, who is powerless against Superman and was against Zod. It will be easier to explain Batman's lack of appearances in Man of Steel much easier than it will for Marvel to explain Spiderman's lack of appearances if he does appear in Civil War without an origin story. Hope this helps Sulley! :)

That's comic book logic. Zod declared his intention of global genocide so what does it matter to him if a few thousand humans die before the terraforming is complete? In Zod's mind they're all ready dead. But I guess some fans wanted that fig leaf so they could ignore the consequences of what happens when Gods go to war. In fact that's what Batman says to Superman in The Dark Knight Returns: "We must not remind them that giants walk the Earth.”

I hope DC addresses the "real world" implications of what happens when Gods and Monsters walk among us. Then comic book movies will really have grown up.

Unfortunately the consequences of Gods roaming the earth's story element is entirely undercut by the fact that Batman can deal with one by just himself alone. There's no story element if the danger can be averted like that so easily. Batman isn't even a character who focuses on robotics & weaponry yet he just decides to fight Superman and voila it happens. So much for the intended realism.

I think what would've worked far better is Lex Luthor indeed driving a wedge between the public and Superman, and have Batman somehow come into play with that because if Batman were to voice is negativity over Superman that would drive the wedge in that much deeper. Why? Because Batman is a vigilante himself, and if even he does not agree with Clark's conduct who else would end up backing Superman? Clark ended up with a lot of frustration at the end of Man of Steel, and these extra outcries and negativity would only make it even harder for him. You'd end up with a story kind of like "Batman vs. The Elite", which in my opinion is the best Superman character story ever (and his most emotional one). Despite the entire world being against him, he would still stay true to his convictions and it would strengthen the character's standing as most people don't like Clark's ark so far. Luthor would take the conflict to a more physical level of course (every super hero story needs some of that otherwise people start complaining ala Superman Returns) and eventually Clark manages to earn the trust of both Bruce and Diana and they end up working together to thwart Luthor's plan (he could team up with some other villains like the final season of Justice League: Unlimited).

At the end the public outcry might be slightly more positive, but this way the danger of super-powered beings roaming the earth element could be better retained.

Also, why people don't mind the changes for Batman's character but there's negativity towards Superman's is because "being cool" is Batman's schtick and it has been for a while now. Miller's Batman, Nolan's Batman, the Arkham Video Game Batman? It doesn't really matter as long as he's the cool badass guy who is always ten steps ahead of everybody and is never wrong about anything. It's the only way they think they can justify him being in the League after all. Were they to feature a Batman like the old TV series? Oh I bet you the internet would explode.

Regards.

We don't know if Batman can deal with Superman by himself, and we don't know the context behind the showdown being hinted at in the trailer. It might not be as "Voila!" as you think. For all we know, Lex Luthor *is* driving a wedge between the public and Superman.

I've also gotta disagree about Nolan's Batman being a flawless "cool guy". He got his ass handed to him a lot in those movies, and every one of his victories was a result of learning from a prior defeat. He also got called out a lot by Alfred, and Alfred was in the right every time. "Year One" Miller Batman also had his share of setbacks.

In the The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel the only reason Bats stood a chance against Supes is because Kal had been weakened by the Coldbringer nuke and Bats also had his secret stash of kryptonite. I wonder how Snyder and crew are going to stack the deck in Bats' favor?

His voice does sound robotically influenced.


It almost feels like it was auto-tuned to some degree.
Harmonic distortion, courtesy of Wanye Enterprises R&D.

It could also just be the trailer.
There might be a different scene where he has a different mask that covers his whole face and he speaks through it and it turns out like that robotic distorted voice.

Trailers will always take audio from one scene and place it wherever they want in the trailer.

His mask could also be emitting a wave that's closely matched to his own vocal spectrum to cause harmonic distortion.
Similar to how they processed dialogue in Prometheus for the scenes where the actors had to wear those giant helmets.
Mics inside the helmet picked up too much noise from the fans inside that cool the actors and other things.
So post-prod, they got the actors to re-do their lines ADR and then run a recorded sine wave over them that reflected the physical properties of the helmet.
To get the right sine wave, they played a standard sine wave in the helmt and recorded the feedback.
Playing it over the actor's voice, it gave the desired effect of talking inside their helmets.

Wayne could have had a similar concept where his mask would emit an impulse repsonse that would slightly alter his voice like that whenever he spoke.

It could be microsocopic in application so he can have the emitter resting on his neck-part of the mask. Of any mask.
It could be a silent frequency that humans can't hear. And maybe not one cats or dogs can hear either.

Superman probably hears it and knows his voice just fine.
But we don't see the film through Superman's eyes. It's not his narrative. It's not anyone's. It's third-person all the way.
There might be a clever scene where it switches perspective to prove to the audience that Superman sees through all of Batman's tricks (that only work for humans; as far as hiding his own identity goes).

---------- Post added at 05:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:09 PM ----------


In the The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel the only reason Bats stood a chance against Supes is because Kal had been weakened by the Coldbringer nuke and Bats also had his secret stash of kryptonite. I wonder how Snyder and crew are going to stack the deck in Bats' favor?

I was thinking the same thing.
Batman had his advantages and knew Superman for quite some time before they got to that point.

BvS takes shortly after MoS. Don't know how long after, but not a century or anything. Amy Adams is still in it.
We haven't seen her in the trailer, but Diane Lane is still in this (IMDb).
So it can't be too far off from where MoS ended.

Luthor and Wayne would have to be observing over the years to get to a point where they both have an advantage to help them against Superman.

And as far as anyone obtaining Kryptonite, I don't even want to think when or how they would get it.

We don't know if Batman can deal with Superman by himself, and we don't know the context behind the showdown being hinted at in the trailer. It might not be as "Voila!" as you think. For all we know, Lex Luthor *is* driving a wedge between the public and Superman.

I've also gotta disagree about Nolan's Batman being a flawless "cool guy". He got his ass handed to him a lot in those movies, and every one of his victories was a result of learning from a prior defeat. He also got called out a lot by Alfred, and Alfred was in the right every time. "Year One" Miller Batman also had his share of setbacks.

You're right, I should've used the term “gritty” or just have omitted Nolan's Bats. He did fairly easily dispose with Ghul's henchmen though, and he took down a full SWAT team + protecting the hostages no problem. But yeah, Nolan's Batman definitely had trouble just surviving as being the Batman evident from all his bruises and wounds.

The trailer outright shows Luthor is driving a wedge between him and the public (listen to his voice as the camera pans over the Superman statue).

“Voila” I used to signify the effort it would take. I don't mean “Ping! Here's a suit!” like in TDKR; I meant that even if Batman were to take years how would he be able to construct a suit that could sufficiently counter Superman as he was displayed in the first movie?

You don't see Iron Man regardless of how powerful his arc reactor is throwing around trains or causing craters just by punching someone, destroying a 50ton bank vault door by being thrown into it (which by that way are known to survive nukes no problem), all while spilling zero drops of blood or even so much as a scar. How realistic would it be to see Batman do these things? What would his suit have to be made of? What would power this suit? Why doesn't he give this power to the people? If that power resides in the suit alone, he could probably power all of New York for weeks with that. You need to be able to at least suspend your disbelief at least. Like how Iron Man could not counter Thor properly in The Avengers (2012) in terms of physical prowess even at 400% capacity. At least that made kind of sense.

Maybe I look too much into these kinds of details, but they bother me if not done properly. Like how the first Superman had him chasing after a nuke for minutes only to have him travel back in time on speed alone minutes later.


In the The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel the only reason Bats stood a chance against Supes is because Kal had been weakened by the Coldbringer nuke and Bats also had his secret stash of kryptonite. I wonder how Snyder and crew are going to stack the deck in Bats' favor?

But not since the Golden Age has something along the lines of a nuke hurt Superman that much. The only conclusion could be that he was weak from the start in that story.

The only exception would probably be Bruce Timm's Superman in the earlier episodes of the Animated Series, but even that was outright stated by the makers in the extras as only hurting and not killing Superman were that to happen.

By the way I'm just arguing here. No hard feelings at all.

Regards.

Wow, all this text generated by a two minute trailer. Can't wait to see the word-gasms the movie engenders when it comes out. In a year.

P.S. Actually, Supes was at his peak. In the graphic novel Kal was the tool of the US government, read lapdog, and Soviets designed the Coldbringer with Superman in mind. (They knew he would stop the missile.) The missile not only drained Kal of his power but created a nuclear winter, blocking the sun's light. And since Superman's powers come from the sun, well, you know the rest.

Superman at his peak would be so laughably strong he could just blow the missile out of range, and would need to assure he doesn't suck up the entire atmosphere in the process probably. Normally Superman only needs a few seconds of sunlight to gain back all his strength if it was somehow drained. After the nuke hit him and drained him he drained the lifeforce out of the plants to survive. After that he could fly again. All he would have to do is fly above the clouds and his powers would be replenished.

By the way the two animated features for TDKR, from what I can remember they don't specifically state the nuke is different from a regular one.

Anyway I'm I'd like to know how audiences are going to respond. The biggest complaint was all the action for MoS. Now they've chosen yet another physical conflict, are they going to like it or complain there's just more fighting.

The graphic novel goes into greater detail than the animated feature, the strength of the written over the animated.

And you realize we're devoting a lot of time and text to fictional characters and situations? What's next, discussing if Superman could lift Thor's Hammer? (Boy, could that be taken another way. Well, hello Sailor!) Could Wolverine kill the Hulk? And just how does She-Hulk shave her legs? Maybe Wolverine moonlights as a stylist. ("Going in boys and if I'm not back in two weeks, presume me missing and having a good time.")

And you realize we're devoting a lot of time and text to fictional characters and situations?

Then why bother contributing any further to it???
What's the point of bringing up more points if only to talk shit?

You're not any better for "taking the higher road".
You're not more intelligent for "bringing up more topics".

You talk a great deal of shit, pre-emptively call others shit if they choose to react to you, and then walk away saying "with all due respect".

I can see why a lot of people abandonded this forum.

Nothing but shit after shit.

If anyone types too much, no one reads because they'd rather suck their mothers tit.
Right too little and you leave it open for the other asshole to write out lots.
There's no wining except to write first.

Somebody's taking this all a little too seriously.

Then why bother contributing any further to it???
What's the point of bringing up more points if only to talk shit?

You're not any better for "taking the higher road".
You're not more intelligent for "bringing up more topics".

You talk a great deal of shit, pre-emptively call others shit if they choose to react to you, and then walk away saying "with all due respect".

I can see why a lot of people abandonded this forum.

Nothing but shit after shit.

If anyone types too much, no one reads because they'd rather suck their mothers tit.
Right too little and you leave it open for the other asshole to write out lots.
There's no wining except to write first.

Wow. That's a lot of anger. If you get this wrapped around the axle about a bunch of comic book characters you must really Hulk-out when something truly goes wrong in your life.

Just remember: when you can keep your head while all others around lose theirs, you'll be the better man.

Yeah. Is it just me, or has Sparktank been a lot more "on edge" of late?

Hope you're ok, Sparky.

Yeah... he got rid of his awesome avatar and sig too.


If anyone types too much, no one reads because they'd rather suck their mothers tit.


For what it's worth, I read everything you write. Regardless of length.

His wording might have been harsh, but his frustration is understandable. Everywhere on the internet where arguments arise people start to divert to other insults. Particularly, the topic of who's better at life always seems to arise and "schooling" comments are sure to follow about who and what (or at the very least are vaguely implied). People are probably insecure about these kinds of things, which might be the reason why it happens so often (merely an observation; I am not directly targeting this at anyone here).

I even went out of my way in the message to specify I was merely arguing about the topic and had no hard feelings about it whatsoever, because I knew beforehand it would end up like this whenever a decent discussion might arise.

And I'll do it again: These are not meant to be insults towards anyone and I have no hard feelings regarding this whatsoever.

Regards.

EDIT: Spark, you seem to have digressed from the forums and even deleted some posts. I know you probably won't even end up reading this, but just to throw it out there: That's a very unfortunate thing, and you were a great contributor here. I've enjoyed our conversations over PM and you were a great guy to be sure. You can always still contact me over email ([email protected]) should you want to. I'd certainly welcome it. But in the end it's all your personal decision to make and you should choose what feels best for you.

And on that note I'm out of this discussion as well.

We don't know if Batman can deal with Superman by himself, and we don't know the context behind the showdown being hinted at in the trailer. It might not be as "Voila!" as you think. For all we know, Lex Luthor *is* driving a wedge between the public and Superman.

I've also gotta disagree about Nolan's Batman being a flawless "cool guy". He got his ass handed to him a lot in those movies, and every one of his victories was a result of learning from a prior defeat. He also got called out a lot by Alfred, and Alfred was in the right every time. "Year One" Miller Batman also had his share of setbacks.


batman could have easily KILLED superman in his 60's in the dark knight returns.
since affleck is using the same robosuit as in the comic, im expecting an asswhooping for both.
and judging by the quotes.. oh look, kilgrave is being an asshole. for the 7th time

I told you guys earlier that Man of Steel was too dark (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=119372).

Look at that. I love it. I'd enjoy this film so much more if the colors were like this.

That's just the pallete of Snyder's films. 300 and Watchmen are also dark like that....

I know that's Snyder's style, but it really negatively affected something that's supposed to be as hopeful as Superman.

I really don't like the "bright and shiny" look of that youtube video. The palette of MoS perfectly matches the story. If it were more colorful, it would be at odds with the thematic tone of the film.

Any more color and it'd feel campy like all the hunky-dorey Marvel films

Any more color and it'd be the Off-Broadway production of The Birdcage. ("Splendor, I want splendor!)

Say what you will, at least it's a little easier on the eyes than all that gray.

There are certain shots where that color pallette does look engaging, but there are others where it makes the film exhausting to watch. Snyder should really learn to tone that down a little. As long as we don't get Superman in neon city Schumacher style, too much gray is not a good way to go either.

As long as we don't get Superman in neon city Schumacher style, too much gray is not a good way to go either.

I'd rather the current color pallette than the Schumacher style. It just looks God-awful

It looks like Synder is using the color scheme from The Dark Knight Returns as his template. Great graphic novel but not the most colorful.

And I agree, no Schumacher. No Batmobiles climbing walls, no Riddler going Liberace and no NIPPLES on the Batsuit! That's just way too S&M. (Of course, the way Carrey played the Riddler, methinks he wanted a little spanky-spanky from Bats.)

Great, now that I written it, that image just won't go away.

And those puns from Schwarzeneggar.....oh god....

"TONIGHT'S FORECAST: A FREEEEZE IS COMING!!"

Nope. Just nope.

Of all the ways Schumacher could have done Freeze, why did he pick the 60's Adam West version? Freeze was never a character I found remotely interesting until Batman: TAS. Timm and company made Freeze interesting, tragic and even sympathetic but still kept him a villain. Also one of the series longest running: he even appeared in Batman Beyond. And actor Michael Ansara nailed the portrayal of Freeze, in the same way Mark Hamill did with the Joker.

Strange isn't it when animation is better than live action? (The best G.I. Joe movie to date is the animated G.I. Joe: Resolute. That's what happens when a real writer, Warren Ellis, does the script.)

And for the record, the animated series, IMO, was horrible: both in writing and animation. Same goes for Transformers. No offense, but I never understood why those two series were popular.

I'm going to put on my Kevlar undies in preparation for the slings and arrows about to be launched my way.

Transformers I think is corny now, but I loved as a kid. No offense taken there. But Batman: The Animated Series? That I don't understand. To this day I love that show and I'll still watch it from time to time. But I'm a grown-ass man. I'm not gonna throw a hissy fit just because someone doesn't like something that I do

http://i.imgur.com/bTLVEpb.gif

Batman: TAS renewed my faith in American animation, which at the time, I had all but given up on. The quality of the writing, the animation and the voice acting, all impressive. If anyone ever thinks that voice acting is just reciting lines on a page, this is the series that person needs to watch. I remember at the time thinking, who's Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill as the Joker? Luke Warmwater as the Clown Prince of Crime? You got to be kidding.

Then I saw those episodes. Heard the voices. (On screen, not the ones in my head. Which get pretty loud sometimes.) Picked my jaw off the floor and became a believer. (Conroy, Hamill, and the other actors are the definitive voices for these characters.) And the voice casting for Warner's animated productions is almost always dead on. There have only been a handful of times that I didn't agree with the choices made.

I'm one of the few, I guess, that doesn't enjoy B: TAS. The voice acting is spot on in most cases, but the writing is thin and immature and the pacing is all over the place. But, I feel that way about most superhero cartoons. The only ones I've enjoyed are The Dark Night Returns & Year One. Wonder Woman & New Frontier are okay, but they each have very obvious and grating flaws.

On a related note, don't know if anyone's seen this, but:

Yup, I just received that in a text. I like.

Right now, it's probably one of my most anticipated movies ever.

Nice and by that I mean creeee-peeee. Looks like hiring Leto was the right move. Now, will his performance match his appearance?

And on a related note:

http://www.denofgeek.us/books-comics/batman/245758/frank-miller-announces-the-dark-knight-iii-the-master-race

Miller is co-writing the third installment and is NOT drawing it. His health, and not to speak ill of the ill, and the quality of his writing and art has declined in the last few years.

I hope he still has greatness within him and that the third book will resemble the first and not the second Dark Knight tome because that was a disappointment.

Looks weird... but I sort of like it. Though I think the "deranged" tattoo on his forehead might be distracting on camera.

Maybe this movie will be worth seeing after all.

I'm sure fandom will find some aspect of Leto's appearance to gripe, complain and moan about. It's what they do so well. So many fanboys/girls seem to operate from a "glass half empty" instead of a "glass half full" mentality.

Considering the nature of the Suicide Squad and the kind of director Ayer is and the type of movies he's written and directed it would make sense that the Joker would sport a penal appearance, in the words, look like a convict in today's prisons. The tats work for me, especially the "Ha, Ha" ones. The font is straight out of the comics.

The picture looks intense. What I kind of have a problem about is the Haha tattoos. Would he really tattoo that to his own body? He would have killed the tattoo artist long before he'd have finished all those hahahs :D

Some people will suffer for the sake of art.

Looks weird... but I sort of like it. Though I think the "deranged" tattoo on his forehead might be distracting on camera.

Maybe this movie will be worth seeing after all.

It says damaged :p

It says damaged :p

Yeah, just noticed that. Potato - potahto.

5.1 mix just got posted over at Movie-List and I'm editing it now. Hopefully I'll be able to isolate the music.

The center channel has no music at all... meaning you can listen to all the voices isolated! Sounds very cool. Especially the Batman robot voice!

I'm kinda not impressed by the music. I was expecting something on a scale like An Ideal of Hope and instead it sounds like Junkie's droning drums. Nothing exciting :/

Already I can tell I'm gonna have to cut out some stuff. The voices pan from the front to the back and sometimes are in both.

I can't stand the drones and drums either; it's getting old now; but the piano bit was cool.

8 Reasons 'Suicide Squad's' Joker is actively offending me (https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/8-reasons-suicide-squads-joker-021900595.html)

#1 - just came off a 3 day bender at an ICP concert. Love it lol

Yeah, I have to admit, I've always seen the Joker as more classy than looking like a common punk. I think Batman: TAS taught me to think that way.

I'm willing to let Suicide Squad try to impress me with the new demeanor, though.

I can't take anyone who uses the phrase "comic book accurate" seriously.

i havent met anyone who likes this new joker.
there was a picture circutalting on facebook where he looked more like a makeupd handsome squidward than the joker.


I'm one of the few, I guess, that doesn't enjoy B: TAS. The voice acting is spot on in most cases, but the writing is thin and immature and the pacing is all over the place. But, I feel that way about most superhero cartoons. The only ones I've enjoyed are The Dark Night Returns & Year One. Wonder Woman & New Frontier are okay, but they each have very obvious and grating flaws.



maybe because, LE GASP! its a cartoon. for kids.
that it can be enjoyed by anyone, is a bonus.
i personally enjoy it and consider it the greatest cartoon ever made.
granted, even i skip some of the weaker episodes, because its not a perfect series.
but just take a look at episodes like heart of ice, almost got em, mad love, and you can see brilliance.
the episode that focuses on jonah hex is a much better movie than the jonah hex movie.

just take my little pony, its a show for LITTLE GIRLS, yet i have not (and im dead serious) met a single girl below the age of 20 that actively fangasm�s over it like the bronies.

Yeah, I have to admit, I've always seen the Joker as more classy than looking like a common punk. I think Batman: TAS taught me to think that way.

I'm willing to let Suicide Squad try to impress me with the new demeanor, though.

The setting of Suicide Squad falls right into David Ayer's wheelhouse. Training Day, End of Watch, Sabotage, Fury are all guy centric movies and largely focus on what happens when you put a bunch of men together and turn up the heat. And for Ayer Suicide Squad should be the ultimate expression of that interest: alpha male convicts and ex convicts forced to work together. Also women haven't played a major role in Ayer's films so how will the script treat Harley Quinn and Amanda "The Wall" Waller? Will they be people or props for the guys?

As for the Joker's appearance, and it didn't take long for the fanboy/girl snark to surface, any director with an ounce of creativity is going to want to forward his interpretation of the iconic character instead of copying someone's version.

Burton gave us a Joker in the Cesar Romero/"Clown Prince of Crime" mold.

Nolan's version was as well dressed anarchist/terrorist, a man with plan.

Ayer has gone prison style which makes sense given what we know about the film. The character has to fit into the film's milieu in order to work. Ayer likes the grit and grime and having Harley and Deadshot break into Arkham and having the Joker look like Nicholson's version of the Joker would kneecap the movie.

Appears the image of the Joker might not be entirely accurate as to how Leto will actually appear in Suicide Squad. Those crafty devils at Warner Brothers marketing might have click baited us. Damn those crafty devils at Warner Brothers marketing!

And whilst on the topic of the Joker he might be making an appearance in Batman v Superman. But beware, there be spoilers in this here link:

Joker To Appear In "Batman v Superman"? | News | Dark Horizons (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/36758/joker-to-appear-in-batman-v-superman)

Nolan's version was as well dressed anarchist/terrorist, a man with plan

http://i.imgur.com/4W8S8ef.gif

When the Joker goes "casual" for Casual Fridays, he's all in. No half measures here.

Though I think an off the shoulder peasant blouse might have been a better choice.