Oooo...so topical!
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, which is a mouthful of a title, is intended to be the jumping off point for the DC Extended Universe, and lead to the Justice League movies down the road. Not only are the Dark Knight and Man of Steel in this movie, but Wonder Woman plays a substantial role, and we’ve heard that we’ll see Aquaman, the Flash, and others show up in at least some capacity. That’s all well and good, but according to Drew McWeeny at HitFix, and his sources, now that people are finally getting a look at BvS, the reaction hasn’t been quite what the studio hoped and could have a huge impact on DC/WB’s plan moving forward.
Well said. That is precisely what MAN OF STEEL was missing -- a sense of fun, a sense of joy, and that's what's absent from Snyder's work in general. I disliked WATCHMEN and have found most of his movies to be utter chores to sit through.But that approach doesn't work for Superman, a character who is meant to be unabashedly, romantically heroic. Superman exists in bold colors, both as a symbol and as a character. Richard Donner showed it was possible to stage that character in a realistic environment, but you still have to embrace the blue and red tights, the cape and the sheer fun of the idea. Otherwise, the story turns into a dour action remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still, and who really wants to see that?
The original cast is finished I believe. These movies are clearly set up to go with "the kids" from now on...though they do lose a load of star power with Lawrence departing, and they have repeatedly said they can't see anyone else but Jackman as Wolverine. But even his dozen-picture (or whatever number it was) deal is up after the next Wolverine film they're currently shooting.I wouldn't be surprised to see Apocalypse actually take a dive, at least compared to Days. And I wouldn't be surprised to see Singer make noises about retooling the franchise afterward. They lose Jennifer Lawrence after this one, and it may serve Singer better to go back to the original cast for his next go-round.
I was never very impressed with Batman, even when I first saw it. I found it clunky and awkwardly written. Character development was poor, and Michael Keaton incredibly bland in the role. NIcholson was fun to watch...but his performance was more schtick than character. And unlike many, I wasn't even that crazy about the score. But agreed on the sequel, which was far-better executed and dramatically satisfying (and better scored!).AndyDursin wrote:Though I liked it more than you David, The '89 BATMAN gave me the same general feeling when I saw it again a few years ago. It's very clear Guber/Peters and the studio (and probably Nicholson also) tightened the reigns on Burton, so much that the movie feels bland and shockingly vanilla -- even its visual design isn't that interesting.
Batman: The Animated Series remains, IMO, the best-ever adaptation of the character outside of the comics...a big part of the reason I found the Schumacher movies so terrible was in seeing dramatically conflicted, tragic villains from TAS like Two-Face and Mr. Freeze turned into campy, mugging fools.Paul MacLean wrote:Honestly, of all the Batman movies I've seen, the one I liked best was Mask of the Phantasm (which has the best score, too)!