Whether you liked or hated it, I think we can all agree it took more risks than anything in the MCU.
Even if the results weren't always on point, are we really living in an era of entertainment where we punish projects that take the biggest risks?
Am I seriously the only one who has a problem with this?
HOW MANY FUCKING THREADS ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE, THERE'S LIKE FOUR BVS THREADS UP RIGHT NOW YOU FUCKING CUNT
The entire MCU wasn't a big risk?
>implying taking risks absolves you of responsibility if those risks make a shit final product.
So you're saying we should treat projects that take any degree of risk more favourably by default. Where's the risk then?
Yes, when you shit on source material.
iron man 1 was a risk. once it made enough, no movie after that was a real risk due to people craving for more
BvS was a risk because man of steel wasn't even popular among critics but they made another one
>when you shit on source material.
do explain how they shat on the source material
I really want to see whether you are stupid enough to go the retarded-ass "batman kills" and "luthor is young" way
>BvS was a risk
a real risk would have been Man of Steel 2, OH SUPERMAN CAN'T CARRY A MOVIE?! WELL BETTER SHOEHORN BATMAN IN THERE, EVERYBODY FUCKING LOVES BATMAN, TOSS IN WONDER WOMAN WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, HEY THESE ARE SOME NICE SCENES OF CLARK KENT BUT NO ONE WANTS TO SEE THAT, PUT MORE BATMAN STUFF IN THERE
>they friends at the end
>Superman already show to be alive at the end
what risks?
Doomsday being Zod was retarded
this
>take risks
>fail
>lol you shouldn't punish people for taking risks
You stupid fucking ingrate, shit tier masterb8ting ruseman. Nobody is punishing anyone for taking risks. People didn't enjoy BvS because it was a flop. Nobody left the movie saying to themselves: "what a risky product, I hate it because it was risky". People left the theater saying "that movie sucked. They took risks, and it didn't pay off at all"
If you want to make a risky movie, fine. Accept that if you fail, you fail big. That's the fucking RISK. That's what RISKY means in this context. You accept that by taking RISKS in the first place, you fucking double thinking marketing shill of a half man half lizard jew with aids.
not that user but I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say that we are tired as fuck of pointing everything wrong with this garbage movie and you will just justify the complete rape of the characters by saying that it was against expectations and a bold move
go fuck yourself
there's nothing respectable about taking risks and fucking up.
Marvel made a movie about Guardians of the Galaxy, a bunch of Z-listers that not even comic book fags ever cared about.
DC is never going to move on from their mains, and the only risk they took was thinking
>HEY, PEOPLE LIKED NOLAN'S SERIOUS MOVIES, LET'S MAKE THEM EVEN DARKER
Hell, after MoS, they had to shoehorn Batman in the second movie of the franchise without even having a solo one.
I've not seen it but I can't understand why they jumped straight into 'Batman vs Superman' without an establishing Batman film and a second Man of Steel to introduce Lex. They've thrown Wonder Woman in there as well and I've heard a load of other 'cameos'.
Seems like they had no faith in anything other than Batman and just wanted to throw him in there as quickly as possible, so from a brand perspective they've taken the safest route possible by attaching Batman to it. Can't speak of artistically, which is your primary concern though.
BvS is a triumph. Most genuine complaints come from issues related with executives butchering it because they don't trust audiences.
>go to the zoo
>put your hand in the mouth of a crocodile
>get bitten
>''WOW WHERE'S MY MEDAL''
>a real risk would have been Man of Steel 2
why the hell would they do another man of steel movie when they need to introduce more characters?
WB's safest bet was to get AT LEAST batman in there in order to see whether audiences are on board with the new batman. that part went pretty well. now if the movie hadn't gotten such abysmal reviews, the stage would have been set but now, justice league is their last hope
WB needs a Avengers 1 type of movie in order to get as many viewers as possible. that way, they can safeguard a benchmark in viewers and expand on their cinematic universe
well, I'm sure the comicbook origin would've been really great, jesus
the way they did it was perfectly fine. the only complaint I see is that there was literally no proper explanation (that I can remember at least) as to why lex came up with that idea in the first place and why he thought it would have been smart to do it
>I've not seen it
Lucky you.
BvS is true kino
Thing is, BvS was supposed to be their Avengers 1.
Let's not pretend the audiences care about Aquaman or Cyborg, and Flash is only taken slightly seriously because some people might have watched the TV show.
They'll be lucky if Justice League makes as much as BvS.
>People didn't enjoy BvS because it was a flop
do you even know what the fuck the word flop means you idiot?
people didn't like it because they didn't get it DUE to the terrible pacing. also, scenes being left out meant even worse experiences for viewers
people didn't "enjoy" BvS because WB's executives wouldn't let snyder put his complete product into the theaters. thank god further movies are being made but fuck those suits for interferring. those apes know nothing about movie making, yet still they try to act like they do
>we are tired as fuck of pointing everything wrong with this garbage movie
why the fuck are you even participating at discussions on this board then you stupid faggot?
>why the hell would they do another man of steel movie when they need to introduce more characters?
Give them their own fucking movie then!
>Didn't get it
Fuck you and fuck this BvS is smart Meme.
There was shit all to get, it was obvious and stupid as any Marvel flick just a fuckton Moore pretentious.
>I think we can all agree it took more risks than anything in the MCU.
Yeah, risking casting a skeleton for a fucking badass, hotass, strongass woman.
I really wanted to like it, but it's fucked because of this IMO... I tried to ignore her, but I just couldn't.
Afleck was actually pretty good.
>because they don't trust audiences to see a beautiful, strong non-jew wonder woman
>BvS was supposed to be their Avengers 1.
no it wasn't. Justice League is supposed to be Avengers 1. the team wasn't even complete so there you go
>Let's not pretend the audiences care about Aquaman or Cyborg
people said the same shit about thor and especially captain america. let's not even begin to talk about the guardians of the galaxy.
if you put properly designed characters to the big screen and market them well, audiences will definitely care
I think the studio and DC already have a fair advantage when it comes to characters due to Superman, Batman and Flash being household names by now. they only need a safe story and marketing for the next few movies.
Marvel is only successful because they make their movies generic, which is smart as fuck from a business perspective. it's not about being faithful to the characters, it's about making as much money as possible while shitting out okay-tier movies and Marvel does that in a perfect manner
>people said the same shit about thor and especially captain america
The difference is that DC has no idea of how to market these superheroes.
We are talking about the company that has made a Batman vs Superman (and Wonder Woman) movie be less succesful than a solo Batman movie coming from a sequel that only made 300 million.
Just saw Warcraft yesterday... say what you want about the movie, but the woman playing Garona was way more suited for it than Gadot was for Wonder Woman.
Holy fuck, what a hungry skeleton. Give me the most anorexic bitch and I'll give you a badass, fit-as-fuck bitch in mere months with the kind of training she had access to.
I really don't get it.... how is society not fucked if this can happen? How much did they even pay her to not train at all and stand in front of a camera while they played guitar riffs?
>Fuck you and fuck this BvS is smart Meme.
do you even know how to read? I said the plot was incoherent due to the bad pacing. that in no way implies the movie was "smart" but what do I expect from you retards? you couldn't understand a text if it sucked you off
>stupid as any Marvel flick
Marvel flicks are stupid while Snyder actually tried to make his movie artistic. since when is artistic value just brushed off as "stupid" just because people don't like it? you crybabies are pathetic
Marvel is succesful because their superheroes are likeable and they make people just want to see them do shit.
Justice League won't be Avengers. It will be Avengers, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk and Captain America. Its not just introducing the team, its introducing the characters.
If anyone thinks JL isn't going to be another bloated mess they are fucking deluded.
>it's not about being faithful to the characters
And yet when people point out how not faithful DC's movies are to the characters you cunts reply "NOT MUH COMICS" and "SNYDER'S VISION"
Eat shit, you hypocrite.
Why don't we discuss Civil War to this extent?
>Artistic Value
You're memeing hard.
Because that was just some action movie.
Because no one needs to invent excuses for a financial and critical success
Whether it was a risk is irrelevant, the result is what matters
The extent of the metaphor is "Superman is jesus lol"
We got that snyder. No need to make it too obvious what with direct comparisons, and 20 nonsense speeches from luthor about it.
You clearly weren't around for the TeamCap/TeamTony political shitfests.
>tried to make his movie artistic
I think we all had in our class, when we were kids, a guy that standed out because he was just a loud, stupid dudebro.
Everyone thought he was stupid, he WAS stupid, but he thought he was smart.
And i'm sure everyone has had to write a poem in class.
That's what Snyder and his DCEU movies are
The stupid loud dudebro of the class trying to write a poem.
>The difference is that DC has no idea of how to market these superheroes.
that's what I'm saying the whole time. on the one hand, they want to copy marvel but on the other one, they have no chance to do so because they would have to make their movies family friendly and generic first. there's no way that movies full of symbolism and gritty stuff all over the place can achieve the same amount of money like the other end of the spectrum
>movie be less succesful than a solo Batman movie coming from a sequel that only made 300 million
I don't know what you are referring to exactly but the nolan movies had goat-tier marketing and great word-of-mouth
BvS would've made over a billion easily if it wasn't for the poor viral marketing that went on after the first two weeks
>risk
>capeshit
>starring Batman
>Marvel is only successful because they make their movies generic, which is smart as fuck from a business perspective. it's not about being faithful to the characters
I totally remember Superman and Batman killing on a whim in the comics.
>after how fucking shit the JEEZUS symbolism was in Man of Steel, they FUCKING DID IT AGAIN
I refuse to forgive anything in this shit movie.
Because marvel fans are satisfied with their movie, and DCucks are not.
Because that was already done, and since Civil War was a success there's no need to do constant damage control threads.
It came and it did it's job.
While BvS tried it and it had a massive faceplant, so now we have people laughing at it, and people trying to defend it saying that he faceplanted in purpose.
>I think we can all agree it took more risks
Someone please explain to me what "risks" BvS made.
so Marvel making generic and stupid garbage is anything different in your eyes?
You can't even articulate why religious symbolism is bad. It's bad because you say so and you're only saying so because you read some guy say it here.
It's always a risk with Snyder
No.
Marvel doesn't try to be artistic because they understand that a superhero movie trying to be artistic is like eating a stake with ketchup.
No one asks for it, no one likes it, and whoever wants to do that is absolutely retarded.
>takes big risks
Yeah it was an awfully big risk of putting 2 of the most popular characters in fiction into the same movie. Bravo Snyder! Bravo WB! Bravo DC!
well, apparently you don't because you never read comics you retard. didn't batman even kill in burton's movies? you should know at least that
Yes, because it's the chad that's happy with his chadness.
Think about it this way: marvel is the normie jock. DCucks are the fedora tippers: not normies, but reviled by both sides.
A wonder woman suffering from anorexia for one.
They hired Zack Snyder to direct it.
>Marvel doesn't try to be artistic because they understand that a superhero movie trying to be artistic is like eating a stake with ketchup.
I love how you say that even though the trailer and every single info on Doctor Strange imply exactly that. typical brainless Marveldrone
>DC is taking a risk by trying to make their own MCU
It's awful because it's fucking pounded into your face where there's a fucking cross in nearly every scene Superman is in.
if it were subtle or clever or made some sort of actual commentary about religion it would be different. Instead it's just HURR DON'T YOU GET IT HE IS JESUS GUISE made for fucking 5 year olds.
The only thing the Doctor Strange trailer implies is that it's going to be a trippy and cuhrazy movie, which is what a Doctor Strange movie should be.
What risks did it take? Men in tights beating up bad CGI monsters. Same as marvel. Jesus imagery is overrated as fuck
If you take the most risks, and you fail at all of them, then you fail
That's not a punishment, that's you failing, because you failed
No it didn't.
>pointless talking scenes that go nowhere
>scenes that could go somewhere cut off
>aftermath of scene we didn't see shown
>bad and absolutely terrible casting aside from the two leads and alfred
>story rushed and forced
>pointless end villain fodder
>short battle of the Batman v Superman
>bad CGI
>everywhere grey and black
>mopey Superman throughout
>physco bitch Batman and not in a good way
>blurry jumpcuts everywhere
the movie did nothing but bad things. I wish it was amazing, but it wasn't.
>it took more risks than anything in the MCU
Except the entire MCU being a risk to begin with.
Marvel could pull some pajeet director from bollywood for Iron Man 4, and it would probably be a better film than BvS, would that be risky?
>I'M DOING THIS FOR MAAAAARTHA
>martha... THAT'S MY MOTHER'S NAME!
>martha... that's MY mother's name!
>suddenly bffs
Fuck this movie.
Ok, she's put on weight since her pathetic fast and furious bullshit, but how... how do you manage to put on no muscle after two fucking movies, with all the trainers/nutritionists/medical staff behind you...
Just.... how the fuck, I don't even.
As a poor fuck with no support and barely any free time I managed to do probably 10x what she did in half the time she had.
Get Snyder's dick out of your mouth and quit talking in ebonics. Let me get this right, you are saying Batman and Superman regularly kill people in comics?
No.
Hiring Zack Snyder is a risk because everyone hates his movies except 300.
Marvel don't need to take risks because their roster is already different and unique for each movie (despite the similarities and cliche formula) they are still multiple time viewing flicks that are enjoyable.
I will never watch BvS again. I'll rewatch Man of Steel now and again though.
to be fair bollywood is amazing
all the movies are like 5 hours long and are like 18 genres. horror comedy scifi drama romance musicals.
also they're insanely entertaining when they have a budget, some of them have almost Platinum Games tier action scenes.
Gotg was never going to fail, all the publicity stated how much of a risk it was fo disney when it literally was just reverse psychology advertising.
First sentence repeated yourself. Second sentence makes no sense because that's what Snyder did.
Third just typing in caps and adding little Internet insult.
Try harder next time. Better yet, get the go you copied your opinions from to explain yourself. I'm sure he'd do it better.
>Hurr
Oh nevermind you're under the age of 25. Opinion discarded.
Because she doesn't have to.
It wasn't as if she worked hard to get the role. She was given it for some strange (jew) reason. Then she was handed a solo movie, and now she's filming Justice League.
She's a lazy bitch whose been handing this role on a plate with her leaves and water. It's disgusting desu.
They actually hired a pajeet director for Thor 3 and it's not looking bad at all.
Seems evident that Perlmutter is now gone considering they are just throwing money at the cast.
even the normiest of normies said this scene was gay as fuck.
that coming straight after a 5 second bland fight scene, man this movie fucking sucked.
>Whether you liked or hated it,
irrelevant
Everyone who saw this movie will remember it.
>2 months
>2 weeks
anons with divisive opinions still talking about it
How was Snyder's Jesus symbolism subtle or clever?
please explain how having a cross in every scene is in any way subtle or clever compared to the Donner films.
>let's make Man of Steel 2
>but add Batman and Wonder Woman
>and call it Batman vs Superman and add Dawn ''hehe guess which movie is coming next'' of Justice
>as we try to make our own version of the most succesful movie franchise in history
What was the risk, writing a boring plot full of drama, building up a conflict for 2 hours just to end it 5 minutes after it finally begins?
it's like you don't even think about what you're typing. so what did the interviews imply then according to you? it was outright stated but let's hear your take on it
also
>trailer implies is that it's going to be a trippy and cuhrazy movie
I don't even know whether you know what "artistic" means at this point
Woah, take a look at this... wait...
Kinôgraphé.
After you explain how it wasn't clever and a detriment to the film other than "you didn't like it".
>I-it was pretentious
How?
>I-it was hamfisted
How?
Support just ONE of your arguments, please. Try.
Sure, we can call that a risk, but keeping him around after man of steel was straight up retarded
What did they state?
It's going to be a masterpiece, an artistic movie?
Would be surprised if Michael Bay didn't say that about his Transformers movies.
There wasn't a cross in every scene
the funny part is that people on Sup Forums and Sup Forums have literally no idea about how the MCU works
it really doesn't matter what the director is like. everything is on Marvel themselves, the success and the failures
>hire director
>let people write story that fits everything that you dictated
>let director direct exactly as you're telling him to
that's why they chose to get rid of wright. he didn't want to be a bitch that his masters' every bidding
I know that. I just want to scream it from the top of a mountain.
That woman is total scum. She was the ugliest woman in the Fast and the Furious bit she had, and now she's done fuck-all to look like a badass Amazonian princess, AND ON TOP OF THAT she likes to flaunt her "military service" which includes being a Jewish model, and... well, just being a Jewish model.
They got rid of Wright because after 10 years of ''work'' the only thing he had was a script.
>you are saying Batman and Superman regularly kill people in comics?
no I'm not because neither does superman kill "regularly" in the movies. he killed off zod and doomsday (does that even count as number 2?) and that's it. quit making it look like he kills literally everyone he sees
batman did more bad shit in the old comics though. also, it's confirmed that he only did so in BvS due to the Jason Todd incident but I guess that doesn't matter to you
>PPPPP PLEASE DEBATE ME
Kill yourself.
Write BvS was shit on your suicide note.
>they are still multiple time viewing flicks that are enjoyable.
they're enjoyable for mainstream audiences. people who know about movies don't even watch their new movies
phase 1 was the only decent thing to come out of the MCU
How was it not?
>an artistic movie?
that is exactly what they stated. check your facts before you start spouting mindless and uninformed opinions the next time. makes you look even more stupid
>pointless talking scenes that go nowhere
Like?
>scenes that could go somewhere cut off
>aftermath of scene we didn't see shown
these two are true, blame WB
>bad and absolutely terrible casting aside from the two leads and alfred
Bullshit,fuck off with your "Not muh" crap
>story rushed and forced
You dont even know what that means
>pointless end villain fodder
why was it pointless? it left impact and consequence.
>short battle of the Batman v Superman
ok.
>bad CGI
Ok so are you just trolling or actually an idiot.
>everywhere grey and black
Muted colours do not mean grey and black.
>mopey Superman throughout
>physco bitch Batman and not in a good way
what is character evolution.
>blurry jumpcuts everywhere
no there wernt.
Your a fucking idiot user.
Exactly, everyone says their movies are artistic, but little have to show for it.
Not Marvel, not Snyder.
Marvel doesn't even try, and I really doubt those are anything more than empty words.
Problem is Snyder tries it and it completely backfires because he's just not smart enough to pull it off.
You have to be over 18 to post here
>projecting