I really liked the TC of BVS (even though I know a lot of you don't) but CW was a ton better than it. While I do think the UC is on the level of CW, right now, I am talking about the TC. Is there anyone who didn't like CW more than the TC of BVS? I'm genuinely curious to see the reasoning.
shareThere's Grace Randolph and Tyrone Magnus for starters.
How does it feel to be deconstructed?share
Knowby... Joby... That Jedi idiot...
"Silflay hraka, u embleer rah!"
Grace Randolph is all over the place...
Tyrone Magnus is cool though, and he kinda is coming from the GA perspective. Like he doesn't care a ton about all of the techincal aspects of the movies, just which one entertained him more.
I think that Civil War was easily the better film than UC. However I do feel that it was a real shame that the UC was not the edition that was shown in the cinema because it is clearly superior than the TC which was a mess.
To make a great film you need three things - the script, the script and the script -Alfred Hitchcock
I wholeheartedly agree.
shareAsa Butterfield.
Says he prefers the grit of DC's movies.
At the end of the day, I'd say I enjoy the BvS TC more than Civil War. I've just seen enough from Marvel. There are too many movies that I dislike in that franchise and it's just left a sour taste in my mouth.
I just don't care about their characters.
Make up your OWN mind. Don't be a follower.
I didn't quite nail it - Christian Bale
Oh yeah, I saw that interview. I can see where he's coming from. I definitely like the grit of DC's films compared to the more lightheartedness of the MCU films (which is not a bad thing).
shareThat's what I mean. Technically, Civil War was a superior film to BvS TC but they're both so different in tone. I Just prefer BvS' style. And therefore I like it more overall. And it's not like Civil War is SO technically superior to the BvS TC that it's night and day. One just had more editing flaws than the other.
Not enough to sway my vote.
Take Suicide Squad for example, totally different tone than BvS... and I hated that one. But I've seen other people say it's a better movie than BvS
Just depends on what kind of movie you like.
Make up your OWN mind. Don't be a follower.
I didn't quite nail it - Christian Bale
I truly prefer the atmosphere and tone of BVS as well. I think CW could have been even better with that kind of tone.
I also enjoyed SS as a fun time but as a movie, it really deserves its RT score.
I understand where you are coming from. I was a bit mixed on that myself for a while but then WS was awesome and from then on Marvel had nothing but 9 or 10s in my opinion (GOTG, AOU, Ant Man and Civil War).
shareAOU, Avengers and Thor 2 are the worst Marvel movies I've seen, imo. I really don't find Joss Whedon is an impressive director.
His movies are so painfully mainstream.
Make up your OWN mind. Don't be a follower.
I didn't quite nail it - Christian Bale
IMO, Civil War had the more coherent story. Not to mention more emotional stakes with the characters than in BvS:TC. We never met the current Batman, and the current Superman is VERY divisive.
With Civil War, we, the audience, has known Tony since 2008, we've known Steve and Thor since 2011, Black Widow since 2010, and Hawkeye since 2011. And the current Hulk since 2014. We've had years to get to know these characters.
Having some of the more erratic emotionally driven scenes given by Tony, fits, we know how Tony is since 2008, we know how he tends to be more emotionally driven when stress is high. This is something that has been shown to us through five movies before Civil War.
We know how Steve is never going to give up on his friends, because we've seen him be that way for four movies before this. We know the characters.
With BvS:TC we don't have ANY of that kind of background, and it doesn't work.
But that's just me.
"Silflay hraka, u embleer rah!"
I like your take on Civil War and how well it emotionally resonated because of the 8 year buildup.
For me with BVS, I didn't need the years of buildup. In contrast to Civil War, this wasn't a both sides are right thing. In BVS, Batman is a villain (until "Martha"). He's a villain with good motivations. And that really worked for me, showing how dark a hero could go. It's the line right out of Harvey Dent's mouth in TDK "You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain". And that's what Batfleck was. A villain. Superman was the hero.
Except that I don't see Superman as a hero in the current universe because of how badly I feel Snyder did with MoS.
I see why Batman had a hate on for Superman in this, it showed. I also think his complete 180 because of Martha was very poorly done. And don't get me started with his killing, yet having the Joker still alive and the Dead Robin's weapon being what looks like a Halberd.
Tony flipping out and attacking Steve and Bucky the second he learns that the Winter soldier killed his parents, TOTALLY in character.
Batman and Superman in BvS. Totally OOC.
"Silflay hraka, u embleer rah!"
I respectfully disagree about MOS Superman. I loved it. The only un-hero like thing he did was kiss Lois and joke in the rubble of dead people which took me out of it for 2 minutes.
The Martha scene is a very controversial topic. For me though, the Martha scene was Bruce looking in the mirror and realizing that he was Joe Chill in that situation. He had realized he was the monster, the very thing he set out to destroy. His PTSD was screwing with him, which was why he was acting erratic ( WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME). He was about to kill an innocent person who had human loved ones. That's what the Martha scene did for me.
With Bruce's killing, it didn't bother me as much because I kinda understood where he was coming from and the fact that it didn't happen until the Metropolis incident.
Although I think they missed a huge opportunity with the killing. If he hadn't killed yet, it would be a buildup through the entire movie that Superman would be his first kill, which for me, would have been a better buildup. Like everything is leading up to his first kill: Superman and this will be his legacy. It would have made more sense to me.
I respectfully disagree about MOS Superman. I loved it. The only un-hero like thing he did was kiss Lois and joke in the rubble of dead people which took me out of it for 2 minutes.
The Martha scene is a very controversial topic. For me though, the Martha scene was Bruce looking in the mirror and realizing that he was Joe Chill in that situation. He had realized he was the monster, the very thing he set out to destroy. His PTSD was screwing with him, which was why he was acting erratic ( WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME). He was about to kill an innocent person who had human loved ones. That's what the Martha scene did for me.
With Bruce's killing, it didn't bother me as much because I kinda understood where he was coming from and the fact that it didn't happen until the Metropolis incident.
Although I think they missed a huge opportunity with the killing. If he hadn't killed yet, it would be a buildup through the entire movie that Superman would be his first kill, which for me, would have been a better buildup. Like everything is leading up to his first kill: Superman and this will be his legacy. It would have made more sense to me.
Destroying that dude's truck didn't bother me one bit. Also, it was in that scene that I knew that I would never be Superman, because if I was, I would have sent that guy flying.
Superman is pretty much innocent. He didn't cause any of the death or destruction in MOS. The World Engine and Zod did the destroying. The most that Superman did was put Zods face against the side of a building, which was only windows.
My thing with the killing was that he didn't go out of his way to kill criminals. It wasn't "Screw it, Alfred! I'm going to kill every crimnal out there! Because I'm Batman!". It was more " Screw it, Alfred. I won't try to kill anyone but if any dumb criminal stands between me and Superman, I won't try and save him". Also, remember, this is a jaded, cynical, broken, PTSD ridden, tired and somewhat psychotic Bruce Wayne who's been fighting for 20 years and lost friends and family (Robin) in his crusade that means nothing when Superman arrives in the skies. His world is shattered. His perception of reality is distorted from Superman's arrival. He's thinking that all of his years meant nothing because now
we have a all powerful alien who at any moment could snap and wipe out the planet (Knightmare). He's seen it happen in his 20 year history (Harvey, Jason Todd). The rules are gone. His no kill code is gone. He has to stop Superman at all costs before he turns. And also, it's evidenced that he hasn't been killing for a while, hence the "New Rules" scene.
It's a pretty good motivation, in my opinion.
We have to agree to disagree because Snyderman and Batsnyder are not Superman and Batman to me. They are too OOC and the WB needs to get their crap together.
"Silflay hraka, u embleer rah!"
Sure, let's agree to disagree.
shareI didn't care about Superman destroying the truck. That's hardly a crime when you consider what Superman COULD do to humanity. It was years of being trash talked by people but being unable to do anything about it.
It's set up well in the film as a joke because we witness different instances of Superman being trolled leading up to when he does it. His whole life he hasn't been able to take out his frustration on people because he's far more powerful than him.
So he takes his frustration out on an object.
Big deal.
Make up your OWN mind. Don't be a follower.
I didn't quite nail it - Christian Bale
The only thing you and other rabid DC fanboys care about for the DCEU is the heroes being "dark" badass, reckless, muscle-bound and action scenes but no story. Its like you want the DCEU to repeat the same mistake as Schumacker's Batman & Robin.
sharePlease don't reply to Ramboman in our discussion. I don't need to see his insanity.
"Silflay hraka, u embleer rah!"
oh the giant hypocrite got triggered.
Calls out DC fans for being biased, but is totally biased herself
Make up your OWN mind. Don't be a follower.
I didn't quite nail it - Christian Bale
Well said.
shareFor me with BVS, I didn't need the years of buildup. In contrast to Civil War, this wasn't a both sides are right thing. In BVS, Batman is a villain (until "Martha"). He's a villain with good motivations. And that really worked for me, showing how dark a hero could go
That's exactly why Batman is a villain in the movie. And for me, it was done well.
To your point of him killing even after Martha, my explanation of that is that while "Martha" is what snapped him out of his kill rage for Superman, Superman's death was the thing that restored hope in humanity and that's what stopped his killing (evidenced from him not branding Lex in the prison).
This Superman does not have a happy life. He's thrown into situation after situation of death and destruction. He is the most controversial figure on Earth. Every action he does has consequences. He has a psychotic billionaire who dresses like a bat after his life. And he has another psychotic billionaire after him who kidnaps his girlfriend and his mother. This is the furthest thing from a happy life.
Superman's death was the thing that restored hope in humanityI get that's how they meant all this, but it just doesn't work for me. Maybe if Superman had actually appeared to be some kind of inspirational figure to Bruce, but he was mostly just a superpowered alien bully. A bully whom Bruce wanted to murder, before he started to claim that his mother had the same name as Bruce's.
that's what stopped his killing (evidenced from him not branding Lex in the prison).I'm almost more pissed about him letting Luthor live at the end than I am about him nonchalantly killing the thugs. That's the one kill that would've been well advised.
This Superman does not have a happy life.Can't say I ever reaally saw him working towards changing that. His standard reaction to anything unwelcome happening to him is to look constipated and accept it. share
The thing is that Bruce has been demonizing Superman as a monster. "Martha" changes that.
Superman's death shows how much he cared for this planet, that he gave his life. And Bruce saw this first hand. Metropolis was entirely different.
By not killing Lex, he finishes his arc that ran through the entire movie.
He was plenty happy through a lot of MOS and showed some happiness in BVS. But he doesn't lead a completely happy life.
The thing is that Bruce has been demonizing Superman as a monster.He even acknowledged that Superman wasn't exactly evil, he wanted to murder him for a 1% chance that he might turn bad at some point.
"Martha" changes that.There are precious few scenes in movie history that I so wish would've worked for me but so absolutely didn't work at all.
By not killing Lex, he finishes his arc that ran through the entire movie.The arc that he started out somehow so broken that he killed people left and right, without us really ever seeing what -if anything- that meant to him? He kills hired thugs and doesn't even bat an eye (pun alarm) and he plans to murder a guy who did nothing but help people, but seeing that guy sacrifice himself somehow brings him to return to being a better person we can only guess he might've been in the past.
He was plenty happy through a lot of MOS and showed some happiness in BVS. But he doesn't lead a completely happy life.I don't remember too much happiness before learning to fly, meeting Lois and working at the Planet.
I prefer BvS theatrical cut. With CW, I find a lot of scenes to be bland and while it may be Marvel's most mature movie and the action in some scenes were amazing, I also don't feel emotionally connected with the movie while I do with BvS TC.
share
Make up your OWN mind. Don't be a follower.
I didn't quite nail it - Christian Bale
CW is the way better movie, end of story.
WB/DC blew it big time with BVS. The disappointment of that movie scarred alot of DC fans who trusted WB and Snyder for it.
"This is my opinion. I am treating it as fact. End of story."
That must work well for you.
That's your opinion. End of story.
shareVery few.
shareI liked it more.
Despite all those flaws that were nit-picked to the oblivion since its release I think it´s more epic, more artistic and it feels more organic to me...
It has some really great moments...
I will say I like the 1st half of Civil War much better than the 2nd
But I think MCU and DC is simply for a different audience...obviously by reactions
I like MCU. Hey I saw 13 movies now why stop? :D
But DC was always closer to my heart because Batman...
Funny thing is I really really love X men and they are not part of MCU...and I must say I´m happy about that...
I don't. CW is a far better film. Zack squeezed like four comic books into one film and then didn't even understand what took place is said source.
It ended up being silly and not making much sense.
Even if we take out personal taste from the equation, there are still more things we can objectively say that Civil War did better than BvS:
1. The airport battle was much more complex than any fight scene in BvS. You might not like the airport battle (most like it though) but you can't argue the fact that that fight entailed choreography for way more combatants using vastly more different powersets than anything in BvS.
2. The argument between Cap and Tony have more development to it. Their argument has built up for 3 movies now, and then you add both their disagreement on the Accords and over Bucky. So while you may or may not agree with their argument, you can't really deny that it has at least been more developed than the disagreement between Batman and Superman.
3. There was a better resolution to the fight. Even if you feel that the Martha scene is perfectly justified (most do not) it still doesn't change the fact that the ending of the fight felt too abrupt and unfinished. In comparison to Civil War, Cap and Tony actually finish their fight, with Cap ending up completely depowering Ironman and walking away able to save Bucky. Yes, there were no deaths, but then Cap's intentions were never to kill or even hurt Tony. So the fight actually ended.
4. Side characters have better reasons to be there, and cameos are better handled. Black Panther was central to the storyline of Civil War and although Spiderman's, Antman's and Hawkeye's involvement were pretty shallow, they at least had better reasons to be in the movie instead of just looking for your picture or seeing you through CCTV footage.
Technically speaking, no one can really say anything is "objectively" better because people have different preferences.
I disagree with some of your points. I will respectfully rebut them and hopefully we can make this a peaceful discussion:
1. I really loved the airport fight. But to me, it wasn't more complex than the BVS fight. And in the airport, they severely mishandled Vision and Wanda in the airport. They didn't do much. It was like the directors didn't know what to do with them in that scene. Vision could have destroyed the jet with his omnibeam. Heck, any of Tony's side could have done it. Or Wanda could have used her powers to literally just throw all of Tony's side away or pinned them down. But they didn't.
2. Fair Enough. I agree.
3. Most people are mixed on "Martha". It isn't one sided with dislike. Martha ended the fight well for me. Tony and Steve's resolution was good as well. However, the ending of CW was more abrupt and unfinished than BVS's ending. BVS actually concluded but CW kinda rushed its ending.
4. WW had just as much as reason as BP. And Spider-Man, Ant-Man and Hawk-eye's reasoning's are extremely shallow.
Thank you for the respectful rebut. I don't mind level-headed debates. Anyway to answer your points:
1. I'd like to point out that it will always be more complex to choreograph fight scenes between multiple combatants especially if you try to make each fight individualized so that each participant is given enough focus to showcase their unique skills. CW and BvS did this, but CW did it with more characters who had a greater variety of skillsets. That's why I say it's more complex. You may not think it's better, but the choreography is definitely a lot more complex.
2. ~
3. I was talking only about the resolution of the fight itself, not so much the ending of the movie. I feel that CW was intentionally made to feel vague and open at the end. Also, the ending of Cap and Tony's fight was very close to the end of the movie and it was central to the theme of the movie which means it won't feel quite as closed as BvS because Batman and Superman's conflict ended with pretty much a lot of stuff still happening after it, and it wasn't the climactic fight. Which means it had more time and opportunity to close. Don't know if that makes sense.
4. Spiderman, Antman and Hawkeye's reasons for being in the movie are shallow I agree, but it's still better than the CCTV cameos we had of the rest of the JLA. BP's father was killed by Bucky supposedly and BP wants revenge on Bucky. That makes more sense in getting him involved in the whole fight as compared to WW who went looking for her picture.
1. The choreography is definitely more complex in Civil War but I'm talking about the storytelling in the battles, and in that regard, BVS was better done.
2. ~
3. They kind of level out for me. As sad as it was to see Tony broken and alone, it also saddened me to see Bruce break down from his mother's loss and come to the realization that he has become the very thing he set out to stop.
4. Oh, I hated the CCTV cameos. I was severely disappointed with them. They could have included Aquaman in the final battle and Victor could have been shown, as a civilian, helping people in the final battle but then getting injured, which would have tied it in to his inclusion in the universe. But no, we got the CCTV mess. So I agree that SM, BP and Ant Man were better included. But for me, Wonder Woman had a good reason to be in BVS. If she doesn't get her picture, then she will be exposed as a metahuman, which A: would have led to her being hunted and B: bring her out of the shadows which she has tried (presumably) for the past 80 years to prevent. That's why it worked for me.
1. I didn't want to get into discussing the "storytelling" of the fights because I felt that was something that could be very subjective. Which is why I was only focusing on the fight choreography, which I felt was objectively and unquestionably more complex for Civil War than it was for BvS.
3. Same with #1, I didn't want to discuss which one felt more emotional or more gratifying. Simply that the fight in CW had more closure since their fight actually finished. With Cap winning and walking away. In BvS, they fight was stopped before it was concluded. One could say that Batman had just about won, but that "Martha" moment will go down as probably one of the most controversial scenes in a fight ever.
4. Ok I'll revise. WW does have a reason to be in the movie. But did she have a reason to be in the fight?