Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Originally posted by Mindset
Superman and Thor are completely different characters, you aren't even making sense now.

So you wanted a whole movie of Thor being selfish and arrogant so you could be more invested when he lost his powers? You aren't supposed to be sad when Thor lost his powers, you are supposed to be happy when he earned them back. I need to teach you how to watch movies.

I kinda made my point very clear that it was "in my own opinion."

Your missing my point about Superman & Thor.
I wasn't comparing them to eachother, I was comparing the structure of the story being told.

If you didn't mind the main bulk of Thor being a rom-com then that's fine.
I, on the other hand thought it was a weak solo intro.
That's all I'm saying.

I posted a big list of superhero movies I thought could've been done better & the fact that no one's mention them, other than to focus on just one on the list vindicates my stance.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I kinda made my point very clear that it was "in my own opinion."

Your missing my point about Superman & Thor.
I wasn't comparing them to eachother, I was comparing the structure of the story being told.

If you didn't mind the main bulk of Thor being a rom-com then that's fine.
I, on the other hand thought it was a weak solo intro.
That's all I'm saying.

I posted a big list of superhero movies I thought could've been done better & the fact that no one's mention them, other than to focus on just one on the list vindicates my stance.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I, on the other hand thought it was a weak solo intro.

There were tons of ways Thor 1 could have been a disaster. But the movie was decent and enjoyable and most importantly did a good job of portraying Thor , Asgard, Odin , Loki in a respectable way.
Thats not an easy thing to do with characters like Thor. Look at Superman. They are still having a tough time figuring out how to portray him properly. They dont know if they should go campy, dark, edgy, brooding, etc.

Thats the reason I like Cap 1. because of how they portrayed Cap and made him respectable. Something I thought would never happen based on how cheesy his costume is and old fashioned he was.
Now he is a straight up BOSS in the MCU.

Originally posted by Mindset
Yea, I'm telling you that the structure in which the story being told had to start off with Thor losing his powers and learning humility in the first movie, that is his origin. That is how he becomes the hero that fights to save a planet not his own and why he joins the Avengers, it can't work any other way.

Then I stand corrected. You finally made it clear to me that Thor finding humility was a very important factor. I didn't know that. Kaz hinted but didn't explain.
Thank you for clarifying it for me.

Originally posted by Inhuman
There were tons of ways Thor 1 could have been a disaster. But the movie was decent and enjoyable and most importantly did a good job of portraying Thor , Asgard, Odin , Loki in a respectable way.
Thats not an easy thing to do with characters like Thor. Look at Superman. They are still having a tough time figuring out how to portray him properly. They dont know if they should go campy, dark, edgy, brooding, etc.

Thats the reason I like Cap 1. because of how they portrayed Cap and made him respectable. Something I thought would never happen based on how cheesy his costume is and old fashioned he was. (in comics)
Now he is a straight up BOSS in the MCU.

I see & agree on all points.

WTF is up with Affleck's face?

Originally posted by Inhuman
WTF is up with Affleck's face?

Originally posted by Inhuman
WTF is up with Affleck's face?

bad botox, he used up his steroid injections or got a beat down from Jennifer garner

Originally posted by Inhuman
WTF is up with Affleck's face?

That's what depression and old age will do to you.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I didn't know that. Kaz hinted but didn't explain.
Thank you for clarifying it for me.

Or you could'eve done some research yourself by using a search engine.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Or you could'eve done some research yourself by using a search engine.

I'd rather learn & communicate back & forth with fellow posters, Kaz.
That's why I signed up on a MB.

I thought Thor was the most impressive of the Phase 1 movies.

Originally posted by Quincy
I thought Thor was the most impressive of the Phase 1 movies.

For me top 3 Phase I movies were:

Avengers 1
IM1
Thor 1

And I really do feel it was those 3 movies that turned the MCU into such a huge shared movie franchise. In fact it was IM1 and Thor 1 which built up all the massive hype for A1 IMO. Then A1 just killed it.

So, one big problem with this movie is it was billed as Batman Vs Superman.

While we know that there are 2 movies with heroes fighting heroes...it doesn't seem that this one will have any real ramifications or lasting effects in regards to Bruce and Clark's relationship. I think that Civil War is going to be a game changer like Winter Soldier was...at least that's what the Russo Bros. would have us think. So, I feel the impact of the movies is going to differ greatly.

Originally posted by CPT Space Bomb
So, one big problem with this movie is it was billed as Batman Vs Superman.

While we know that there are 2 movies with heroes fighting heroes...it doesn't seem that this one will have any real ramifications or lasting effects in regards to Bruce and Clark's relationship. I think that Civil War is going to be a game changer like Winter Soldier was...at least that's what the Russo Bros. would have us think. So, I feel the impact of the movies is going to differ greatly.

Actually, it was billed as Batman V Superman. The distinction between the 2 is that "V" denotes a court case/trial. They initially said it will be more about a conflict of ideologies as opposed to just a punch-fest.

I would assume the ramifications would be that they start antagonistic towards each other but come to respect the others point of view/tactics, which helps lead to the formation of the JLA. It's the inverse of Civil War, which dissolves the Avengers and turns friends into enemies.

Originally posted by 80sBaby
It's the inverse of Civil War, which dissolves the Avengers and turns friends into enemies.

But...there are going to be ramifications coming from their fight.

The Justice League, bro. It's right there in the title.

Originally posted by CPT Space Bomb
That's my point. I feel that Civil War is going to emotionally impact us in a way that BvS cannot. Sure, people (particularly DC Fans) will come out of BvS with, if nothing else, a rush from seeing the Trinity on screen for the first time. But as far as story goes...I really don't see how BvS can compete.

Well they're different emotional payoffs, true. BvS is closer to the 1st Avengers film than Civil War, if you really want to compare franchises.

Originally posted by 80sBaby
BvS is closer to the 1st Avengers film than Civil War, if you really want to compare franchises.

It shouldn't be though. It's way too early for their version of Avengers Imo.

Originally posted by CPT Space Bomb
.I really don't see how BvS can compete.

Why have the frame of mind that they must complete in the first place?
If they both weren't released in the same year, no one would make the comparison, would they?

And yes, there's a certain more exhilarating sense towards BVS because these characters have been iconic from our childhoods whilst CW is but one storyline.

Personally I can't relate or feel a personal attachment to any of the characters in Civil War. But I can relate to Batman's mortality & his driven spirit.

And yeah we also know they make peace & form the JLA but we also know that Cap & IM will still be part of The Avengers no matter the outcome of CW.