Snyder loves that desaturation filter. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few movies will just be a black screen, some sound effects and voice overs.AccursedTheory said:Holy crap, was it dark. You have to squint to see half of the crap going on
Snyder loves that desaturation filter. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few movies will just be a black screen, some sound effects and voice overs.AccursedTheory said:Holy crap, was it dark. You have to squint to see half of the crap going on
Or just make it comepltely Black and White.008Zulu said:Snyder loves that desaturation filter. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few movies will just be a black screen, some sound effects and voice overs.AccursedTheory said:Holy crap, was it dark. You have to squint to see half of the crap going on
Are you crazy? There's too much contrast in a black and white film. There's a serious danger that we, the audience, would actually be able to make out the occasional outline of an actor.Samtemdo8 said:008Zulu said:Snyder loves that desaturation filter. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few movies will just be a black screen, some sound effects and voice overs.AccursedTheory said:Holy crap, was it dark. You have to squint to see half of the crap going on
Or just make it comepltely Black and White.
The Artist and Raging Bull did it![]()
They will have to make a decision sooner or later. Suicide Squad does take place in their shared movie universe. There will be crossover, because WB thought process has all the accuracy of a Soviet era scud. The trailers for SS, you can see everything clearly enough. Swapping from one visual style to another and back again will just give people headaches.AccursedTheory said:There's too much contrast in a black and white film. There's a serious danger that we, the audience, would actually be able to make out the occasional outline of an actor.
And that's a danger DC Movies just can't allow.
I can kind of see what you're saying, but in my personal opinion, I don't see why you would bother using existing characters if you are going to change them beyond recognition.King Billi said:Just saw it.
The whole thing is less a film and more a marketing tool to drum up interest in hypothetical future films and build a foundation for the franchise, more or less an extended trailer.
And I guess since I came away from it keen to see the upcoming solo Wonder Woman and Batfleck films it wholly succeeded in that regard.
I really liked how they took inspiration from the comics in purely visual ways incorporating designs and iconic images from the source material rather than specific story points or characters.
The film makers really did seem to go out of their way to change or twist established traits of the characters much the same as they did in Man of Steel. Some may call it disrespectful of the source material if they like but I rather see it as more the film makers not allowing themselves to being beholden to any established interpretation of these characters and making their version unique from all others rather than pandering to fanboys, I feel thats something to respect.
But that doesn't really make it better, because it just begs the question - Why ISN'T the good Luthor in? Alexander sure as shit talks him up - Half of his scenes are talking about how bitching his adopted Dad was, and the other half were spent proving how he's not even a pale shadow of him - He's just creepy as all hell. Zero charisma, zero power - The most he ever really does is make everyone feel really, really uncomfortable. He reminds me more of the special kid in my middle school class who got caught masterbating in the computer lab with 30 other people in the room then of a real nemesis.Nedoras said:I noticed a lot of people saying that Lex Luthor was completely miscast, and I haven't seen the movie yet myself, however Eisenberg isn't Lex Luthor. I'm guessing it's never clarified in the movie, but he's actually playing the part of Lex's son. This was clarified I believe late last year at some point by the actor himself. If it's truly never said that he's actually Lex's son in the movie and not Lex himself...that's kind of a blunder on their part, a major one at that.
The only reason he is playing "Lex Jr" is because of the reaction to him being cast. What sense would it make to kill off Superman's greatest villain before they even meet? This interpretation of Lex is no more out of place than any of the other choices they've made.Nedoras said:I noticed a lot of people saying that Lex Luthor was completely miscast, and I haven't seen the movie yet myself, however Eisenberg isn't Lex Luthor. I'm guessing it's never clarified in the movie, but he's actually playing the part of Lex's son. This was clarified I believe late last year at some point by the actor himself. If it's truly never said that he's actually Lex's son in the movie and not Lex himself...that's kind of a blunder on their part, a major one at that.
I argue that Zack is not really the problem but David Goyer who screenwrote this and the Editor (David Brenner) doing his job badly.suikodenstorm said:I didn't read much of the replies in this thresd, so I apologize if I am rehashing what others have already said.
I just saw it yesterday as well, and I thought it was alright. Ben Affleck was probably the best part of that movie and I look forward to him in the standalone Batman movie. I think he portrayed the older, gruffer version of Batman very well and his scenes were the best.
I think the problems with this movie lie with Zach Snyder more than anything. It feels like a lot of the movie was left on the cutting room floor. There was no real pacing to the movie and the usual parallels that you draw between Superman (the colourful hero of the people) vs. Batman (the dark, brooding anti-hero) were missing. Both of these characters in Zach Snyders version are murderous hypocrites who carve through faceless bad-guys with abandon. That is still the main drawback that these DC movies have, and will continue to have until they distance themselves from Snyder.
That won't happen though, since this movie will be a commercial success, WB will attribute that to Snyder, despite the fact that he is doing more harm to their image than good.
I remain cautiously optimistic for the future of these movies, since there is such potential to be great, but still can't quite get over the hump due to the producers, writers and directors not knowing a thing about the characters and their history.
Have to echo this sentiment. Please don't go see this expecting to make a decent evening out of a hilariously bad film. I turned to my girlfriend halfway through and said "I hate this" only to have her feel relieved she wasn't the only one. The shit plot just serves to butcher the characters and drive my interest in the DC cinematic universe further into the ground. I was enjoying Affleck as Batman untilAccursedTheory said:It fits the film. It really does.IOwnTheSpire said:I don't know where that theory came from, but I can't imagine how anyone could think it's true.TheLaughingMagician said:If they are going with the Jason Todd being the Joker now
That's a testament to how bad it is, really, that Robin being the Joker would fit right the fuck in.
It isn't 'haha' bad. It's so bad it goes past really bad, past funny bad, past so bad it will make you angry, back around the dial to good, then all the way through the bad scale to land on 'Day Ruiner' bad. It's the kind of movie that needs a new rating, not based on maturity, but on how dangerous it is for people with high blood pressure or pre-existing heart conditions.Darth Rosenberg said:As for BvS? I've gone full spoilers, and every single source I've read or watched has convinced me I'll either loathe or just laugh at this film. I really am curious to see how much of a nasty, brain-dead broody wreck it is, but if I did I'd just be tossing more money Warner's way, and they wouldn't learn anything.