Gary Oldman comments on J.K. Simmons playing Commissioner Gordon in 'Justice League' (video)

Yahoo caught up with The Dark Knight Trilogy's C0mmissioner Gordon, Gary Oldman, and asked for his thoughts on J.K. Simmons taking over the role in Justice League. "God bless him. Good luck." is all Oldman had to say before going into some advice on playing the character.

“The thing you’ve just got to get used to with Gordon is he’s a really sound detective, first of all,” Oldman said. “And he’s really incorruptible, which is a kind of wonderful quality to play and sort of, like, true blue.”

“He’s like a Watson, oddly,” he continued. “He’s sort of like Watson to Sherlock, is Gordon to Batman.”

Justice League is scheduled to beginning shooting this Monday, so hopefully it won't be long until we get an official look at J.K. Simmons as Commissioner Gordon.

SOURCE: Yahoo

159 comments

Aheaney15

April 9, 2016

Cool! Honestly, the supporting characters/cast of the Dark Knight Trilogy (and the badass villains), especially Gordon are the backbone of what made it so good for me. While I do think Batfleck is a better Batman than Bale, I still think the three Dark Knight films are better films (only by a little with Rises, but by far with Begins and Knight)

Bats
April 9, 2016
Batfleck was all stuntdouble.
1. OssamNin
  April 9, 2016
  well of course, he did some pretty acrobatic stuff no normal person would be able to do...
2. Meg
  April 10, 2016
  Mostly in fight scenes, in which they wouldn't risk hospitalizing Ben Affleck to make. I'm sure his insurance would be a sweet number. Otherwise he probably did the work himself
3. col42
  April 10, 2016
  No shit...
Bats2012
April 10, 2016
Idk how anyone can say Battleck is a better Batman. What film did you watch?
1. Meg
  April 10, 2016
  Shrug....I watched BvS, and I think Batfleck is a better Batman,even in a heavily flawed film like BvS. It's hard to explain. I never really thought of Christian Bale as the Batman I grew up loving and admiring. He was a very good character in a great crime thriller movie, and his character worked perfectly for the universe Nolan created. But he was never quite there as "the Batman" IMO. For ex, the comic Batman would never quit over someone like Rachel. He would never mope around for 8 years mourning a never-meant-to-be girlfriend. He would never be fooled by the silly lies Talia fed him in the TDK Rises, etc. Don't get me wrong. I adored the Dark Knight trilogy, but this is the comic universe, and it didn't take much to see how much more Batman-y Ben was compared to Bale.
  1. royal emperor
    April 10, 2016
    TDK had the best BATMAN story but not the best BATMAN
  2. Bats2012
    April 10, 2016
    I can respect your stance on Bales Batman but I feel Afflecks was even further from the mark. The Batman I grew up with would never plot murder against anyone, especially Superman. The Batman I grew up with wouldn't gun down people that were simply in his way, especially people who were in the way of his larger murder plot against Superman. The Bruce Wayne I grew up with respected women and men alike, he didn't call people "son," and he didn't stare at women's asses and ignore others in the process.
    I guess the look of the suit is more important to some people than all that other stuff though.
    1. S.P.M
      April 10, 2016
      Then you didnt grew up with the Bruce Wayne/Batman of the comics.
      And I really think you didnt understand that whole scene at Luthor's "party"
    2. Bats2012
      April 10, 2016
      I understood it, and it was bad. Don't question my knowledge of Batman I've been a fan since 1992 and I've never seen a more sloppy and disrespectful interpretation.
      If you like Bro-fleck that's fine but don't tell me I don't understand the character because I thought it was garbage.
    3. j4444
      April 10, 2016
      disrespectful interpretation? haha, if you didnt know that what a front, then i guess you really dont know batman. every interpretation of bruce puts up a front. and you thought that was disrespectful? how about in batman begins when bruce(christian bale) kicks everyone put as his party and says "thank you all for drinking my booze...etc"
      it was a front.
    4. Bats2012
      April 10, 2016
      Yeah but Bro-fleck stares at women creepily and uses failed one liners and is just a general douche for no reason. That's completely different from pretending to be drunk to save peoples's lives.
      You conveniently ignored the entirety of my argument.
    5. j4444
      April 10, 2016
      no i did not ignore it.
      just petty much going on more of the "disrespectful
      interpretation from
      ben" which i find dumb.
      so bale wasnt disrespectful when he bought the whole place and disrespected the waiter(or whatever the employee was)
      from batman begins, thibking he can swim wherever he wants with his women.
      you pretty much ignore mine.
      like i said, its a front.
      the reason and always the reason is a front.
      but even when i point out all these examples
      theres always gonna be "but."
      but bale this but bale that.
      i love bale, but you trashing on ben for "disrepectful interpretation"
      even when bale was similar... is just dumb.
    6. Bats2012
      April 10, 2016
      They weren't similar, at all.
      Bale's Wayne was charismatic, and funny, and when necessary quite clearly a front. Bro-fleck's Wayne seemed like he was genuinely a douche because most times there was no apparent motive behind his "front" other than that's part of who he was.
      If you can't see the difference then I believe this new movie was made with you in mind.
    7. j4444
      April 10, 2016
      similar when they have to put up a front. the asshole-ness that comes with it. def not similar bruce waynes.
      just saying they were both assholes when it comes to it.
      i definitely agree with you how bales wayne was.
      but bens wayne is truer to the books
      and maybe bens front got to you.
      you think hes a douche, when we all know he isnt, so maybe his front really worked.
      or maybe you just dont get it.
      and clearly him and diana were staring at each other...
      just an excuse of "sorry, old habits" to clark and speaking with such confidence of a billionare/playboy callin another individual "son." and you call him a douche ...
      but ive come to realize that this wont change your view on ben,
      but maybe when or if he gets his solo films you'll, we'll, see a longer take on his bruce wayne.
    8. Bats2012
      April 10, 2016
      Don't take this as a complement but I'm not necessarily blaming Affleck for it. I think it was poor writing and directing combined with Affleck's tendency to only be able to play himself.
    9. j4444
      April 10, 2016
      hahaha damn, guest you really dont like affleck.
      hes pretty good then
      since he got you to believe hes that much of douche then
      the true bruce Wayne disguise
    10. j4444
      April 10, 2016
      guess*
    11. Bats2012
      April 10, 2016
      But his Bruce Wayne isn't any different, we don't see any evidence that he cares about anything or anyone outside of his own ego and his dead parents.
    12. man_you_fear_19
      April 10, 2016
      Obviously you missed the idea that this is an older, tired Batman. In the scene where he is just staring at the suit, it is because he knows that Alfred is right about Bruce being the better way to get the information but is much more comfortable being Batman.
    13. man_you_fear_19
      April 10, 2016
      In many cases it has been shown that Batman has plans to defeat/kill all the people in the JL, not just Superman. So you think Bale's Bruce Wayne was respecting women by having multiple dates at the same time? So I guess you had a problem with Captain America calling people son too? I can't remember the exact line so I can't be sure but I assume that yeah he was being disrespectful but this Bruce is also older than Clark.
    14. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      https://www.youtube.com/wat...
      here you go
    15. Meg
      April 10, 2016
      It's not just the suit, mind you. But anyway, Batfleck killing goons left and right didn't sit well with me either, but I was able to look past that part and take into account other factors. It was an unwise and unnecessary decision they made, but otherwise I think he nailed the part pretty damn well. Also, I don't think him calling Clark "son" is disrespectful to be honest. It depends on how you interpret the character. In my eyes, Bruce Wayne is a classy guy but despite that, someone with his social status, fortune, talents and personality is definitely prone to using a condescending tone when talking to people, especially someone who was accusing Batman of being a criminal right in front of the man behind the cowl himself. He was probably both annoyed and amused by the notion of being talked about like that.
      Him wanting to kill Superman...I actually had a small problem with his motivation not being sufficient enough, but that is more of a script problem, not his problem.
      Btw, the last part when you said he was ignoring other people and looking at women, I think you were describing Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne as well.
    16. Bats2012
      April 10, 2016
      Despite any correlations I just didn't find any aspects of the most recent interpretation of the character very entertaining.
    17. Meg
      April 11, 2016
      To each his own
    18. Bats2012
      April 11, 2016
      It baffles me, it pretty much invalidates anyone's argument when they say that. It shows they have zero literary analysis skills.
    19. Bats2012
      April 11, 2016
      Your right, although I haven't seen Chris troll really. It's the same people who want to see more wire work and CGI that are saying that TDK films weren't that great. Why do I expect them to get the philosophical subtext when they're sad that it didn't look like Kill Bill and Transformers?
      As someone who's boxed the last minute or so of Bane and Batman's fight is some of the greatest fighting I've seen on screen and the best parts are when Bane's punches aren't hitting anything. At that point Batman has won, he's outsmarted and out maneuvered his opponent. But I guess people prefer wire work.
    20. Bats2012
      April 11, 2016
      Yeah, I've said that before too. All of the fight scenes in Watchmen, MoS and BvS feel very obligatory. There's no build up or emotional investment in the characters, it's just... Because.
    21. Bats2012
      April 11, 2016
      In case we don't know which visuals are supposed to be meaningful he makes sure to make the important ones slow-mo.
    22. Rust
      September 16, 2016
      Batman calls the Mutant Leader "boy" with the same tone in The Dark Knight Returns. I figure most of us here grew up with that book, or read plenty of books heavily influenced by it.
      The difference is, Batman is his true face, and as has been explained, Bruce Wayne tends to, as necessary, put on a show that all he cares about is being rich and drunk.
      You're enough of a fan that you can read between those lines without it being spelled out for you for the umpteenth time in the movies.
  3. Bats2012
    April 10, 2016
    Further, Bale's Batman hadn't been confirmed sighted by police in 8 years because 1. He was officially suspected of killing Harvey Dent 2. The Dent act made it difficult for organized crime to even exist.
    Bale's Bruce Wayne became a recluse three years prior to Rises when he mothballed the nuclear fusion program. He worked with Talia on the nuclear project for many of the years prior to this so he had a level of trust with her before the events in the film.
    The thought that he becomes a recluse for 8 years over Rachel is a complete misinterpretation of the film and you have to ignore major parts of the film to believe it.
    1. RedHood
      April 10, 2016
      bale was more of a james bond/batman, batfleck was more of a batman animated series/ frank miller batman type batman.
      i prefered batfleck, still enjoyed bales interpretation though.
  4. JCFan1979
    April 11, 2016
    True. Batman was never driven by his love for a girl. He's driven by something he can't quit and wouldn't be moping around.
Kriss_Kringle
April 10, 2016
Yeah,they are better films overall,but it's not really fair to compare a movie in which Batman has an important role (among other characters)with a Batman trilogy.
Based on what we've seen in BvS,the Batman solo movie,if done right,could be just as good as Nolan's.
Aheaney15
April 11, 2016
You may be right about Bale, but Affleck to me was the first Batman to possibly be the most well balanced of the two personas in any live-action performance to date, creating compelling ways that sorrow and rage consume his soul. In BvS, we see Bruce Wayne coping with feeling powerless for the first time in his life and asking himself what exactly is he leaving behind both as Bruce Wayne and Batman. Every scene involving him in any capacity elevates the film, but a reminder that this is without a doubt a Frank Miller inspired interpretation for better and for worse, so of course he wasn't bringing much to the character. Also, I loved how we could actually see him fight, unlike TDK trilogy (though to be fair, I blame the cinematographers for that)
I agree with the entirety of the second paragraph. I'm surprised you didn't bring up Ra's Al Ghul, Scarecrow, and Two-Face. To me, I like those versions better than any other iterations. When I think of those three villains, I immediately think of the TDK trilogy iterations.
I disagree with the last paragraph. BvS had a shit-ton of problems, but enough good things for me to call it, "alright." I don't consider TDKR a great film, but it's good. BB and TDK on the other hand...

Seb

April 9, 2016

Chris Evans is a pretty underrated actor though. Hemsworth is very good, but not great, Ruffalo has also been nominated and he's great in the role and he's very talented as well. Jeremy Renner was incredible in The Town, but yeah the rest is pretty average.

Seb
April 9, 2016
I disagree on Ruffalo. I thought Norton was boring as hell in Hulk 2008. He hardly showed any real emotion and looked bored to death. I think Ruffalo nails the quirky innocent scientist. But that's just me.. And yes, Batman giving directions is always a good thing.
1. Supafairy
  April 9, 2016
  Ruffalo is the best Hulk to date. I wish he'd get his own movie.
Seb
April 9, 2016
Also, I wasn't just talking about their roles in the MCU, more so than about their talent and acting ability. Even if you think Ruffalo is a poor Bruce Banner, you can't deny he's a very solid actor. And this is coming from a guy who thinks he's an absolute idiotic douche in real life.
1. royal emperor
  April 10, 2016
  ruffalo is a poor bruce banner? the scene in avengers when he explains how killing him is not an option is a masterpiece acting . the transition from sarcastic to irritated to angry within two minutes was beautifully portrayed by ruffalo.
  1. Seb
    April 10, 2016
    I literally said Ruffalo was the best Bruce Banner we've gotten.
    1. royal emperor
      April 10, 2016
      sorry bro. lost in translation
    2. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      It good man :)
2. Seb
  April 10, 2016
  I didn't say you did.. Just making things clear.
OptimistPrime99
April 9, 2016
..said no intelligent actor, producer, or movie watcher, EVER!
Supafairy
April 9, 2016
Neither of the Chris' are great at anything outside the MCU. Yes, they're called competent but they have very limited range. Which is fine, as long as they keep to the roles that they're good at.
1. The Dark Knight
  April 10, 2016
  Tell me Chris hemsworth was bad in Rush?
  1. Supafairy
    April 10, 2016
    I haven't seen it because firstly, not kind of movie and secondly, because he's in it. I'm not a fan of him as an actor. I can't take him seriously. But when it's on Netflix.ca I will give it a shot.
    1. The Dark Knight
      April 11, 2016
      That's ridiculous.
    2. Supafairy
      April 11, 2016
      Why is it ridiculous? I don't think he's good, I don't think Chris Pratt is a good actor either. I like him in his movies he has been in but he's pretty much been the same person. Same can be said about Jesse Eisenberg, the difference is I actually like the movies he's been in.
    3. The Dark Knight
      April 11, 2016
      So you like BvS and adventureland over Jurrasic world and Rush? You sure have weird tastes
    4. Supafairy
      April 11, 2016
      Yes! I enjoyed JW for what it was but it wasn't a great flick. I was never interested in watching Rush.I hate biographical movies. Zombieland was fantastic. Adventureland was fun . BvS is one of my favorite CBMovies. I even liked Now you see me, Jesse was one of my favorite things from it and I'm looking forward to the sequel.
2. Seb
  April 10, 2016
  Watch Rush and Snowpiercer.
Supafairy
April 9, 2016
A director matters. There are a few examples of great, magnificent actors being put in certain roles and doing great poorly because of bad direction. Thor is a great example of that. They had Portman and Anthony Hopkins for crying in a bucket and they completely blew those characters. You can't blame it in bad acting because they are using what is given to them.
1. Supafairy
  April 9, 2016
  Yeah sorry. Meant that. Stupid mistake. Fixed it. Lol, always used to get confused between them. Not sure why.
Kal-Il AKA Ultraman
April 9, 2016
BULLSHIT.
How did someone put it once?
"the PR department is responsible for the opening weekend, the director is responsible for all the weekends after"

OmegaCorleone

April 9, 2016

https://49.media.tumblr.com...

Matches Malone

April 9, 2016

Simmons' casting is an example of Warner Brothers' and DC's impeccable decision making in comic book film. The universe has attracted all sorts of talent in many different ways from many different mediums.

Whether or not Marvel fanboys and the critics like it, Darkseid is coming.

Warner Brothers and DC Entertainment has shown that it is fully committed to the DC mythology. BvS stayed true to the comics and formed a great story. The movie truly felt like a comic book.

What Marvel fanboys and critics haven't realized is that there are different ways of making comic book movies. Marvel has created the "Marvel Standard", which states that there is only one way to make a comic book film, and that is with plenty of mindless explosions and contrived humor.

DC has tried, and in some ways succeeded in making a contemplative, thought provoking universe for comic book movies.

I look forward to what is coming in the future, especially with Justice League's commencement of filming this Monday.

People will be disappointed by some of the differing qualities from Marvel, but it proves how revolutionary DC is in their storytelling. Like they say, the first one through the wall always gets bloody.

Seb
April 9, 2016
Stayed true to the comics? That's why this Batman is a stone cold killer. That's why Superman is always reluctant to even use his powers and why he's always so depressed.
I mean, I applaud the studio for making these characters multi-dimensional and I like the fact that this Superman can't do anything and responds accordingly to bad situations.
However, Superman is an optimist who inspires hope. No matter how grounded or "dark" you get with the character, that has always been the core of his personality. And this Supes is the furthest away from the inspiration of hope he's meant to be. And don't get me started on Batman's ruthless behavior. And Lex? He was never as obnoxious in the comics (not saying that in a bad way, just calling it as it is). It's fine if you think all these changes were for the better (I like some, others I hate). But to say they're completely faithful to the comics is completely false. Superman would be the typical boyscout. Batman would never kill and Lex would be a imposing business man.
And DC fan(boys) need to stop saying "Marvel fans/critics" don't understand this type of comic book movie. Need I remind you the Dark Knight Trilogy are the highest rated comic book movies ever? And I'm pretty sure most would call those movie dark, grounded, thought-provoking, etc. BvS was a mediocre movie, stop trying to find excuses for it and face the facts.
1. Matches Malone
  April 9, 2016
  okay
  1. Seb
    April 10, 2016
    lol..I'll admit I'm kinda baffled at some decisions they've made.
2. Tres Swygert
  April 10, 2016
  To be fair - this is not the Superman that has fully resembles the figure we know he should be. This is the Superman in the beginning, learning how to use his powers effectively, how to have people trust him, and to become the beacon of hope.
  After what happened in MoS, and dealing with the consistent doubt and accusations in BvS (before his death), he was really unsure if he was fit to be Superman. We have even seen that kind of doubt with Christian Bale as Batman in The Dark Knight (the second time seeing him like seeing Henry Cavill as Superman) where the challenge is bigger than what they have anticipated.
  So what I do hope to see, is that through the moment of doubt, we start to see Superman (Cavill) more inspired within himself, and to have others inspired for hope and a bright future in the future films to come. Especially for a possible second MoS (I do hope they have that in the works).
  1. OmegaCorleone
    April 10, 2016
    I think that's exactly what they've got in the works. This is Superman's trilogy, you can't just let him fight evil and instantly become that beacon of hope. The way the Earth would see him and how confident he himself is. That's something he is becoming. That's character development. This way Clark is a multi-layered character and not you go to boyscout who's a boyscout because that's what some people want him to instantly be.
    We're going to witness Superman coming back to life, perhaps not instantly joining the League or choosing to fight once more but we know we will. We know he sees that not only do the people of Earth need him, he now knows that he can finally be what his father had intended. The people will join him in the sun.
    I bet that the final fight between Darkseid and the League is going to take place at either dawn or broad daylight. This way Superman looks even more like the beacon of hope, I loved his new suit in BvS and it'll probably be altered a bit but damn does it look fantastic in daylight. Cavill's performance was better in BvS than in Man of Steel and I think he's going to absolutely nail it once more in Justice League.
  2. Seb
    April 10, 2016
    I just don't understand why it has to take 3 freaking movies. Bale was the Batman we know and love in Begins. Sure, he had some moments of doubting himself but nothing on Cavill's level (and this isn't Cavill's fault).
    For example, they could... never mind that... SHOULD have let Superman speak during the court scene in BvS. Imagine if he was permitted to say his side of the story and why he's doing what he's doing. Imagine if even the cripple was touched by Superman's speech and realized he's actually a good man. Not only would Superman actually say something in the movie, he'd actually have some optimistic scene for once. But no, everything just blew up in his face for no real reason.
    1. Tres Swygert
      April 10, 2016
      My only argument is the deliberation scene didn't last long thanks to Senator Finch noticing something wrong. She was the one leading the court case, and there would have been a chance for Superman to provide his side of the story. However, she kept noticing something was off, as it came odd to Superman and a couple of others in the courtroom before the explosion occurred.
      As for the reason the explosion happened, Lex Luthor planted a bomb in Wallace Keefe's chair for a couple of reasons: 1. Senator Finch blocked Lex's ability to obtain the kryptonite (legally), and Lex was not thrilled at all. With Finch gone, no more obstacles in having what he wanted. 2. It was to make Superman appear responsible for what happened, along with what happened with the killings in Africa (and one of the reasons to show to court). While it was reported that a bomb was located on the wheelchair of Wallace (that Lex provided), it caused enough anguish and belief that Superman is not needed (as people were shown divided on what they thought about Superman).
      If nothing else, Lex throughout the movie wanted to get people not to trust Superman, to doubt him, and to make them see he is not the 'savior' they have him out to be. Even if Superman was given a chance to speak, and to share/show how good he is, had the explosion still happened as planned by Lex, the outside world would still assume that Superman was responsible for what happened, as no one was recording/filming inside the courtroom.
      Maybe it doesn't need to take as many films to get to Superman as you mentioned. I would say though that Batman is not as complex as Superman (human being, no powers, has a cold vendetta against criminals), and I'm sure that is why it didn't take a long leap to see the Batman we know in the first two films of The Dark Knight trilogy. With Superman being more unique as a character, there are things they (DC/WB/Zack Snyder) probably want to bring out before we all finally see the Superman we long for. That's what hope is, longing for something better and soon, and the character development with Henry Cavill, we hope, will showcase that Superman we all want to embrace. Hopefully in the Justice League films, and then Man of Steel 2.
    2. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      I know why Lex blew up that building. Seems people took that statement quite literally which is my fault I guess. I know his motivations behind it, I'm just saying the scene could have been so much more.
      But come to think of it... Why would lex care about "legally importing Kryptonite" at that point? He already had it be transported, hell it was already in his possession. So that is a weak justification. However, there are 2 more reasons, one of which you mentioned (blackmail Superman) which is a good reason I think (fits Lex' character) and another (just my theory, nothing official) is that he obviously can't stand it when people are more powerful than him (Superman obviously) but Finch also had power over him, which made him jealous and motivated to kill her.
      My guess is, we'll see a "fully formed" Superman in JL1. Or at least I hope so.
    3. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      Also, "Even if Superman was given a chance to speak, and to share/show how good he is, had the explosion still happened as planned by Lex, the outside world would still assume that Superman was responsible for what happened, as no one was recording/filming inside the courtroom."
      Exactly!! That would have actually made that scene emotionally much more engaging. I don't mind that the world doubts him in BvS, but it seems even Superman doubts himself every second and he never stands up for himself.
    4. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      I know that dude... It was a sarcastic remark, cause I still think that scene felt flat and could've been so much more.
    5. man_you_fear_19
      April 10, 2016
      What do you think Superman could have said to make "the cripple" forgive him? As he sees it this alien caused him to lose his family and his legs and his life seems to pretty much suck. I don't think there is anything he could have said and unless it was done in exactly the right way, it would have come off as convenient, and probably be called lazy writing by some.
    6. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      An equivalent of this scene: (Look at Smeagol's reaction. He hates both of them, but was still touched by his speech)
      https://www.youtube.com/wat...
      Considering they have Chris Terrio, that should be enough.
    7. man_you_fear_19
      April 10, 2016
      But again how would you make that work coming from Superman? In the real world, in that world, it would come off as insincere and just him making excuses. In that world he hasn't proven himself enough to get the benefit of the doubt from people, like in the comics. And Sméagol has a reaction because that is the hopeful part of that character. Gollum hates them both.
    8. Seb
      April 10, 2016
      Indeed he hates them both, I said that :p And yet still he was touched. At this point in the story, Smeagol was already bent on killing them, the goodness that was still in him was eradicated by the Ring. But it's irrelevant. Superman could exchange dialogue with Finch.. You are pretending as if a motivational speech would be impossible to pull off. There are a ton of movies out there with great speeches coming from places you would least expect it. If Captain America can do it, so can Superman damn it!
    9. man_you_fear_19
      April 10, 2016
      No I'm saying an motivational speech would be a) very difficult to pull off right b) even harder to make believable that it would change Wallace's opinion of him and c) probably wouldn't fit with where Superman was in his character development.
    10. Seb
      April 11, 2016
      It would be just as difficult to pull off as any other important scene... In other words, making interesting scenes is not easy. Nothing new there. I'm not saying after his speech everyone would change their minds, I'm saying Superman needed to defend himself and make people understand why he's doing what he's doing. Also, I never meant to say Wallace's opinion should change radically, in fact I linked that LOTR video for a very good reason. Wallace shouldn't have to say anything, if he looked the exact same way Smeagol did in that clip, that would've done wonders to Superman's character and you wouldn't have the trouble of Wallace's opinionated inconsistency. He could still show resent for Superman afterwards, but one small 2 second look is all I wanted. Completely disagree with C. It's totally withing Superman's character to do that. Remember in MOS when he stood up for himself and actually showed confidence? Yeah, that was nowhere to be seen in BvS.
    11. man_you_fear_19
      April 11, 2016
      I totally understand what you are saying but I still don't think a scene like that would have worked in that movie, at that time.
3. SorrytDCnobillionforyou
  April 10, 2016
  Specially love this part...
  "No one cares about the "perfect boyscout" from the 70s. Superman is not that anymore."
  Says who?
  Have you actually done a survey and asked ALL the superman fans on the planet?
  if the answer is no you just lost all credibility.
  If you have an opinion FINE,voice YOUR opinion but dont pass it along like if everyone feels the same way.
4. Seb
  April 10, 2016
  Weak response. Also, you are wrong.
  Just because there are a couple times in Batman's history, he has killed before, doesn't mean the character is therefore generally accepted to be a killer. Don't you think I know he killed during the Golden Age? Of course I do, but it is accepted by I don't know... EVERYONE that those initial first years of Batman's lore are not representative of the character, and neither is a NON-canon Batman story (TDKR). You can't escape the FACT that Batman, for the last 30 years has always been portrayed as a non-killer. The few instances where he actually does kill, does not justify your point. So no... Batman absolutely doesn't kill, that doesn't fit his character description.
  "No one cares about the "perfect boyscout"..." I'm happy to see you speak for all Superman fans. If you really were the self-proclaimed all-knowing comic book reader, you would know that Superman's new 52 interpretation is extremely unpopular with fans and has received a lot of criticism. And the funny part, Cavill's Superman doesn't even resemble the reckless New 52 version. Cavill's Superman is his own character, just like Bale's Batman was his own version of that character. However, at the core of Superman's character, he is an optimist and an inspiration of hope. Cavill's Superman is the opposite of an optimist, in fact he always doubts himself in nearly every scene. And he's not an inspiration of hope at all. The people hate him, they don't want him, they want him dead. Sure doesn't look hopeful to me. He's constantly brooding and lacks the confidence Superman is known for. MoS executed this better I think.
  I know Lex' LOOK was based on those issues. But Eisenberg's portrayal of Lex Luthor was completely his own and was NOT based on any comic book interpretation. Even if there was a comic book Lex that resembled Jesse's behavior, that really doesn't suit your point. AGAIN, one interpretation of a particular character does not override 70 years worth of history. Lex has always been the manipulative genius business man, at least over the last 30 years.
  So yeah, there goes your entire argument. And the fact that you need to affirm your own victory speaks volumes about your insecurity mate. You can act as if you know comics, but reading your comment, I know for a fact you've barely read any comics in your life. Top kek mate, try harder.
  1. Seb
    April 11, 2016
    "The DCEU is not canon to the comics"
    yet in your previous comments you were so desperate to claim the movie version are faithful or representative to their comic book counterparts. Which is it? You can't have both. Yes, DCCU is not canon to the comics. THAT WAS MY POINT!
    Alfred's speech was about Batman's new rule of branding, it had nothing to do with his murders.
    Your second paragraph is laughably moronic. I only mentioned New 52 because that is the closest to Cavill we've got comic book-wise. And still THAT version doesn't resemble Cavill, plus even if it did, that wouldn't exactly be a positive thing since people hate that interpretation anyways. You completely pulled my comments out of context. I never said anything about New 52 being less relevant. Nice strawman, well done. I applaud your intelligence.
    Also, now you claim "Cavill has read many pre-52 comics". First, he never actually specified which comics exactly and second, if he really took inspiration from pre-52 comics, that only strengthens my point. You realize that right? Of course you don't. Pre-52 was more your typical, "2-dimensional" boy-scout to put it simply. Cavill does not resemble that in the slightest.
    I already stated I applaud the studio for making Superman more relatable and having him act accordingly to bad situations. But that should never be at the cost his his character. Yes it's normal for Superman to doubt himself occasionally, but in BvS he is constantly brooding and depressed. It's completely out of character and his "character evolution" is irrelevant. In MoS, he already showcased confidence, leadership to some extent, and optimism (not much but still). They completely contradict this in BvS. So again, nice way of ignoring what I've said before to try and justify your meaningless rhetoric.
    Umm.. Can't you read? I've acknowledged Jesse's look as Lex was based off of those comics. I was talking about his portrayal. Have you even read birthright? Of course you haven't because that Lex acts NOTHING like Jesse does. I'm not saying Jesse's performance was bad, in fact I'm one of his defenders. But I'm not claiming it's faithful to the comics. Jesse completely made that character his own. In fact, Terrio rewrote his dialogue to suit Jesse's natural awkward behavior.
    Also, your argument is ignorant and dismissive as fuck. You blatantly deny opposing arguments that debunk your ludicrous claim. You are basically saying "Well, Batman killed during the Golden Age, therefore any movie-Batman that kills is completely faithful to the comics". No. That is an idiotic argument. It's generally accepted that Batman does not kill and that is reflective of his actual current day character. So if you have a killer Batman, you are not being faithful to his character at all. Same for Lex, even IF birthright's Lex was just as awkward as Jesse's Lex (which is false), that doesn't mean THAT Lex is reflective of his character. Would you call it a "faithful adaptation" if Superman was played by a black Russian? No, it would NOT reflect Superman's character at all even though Earth 2 Superman is black and Red Son Superman is Russian. Those instances do not make it okay to break the official canon. Your argument is completely refuted.
    I didn't affirm my own victory, when I never even claimed this was a competition to begin with. You're projecting your own delusional games unto other people and it shows.
    I also just love your pathetic arguments "you got your ass handed to you". Umm no... I have stated time and time again (even in other threads prior to this one) that I know Batman has killed etc. I also have READ Birthright unlike you (go ahead and lie) so I knew where Jesse' look came from. But again, Batman's killing days (Golden age and yes even DKR) are not reflective of Batman's character at all. And there is not ONE interpretation of Superman that is constantly depressed,brooding and that continuously doubts himself as much as much as Cavill's Superman does. So you don't even have an argument there. Same with Lex. Again, try harder.
    1. Seb
      April 11, 2016
      In other words, you don't know how to respond after being proved wrong. Well done. The first sentence alone perfectly explains why your argument as a whole is bullshit. Go ahead and whine in a corner.
    2. Seb
      April 11, 2016
      Then why did you reply in the first place? Also, you debunked exactly... nothing and you would know that if you actually read something, hell I'm giving you way too much credit. Well done. Keep whining.
    3. Seb
      April 12, 2016
      But there aren't hundreds though.... Batman (except for Golden Age) has maybe a couple. Lex has none (talking about Jesse's behavior) and Superman also has none. I don't know what you're talking about. Frankly, I'm tired of this. Bye.
    4. Seb
      April 12, 2016
      Thank you for proving me right. Ironically, you admitted you did not read anything I said, yet you gladly say I was wrong. If you actually read my comments, your response would look completely different. So again, your first sentence does prove my point, you're just too ignorant to see it. Good job friend.
5. Seb
  April 10, 2016
  Again with your bullshit?
  One particular scene in one particular comic does not change who Superman is. He's an optimist at heart, and he inspires hope. I you weren't aching to be so defensive, you would've seen that I said I applaud the studio for making Superman react accordingly to bad situations and making him multidimensional. But no, instead you reply with your lazy straw man. Well done.
  I never cared that this Batman is way more brutal, in fact I loved that. I was referring to his killing behavior. I don't care what you have to say, any faithful interpretation of Batman does not kill. And don't start with "But he did so in Golden Age, he did so in TDKR, etc". Those instances are widely regarded to be non-reflective of the character. So when I said "ruthless behavior" you know for a fact I was talking about his murderous behavior (I mentioned it literally 2 seconds earlier). Nice way of pulling my comments out of context yet again. Thank you.
  "Not fact, you're opinion, please do the research before posting, your opinions as facts."
  Seriously? I'm fucking tired of your wannebe intellectual bullshit. REGARDLESS of MY opinion about it, the movie was NOT well received. Last time I checked, it is a FACT that is has a 29% RT score. You call that an opinion? Fuck outta here. Evidently, the only one in dire need of research is you. Contrary to what you would like to believe, not everything is an opinion. You can love the movie, that's fine, I have stated that although I was disappointed, I still liked it but I'm not so ignorant to stick my head in the sand... No, I'm calling it as it is, and BvS was NOT well received. Get the fuck over it.
  Also, who the fuck likes their own comments? Nice conformation bias going on there I see. -____________-
  1. Seb
    April 10, 2016
    What facts are you referring to? Right now you have provided exactly... zero facts.
    No it's not multiple interpretations, give me one comic book (canon) interpretation where he continuously doubts himself, lacks complete confidence and is not the optimist we all know and love. Good luck.
    The point is that Cavill does NOT display Superman's basic core personality traits. At least not in BvS.
    Umm, Batman has practically never killed outside those exceptions I've mentioned. "You know nothing" I clearly said he HAS killed before (even Silver age, Current day). I personally don't even count Darkseid, he didn't really die plus the stakes were high enough for him to break his rule. And most other instances of his murders (Killing joke and KGBeast) have been retconned and are not canon anymore. Any standard interpretation of Batman does NOT kill. Give me counter-evidence, one that proves Batman has absolutely no problem killing people, even "harmless" goons who do not pose immediate threat. Good luck.
    LOL OF COURSE "RT is biased unfair, not accurate". How convenient. You deny any and all empirical proof that doesn't suit your narrative. You're a fucking moron.
    Also, learn the difference between you're and your.
    Check out cinemascore (B is not a good score by any means) or how about the box office drops? They're fucking huge.
    "Jesus! Again not fact, you're opinion. Maybe you and yours did not like it, but there are many more that loved it! and that is a fact. So IT WAS LOVED."
    Okay now I'm convinced "your" a troll. I'm not allowed to say BvS received negative reviews whilst claiming that as fact, but "your" allowed to say "most people love it" based on absolutely nothing? Haha, obvious troll is obvious.
Alan Conn
April 9, 2016
Hear hear!!!
The Dark Knight
April 10, 2016
I'm not a Marvel fanboy, I'm not a critic, and I think the movie is a big disappointment.
1. SorrytDCnobillionforyou
  April 10, 2016
  yep,agree 100 percent.
Seb
April 10, 2016
Just curious... Do you think they showed Bruce's humanity in BvS? XD
1. Seb
  April 10, 2016
  So no humanity? Because I seem to remember you were so confident Batfleck would nail that, better than Bale mind you :p
  1. Seb
    April 11, 2016
    Lol... I appreciate your comments, but it really does feel like you put that last sentence in there because you don't want to admit your fault. It's fine though... I really liked Affleck's Batman... But his Bruce Wayne was nearing on horrible I'd say. He's boring, one-dimensional, lacks any charisma and talks as if he's bored as fuck. Frankly, there is absolutely no character development at all for Bruce other than "kill Superman". I did like the Martha scene though. But all in all... Very disappointed with the movie (and remember I was fucking hated for saying it would most likely underperform and be critically mixed. Not to brag, but I was right - for once). Still enjoyed it, but eeeh.. Can't escape the feeling it should have been way better. Personally, I blame Snyder for all this. His interpretation of the characters are horrid. I don't buy for a second Snyder is the self-proclaimed comic book fanatic he thinks he is. After BvS, he showcased his complete lack of understanding of the characters.
    Just curious... If you didn't like Affleck that much, why do you still prefer him over Bale? I know you didn't specify which Batman (Keaton, Bale, Affleck) but between Bale and Affleck, Bale did end up being the DRASTICALLY better Bruce Wayne, I mean it's not even funny. His Batman is debatable. Right now, I still prefer Bale's, but that might change after a a couple movies.
    1. Seb
      April 11, 2016
      Well yeah of course it is your opinion. I just meant that many people (including you) were so sure Affleck would deliver. And now, after seeing the film, you were somewhat disappointed if I understand you correctly. So yes, I think it's fair to say people were wrong (not you specifically per se) to say that Affleck would be the best Batman/Bruce Wayne on screen. And I get your comments about Bale, but that was not my point. Your last sentence makes no sense though, I'm not looking for validation, I was genuinely interested in hearing your thoughts about Batfleck after seeing the movie, considering our prior disagreement. Just happy to see you're not biased and you are critical if need be. Anyways, I took the hint, so I guess that's it. Take care.
    2. Seb
      April 12, 2016
      I didn't preach negativity, I talked possibility. What did I expect? That either people wouldn't care, or that they would accept it. Naive, I know. I explained what I meant by "fault" I worded it poorly. And yes, I think it's very ironic, after all those butthurt replies I got (not coming from you, just in general) that I was right for once and people actually seem to agree with me in the end.
      Again, I get your Bale reasoning.
isaaclian11
April 10, 2016
Why is it that people here think the movie has low ratings because it's not like Marvel? The tone is the least of its problems. The editing, some character decisions, subplots, build up and Doomsday are what cause the movie to have low ratings. Not because "Marvel paid critics to bash this movie" like some people here are saying.
1. SorrytDCnobillionforyou
  April 10, 2016
  Its just an excuse they are using,Mickey Mouse paying critics,critics suck,blah blah blah...
  Truth is a character roster of main heroes like Superman,Batman and Wonder Woman should have been hitting atleast 1.5 billion by now and it still is under 800 so yeah something is wrong here.
  Also something very curious happens around here,supposedly "only" critics hated the movie but all DC fans loved it....WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!
  When a DC fan like myself says he didnt like the movie im called fake dc fan,a marveltard and stupid because i didnt understand the plot of the film,delusion is all over the place,they cant fathom that a DC fan just didnt like the movie,if that is the case then well we arent a DC fan,that is their reasoning...if you can call it that.
  1. isaaclian11
    April 10, 2016
    Exactly. The Disney/Marvel hate here is ridiculous. What exactly did Marvel do to make these people so mad? I'm happy that they loved BvS but there's literally no reason to attack critics because they don't like the movie. I bet if Civil War is great, which it probably is according the early critics review, some people here will find any reason to hate on the movie.
  2. Bat-Mite
    April 10, 2016
    It sucks when i see that happening to people that didn't like it. Personally, i loved it, but even when i was watching it i saw things and recognized that some people wouldn't, and not all of them were just "you don't like it because you don't understand it" moments, most of them were things that just come down to personal preference, which is fine
2. Mark
  April 10, 2016
  What is supposed to be wrong with "the editing"? I keep hearing that, and I don't get it. The ONLY thing I didn't like in the film that I would call a bad edit is the awkward shot they chose when Lex greeted Bruce at the party, and that certainly wasn't enough to throw off my enjoyment of the movie.
3. man_you_fear_19
  April 10, 2016
  People think the movie's ratings are low because it's not Marvel because some critics actually mentioned Marvel in their reviews, or mentioned that the movie wasn't "fun" which implies they wanted it to have a lighter tone like most Marvel movies.

royal emperor

April 9, 2016

good choice. lets hope his character is well written for the movie, unlike lois lane in BVS.

OptimistPrime99
April 9, 2016
Whoa! Shot fired!
1. royal emperor
  April 10, 2016
  here she is a badass..... :D not in the movie
  your lois lane gif is better written than the lois lane in the movie
  1. Pat Bateman
    April 10, 2016
    lois isn't a badass character
    just wtf man
    1. Kal-Il AKA Ultraman
      April 10, 2016
      LOL clearly you don´t know jack about Lois Lane, who is one of the most badass female characters in comics.
larva
April 9, 2016
wtf that gif
royal emperor
April 10, 2016
happy/sad/intrigued?
Orlando Furioso
April 10, 2016
I always thought Lois's job was to be annoying and to be rescued.

SlyTrooper

April 9, 2016

Would be perfect if he was stood next to the bat signal.

Mark
April 9, 2016
It's wrecked. Again.

Joe K.

April 9, 2016

No but definitely one of the best. Gordon is my favorite bat character so im glad they got another great actor to play him. Glad he wasn't killed off like rumored before. Oldman was my favorite part of the Nolan flicks

OptimistPrime99

April 9, 2016

So he thinks that Gordon's incorruptible? I'm guessing he doesn't watch Gotham. I'm expecting Simmons' Gordon to be intense, but "fun".

Kal-Il AKA Ultraman
April 9, 2016
This is exactly why nobody should take Gotham seriously. The whole point of Gordons character is that he is the incorruptible light in the swamp of corruption in the GCPD.
1. SorrytDCnobillionforyou
  April 10, 2016
  Gotham is just a glorified,run of the mill,garden variety cop show.
  Now on the other hand if they would have started with a teenage Bruce,well that would have been something worth watching,seeing him start his training and getting all the skills he would put to use in his future,i would actually pay to see that...
  1. Kal-Il AKA Ultraman
    April 10, 2016
    would be a bit too close to the concept of Smallville though
Axxell
April 10, 2016
I'm expecting Gordon to be turned into a corrupt villainous cop...you heard it here first, folks.

Supafairy

April 9, 2016

The cast of Civil War are all decent actors none of them hold a candle to the likes of Simmons, Irons, Leto, Will Smith and heck, even Margot Robbie.

I'm not a fan girl but it's truth Civil only has 2 maybe 3 really good actors that's managed to pull money on roles outside of the MCU and that's ScarJo, RDJ and Sam L. The Chris' are average actors outside of their MCU career, Renner has been successful but only because he's been part of bigger productions where he's wasn't the main focus, although I really Ike him. Even a such as I love Ruffalo, he's only now finding his feet. Spotlight is his first real standout movie. Him and Renner have potential though. Unfortunately, the Chris' not so much.

Mr. Five Rings

Batman News Archive

Gary Oldman comments on J.K. Simmons playing Commissioner Gordon in 'Justice League' (video)

159 comments

Browse By Topic

Browse By Year