Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

'Batman v Superman' Honest Trailer: A cool new Batman movie, boring Superman sequel

By

·

July 19, 2016

Screen Junkies has released their highly anticipated "Honest Trailer" for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and it's pretty funny!

"Strap in for the superhero film that was so highly anticipated it could never have lived up to all our expectations and instead turned into a badass Batman movie trapped inside a mediocre attempt at a Man of Steel sequel -- Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice!" they wrote as their YouTube video description.

And if you're unable to find humor in someone making fun of something you like, you have to admit this alternate title is pretty accurate!

Batman v Superman Honest Trailer Title

Check out the Honest Trailer above and let me know what you think about it in the comments below.

VIA: Superhero News

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com

135 comments

Meg
July 19, 2016
I've always thought of Screen Junkies as a bunch of biased Marvel fanboys, but they were actually honest with this one. One of the funniest honest trailers in a long time
1. BatmanNewsChris
  July 19, 2016
  Man of Steel one is still my favorite: https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  1. Meg
    July 19, 2016
    It's mine as well. I was literally rolling on the floor at the dubstep part and the product placement.
    1. Sisyphus
      July 20, 2016
      Haha!! Yea man the dubstep was damn funny.
  2. Sisyphus
    July 20, 2016
    Lol!! This is indeed funnier than Batman v Superman.
  3. Batpod4L
    July 20, 2016
    Then I got the movie for you.....psycho lol
Worlds Finest Comments
July 19, 2016
That was a lot more fair than I thought they were going to be to it.
1. Kerk Lastnameless
  July 20, 2016
  DC fans have given them so much shit last year that they are apprehensive to be too mean about anything involving DC.
  1. Vulpini
    July 20, 2016
    They only give shit to the Screen Junkies hosts. To be honest, they kinda deserve it.
2. The Dark Knight
  July 20, 2016
  You mean they were less brutal, HISHE completely destroyed it though
  1. Vulpini
    July 20, 2016
    Less brutal? Hishe always makes fun of movies up to a point. Yes, sometimes they cross the line but they're mostly hilarious. That's their thing.
    Sorry for my manner, but the Screen Junkies hosts are known for sucking Marvel's dick. It's quite obvious.
    They made a video titled "Will BvS Suck?" but because of the backlash, they changed the title to "....be Great?"
    Later they made another video with "Could Civil War Suck?" after being called "Marvel Junkies" 24/7.
    This was the first and last time they ever did that.
    They are a bunch of hypocrites, especially Hal.
JaymusYawsley
July 20, 2016
The most obvious Simpsons reference was still the funniest possible Simpsons reference.
Kryptonian Knight
July 20, 2016
Well done! These guys nailed it! It's so hard to defend the grumpy, mope, Eeyore persona Zack has created with his interpretation of Superman after watching this video. Let's hope he gets it right in JL.
1. residentgrigo
  July 20, 2016
  You do know that this is 80s/90s and Rebirth Superman? Dan Jurgens went out of his way to praise Synder´s take.
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  1. Kryptonian Knight
    July 20, 2016
    It doesn't matter, this interpretation of the character is disliked by the majority. It's why MOS was so divisive and what added even greater gloom to BvS. If you like that take cool but you're in the minority. I think the DCEU would be in a much better place with the more conventional hopeful confident Superman but that's my opinion.
    1. Schuyler Finley
      July 20, 2016
      But that what's they're doing with Superman. His character will progress to being the hopeful icon that we grew up with. They just didn't want to start him off as the icon.
      1. Kryptonian Knight
        July 20, 2016
        That's an assumption, since we haven't seen so called transformation yet to occur. Am I hopeful Zack can make that happen? Yes. Is it a fact that he will be able to deliver? Only time will tell.
      2. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        But Snyder said that he was gonna have Superman become the icon.
        "I wanted to get to a Superman that had a reason to be Superman, a reason to feel the way he felt about humanity, that we all understand from the comic books," Zack Snyder explained. "As far as a moral compass goes, he's pretty much the thing. But I feel like he had to go through something to be that."
      3. Kryptonian Knight
        July 21, 2016
        I'll believe it when I see it!
    2. residentgrigo
      July 20, 2016
      A minority? MoS the 5th biggest comic origin film ever and BvS is in the top 50 grossing films of all time. Death of Superman is the bestselling Superman TPB of all time. Rebirth is currently doing record numbers for THAT version. That Superman has been the default Superman since 1986. What are you talking about? Has DC been wrong for 3 decades? They killed New52 Superman (a Golden Age remake) to get him back...
      http://www.panelbeats.co.uk...
      http://www.byrnerobotics.co...
      1. Kryptonian Knight
        July 20, 2016
        If MOS was such a great hit were is the sequel? Since MOS you are going to have BvS, SS, WW, JL... A MOS sequel isn't even in the cards yet. How long did it take Marvel to make an IM movie sequel? When there is a demand and a movie does great financially and critically Hollywood kicks things into gear quickly but because of the Backlash of MOS there is no sequel in sight. If you can't accept that BvS underperformed in the BO and with crittics then you are lost. So far DC stands for divisive cinema hopefully Ayers will change that.
      2. HR
        July 20, 2016
        What you mentioned about MoS and BvS is based on how popular Superman and Batman are, not on how good those movies were. Batman v Superman has one of the worst domestic multipliers ever for a comic book movie. Man of Steel spent $225 million in production, but every comic book origin that spent as much or more, did better and some of them less, much less. In terms of production budget to worldwide gross, if Man of Steel did as well as Iron Man let alone Deadpool, its gross would be much higher.
      3. residentgrigo
        July 20, 2016
        I don´t think you know what that means and both films are a multi-media toy comical first and foremost. Look them apples up instead.
        MoS made Superman internationally relevant for the 1st time since 1992/93 (his death) or maybe 1996-2000 (TAS). Have fun arguing that...
        http://www.independent.co.u...
        http://www.forbes.com/sites...
        http://www.forbes.com/sites...
      4. HR
        July 20, 2016
        Making Superman internationally relevant shouldn't be difficult. Marvel did that with multiple characters over the last 8 years including Guardians of the Galaxy. WB did it with Batman. That just speaks to how poorly WB has handled Superman as a character. I'm more than familiar with the $170 million they made in product placement to offset the costs of making the movie. The problem was that the $668 million Man of Steel made was a bit paltry for such an investment. But I guess that might be one of the reasons why Robinov is no longer running things at WB.
        As for Batman v Superman, if it was a higher quality movie, it simply would have made more money, a lot more money. However Scott slices it, the lack of quality of BvS left hundreds of millions on the table. Marvel has their 13th movie in 8 years and Civil War was their fourth 1+ billion dollar grosser in the last five years. Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman in live action for the first time couldn't scrape that together because the movie didn't live up to its promise.
      5. Orion
        July 20, 2016
        Iron Man 2.
2. BROWN_KNIGHT 4 Trump
  July 20, 2016
  He created a superman who in reality will question if he is needed and what to do with his abilities...what do you expect for him to be smiling 24/7 and saving kittens?...if you had his abilities...you honestly wont question if you belong here or how the people would react to you and if they would accept you? Zack has done an incredible job with his supermans arc..we will see his glorious return in Justice League..
  1. Vulpini
    July 20, 2016
    If this is what they want, let them have it. When there are men who want to watch the world burn, better smile 24/7.
    #ManofSmiles
    1. Schuyler Finley
      July 20, 2016
      He's not smiling hard enough! I want to see his teeth sparkle like Edward's skin!!
      1. Vulpini
        July 20, 2016
        Fact: The author of Twilight wanted Henry Cavill to play Edward.
        Oh boy...
      2. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        Well, it would've made Edward v Jacob wars a lot more entertaining to see.
      3. Vulpini
        July 20, 2016
        Ye totally. The neck snapping scenes, the sparkle Vamps did, would look great with Cavill..... oh wait.
      4. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        And I think Cavill could make look Edward less creepy and constipated.
      5. Vulpini
        July 20, 2016
        And Kristen Stewart would smile more. I mean it's freaking Henry Cavill.
        Who doesn't have a man crush on him? No homo.
    2. dugzino
      July 20, 2016
      Yeah that's what these people think DC is all about.
      If they only had read a bit of the comics, they'd know that Zack totally nailed it.
      It's like Kevin Smith "I went to see BvS thinking I'd see a fun movie." WTF?!
      1. Vulpini
        July 20, 2016
        I guess he didn't see the trailers.
  2. Kryptonian Knight
    July 20, 2016
    Listen, if you like this take on Superman that's fine but trying to argue the fact that the majority of people don't like this version is futile because it's a reality. It's like trying to argue that MOS wasn't divisive when anyone with an IQ over 10 knows that is not true. I expect him to not be a Debbie Downer 90% of the time and saving kittens has nothing to with anything. Now the question you asked me let me answer it for you honestly, NO! First off questioning whether I belong here is dumb cause obviously I'm an alien from an advanced people and I would accept that and move on that's my personality, besides my planet is gone so there's nothing I can do anymore and im not the kind of person that focuses on things out of my control and this is the only home I would know and be glad I'm alive and not dead. I could care less what people think or how they would react to me, just like I do now. I live my life for me and not for someone else, this is my life and I will live it how I please and if you add the fact that I'm basically as close to a god in power that there is with a great moral compass, I'm set! There will always be people who complain and hate you, welcome to the real world! And I can promise you this, I would be having a lot more fun than he has that's for damn sure and that's my final answer. Look at how many people hated Jesus and what did he really do outside of miraculous healing an telling people to love one another? And what happened to him? People are fickle and I learned a long time ago that I live to make myself happy not everyone else. If you're mad because I just saved people in a burning building or saved people from criminals and natural disasters then you can kiss my A$$ and if you're scared or jelous of my powers too bad and welcome to the food chain!
    1. BROWN_KNIGHT 4 Trump
      July 20, 2016
      I learned a long time ago...arguing on the web is just stupid.. You say the majority of people..have you seen the the haters as in disney cock suckers have even apologized to zack...the divide is clear and the uc shows what zack intended...hope you enjoy the rest of the films..
      1. Kryptonian Knight
        July 20, 2016
        Who's arguing? I made a statement that you chose to resond to with a question so I answered. There is no argument here. You have an opinion just like everyone else and that's all. And yeah I hope I enjoy the rest of the films. Looking forward to Ayers headlining a DCWB project and seeing what kind of difference he makes.
      2. BROWN_KNIGHT 4 Trump
        July 20, 2016
        I answered your words about me trying to convince anyone of my view...the next 2 films great...ss is in good hands as is WW...future looks bright...
    2. dugzino
      July 20, 2016
      You should stop talking as if you had numbers.
      Don't say "majority", use the word "many".
      This is by far the best Superman we've had so far on screen and it was Zack Snyder who did it. Batfleck is the best Batman we've had so far on screen and it was Zack Snyder who did it. His take on Wally West, Victor Stone & Arthur Curry will probably rock as well.
      1. Kryptonian Knight
        July 20, 2016
        Who's "we've"? Cause outside of a DC homer site Zack's Superman has been ridiculed far more than he has been praised. And there are "many" more websites that make this point over and over again.
      2. dugzino
        July 20, 2016
        By "we" I mean fans, those who've read Superman comics.
      3. Kryptonian Knight
        July 20, 2016
        Well I own boxes of comic books so I guess you're wrong. In the early 30's and 40's Batman used to kill all the time and then say things like "He's better off that way." And yet most comic book readers would say that's not the "real" Batman. Taking an interpretation of the character who's core is hope, joy and confidence and then use a version of a confused, conflicted and insecure one is the main reason MOS was so divisive. The fact that you can't acknowledge this simple fact because you prefer Zacks take is sad. I'm glad you like it but many don't and what he did with BvS didn't really help sense it was poorly executed, hence the backlash for that.
      4. Kryptonian Knight
        July 21, 2016
        Why are You lecturing me on Batman's behavior for BvS? It has nothing to do with my premise on Superman, which is the discussion. And who said I have 30's Batman comics (I wish!)? I was using 30's Batman to counter the idea that one era of a superhero does not define who he is at his core regarding Superman under Zacks direction. Is Batman a killer? Yes but that's not what he's about even though he's killed as recent as in the eighties in the comics in the 90's in movies until now and even killing multiple people in Crisis on two Earths animated movie in the 10's. Like I said at his core Superman is about Hope, joy and confidence and Zack has failed to capture that and has taken too long to get it right hence why there is no MOS sequel, Why MOS was so divisive and one of the multiple reasons BvS received so much backlash costing it hundreds of millions in dollars.
      5. HR
        July 21, 2016
        Hundreds of millions more like.
      6. Kryptonian Knight
        July 21, 2016
        Oops, that's what I meant. Fixed it!
      7. Kryptonian Knight
        July 23, 2016
        First off Batman's first appearance in the comics was issue #27 Detective comics in 1939 and Superman's first appeared in Action Comics #1 a year before in 1938 so yeah there were comics of Batman and Superman in the 30's. Second off in the history of Superman he was a beacon of hope, joy and confidence to the world wayyyyyyyyyyy before he ever died. Resurrection wasn't a requirement in canon for people to cheer for him and love him, that was Zack's idea and why MOS was so divisive and a depressed, insecure Superman in BvS just added fuel to the fire. Instead of being a contrast to the darkness of the film he contributed to it and that is not who Superman is. In the comics it was never required for him to die before people saw him as a beacon of light and hope. Superman was the first entry into the DCEU and Batman will be in SS, JL and solo Batman film before MOS even gets a sequel and that's all due to WB/DC going through with Zack's dark vision which has done more damage than good to the franchise. I look at the colors, hope and light the WW trailer brought today and realized that should have been Superman, now we have to wait and see if third time is a charm.
      8. Kryptonian Knight
        July 24, 2016
        Context is everything bud, you use infinite crisis as a source but it's a straw man argument because in that world Superman has been around for years! In Zacks world Superman hasn't even been active for 2! But this is why MOS never had a sequel people weren't interested in Zacks characterization, it was divisive and BvS made it worse. After watching the WW trailer yesterday it's sad to see that she's the one that has to bring color, hope and inspiration to DC. That's supposed to be Superman's job, Opportunity lost! I only hope he doesn't mess it up in JL.
JAG2045
July 20, 2016
Agreed that they made a mistake wasting 5-6 films worth of material by compressing everything into one movie!
1. krampe1995
  July 20, 2016
  they wasted:
  - The dark knight returns part 2
  - Injustice ( Now its been reset by flash)
  - The death of superman
  Those are some pretty big titles. They should first focus on regular popular stories, just go the normal route and then later experiment with injustice
  1. Orion
    July 20, 2016
    Injustice was never an actual storyline in the movie, it was in a dream. TDKR was probably the only ostory that was fleshed out and Death of Superman was a disservice. But can't change the past
    1. krampe1995
      July 21, 2016
      it kinda was. as far as the movie goes and the nightmare scene it seems like bats didnt assembled the justice league in time. Darkseid came in, resurrected supes and he basically raped the entire planet. Now it seems it has been changed by the flash
Guest
July 20, 2016
People don't really like to think. It's easier to just judge and bash.
Mark
July 20, 2016
Thank you for thinking. When, before the film was released, the production designer was saying that "we never see Lex's bedroom, everything with him is a facade," I knew that they were going for layers of meaning and metaphor in this movie. Those that bash it for not being, in effect, a straightforward superhero movie, without acknowledging that it's trying to make us reexamine what it means to be these men, without allowing themselves time to think about it and see that there are deeper meanings they're trying to express (I'm convinced that it's really about nothing less than the relationship between God (the real God, if you will) and Man), do themselves and the filmmakers a disservice.
1. HR
  July 20, 2016
  The movie isn't bashed because it's not a straightforward superhero movie, it's bashed because it tries to be more than that and falls flat on its face from lack of proper execution. It's not enough to simply approach topics, you have to engage in them as well and throughout all the runtime this movie has in both cuts, the movie never does that. People don't mind when you want to do more. They mind when you want to do more and have no idea how, and act like you do. It's the very definition of being pretentious. That's why people would prefer that this movie to be a straightforward superhero movie because in trying to be more than that, they've utterly failed. On top of that, if you want to deconstruct your characters, you first have to build them up. You can't put the cart before the horse.
  I see both sides argue and exaggerate about Superman brooding, or being happy or angsty, and it misses the point. The real problem resides in the fact that to the audience in general, Superman's brooding and angst never feels earned. They're all these talking heads but no one is going to care what Neil deGrasse Tyson thinks if there isn't enough Superman telling the audience how he thinks, feels or sees things. Without that, it becomes a more difficult task than necessary to relate to Superman as a character and no wants that with one of the most iconic and well known superheroes of all time. Also the movie just isn't very good. The animated movie back in the day, "World's Finest" does a simple yet far more effective and efficient job of creating tension and distaste between the heroes than Batman v Superman. So does the Dark Knight Returns. There is so many references to choose from that do a great job of creating great tension between Batman and Superman and yet this movie seems to ignore all of them for something that is more convoluted than complex.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    July 20, 2016
    But Superman did. He questioned if the world really needs someone like him and if he was just another problem that the world has to deal with.
    The reason those animated films worked was because they relied on previous history. BvS is building its own history.
    1. HR
      July 20, 2016
      Like I said, there wasn't enough Superman telling the audience how he thinks, feels or sees things. There was some, not enough for the general audience to get attached to. I've seen too many complaints about how few lines Superman gets in the movie. His name is in the title, that should never be an issue.
      Batman v Superman building its own history wasn't the problem. Its problem was that it tried to deconstruct both characters without having enough of a history to do so. World's Finest also had it's own history. Also as these are different from the contemporary takes on the characters, they can't rely on that history the same way the other animated films did.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        Well I guess I was just able to understand Superman's feeling despite his few lines. I consider myself to be part of the general audience because I don't look for much in a film, and yet I was able to understand that Superman was sad and nearly depressed based solely on his facial expressions. And when the film included that either demoralized him or suggested what he should he do, I could consider why Superman wasn't that cheerful in the film.
        The film tries to do both. It acknowledges that audiences know both heroes history, while also trying to build its own. You don't need to have a solo Batman film to understand why Batman was so merciless in BvS. Not only does the film give various hints to his past, but his arc has been done the exact same way but people don't like it because it's Batman.
        World's Finest already had established history from both shows' many seasons, which was why it was able to work so well.
      2. HR
        July 20, 2016
        Understanding Superman's feeling is not the same as liking it or feeling that it's earned. The film tries and ultimately fails in trying to both acknowledge that audiences know both heroes history (ie playing out Bruce Wayne's parents getting murdered), and trying to build its own history in which they put the cart before the horse in deconstructing the characters before they have properly built them up.
        If you want to make Batman merciless and show this is how far he's fallen, that's fine. The movie's problem is that after his fight with Superman, he still kills bad guys easily and mercilessly and never finds these actions questionable. That's what people don't like.
      3. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        I don't see why you think Superman's feeling weren't earned. Superman tries to do good things, and in return,the world basically spits at his face. He then goes to a court hearing to address the issue, but instead fails to save lives from something that he could've prevented. I believe he earned the right to be mopey in the film.
        The film is deconstructing characters that were already built, and modeling them into its own version. That's why they didn't make a solo Batman. We just had Nolan doing the building and deconstruction, so WB decided to do more deconstruction especially since Goyer wrote the Nolan Batman films.
        Batman starts to change his ways AFTER Superman's death.
      4. HR
        July 21, 2016
        No, the world doesn't spit in his face. Part of the world does, but the other part built a statue of him in the middle of Metropolis in his honor for saving the city and the world. The people in Mexico didn't spit in his face when he saved that girl and neither did the woman who wrote his symbol on top of her house as it was being flooded. They're more examples but those are the most obvious. That's one of the ways that Superman's angst doesn't feel earned. You can't tell me that the world as a whole spits in Superman's face when I will see examples from the same movie contradicting that very premise.
        Another way it doesn't feel earned is these lines like, "if God is all-powerful, then he can't be all good. If he's all-good, he can't be all-powerful." Says who? The movie is full of these ridiculous platitudes that are spoken as though they are absolute truths. Almost every character at some point speaks in broad generalizations about the nature of man, and they are almost always notions that go unchallenged by anyone else. Characters posit questions into the ether just to drive home the message that should be subtext. Instead what we see is the characters asking out loud the the same rhetorical questions over and over again.
        The movie levels charges at Superman and then the film never let's Superman really speak. Due to this, it doesn't become a philosophical debate, it becomes character assassination. The movie is entirely focused on comparing him to God, which is a logical leap we have no reason to follow which is why again, it doesn't feel earned. Future Flash inexplicably shows up from the future to tell Bruce Wayne that he was right about him, he's definitely the bad guy.
        The film is deconstructing characters that we're not built, that was their mistake. Both the Dark Knight and Captain America: Civil War deconstructed their heroes and were critically acclaimed and made over a billion dollars apiece, directly contradicting what Deborah Snyder said, "the main thing we learned [on Batman v Superman] is that people don’t like to see their heroes deconstructed." She's wrong and unlike her husband, Nolan and the Russos knew what they were doing.
        I know Batman starts to change his ways after Superman's death. My point is that by not killing Superman, Batman is realizing that Superman is a person, no better or worse than himself and thus is respecting the sanctity of life. But just minutes later he kills again. It's not just simply that he kills, it is also the ease at which he does it. It negates his arc. Worse, the film doesn't question the easeness in which in he kills at this moment.
        That being said, Batman has spent so much of the movie and the last 18 months having a grudge against Superman, to the point that he is going to kill Superman by stabbing him through the chest with a Kryptonite spear, that his sudden change of heart seems ... odd. Even if Batman decided not to kill Superman and save Martha (which he did on both counts), at least some mistrust would still remain even if he does now see Superman as a human being. After all, he made the argument to Alfred if there was even a one percent Superman could go rogue they have to treat it as an absolute certainty.
        If realism is what they were going for, then they need to tell the story in a realistic way. You don't have scenes where Superman looks like he's floating from the very heavens and everyone reaches out to touch him like he's this Christ figure and he just looks at them benevolently because you're trying too hard to shove in some religious plot in a attempt to make it culturally relevant. What you're talking about is what they attempted to do and never succeed. I'm sure there will be people telling me that I'm wrong but as I always like to say, look at the results.
        The movie only fared as well as it did because WB embargoed the reviews until a few days before the movie was out. Steve Weintraub even said on Twitter that Tuesday, they had extended the embargo by a few hours. $424 (49 percent if you round off) of the $872 million this movie made was in the first five days. Its domestic multiplier was 1.99 which is by far the worse ever for a comic book movie of that size. The only comic book movies that have done worst in recent memory is Elektra and Watchmen. It's at 27 percent on RT, it has a score of 44 on Metacritic. It experienced a Friday-to-Sunday hold so poor that it set a new record for the worst Friday-to-Sunday drop for a superhero movie release in modern box office history. They also had one of the biggest Friday-to-Friday drops that any blockbuster has ever seen, and the second largest decline for a superhero title. Its legs were like toothpicks. It's of little wonder why WB took notice and made a few changes.
      5. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        The "if God is all-powerful, then he can't be all good. If he's all-good, he can't be all-powerful." absolute-truth was Lex's. He was the one who deemed Superman as dangerous. The political heads that had discussions on the news were talking about how Superman's presence will change humanity's perspective and if he should be held accountable. To them, every action Superman does is a political act since he doesn't answer to anyone and he can go to anywhere in the world.
        Even in comics, Superman was looked at as a god by some, and even Batman mentions the comparison but also says that it's good that Superman is a humble person.
        But as others here would point, Civil War felt like it was character assassination of Steve and Tony. And as others have pointed out, the film just forgets about the thing that represents their philosophical argument : The Sokovia Accords.
        And with the Dark Knight, it goes on and on asking if Batman may have to kill someone like Joker, but Batman later kills Two-Face, albeit accidentally but the film just glosses over the death. And in BvS, his redemption arc doesn't begin until after Superman's death. He saw Superman as the scared little boy who had to watch his parents die. He doesn't immediately start respecting the sanctity of life. It's a slow process, which is way he only warns Luthor to not step out of line.
        Scenes of Superman floating down to people as a benevolent deity show the perspective that some of the people see him as. They see him as that kind of a savior. If someone as powerful as Superman were to come our world, some people would view him as a god.
        And you're really bringing up RT when even the folks from Screen Junkies pointed out that some of the criticism was a bit too harsh. And thousands of other people have made legit points for why the film was judged too harshly. Not to mention that some of the reviews from RT included mentioning Marvel films
      6. HR
        July 21, 2016
        I know who said, "if God is all-powerful, then he can't be all good. If he's all-good, he can't be all-powerful." What I meant by "says who?" is that the comment isn't anything more than a platitude in Batman v Superman because the narrative doesn't engage the general audience. Everybody is talking about Superman and the least of it is coming from Superman. Lex, the political talking heads, even Batman but not Superman.
        What you described is exactly the problem with Batman's redemption arc. If he doesn't immediately start respecting the sanctity of life, then his sparing Superman's life in the moment doesn't hold any value. He doesn't kill Superman because he realizes that Superman is a person, no different than himself. Like I said, it's not just simply that he kills, it is also the ease at which he does it that negates the arc. It's not a slow process because the movie itself doesn't question it. If it did, then I would actually agree with you.
        I understand the intention of the scenes of Superman floating down to people as a benevolent deity show the perspective that some of the people see him as. That's my point. You told me that the world spits in his face. Even Zack Snyder says there isn't any winning for Superman because of how the world sees him. I'll say it again, you can't tell me that the world as a whole spits in Superman's face when they're examples of people in that very world who see him as a savior. You can't tell the audience that either and Snyder's mistake was that he tried.
        And yes, I am very much bringing RT because the harsh criticism came from the pretentiousness of the movie and if you essentially tell the general audience they're too stupid to get a terribly made movie like Snyder did, then don't be surprised that the criticism is harsh. And they're thousands of other people have made legit points for why the film was terrible. Yes, some of the reviews from RT included mentioning Marvel films. Marvel films are now part of the cinema landscape. In comic book films, they're at the top of the market and Civil War proved to be the film that Batman v Superman wanted to be. It received all the accolades, it received a bigger box office. So did the Dark Knight. They both directly contradict what Deborah Snyder said about movie audiences not liking superheroes deconstructed.
      7. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        But Lex was explaining his perspective to Superman. He essentially telling the audience why he's doing this smear campaign against Superman. He wanted to prove a point, in which case his point was proven because Superman lost in the end.
        But him sparing Superman does hold value. We see Batman kill criminals, but killing Superman would've shown that Batman has sunk to the lowest of low: killing an innocent person. He could've easily had branded Luthor, but because of Superman's death, he decides to act nice for a change.
        Yes the film does how people supporting Superman, BUT it also showed that no matter what Superman would do, his actions would be questioned and some people kept deeming him as a monster. No matter what Superman, things only seemed to get worse for him.
        But CA has the same mistakes that BvS has, albeit worse because they just about killed multiple films' worth of character development.
      8. HR
        July 21, 2016
        Lex was explaining his perspective to Superman doesn't make it engaging. It just goes back into what I said which is without Superman's perspective, it isn't a philsophical debate, it's character assassination. It's just Luthor hamming it up. Speaking of which, it doesn't matter if Batman could've branded Luthor, but didn't if he's still killing criminals and even the movie isn't questioning it. I don't expect Batman to stop killing criminals the moment he spares Superman but I do expect the movie to at least question it. This is something that Daredevil in Season 2 does to a far better extent with the Punisher. Knowing quintessentially that the Punisher is a murderer, the show questions his killing, even when what he does comes as a result of losing his family, even when the men he is killing are some of the most vile, sadistic men living in Hell's Kitchen. They never forget to make it sound every bit as brutal as it really would be.
        As far as the film showing how people are supporting Superman, that's my point. There's no buts because I was never saying that his actions weren't questioned or that some were condemning him for whatever he did. People don't want Superman smiling 24/7 or in the face of death but they do want him smile because they're still good things in his life. That's what an adult does. It's a child who thinks it's all one thing or the other.
        "But CA has the same mistakes that BvS has, albeit worse because they just about killed multiple films' worth of character development."
        And where is the proof in that? The box office? The critical reception? Both were exceptionally high. I can understand if that's a point of view but if you want to state as if it's a fact, then I will say you're wrong and you need context. It was far too critically and financially successful on its own let alone against Batman v Superman which it outgrossed in less than three weeks and offered a critical reception so much stronger it's almost not worth mentioning.
      9. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        But Superman gave his perspective when he was at his lowest point. He questioned if maybe Superman is just the dream a farmer from Kansas. And Luthor's perspective isn't character assassination since he's building his character film, and it fits with his comic book counterpart's characters.
        And film doesn't question Batman killing those mercenaries when he was in the midst of saving someone. Can't really stop and question his actions when he's trying to save another man's mother.
        Also people have pointed that out in Daredevil, but they also said that the show kills the debate when moments or a few episodes later Daredevil tries to kill someone.
        But Superman did smile in the film; multiple times, in fact. That's the same complaint that people had in MoS when a many others have posted images of Superman smiling in that film as well.
        Yes, because critical response and box office tells the flaws that a film has. And I can state it as a fact since I have easily found reviews of CA that have listed the similarities; and no, the reviewers weren't bashing the film, they were listing similarities and questioning why audiences were so forgiving to the film but not to BvS.
      10. HR
        July 21, 2016
        You keep pointing out individual scenes but your explanations don't work because they're not woven neatly into the narrative of Batman v Superman. You can say that they are but the awful reception the movie received will always tell me otherwise. And Luthor's perspective isn't character assassination of Lex Luthor but of Superman as Superman isn't allowed a perspective of his own in that scene. In simple terms, Lex and Superman aren't having a philosophical debate at that scene despite Lex introducing philosophy into their conversation therefore there isn't any engagement which would serve the movie much better than merely Lex offering the audiene his point of view. What we never hear is what does Superman think about people perceiving him the way they do.
        If the arc is supposed to show Batman respecting the sanctity of life, then it should matter when he's killing someone but movie doesn't do this. You don't even want to and that to me is why the arc doesn't have any relevance. He was in the midst of saving someone, so therefore we should entirely ignore whatever actions he takes even if they directly contradict why he didn't kill Superman. Those people you're talking about should have also pointed out that in Daredevil that the Punisher explains to Daredevil why he can't be him, why he can never cross that line and become a murderer. The show never lets Daredevil or the Punisher get away without questioning their actions, no matter the reason they're doing it for. Batman v Superman lacked that. You say they can't do that, and yet Daredevil did.
        Saying that Superman did smile in the film is missing the point. There's a difference between saying he did smile and saying that he had a positive demeanor. Batman broods, Superman does not. Even if you want to argue he has a reason for brooding, you insert too much levity, it takes away from the tension. Not enough levity, the tension becomes melodrama. Batman v Superman became the latter hence the many complaints about the film being joyless.
        Your comments about the reviews for Captain America Civil War are easily answered in the same reviews that you seemed to have not read because you weren't looking for them. The reason the critics and the audiences applaud Civil War but put down Dawn of Justice is because one, they're much more invested in the characters. Two, the audience feels that the struggles they go through are earned. Batman v Superman, none of this is true. Superman as a Christ like figure isn't forgiven because the movie that surrounds it is so bad that to the audiences, it's over the top. Add to that Zack Snyder who gives the impression that his movies are greater than they are and the people who don't see it that way "don't like to think", well again. In this case, the board does hit back. His wife should know better than to say the audience doesn't like to see their heroes deconstructed when the audience applauded when they deconstructed Batman in the Dark Knight.
        WB hacks Snyder's movie to the bone and puts out that editing nightmare and lo and behold, the audiences reject it. The UC is better but by now, the damage is done. They embargo the movie down to damn near the release date which does nothing to inspire confidence and they set as many records in drops as they do in receipts. Captain America Civil War on the other hand tests extremely well with beta audiences, they make very little changes and they let reviews drop almost a month before the movie is out. You want to tell me what Civil War did was worse, but it has better reviews from the critics and the audience, it made more money domestically, internationally and worldwide. Again, I'm going to need more context than what you're giving me.
      11. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        You do realize that in the scene where Luthor is giving his perspective, Superman is reeling from the discovery that his has been kidnapped and will die if he doesn't listen to Luthor's demands, right? Lex isn't trying to have a philosophical debate, he frankly wouldn't care what Superman would say. All he cares is that he has a powerful figure such as Superman, bowing at his feet, and that in an hour, his perspective will be proven right.
        And Superman did give his point on how people perceive him. After the Africa scene, he basically says that he doesn't care what people think about. His side of the story culminates with him shouldering the burden and hate. Everyone else in the film talk of what Superman should do and whether he is God-sent or not. Superman on the hand learns that this crap will never go away. His actions will have unforeseeable consequences and people will judge his them. His father taught that the best way bear all of the hate is to someone who can make the pain go away. That's why he told Lois that she is his world.
        His actions don't contradict sparing Superman. He spared an innocent man. In the warehouse, he's fighting murderers and human traffickers. And I'm sure that Punisher would say something different if Murdock was as powerful as Superman. Batman is taking a leap of faith with Superman.
        And why shouldn't Superman brood given his predicament in BvS? The man has emotions just like everyone else. Anyone else would've called it quits if they were in his shoes, but Superman does some more soul searching to find the answers.
        Actually I read the positive reviews for CA. Audiences were invested with the characters because we have already seen 12 movies with these same characters for the past 8 years. BvS did well with test audiences, but people immediately dismissed those early reactions, saying that those reviewers have to say positive stuff about the film. People were turned off by this Superman because he wasn't "their Superman". Same with Batman, except complaints were that a solo Batman film should've been made before so that audiences would've been more sympathetic to him after seeing his fall instead of the many hints BvS showed.
        And again dude, if you always go solely on reviews and box office, then you'll be easily lied to sometimes. Sometimes, critics and/or audiences are wrong with certain films. Some of the classics that we herald today, were bombs back when they were first released. Not to emotion that SOME critics like to show their personal bias towards certain directors.
      12. HR
        July 21, 2016
        It doesn't excuse lazy, haphazard storytelling. The movie is trying to have a philosophical debate, instead it's doing character assassination because it too seldomly allows for Superman's perspective. You're talking about the characters as if they're real people and how the scene succeeds when it clearly doesn't. Superman gave his point of view on how they didn't care that they had hearings about him flying into Africa to save Lois, not about people in general. The writers can alter the situation in any way they please, they just didn't do it well. As I once read, God can't be a crutch for a movie to stand up on.
        Batman didn't spare Superman because he was innocent. He didn't spare Lex Luthor because he was innocent. You're still trying to justify Batman murdering criminals by condemning the bad guys. That's why the movie was wrong. And you're wrong, the Punisher wouldn't say something different if Murdock was as powerful as Superman. That's the thing about Punisher, he doesn't care what anyone else thinks and isn't afraid to take a lot of punishment to say what's on his mind. In Daredevil, he took a power drill right through his foot because he wouldn't talk.
        "Audiences were invested with the characters because we have already seen 12 movies with these same characters for the past 8 years." That's right. What did I tell you? You have to build characters up before you can deconstruct them. The better you build them up, the better the deconstruction works. You can't just shoot from the hip and call yourself Deadshot or Hawkeye. Look, since Man of Steel and Batman v Superman were adaptations, it's completely fair to compare the films to "preconceived notions." Superman and Batman are established figures and a pop culture icons, have been for decades. What did they expect?
        I'm going to go solely on reviews and box office because you haven't given me any real context in stating that Captain America Civil War was worse than Batman v Superman as a fact. If it was your opinion, I would simply disagree and let it be. As you're arguing it as a fact, then I need real context, evidence. Yes, sometimes, critics and/or audiences are wrong with certain films. You haven't shown me at all how they were wrong with this one. Some of the classics that we herald today, were bombs back when they were first released. Batman v Superman is not yet one of those movies.
        As for Superman brooding, I made myself very clear, so I will repeat what I said. "Even if you want to argue [Superman] has a reason for brooding, you insert too much levity, it takes away from the tension. Not enough levity, the tension becomes melodrama. Batman v Superman became the latter hence the many complaints about the film being joyless."
      13. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        Fair enough with him saying that he doesn't care about the hearings. However, it was after he was accused for no accountability.
        But Batman did spare Superman because he was innocent, in his eyes. As for Luthor, yes he wasn't innocent but that wasn't the reason why Batman didn't brand him. I said earlier that it was his first step for redemption. The branding was a new thing, and he chose to give Luthor a warning instead. And I'm pretty sure that Punisher would be say something different if he was in Metropolis during Zod's attack.
        Man of Steel and BvS weren't adaptations. They had took some elements form comics, but they had their own respective story. And audiences felt that both characters were acting out their previous notion when they actually weren't. Superman killing and destroying building in MoS was out of character for him? Well he had done those exact same things in the comics and tv shows, but no one made a fuss about until now. Batman killing criminals is character assassination in BvS? Well he's don that in the comics and a majority of his own live-action films. This is part of the reason why me and others felt that the criticsm was too harsh to BvS. Both characters have killed and destroyed an enormous amount of property in their previous films, comics, and shows but when they do it in BvS and MoS, it's labelled as them being out of characters.
        I didn't even say that CA was worse than BvS. I only said that its mistakes were worse because they killed character development that previous films had built up. And sometimes, a film doesn't need levity. BvS was meant to be a dark film. It was mean to be the darkest out of the trilogy: MoS, BvS, and JL. And I don't really feel posting links to reviews that pointed out CA's flaws because I know that it won't change your opinion and I just don't feel like it.
      14. HR
        July 21, 2016
        If Batman spared Superman only because he was innocent, then his redemption arc is irrelevant. And yes, Man of Steel and BvS were adaptations of the characters and therefore were subject to preconceived notions. The complaint isn't about Superman killing and destroying buildings in Man of Steel. If no one made a fuss about Superman doing the exact same things in the comics and the TV shows until Man of Steel, then its not about destruction. It's about the character's reaction or lack thereof. The same goes for Batman killing criminals.
        Regardless of what you said, I need context. You say Civil War killed character development. The critics and audience said they enhanced it. So do I and I've seen the movie more than a few times. I can't ignore such positive reception or my own opinion for reasoning that doesn't even have context to it. BvS was meant to be a dark film. The problem was that it was too dark, took itself too seriously. A movie can do that. The Dark Knight was a dark film too, Daredevil and Jessica Jones are even darker TV shows. They all had a levity that fit with the drama and tension of their content. Without levity to balance the drama and tension, it becomes melodrama and your film or TV show loses its balance like BvS did to the point the reception was that it was bland and humorless. You don't need reviews to point out Captain America Civil War has flaws. I agree that it does but more than Batman v Superman? No, I don't agree.
      15. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        Look dude. We've been doing this argument all day, and I'm about tired of it. You say that the film failed in it's approach, fine.
        Lastly, I didn't say that CA's had more flaws. I said it had similar flaws.
      16. HR
        July 27, 2016
        Both.
Person
July 20, 2016
I think they just needed to thin down the plot because that climax to their fight would have worked wonderfully if given time to build to it because going from the absolute fury, rage and fear he felt from Superman's presence and threat to stopping in the middle of their fight because their mums names are the same doesn't work in how much story they tried to shove in that amount time in the movie. Like the trailer said they shoved nearly six different movies into one.
residentgrigo
July 20, 2016
Their MoS trailer was phenomenal but this one got a rare down-vote by me. It, especially the Ultimate Cut on their site, were extremely mean spirited and the on gag i liked was the Max Landis bit (his Superman mini is amazing btw.). It was pretty clear that the writer neither understood the point of the story, nor liked ANYTHING but the visuals. This is Zack´s 2001 (watch the special features), Watchmen, Kingdom Come, Pax Americana and so on. Every frame is a painting, with wheels within wheels. The "v executives" was the existence of the TC and nothing else. Not liking the film is fine, but refusing the basic artistic artistic merit is childish and one dimensional.
1. The Dark Knight
  July 20, 2016
  Must be cool to be a fun hating guy huh
  1. residentgrigo
    July 20, 2016
    I knew that the trailer would be "off", when i saw their actual movie review in March. They had people calling in to explain to them how anyone could like the film. Yikes. This weeks game trailer is better, if i forget that even that one goes after Bvs ("the BvS of superhero games"):
    https://www.youtube.com/wat...
    These videos aren´t made to be funny, they are made to make money...
    1. OGmacrazy
      July 20, 2016
      "These videos aren't made to be funny, they are made to make money" so was Man of Steel, BvS, Iron Man, Avengers, etc. That logic makes no sense, unless you also criticize BvS for that very same reason.
2. OGmacrazy
  July 20, 2016
  You know who said "It's so dense! Every frame has so much going on"? The producer of the star wars prequels/OT special editions... Yeah, every frame is a painting is not an argument for a good movie, especially when only the visuals are amazing, and the film itself is mediocre, at best. It's a comedy video, it always nitpicks movies, no matter what. Stop being a fanboy and start being critical and appreciating when someone makes fun of something you like. As long as it isn't mean spirited, which this definitely wasn't, then there's no reason to get as defensive as you got.
residentgrigo
July 20, 2016
Wanna see good (and actual) satire of BvS, here it is:
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
http://www.dialbforblog.com...
1. Virgil Scott
  July 20, 2016
  I thought the Rock 'Em Sock 'Em was real.
  1. residentgrigo
    July 20, 2016
    Layers within layers, my friend.
    http://i2.wp.com/www.retroi...
mma895
July 20, 2016
Haha they put a lot of work into this one. More than they usually do
Knight Radiant
July 20, 2016
https://media.giphy.com/med...
C.
July 20, 2016
hahahahaha!!! This honest trailer is probably one of the best, awesome!!! (by the way I love Batman vs Superman, best movie ever!)
IamTheOneWhoKnocks
July 20, 2016
They were fair...they mad fun of the movie and they also called out the haters of the movie for how ridiculous the criticism was. One of my favorite parts of course was "starring Hector Salamanca," LOL!!! that had me laughing hard. Great job overall.
1. BROWN_KNIGHT 4 Trump
  July 20, 2016
  I loved the "real" title they gave it...
  1. IamTheOneWhoKnocks
    July 20, 2016
    Lol...me too!...it was funny overall, I don't understand why some people are taking this seriously, it was not even harsh. I had a good laugh, and that alone is worth it. I guess some people can't take a joke.
    1. BROWN_KNIGHT 4 Trump
      July 20, 2016
      People take this stuff wayyy too serious...I love these characters but to become a studio hoe like many out there...will never get this blind fanaticism..
      1. IamTheOneWhoKnocks
        July 20, 2016
        Agreed!
residentgrigo
July 20, 2016
I already have people coming after me for disliking the "honest" trailer. So here is what i would call a good one, besides the one for MoS (the skull bit is the best part):
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
It comes from a place of love and being constrictive, not actual hatred. That´s what Cinema Sins (they used to be good) is for...
1. OGmacrazy
  July 20, 2016
  Cinema sins is used for hatred or somes from it? Dude, the ammount of people who cannot understand the point of that channel is amazingly and hilariously high. People see their favorite movies get 'sinned' and they get all irrational about it. Fuckin' A.
  1. Kerk Lastnameless
    July 20, 2016
    Care to explain the point of CinemaSins to me? I don't hate them -- I just don't understand them. Is it a meta-commentary on the movie nerd culture? Is it self-satire? And why does that guy say "asshole" in every other line?
    1. residentgrigo
      July 20, 2016
      CS used to be good but now it´s about making an easy buck. Now they just propagate internet hatred ( that emotion is was too easy) and they are a bit corrupt too. From his glory days, when i actually subscribed:
      https://www.youtube.com/wat...
      1. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        I still like his videos. Though at times, he does act a bit too harsh on a film.
      2. residentgrigo
        July 20, 2016
        http://66.media.tumblr.com/...
      3. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        I'm just more forgiving. Like with the Nostalgia Critic, I do disagree at times with their points, but I'm still entertained by their work.
      4. residentgrigo
        July 20, 2016
        Nostalgia Critic is fine in my book. His empire isn´t build on cynicism. The internet ruins us all...
      5. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        Though he does let his genuine feelings cloud his judgement sometimes like when he had bashed Adam Sandler's Eight Crazy Nights.
    2. OGmacrazy
      July 23, 2016
      It is simply the cinemasins team making fun of movies and themselves, with no real purpose. "No movie is without sins. Sins have no say on a movie's quality" people seem to forget this motto of theirs, and get defensive and childish about movies they like and don't want to hear any criticism, justified or otherwise, about their favourite movies. It's pathetic in my opinion. It's simply made for comedy, and they are the ones who make up sins, while also getting some legitimate stupidities and inconsitencies and mistakes that movies make in there. It's meant for comedy, not movie journalism.
Ed Jensen
July 20, 2016
Hello Batman Fans,
My name is Ed Jensen. My son, Jack, has been a huge Batman ever since he was born. I am sharing a link to a fundraiser I just set up on GoFundMe.com because my son has a very serious tooth disease and it has basically eaten away at most of the enamel. He needs to get dental implants or dentures and with him being in his late 20's he is very self-concious about it. Unfortunately, we are in no position to even help him just a little with this endeavor. We have helped him pay to get some cavities filled but that is not working (they eventually fall out or break apart). My son brushes his teeth more than twice a day and has even used sodium flouride but it just doesn't prevent his enamel from wearing off. I am trying to surprise him using this fundraiser site (I was told that GoFundMe was a great site and there are a ton of very great people online that help where they can) so that we can fix this problem for him. I can't stand not seeing my son smile and show his teeth when I know he wants to. He is a very great son and an even better person. I know he would want to help in any way he could for his fellow Batman fans so I figured I would come here to ask for your help.
Please visit the link down below to the fundraiser page and if you cannot afford to donate a certain amount even if you just shared it on social media and passed it around I would be so grateful. Thank you all for your help and support! God Bless.
Jack's Fundraiser through GoFundMe - gofundme.com/4xgd44np
Red Devils
July 20, 2016
I HATE SCREEN JUNKIES
OGmacrazy
July 20, 2016
Man, so many pissed off fans. This really just helps prove that ya'll can't accept any criticism towards the film, making you fanboys, which is just as bad as being a hater. The video is funny. Get over it.
1. OGmacrazy
  July 23, 2016
  "Intellectual" fans? Sorry, but most of the defensive fans I've seen are fanboys who can't take a shred of legitimate criticism if their lives depended on it.
  1. OGmacrazy
    July 25, 2016
    Sure, but the movie was more bad than good. That's my take on it, at least. As a movie fan, it was disappointing. I enjoyed myself with the movie, given how I am a total fanboy of these characters and stories, but the movie wasn't really up to snuff, though that's more on the insanely high expectations surrounding it, of course.
    1. OGmacrazy
      July 26, 2016
      There's also thousands of fans (which is a very important word here) that also love the Transformers movies, probably a lot more people than BvS too...
      Also, BvS is seen more as a disappointment and mediocre than bad by people, but "fans" like you see that as "omg he thinks the movie is attrocious! Get him!"
      I never once said the movie was legitimately bad, I only said it simply wasn't a good movie. You helped me prove my point.
      1. OGmacrazy
        July 26, 2016
        If a movie isn't good, it can be mediocre, bad, awful, attrocious, so good it's bad, or simply entertaining but not good. You have a type of mentality that thinks in hyperbole, I guess. But really, bvs isn't a disappointment? A critical flop, barely made money at the box office, has lower user scores than Man of Steel (which was another very divisive movie, also considered a disappointment), and generally failed to grab audiences, as the box office suggests. I'm not hating on it, and I enjoyed it, but calling it a good movie is simply ignoring major flaws it had that stop it from achieving that status.
      2. OGmacrazy
        July 27, 2016
        Still, you are only judging things from a black and white prespective, and that is not how anything works. There is a middle ground, for anything.
BROWN_KNIGHT 4 Trump
July 20, 2016
A few points were funny..nothing hilarious..
GaboPSN
July 20, 2016
In a nutshell http://i2.wp.com/batman-new...
You let your family die
July 20, 2016
"Having a mom changes none of that motivation no matter what her name is. You can write all the essays you want convincing yourself this was brilliant, but then again 'dumb' is a one syllable word that covers it pretty well."
There i just saved you some extra paragraphs. You are welcome.
Faze shaw
July 20, 2016
i think this is the first time honest trailers released on tuesday as opposed to wednesday... what's the occasion?
Renegade Stark
July 20, 2016
But this wasn't funny... This was just them bashing it and saying "our opinion is law and your reasons suck"
I mean I like these guys and Man of Steel's honest trailer was actually funny, I laughed only twice in this one and those were barely chuckles.
One thing I agree on is the title.
dugzino
July 20, 2016
Meh. I don't get it why people think that Batman stopped hitting Superman because their mothers share the same name. Srsly. How can a human being be so stupid and they're the loudest. If there was a bad point in this movie, it was its theatrical release. Zack Snyder was the greatest part in this movie and Justice League will be even better.
1. Vulpini
  July 20, 2016
  As Martha Kent said, "People hate what they don't understand." That sums it up I believe.
  If that's not enough, there's an Anti-DCEU social media campaign. Sad.. sad truth.
  So yeah, people want the DC cinematic universe to fail.
  Mainly because of fanboyism. It's all about fanboyism and psychology. These two go together.
  It's that aggressive devotion that turns fans into hateful fanboys, who form an agenta against the opposite fanbase.
  Mentally weak assholes I dare to say. And as always, the loudest always gets the most attention.
  Nowdays when it comes to franchise movies, being possitive is a bad thing.
  Hell, there are people who shit on Leto's Joker because he's not Ledger.
  So being different and original is bad and wrong. That kind of mindset really needs to stop. It affects the general audience, which is the real bad thing.
Schuyler Finley
July 20, 2016
Just avoid the video's comment section. I had gotten into a long argument with people about the video, and one guy kept going on and on how characters were acting illogical and should've explained things better so that I don't have make excuses for it.
1. Kerk Lastnameless
  July 20, 2016
  He sounds like a swell guy to me. I'll go check it out.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    July 20, 2016
    I will say, Kerk, that you might've fixed my mail notifications. I kept getting them late, but I had immediately got notified by your comment. Thank you for that.
    1. Virgil Scott
      July 20, 2016
      Mine has been doing that lately also.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        July 20, 2016
        Mine's messing up again. I'm just just now getting an email about your comment.
      2. Virgil Scott
        July 21, 2016
        Weird.
      3. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        I thought I was the only one who had the problem.
      4. Virgil Scott
        July 21, 2016
        Nope. It's been happening the last few weeks.
      5. Schuyler Finley
        July 21, 2016
        Same here. Started around June, and I've been having to deal with it ever since.
      6. Virgil Scott
        July 21, 2016
        Yeah. Maybe one of their gerbils died and they haven't been able to replace. Now it's wheel sits there, rusting.
      7. Virgil Scott
        July 21, 2016
        This comment showed up in my email but your other one didn't.
2. residentgrigo
  July 20, 2016
  Stanley Kubrick was widely hated back in the day and Empire Strikes back was a critical flop. Nothing new to report. I used to be a BIG fan of film criticism but the blogosphere just murder the overall intellect aspect of it all. Take it was Mr. Ebert:
  Death to film critics! Hail to the CelebCult!
  http://www.rogerebert.com/r...
  1. dugzino
    July 20, 2016
    Exactly. I've been had my whole life by them. I missed all of Kubrick's filmography and Batman Begins at the theaters because of them. Since then "Screw em all".
  2. Schuyler Finley
    July 20, 2016
    I understood what the guy was debating about, butt the problem I had with his argument was that if the film didn't explain it then my points are automatically invalid. Films, shows, and books don't always explain everything in detail, especially comic books. They tend to just leave viewers clues sot that they can come up with their own conclusions.
    Like how did Lex find out Batman's identity? Well given how earlier we saw that Lex used his resources to search for metahuman, he is a genius and he hungers for knowledge, we can conclude that he had used his intellect and resources to discover Batman's identity
    1. residentgrigo
      July 20, 2016
      The good old spoon feeding the audience. They never want it but backlash immediately comes when someone dares to keep away the spoon. The creators of the DCEU committed a master stroke when they decided to go with the in-media-res approach. As DC´s comic relaunches tend to. That opens up the cinematic continuity book like NEVER before. The whole thing becomes so "lived in" (hello Star Wars), open to discussion and explanation. A+ there.
Tony Baloney
July 20, 2016
More than a mere summer blockbuster, BvS is a case study in good taste v common sense, commerce v art, and "art" v entertainment, and crystallizes a bewilderingly odd time in American culture.
1. grayghost84
  July 21, 2016
  Nicely said man. I believe time will be very kind to BvS.
residentgrigo
July 20, 2016
On a positive note: I just noticed that MoS, BvS and SS (most trailers already did) + WW (due to Etta Candy + the Amazon) all pass the Bechdel Test. How rare is that for comic films or blockbusters? Well done WB!
https://upload.wikimedia.or...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
(Passing it isn´t a sign of quality of course.)
Virgil Scott
July 20, 2016
That was funny.
"A Democratic Senator from Kentucky?"
Nate
February 16, 2017
im so sick of the "martha" thing. people are missing the bigger picture. its not the fact that they have the same names. bruce saw the humanity in superman when he said his mothers name. he saw that superman was raised on earth and is just as much human as he is kryptonian.

Browse By Topic

Browse By Year

Browse By Author

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com