'Batman v Superman' production designer shares concept art of an epic Batman moment

September 3, 2016

Some fans may have shifted their excitement to Suicide Squad, Justice League, and even Ben Affleck's Batman movie, but Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice production designer Patrick Tatopoulos is still sharing awesome concept from his movie with the world!

Tatopoulos shared concept art of the epic Batman moment from the movie, where he crashes through the warehouse window before giving us the greatest Batman fight scene of all time!

"From a rough key frame concept to final movie frame. Sometime it sticks," Tatopoulos wrote on Instagram to caption his photo.

View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Patrick Tatopoulos (@ptatopoulos)

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

200 comments

Carver
September 3, 2016
I loved that moment. Pure Batman.
1. residentgrigo
  September 3, 2016
  http://i.imgur.com/YzMcZnR.gif
2. Schuyler Finley
  September 4, 2016
  Because they thought that he was gonna come through the door. They don't know that it's Batman who's attacking them.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    September 4, 2016
    They may not know what the Batwing looks like. It's dark and they can only see an aircraft firing at them. And there is thing called door breaching.
    1. Schuyler Finley
      September 4, 2016
      But they didn't expect Batman to fight them. There was still time on the clock, so they thought Batman was still fighting Superman. And these guys are mercenaries. They might not be former Gotham citizens.
      And Batman couldn't stop by the Batcave to stock up on weapons.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But he was on a time limit. And there were guards outside with turrets. Stealth wasn't gonna cut it this time. And he was gonna damn well make sure that he keeps his promise that "Martha won't die tonight".
      2. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But the film repeatedly states that Batman is acting out of character.
      3. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        No it wasn't. The start wasn't until after Superman died. And I don't remember Snyder saying that this was gonna be the canon, comic book Batman coming to the big screen.
      4. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But Snyder didn't intend for this to be a 100% accurate portrayal of the character, just because some fans wanted that.
      5. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Did Snyder, in his own words, say that this would be an accurate portrayal of Batman?
      6. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        There's a difference between inspired by and adapting for accuracy.
      7. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        So do many other people. I've seen arguments about whether or Batman had killed that gang member.
      8. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But you don't know that. It's only your assumption.
      9. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        That part. We don't know if Snyder does read the comics or not. We don't know if any of these actors or directors really read the stuff.
        Also kinda hard to use Miller as an example since the guy has a specific perspective of Batman. He hates all of the live-action Batman films. Though he said that Batfleck was very close to the TDKR representation.
      10. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        They're talking about Superman's death. It is what makes Batman a better person.
      11. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But it's plainly obvious that it was he death that inspired Batman.
      12. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Actually it was. Batman's whole arc was that he was becoming more of a monster as the film progressed. After the death, Batman slowly becomes the man he used to be. That's why he told WW that men are still good.
      13. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        There is progression. The name snaps him out of his rage, yes, but it's the realization of what he's doing that leads to him sparing Superman. As pointed out numerous times by other people here, especially residentgrigo, Batman is always haunted by his parents' death.
      14. AquaCthulhu
        September 6, 2016
        You're right. They're all Russian gangsters working under Anatoli.
    2. alec
      September 4, 2016
      Enemy vehicles have turret guns, on-foot enemies don't
      1. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        He might accidentally kill Martha in the process.
      2. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But it was the same in Burton and Nolan films. Batman's vehicle had lethal weapons, but Nolan Batman only used them once on a person.
      3. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But Nolan still killed people in his films. He killed Talia by using his Batwing. And BvS Batman is human as well. He was falling deep into the abyss as the movie progressed.
      4. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Because fans were outraged of Batman even though Clooney Batman is the only live-action Batman who has never killed in a film.
      5. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Nolan Batman intended for Ra's to not survive the crash in Begins. Just because he chose not to save Ra's, doesn't absolve him from killing him.
      6. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But comic book Batman ALWAYS saves his villains. Leaving them to die practically equals t killing them.
      7. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But he always tries at first. Even in the cartoons, we see him at least react to the villains seemingly dying. In Begins, Batman didn't hesitate to give Ra's the deuces.
      8. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        I just got done watching that scene, I'm surprised that no one points that Batman seemingly killed Joker.
      9. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        I was talking about Mad Love. Batman straight up uppercuts Joker off the monotrail. Joker could've had died from hitting the pavement at that height.
        I know writers have Batman exploit loopholes in his "no kill" rule.
      10. AquaCthulhu
        September 6, 2016
        He couldn't have carried Ra's as he gracefully flew away from the train? I find that hard to believe. If Baleman can decide to just not save someone just because the last time was a mistake, then Batfleck can be forgiven for being human.
      11. AquaCthulhu
        September 6, 2016
        It couldn't have been impossible to at the very least toss Ra's's body onto a rooftop before Baleman course-corrects and glides to safety. In fact Nolan should've done something like that being such a strong proponent of Batman's No-kill rule.
      12. AquaCthulhu
        September 6, 2016
        "Ra's can't be contained in a jail so I better let him die. In fact, how is he any different from all the other Shadows I burnt to a crisp in Nepal."—Baleman's internal musings during that scene. And this is perfectly in line with Batman. He's a human manifestation of pure vengeance that was born in the Crime Alley that night. This was pretty much Batman finding cold-blooded closure because Ra's made it pretty clear he wanted Thomas dead. And this is by design of the writing only disguised to avoid the wrath of close-minded fans.
        Well, if they showed us Baleman at least try to save Ra's, then I'd take back everything I said.
      13. AquaCthulhu
        September 7, 2016
        In other words, Baleman, in his right mind, letting Ra's die is okay because why not but Batfleck, being absolutely unhinged upstairs, causing the deaths—it could be argued those thugs suffered extreme fifth-degree burns and survived but that'd be just as contrived as saying, "I won't kill you but I don't have to save you"—of nameless thugs is not okay.
        Also, the fact that Baleman intended not to save Ra's means he killed Ra's by proxy.
        I don't know if we watched the same movie but isn't the ending of TDK all about how Batman became something he didn't want to be—unless being blamed for Harvey's murders was something he'd always wished for from becoming Batman. TDK's ending was about Batman fooling the Gothamites just to have the last laugh at the Joker. The Joker clearly won but Baleman cheated. Isn't that the whole premise for TDKR? He saved Gotham by becoming something he didn't want to.
        Now that I've seen your attention to detail first-hand, I'll make a reminder never to argue with you. Such a waste of time and thought.
        P. S. I do agree that Ra's had to have a more conclusive closure than the usual rogues but that doesn't negate how Baleman pretty much killed Ra's, no matter how carefully Nolan tried to cover it up.
      14. rodo
        September 5, 2016
        Dude... the DCNazis and the Zucksniderlibers are beyond salvation... don't waste your time.
      15. rodo
        September 6, 2016
        Fine then.
OmegaCorleone
September 3, 2016
http://media.giphy.com/medi...
Jesse Hernandez
September 3, 2016
I feel like I'm the only one but, I'm I wrong to say that when Affleck was doing pull ups, they used somone else's physic for that shot ? I've yet to see a picture of Ben being RIPPED, in BvS they did a lot of far shots of him
1. grayghost84
  September 3, 2016
  I think it was him, dude is huge. He really is a lunk like Frank Millers Batman.
  1. Bats2012
    September 3, 2016
    He's built nothing like Frank Miller's Batman if you're talking about TDKR
2. BatmanNewsChris
  September 3, 2016
  I can find some later, but there were lots of photos of him in shirts where you could definitely tell he got that ripped!
3. residentgrigo
  September 3, 2016
  10 secs with google. Meet Rossano Rea:
  https://images-cdn.moviepil...
  http://moviepilot.com/posts...
  1. Jesse Hernandez
    September 3, 2016
    Yeah I read about this one time, I think they molded his costume before him. But I feel like he's trying to grab attention
4. Kryptonian Knight
  September 3, 2016
  Looks like Ben to me.
5. Milo Yiannopoulos
  September 3, 2016
  I don't mean to brag, but that was me. It took a year to get into that shape, and doing it right was a big deal for me and Zack.
6. Jesse Hernandez
  September 4, 2016
  I mean but he was always wearing a shirt
residentgrigo
September 3, 2016
Visual appeal is the DCEU´s strong suit (that Croc make-up was next level btw.):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media...
1. DC DeteCtive
  September 3, 2016
  This is magic of DCEU.
2. StarTheory
  September 3, 2016
  The Batman world we have been waiting decades for
  1. JJ
    September 4, 2016
    I'm still waiting.
3. AquaCthulhu
  September 4, 2016
  Some people think Croc was CGI'd. It's that good.
residentgrigo
September 3, 2016
The dancing Harley gif also just got "upgraded" due to the Vimeo SFX reel:
http://66.media.tumblr.com/...
1. residentgrigo
  September 4, 2016
  Faraci indoctrinated you pretty hard, didn´t he? God forbid that these ultimately successfully films actually have fans... That can´t be it. Let´s instead tear down every single thing about them, specially the popular bits. Much more heathy.
  (I bought "that" Harley comic on the day of release, it was her first "real" comic appearance.)
  1. Grant Dreed
    September 4, 2016
    Harley's outfit in that short clip honestly looks exactly like something from those fan-films on Youtube.
    1. residentgrigo
      September 4, 2016
      I don´t think that the one-piece costume works outside of the Bruce Timm art style in general. I would have ditched it too but Assault on Arkham and the Joker GN from 2008 found a good middle ground. A reworked version could work.
      https://upload.wikimedia.or...
      https://fanartexhibit.files...
      1. Grant Dreed
        September 4, 2016
        You're right, Harley looks much better in those.
residentgrigo
September 3, 2016
Your argument is basically this but ALL of his films apply, so don´t expect to get too much out of JLA:
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
The commentary has it´s point, honest and well thought out too but some of us love these self-important “scene” based movies. The comic medium is famous for such. Watchmen and the mentioned 300 are obsessed with them and they are now embraced for what they are.
I thus loved Zack´s style since DotD in 04 and he himself said that he likes his film to feel like “movies” and NOT real life, so the perceived disconnect is intentional.
Being unable to get behind a directorial style is a far better reason to not like a certain “take” on source material that channeling the basic nature of it in every shape or form, despite a lot of comic precedence. I can live with that.
1. residentgrigo
  September 3, 2016
  I disagree stronger with this one (Zack is a top 5 director for me, the Kubrick of genre films) but it has it´s moments too:
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  The discussed Sucker Punch is his one "mistake". Great intentions but it just doesn´t come together.
  1. Luke
    September 3, 2016
    I would argue Kubrick is the Kubrick of genre films.
    1. residentgrigo
      September 4, 2016
      Kubrick is the Kubrick of adaptations. 2001 and The Shining are also his only "pure" genre film.
      1. OGmacrazy
        September 4, 2016
        What? Because Zack Snyder only makes original movies? He tried and failed miserably. You can love him all you want, but it is a crime to call him the kubrick of anything.
      2. Lol
        September 5, 2016
        in his time, Kubrik had "failed miserably" as well, if you remember.
      3. OGmacrazy
        September 24, 2016
        He had? He had oscar nominations out the ass at the same point in his career as Snyder is.
  2. Bats2012
    September 3, 2016
    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
2. Bats2012
  September 3, 2016
  And some guy on here said BvS didn't have slo-mo
  1. residentgrigo
    September 4, 2016
    It´s MoS that went without slo-mo, as it was a Nolan co-production. The shot of Superman hovering over the flood victims is a prime example in BvS.
    http://static.comicvine.com...
Kriss_Kringle
September 3, 2016
I'll have to disagree on this one.What you're saying applies more to Civil War,though.That movie had way too much action and too little moments for character development.
BvS TC has 6 action scenes and the UE has 7.Most of them are shorter than the ones in Civil War and they have more weight to them.The characters are actually in danger,you know.
1. StarTheory
  September 3, 2016
  Exactly, we actually became attached to those characters and there was a proper reason behind everything, cannot say the same for BvS. There were just too many subplots and dumb moments going on. The whole Africa thing should have been cut out and the focus should have been on the Black Zero Event, Supes goes to the Capitol to tell his side of the story, how he wanted to help as many as he can, how he isn't perfect, etc. Lex's dad should have also died during the event which would have been a better reason why Lex hates Supes, so when he blows up the capitol, that is to make sure that humanity doesn't start supporting him. And rather than showing Bruce's origin again in the beginning they should have had a montage something similar to Watchmen showing all the shit that has happened during his Batman years so we can get more attached and see his perspective in a BETTER way. As for the Martha scene, good idea but awful execution yet AGAIN, he brings up the spear, and rather than Supes saying "save Martha", he should have said, "don't do this", then Bruce gets a flashback to his parent's death and how he is no different than Joe Chill and that is what snaps him out rather than some meaningless death.
  Man this could have been such a good movie...
  1. Schuyler Finley
    September 3, 2016
    But Lex hates his father. Superman's actions were self-explanatory since he had the military backing him, and people could see that he helped destroy the world engine. And why spoil the surprise of Batman's adventures? I actually like that they kept most of Batman's history in the dark in BvS. And with the "Save Martha", it is actually noble for Superman to plead to Batman to save someone instead of pleading to Batman to spare his life.
    1. Johnathon
      September 3, 2016
      "But Lex hates his father"
      Then change it, not like they haven't changed everything else.
      "And with the "Save Martha", it is actually noble for Superman to plead to Batman to save someone instead of pleading to Batman to spare his life."
      Who says their mother's name? it's ridiculous.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        Even in the comics, I think Lex killed his parents. This isn't like in the Smallvile tv show where Lex, at first, wanted to gain his father's respect.
        Many have pointed out that some people do that. Also Superman had to give a name so that Batman could know who he was looking for.
      2. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        Why would he even trust him to save his mother when he wanted stop Batman because of his deadly actions?
      3. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        Because Superman is desperate at this point. He was willing to seek a reckless superhero's help in order to save his mother.
      4. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        This brings up another plot-hole, he can find Lois somewhere on the other side of the planet but can't find his mom in the same city?
      5. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        Martha wasn't in Metropolis.
      6. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        Gotham is across the bay, still close enough.
      7. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        But he doesn't know where she could be. She was kidnapped in Smallvile, and we don't know how far it is from Gotham. And they did had a scene where Superman uses his super-hearing to find his mother, but he ends up hearing all of the pain and suffering across the city and/or world. They cut it because they felt the scene was too dark.
      8. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        How did he find Lois then? and why wasn't it in the rated R version? They didn't hold back with that. Did they film it?
      9. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        If you're talking about Africa, I'm pretty sure that Lois told Clark about her assignment. And when he saves her after Lex pushes her off, I assume that he was on his way back to Metropolis after he finished the soul searching in the mountains. We didn't hear him breaking the sound barrier like he usually does when he's flying fast, so he must've been close by.
      10. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        When the plot demands it, you better be there!
      11. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        But that's like in every other superhero movie.
      12. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        Correct, she was half a continent away and Clark has no reason to think that his mother is "compromised". Who kidnaps waitresses and she didn´t even have time to scream properly.
      13. AquaCthulhu
        September 4, 2016
        He knew about Lois in the African village because he works at the same place. He didn't just find her.
      14. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        I strongly suspect that he was shadowing her too or he learned to laser focus his senses. Martha barely had time to scream though.
      15. AquaCthulhu
        September 5, 2016
        Yes. This is probably why she doesn't tell Clark about finding the bullet later on.
  2. Johnathon
    September 3, 2016
    What was Lex's motivation anyways? Something about his dad abusing him? and then his solution is to create something even more powerful than Superman... this movie is retarded.
    1. Schuyler Finley
      September 3, 2016
      He wanted to prove his philosophy that God is either All-powerful or All-good, and that man should not need to rely on metahumans. Superman is presented as the physical embodiment of a deity.
      1. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        That doesn't justify his shit plan, "Meta-humans are awful so let me create a mindless beast, and who I can control with... blood?"
        For fuck sake's...
      2. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        Lex thought it would work. His plans were working up until he decided to mess with technology he has no business with. He's that arrogant of himself.
      3. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        Bruce was getting ready to kill Superman even without Lex's dumb "manipulation" and killing those with the bat-brand in prison wasn't even necessary because it was his mother that made Superman go fight but even then though he wanted to talk and convince him first. As for Doomsday, thinking he'll get some telepathy with Doomsday is not arrogance, that's pure stupidity and Lex is suppose to be one of the smartest people in the DC universe but they made him into some snot nose daddy issue little bitch.
      4. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        Batman didn't have any means to kill Superman though. It wasn't until Lex discovered Kryptonite that Batman starts to take action. And killing those inmates did serve in pissing Superman off. Even Geof Johns said that this was Lex's starting point. He's not the Lex we know, but he may eventually develop into that character. And again, Lex's plans were going off without a hitch until he got too greedy and wanted open the Genesis Chamber; that was the starting point to his downfall.
      5. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        Piss him off for 5 minutes then he goes back to normal, and Kryptonite was literally like the only thing that Lex helped with, what was the reason for the letters? and I don't want to see that snot nose again, they need to bring in his abusive father, Eisenberg will NEVER EVER EVER be the proper Lex, the guy doesn't watch his own movies so he doesn't improve his performances, and it's why he basically plays himself in every role.
      6. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        Superman is under a microscope in the film. He knows that he can't just anything to stop Batman, especially since Batman has support from the GCPD. The letters were to mock batman. Lex has been studying Batman for years, so he probably knows about Bruce's paranoia.
      7. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        and his identity... and what's your view on Clark's death? Never going to see Clark again in this universe without giving Superman's secret away.
      8. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        I'm sure there's something in the comics that can solve the problem. I'm also pretty sure that they wouldn't kill him off without thinking about what to do with the Clark persona once he comes back in JL.
      9. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        They need to Flashpoint it and keep everyone but Eisenberg.
      10. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        I rather liked his performance, and I've seen a lot of Luthor incarnations.
      11. AquaCthulhu
        September 4, 2016
        The bat-brand was to rile up Clarke enough that he'd go confront Batman, which he does. And that paints Superman as some self-righteous bastard who's basically telling Batman his 20-years's worth of war on crime was pointless and is wrong.
        But you're just going to bring up something else that's also acknowledged in the movie, at least in the Ultimate Edition. So keep at it.
2. Schuyler Finley
  September 3, 2016
  It was the opposite For me. Civil War fight scenes jut didn't excite me while BvS nearly had me jumping in my seat, though I will admit that Black Panther was a major ass-kicker.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    September 5, 2016
    I know, but I was still talking about the weight behind the fights in CW. The climax was brutal, but it didn't make me emotional because I felt that the fight wasn't deserved. HISHE should exactly how the fight could've been avoided, and other people brought up more points for why the fights were stupid. I never felt dead when watching the fight scenes in BvS.
3. Zoom
  September 3, 2016
  There is no such thing as "too much action" in a movie populated with dozens of superheroes. I wanna see a spectacle not an arthouse movie.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    September 3, 2016
    MoS had only Superman, but people complained that the film had too much mindless action.
    1. Schuyler Finley
      September 3, 2016
      But they're his parents. They wanted their son to be safe. They know the possibilities of what could happen if Clark uses is powers around kids. Yeah, Johnathan could've said "I don't know" when Clark asked if he should've let those kids die, but he didn't say "yes". Johnathan was unsure on what Clark should've done. And Martha was his anchor in those flashbacks. And Clark acted like how he did in the Smallvile tv show where he felt that he was freak. It doesn't help that other school kids see him that way.
      1. Zoom
        September 3, 2016
        for the love of god are you really trying to rope me into THAT conversation again ? I had this whole debate about the Kents in MoS a felt million times and am so sick of it.
        The Kents were portrayed HORRIBLY in Snyders films. Nothing like the comics. Nothing like Smallville. End of story. There have been entire articles about this on comic book sites. Read them.
      2. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        And there are articles that explain why they were good parents in MoS.
      3. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        So you assume that anyone who likes the DCEU Kents aren't knowledgeable of their history. You were okay at first, Zoom, but you ruined what could've been a good conversation. I see why people have problems with this version of the Kents, but I see why the Kents were the way they are. Both BvS and MoS proved their points for why the world wasn't ready for Clark to reveal himself.
      4. Johnathon
        September 3, 2016
        I like Ma Kent but not Pa Kent, telling Clark that those kids needed to die, WTF??
      5. Schuyler Finley
        September 3, 2016
        He didn't. He said "maybe". Like I said, it could've been better if he had said "I don't know", but the "maybe" was his way of saying that he's unsure of what Clark should've done.
      6. Kriss_Kringle
        September 3, 2016
        He,like all the others,just didn't get it.
      7. Kriss_Kringle
        September 3, 2016
        Yeah,they were portrayed as scared people who didn't have all the right answers at the right time for their son.You know,like in real life.
        What a horrible way to portray the Kents
    2. Bats2012
      September 3, 2016
      It did
  2. Kriss_Kringle
    September 3, 2016
    Oh,but there is.The goal is to make a good story.If you have such low expectations and want just spectacle,then whatever,but having too many action scenes in a movie knocks the wind out of the final showdown because the audience feels burnt out and doesn't give a crap anymore when the 10th scene comes on the screen.
    Finally,you're watching the movie because you're either a long time fan of one or more characters or you just like them from the previous movies,so having more character development in favor of an action scene will go a long way in the end,because that's what's going to stay with you the most after you leave the theater.
  3. grayghost84
    September 4, 2016
    I want or see both which is why BVS is my fav movie, and I was so disappointed with what they did to SS.
4. Kriss_Kringle
  September 3, 2016
  Nope.They had zero weight because no one was in danger.They were well choreographed,but overall felt like school yard fights.Especially that overpraised airport scene,which could have been scraped altogether in favor of more character development.
  The ones in BvS were better realized because there was a sense of danger throughout.
  1. Kriss_Kringle
    September 6, 2016
    They had diddly squat to fight over.Tony is supposed to be this genius who before this film was cool and calculated,yet in Civil war he acted like an asshole so they could justify the grudge.We never heard of his mother in the 3 Iron Man films that came before or in the Avengers and we're supposed to care all of a sudden just because they showed him on stage recreating the last time he saw his parents?Sorry,but that's ham fisted and rushed just to sell the argument in the least demanding way possible by the writers.
    The whole thing starts because a mother tells him she finds him responsible for her son's death and that's enough to make him sign the Accords,but all of the other people that died in New York in the first Avengers movie or in Sokovia weren't.How is this good motivation or writing?
    Cap says to Tony at the airport that the psychiatrist or whatever that guy that Zemo killed and posed as was,but Tony doesn't give a crap because the writers want him to be an asshole through and through.
    Cap again stresses that Bucky wasn't himself when he killed Tony's parents and that Hydra was brainwashing him and it still doesn't matter.
    Then there's the fact that Tony bugged S.H.I.E.L.D in the first Avengers movie,but somehow he wasn't able to decrypt those files that Natasha released on the internet at the end of Winter Soldier and Zemo,which had infinitely less resources and money at his disposal managed to crack on his own,just because he's a guy with a lot of time on his hands.
    And final,Cap doesn't have an arc in Civil war.He's the guy who's fighting and saving people at every turn and that's it.There's no journey or self discovery for him.Peggy dies off screen and you don't give two bits about it,because the moment isn't done well and then he gets involved with her niece,which is forced as hell and also kind of creepy.
    So don't give me that bull about Civil war having emotional weight or strong motivations as to why they were fighting.It was poorly handled and forced,while at the same time risking and taking the characters nowhere of narrative worth.
5. OGmacrazy
  September 4, 2016
  Danger? You mean the same characters that are either ALL going to have solo movies, and appear in Justice League? Yeah, what fucking danger...
  1. Schuyler Finley
    September 4, 2016
    The MCU Avengers are either gonna have more solo films or we know for certain that it's too early to kill them off.
    1. OGmacrazy
      September 4, 2016
      Hmm... Ok... I was talking about Batman v Superman, though.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        I know. I was pointing out that some of the Avengers will have future solo films, and yet the action still keep people in suspense. We know that the heroes will win in the end, but both franchises still keep the audience in suspense.
      2. OGmacrazy
        September 24, 2016
        They do? Who? 12 year olds?
  2. Kriss_Kringle
    September 4, 2016
    Let's see,Batman gets stabbed in the warehouse fight scene and Superman dies.Yeah,they're coming back,but they have some limits as opposed to the Marvel superheroes,where they leave the fights without a scratch on them.
    There's just no sense of danger in the MCU.The villains are crap and pose no threats.They're there only to highlight the heroes and give them something to punch.
    Wilson Fisk and Kilgrave,on the other hand,make the villains from the movies look like a bunch of kids cosplaying as bad guys.
    1. OGmacrazy
      September 24, 2016
      Really? War Machine got hurt.
      And if you go by that logic, Batman should be dead after receiving just that push from superman, if you want to talk about "realism".
      Either way, your argument is flawed. You are clearly biased and can't see the obvious imiliraties in that regard, regarding both franchises.
      1. Kriss_Kringle
        September 24, 2016
        No,Batman shouldn't be dead after receiving that push,because Superman told him to stay down and if he wanted it,he'd be dead already.He was obviously holding back,but nice try,though.
        As for Rhodey,he'll be walking like nothing happened thanks to Tony's spine device,so if that's the only casualty in a movie called Civil War,then there's a big problem.
        Either way,you failed to make a point about the films or about my opinion,so jog on,son.
      2. OGmacrazy
        September 25, 2016
        What? Realistically (which should never apply to these discussions, obviously) that push would obliterate any and every organ in a human's body. The metal suit protects jackshit.
      3. OGmacrazy
        September 25, 2016
        And I agree. But you are talking about "points", yet my point was about super hero movies in general, and you turned it into a fucking Dc vs Marvel bullshit discussion. I love both, and both companies have movies where the stakes are very non existent. Great way to completely destroy any kind of credibility with that last sentence, though.
6. residentgrigo
  September 4, 2016
  I have been reading Marvel comics for 2 decades and Civil War dropped that story ball pretty hard as act 2 began by showing a fundamental lack of interest to have anything to do with the comics. It also fucked up Bucky, Crossbones, Ironman and Zemo beyond believe. The film looks very nice, Cap and Panther were top notch but even Mark Miller wrote a better story in 2006. That´s just sad...
  I wonder how the film will be looked upon in 10 years time. It´s not a "bad" film but i frankly liked let´s say Hulk 2008 more, as it managed to hold my attention on 2nd viewing. That film at least had a purpose and and didn´t feel like a 2,5 hour add for other films that constantly switches the tone in the middle of scene.
  The MCU masterpiece you are looking for is Cap2 or Daredevil 02, as it actually bothered to feature the conflict Cap3 advertised bit NEVER bothered to address.
  1. residentgrigo
    September 6, 2016
    When did is say that? The Miller comic is a mess too, but it at least bothered to have a story and real a conflict. 300, Sin City and so on are all page by page adaptations btw.
residentgrigo
September 3, 2016
Film is a visual medium by definition and Zack 100% mastered that part. Just look at this prefect BvS to JLA parallel. I could talk for 10 minutes about this trailer frame alone! Accuse him of TOO much substance in his machinations, if anything.
https://i.redditmedia.com/M...
One of the reasons i like his films is lastly found in this editorial on visual storytelling:
http://www.the-fanboy-persp...
Tell don´t show prequel nonsense as this will also never be found in a Snyder film:
http://www.the-fanboy-persp...
1. Schuyler Finley
  September 3, 2016
  "But but but....we still don't know why Batman is so angry. They should've did a solo film first".
  1. Mark
    September 3, 2016
    Exactly! Just like Star Wars wouldn't have worked if Luke, Han and Leia hadn't each had their own solo movie first. There would have been no dramatic tension if Episode 4 was the first time we had seen them.
    1. Schuyler Finley
      September 3, 2016
      Oh definitely. I loved seeing how Han and Chewie became BFFs.
      1. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        The now non-canon Han Solo Trilogy was pretty decent, their meeting was in book 2:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
      2. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Well that trilogy may become canon since they're trying to make a solo film for him, no pun intended.
      3. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        Parts of it certainly will, the "current regime" is very good about bringing the polar bits back. Disney 100% "saved" Star Wars, no denying that.
      4. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Eh, I'll admit that. Though I think the franchise could've been saved by anyone as long as Lucas was no where near production.
      5. Mark
        September 4, 2016
        For me, the two hours of Luke whining about his chores was an emotional experience never to be replicated! I still wish they had IMAX back then to really "live" that one!
        (And if you weren't around back when it was just "Star Wars" and not ANH, you probably don't have any idea how heavy the "Luke is an incredibly annoying brat who lucks out and saves the day" reaction was to the film. )
      6. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Oh I definitely wasn't around when it was only Star Wars. Though now that you mention it, it still baffles me that people are okay with Luke and Kylo acting like whiny brats, but they hate it when Anakin acts like one.
    2. Mark
      September 4, 2016
      I actually got the comparison (if not the phrasing) elsewhere, so I'm not the first to think of it. My point was simple (and meant to agree with Schuyler Finley): the "they should have done solo movies first" is a stupid criticism. Could they have? Yes, of course. But it's unnecessary to the story they're trying to tell with the movie series, and BvS did a fine job of introducing the characters it needed to introduce.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Yeah. The solo films could make things better for the DCEU, but it's probably best for them to get JL movie out of the way before casual audiences get sick and tired of superhero movies. And like you said, BvS did a good job with introducing WW and Batman.
    3. residentgrigo
      September 4, 2016
      And think about all the Hobbit films, how could anyone follow LotR without them?
      The endless Guardians of the Galaxy and Watchmen solo prequels count too... wait.
  2. residentgrigo
    September 4, 2016
    It´s not like the movie repeatedly beat you over the head with it, or anything...
    http://49.media.tumblr.com/...
    1. Schuyler Finley
      September 4, 2016
      "But but but...Batman has no limits. He's the goddamn Batman. He's supposed to be the unbreakable pillar like his in the comics. A live-action Batman should be 100% accurate to the comics. That's why the Nolan films were so good. They were completely accurate to the comics."
      1. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        Especially when he started to kill ninja bros before he even put on the mask and he also retired twice in 3 films.
        http://s2.quickmeme.com/img...
        DKR Batman was 55 and he still retained the night terrors from his childhood.
      2. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        "But but but...he didn't kill them. He just did the same thin he did to Ra's: he didn't save them. Choosing not to save someone doesn't mean that you killed them."
        My response to that last sentence is that comic book ALWAYS tries to save his villains. Christ, the excuses that folks give to other Batmen are ridiculous.
      3. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        My favorite non-save are Talia and her driver. He blew them up with a repainted military jet.
      4. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Mine will always be Ra's. It was clever, but I will always say that Batman did kill him by doing that.
      5. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        I originally had a problem with that scene in 2005 but it came back to bite him in the ass in Rises, so it now works.
      6. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Yeah. As much as I like Rises, mainly because of Bane, Bruce was getting bit in the ass hard in that film.
      7. Mario
        September 4, 2016
        It depicts a guy NOT being a hero, and that is foul playing in a way, he redeemed that when he saves the Joker in Dark knight with the grappling gun, there you have what apparently everybody wants from Bats, i personally don’t mind at all the killing, never cared before, why start now?.
      8. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        Same here. If it fits the story, then the I'm okay with the killing. It's not like Batman took pleasure in killing goons in BvS.
      9. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        But we see bodies fly around as the place goes up in smoke.
        And only Cooney Batman is the live-action Batman who didn't kill anyone. Every other Batman has killed.
      10. If
        September 5, 2016
        he deliberately wanted to kill, he would have shot the goons instead of their car. He'd have shot KGB's head off. He didn't. As clearly said by Snyder and Affleck in various interviews and quite strongly implied in the film, Batman had lost his way. He was off the edge previous Batmen had hinted at. Either way, what a fictional idea has stood for n number of years shouldn't mean shit to an artist taking it on(film directors, comic writers etc). They're free to do whatever they wish to do as long as the their stakeholders(DC, WB) are okay with it.
      11. Probably
        September 5, 2016
        totally why the "Assassins" was replaced with "Shadows"
      12. Schuyler Finley
        September 4, 2016
        That was a summary of various comments that I've had to argue against. Many of those people straight said or agrred with others that Batman is supposed to be unbreakable and that the films were 100% accurate to the comics. I'm not making anything up.
2. Bats2012
  September 3, 2016
  You don't get it bro, you're not... "Enlightened".
  Neither am I.
3. AquaCthulhu
  September 4, 2016
  You could tell the same story through dialogue and character interaction in a book. The visuals are what make films fundamentally different and unique. How could you talk about visuals like they're some afterthought while it's the essence?
  1. AquaCthulhu
    September 5, 2016
    Holy crap, you're so right!
    "If I could have said it in words, I would have - then I wouldn't have needed to make the picture."—Akira Kurosawa
    "I try to make films where they don’t have to read the subtitles in Japan."—Alfred Hitchcock
    “Observancy is a dying art. The essence of dramatic form is to let an idea come over people without it being plainly stated.”—Stanley Kubrick
    "For me, the perfect film has no dialogue at all. It's purely a visual, emotional, visceral kind of experience. And I think one can create wonderful depth and meaning and communication without using words. I started out as an illustrator and a cartoonist and caricature artist, so for me the visual is primary."—Bill Plympton
    https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
    Look at all these idiots running their mouths like they know sh*t about filmmaking. /s
    Everything you mentioned can be created with shear visual prowess. It's just that everyone wouldn't get it because like Kubrick said, Observancy is a dying art. I'm taking a guess but he probably said that after he saw the contemporary reactions to The Shining, which rather unbelievably won a Razzie award for Worst Picture.
    What you're asking for is exposition disguised as dialogue.
    (Source: http://www.the-fanboy-persp...
    1. AquaCthulhu
      September 9, 2016
      Did you even understand what all these great directors said? They're literally saying as far as films, a visual media, are concerned all that matters is the visuals. One could invoke the deepest human emotions without putting it into plain, simple words.
      The beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
      In fact, someone who doesn't know of these references would have no idea about them to find them distracting or useless.
      There are a ton of such visual cues in all of Nolan's TDK movies but nobody complained about them then because it wasn't a cool thing to do.
      1. AquaCthulhu
        September 11, 2016
        I keep hearing this a lot about BvS not having a plot. Of course I heard it first in the blog-posts that a lot of people mistaken for reviews online. It's impossible to tell if they're being literal because they proceed to say an entire batch of stupid things. The only way a BvS movie could've not had any plot is if Bats and Supes had a staring contest throughout the movie.
        Now if the complaint is that the plot wasn't very good, then there's nothing objective about that opinion. You should judge movies for what they are, not what you wished they were. You don't get to decide how any film gets made but rather assess how well.
        Ideas are typically written down? So they just need to be stated in the movie? Whatever happened to show don't tell, which Nolan violates wherever possible so it's no wonder you adore his work.
        Art is equivocal. Even if most of the film industry had turned into a big business, film-making is an art at its roots. Basically you're saying you needed to watch a mindless, popcorn flick but you got something that forced you to think to get through it? Well, that's understandable.
        Science-fiction movies weren't meant to be transcendental like 2001: A Space Odyssey and dangerously bordered on erotica for the more cerebral. BvS clearly does not adhere to any genre—and this really is your and many critics's problem—while also being a superhero film. You like to slap a label on things? Too bad.
        Do you read comic-books? They aren't just escapist, slapstick excuse for entertainment. The best of them reflect the very real society and their contemporary times in a much more accessible reading-format.
        Style-over-substance? You can try and use all of your gathered reviewer parlance you wish, all these trigger-words like soulless, heartless, boring, snooze-fest, etc. only demonstrate how opinionated these people are. They form a basis for each type of film to rest on and when that doesn't happen, they scream bloody murder. Kubrick and Tarantino have such a stylized way of direction it's almost funny.
        Oh, another one of these baseless allegations: Snyder spends more time on visuals. How do you concur? Maybe the visuals just come naturally to him once he spends most of his time on the characters and with the story? Maybe you're just judging his work-process like you've seen it in action firsthand and without information? Which would make all those who use this like it's a valid point a gung ho bunch.
        You say TDK Trilogy references were subliminal but weren't they pretty much taken straight from the comic-book pages? Would you go to the trouble of pointing out some of these subliminal references?
      2. AquaCthulhu
        September 11, 2016
        I wish you could read properly. If you could, you'd know no one asked you the meaning of subliminal. And most of your reply would be redundant.
        You couldn't even tell what you thought was subliminal about Nolan and apparently so on-the-nose about Snyder. Some people just gotta spout nonsense that's been spouted on the Internet over and over 'til conditioned, I guess.
        Anyone that doesn't just read comics to look at the pretty pictures and blindly follow the plot from point A to B would know that the heroes combat societal issues on a daily basis while tackling antagonistic elements with challenging faucets. Maybe my real life isn't so shitty and boring that I need to use Art as a means of escapism and rather as an extension of expression; but I understand a lot of people do. Whether you're a superficial skimmer of comics or not, which you've made abundantly clear, you can't deny almost all the greatest comic-books reflect the society and people's state of mind during that time. Or maybe you will.
        You do realize Metropolis is just a substitute for all the shiny cities and Gotham for all the rusty ones throughout the world, right? I mean it's the dichotomy... Never mind.
        I imagine trolls pouring themselves a glass of something-something every time they call someone a fan-boy online. Smh.
        The vast majority of these crits don't even have a degree in film studies. If you wanna sit on your butt and judge films, crits are the way to go. If you want an analysis of the said film then look towards Film Theory. Ah, I keep forgetting it's all about escapism to you. In which case you should just enjoy all the marvel movies, there'll be at least 2 or 3 every year.
        If you're referring to the theatrical cut then yes, the editing was jumpy at times and not so intuitive but that's because the studio ordered a last-minute chop-down. I hope you didn't mean the UC because editing wasn't an issue at all. But if it's the way these characters are being portrayed then it's too far a cry from anything objective, don't you think?
        I've met people like you. You just can't accept that there are slightly different ways of doing the same thing. It's exactly these people that I'm reminded of when some doofus gets elected.
        All you had to relate to Batman crossing the line is his appearance? No piece(s) of dialogue corroborated it? If only some people weren't too busy smelling their popcorn they'd know it's Superman's death (and don't just smugly jump to his death like a troll now) that proved what kind of a man Clark was. I know Batfleck says "I'm a friend of your son's" but did you stop to think he said that as a way of coping with how close he was to making this woman lose her son? "I figured. The cape?" which implies he's a hero too and it can be juxtaposed to how he says, "We're criminals, Alfred." You'll just say I'm making this up but I give Chris Terrio a bit more credit, is all.
        Citizen Kane is about one technical achievement to the next! You keep asking for plot but all of the story (I didn't use the terms interchangeably) is based on some newspaper business magnate who sued Orson... sigh. Oh, Kane has A 100% on rt so it must be great, huh?
        You said style-over-substance that falls under the same umbrella terms of opinionated critical disapproval.
      3. AquaCthulhu
        September 13, 2016
        Yeah, I only came across that word when I was 4 and looked it up in my trusty dictionary so clearly I don't know what it means.
        Superman has been predominantly depicted as a messianic figure in most of the comics. Every time there's a Superman comic from the people's perspective he's been drawn pretty much the way Snyder directs him and in fact Snyder takes a lot of it from these very comics.
        Clearly you don't understand what a reference is. There aren't a ton of references from Knightfall in TSKRises, the film adapts that storyline for the most part and it was obvious to me at the cinema even though I hadn't read it in a long time. "You are in for a show tonight, son!" is Nolan pretty much shouting that the first sub-arc—Bruce's self-imposed retirement from an altercation with the Joker and the unexpected re-emergence—is from TDKReturns. This, my friend, isn't a reference but sticking to source material. This type of argument can be used to say Chris Nolan referenced so much of the book the Prestige in his film, the Prestige. You probably need to look up what a 'reference' is and how it's different from an 'adaptation'.
        I'm an atheist and I didn't have a problem with the Jesus allegories. That's how most people would view a being like Superman. I mean what did you even like about Man of Steel if this is your problem? The Krypton opening?
        I was countering these two lines:
        I had to justify Batman murdering thugs because "he looks worn and tired". I had to justify him suddenly deciding to love Superman because "he learns Superman has a mommy"
        of yours when I talked about Superman's death, which is a grave misinterpretation of that scene. I get it: you didn't get what you went in expecting so you hate everything you saw. But of course, you'd say, if it was any good you'd have liked it. Especially if it was as good as you would've made it. You can't go to these films with your own version already formed and cocooned in your head just because you've known these characters as a kid.
        Now, Metropolis doesn't hate Superman after the Ground Zero event. They made a fricking statue for him in the center of Metropolis! It's Lex that forces and twists their views on Superman to get them to doubt him really but some people, ahem, would always overreact and start to loathe him for no real reason than what they see some people opining on the news, ahem. It wasn't hate but doubt. And it's the doubt that was erased when Superman sacrificed himself—not absolute hatred turning into complete adoration.
        And Batman doesn't really become someone he wasn't before. Robin has only died months or maybe a year ago and you could see he's grieving even during the battle of Metropolis. Harley was an accomplice in Robin's murder and she's only been in play for a couple or so years. That was the beginning of his loss of faith in humanity. And then in no time, especially since to a grieving person time just flies, he's forced to acknowledge this all-powerful being that fell out of the sky. Bruce being the paranoid contingency guy he is, is also with a fresh wound and a broken psyche. Now he has all this hate toward humanity that took away his loving parents, that took away his best partner as part of a sick joke, and he directs it at Superman, an alien. "But Batman wouldn't do such a thing!" When was the last time you've seen a Batman like this before?
        The street thugs are basically a plot-device to show how deep into the abyss Bruce has fallen—while his dreams promise him to take him into the light, a beautiful lie. Sub-consciously, Bruce wants to redeem himself. Superman didn't have to sit Batman down and tell him what's what. The moment he pulled his head out of the clouds he could see things clearly. And if anyone, Batman knows that action speaks louder than words since it's how he likes to go about as well. For the last time, it's not the fact that Superman has a mother or that her name was Martha that Batfleck spared Superman. It's the realization that he's been in the wrong all this time, that he'd misdirected his own rage towards life at another person just because that person wasn't human (but actually more humane than him). Human mind copes in all kinds of f*cked up ways and Bruce is human.
        All this could only be taken in if you treat these characters as something more than a drawing on a page or a face on a screen.
        Oh, yeah, because I've never read comic-books before. I spend a lot more than you to get them because they're not readily available around here. But sure, go ahead with your assumptions upon assumptions. I really hoped you'd be better with words than you were with visuals: You were the one that said modern, not me.
        Your words
        Is it to see heroes combat modern societal issues or is it to see them fight an interesting villain...
        My words:
        heroes combat societal issues on a daily basis...
        I think we've come a long way from when it was just teenagers that read comic-books. And the reason these other characters are successful as well is because everyone isn't a teenager trying to decide if he should date the red-head or the blonde. Personally I've never found anything relatable about Peter (but I know what the majority have to say).
        The way you summed up these characters shows how extremely polar our views are on them.
        You want to talk about the origin of comic-books but not that of films? That is some A-class hypocricy right there!
        Yes, it's been established well that you went in expecting this but you got that.
      4. AquaCthulhu
        September 13, 2016
        I don't know how to put it into words if you think the very purpose of films was to help all the sorry-assed people escape their pathetic lives awhile.
        Films should be malleable to personal interpretation. How pitiful is it that you need to look for facts in a movie? People should take away what they find, not what they're force-fed through years of stagnant conventionalism. Hey, maybe you love to wallow in monotonous movies every few months and you already have an option for that—you've had it for 12 or so years. But don't drag down these legendary characters to your level with you. It's very insulting to their rich heritage as cultural icons, you probably don't even understand what that means.
        Your annoying assumption that I don't 'actually' read comics—while demonstrating your blissful ignorance on how different people react differently to the same work—compelled me to state the lengths to which I go in acquiring comics. That's how it's relevant to the discussion and what's not relevant is if you care.
        Escapism- learn that word.
        That's too dumb a thing to say. Even for you.
        I only had to explain so much because someone couldn't comprehend what's right in front of their eyes. It's like blaming the film for your stupidity.
        You can't even find the subtext in my replies (written in plain words) so forget about grasping the visual story in the film. I tried my best to take the mule to the pond, now whether it wants to drink or just splash around is upto its own will.
        It is a good thing JL is being made to be digestible for all the creatively-handicapped cretins as well.
4. residentgrigo
  September 4, 2016
  A man without hope is staring down the suit of boy (or young man) who was inspired by Bruce and payed for it. A man now transformed by Superman´s sacrifice is looking up with pure optimism to a suit of a young man, who decided to become a superhero due to Superman (Barry´s lair is clearly a shrine to him).
  I am not reaching, i am drawing a clear cut parallel that the filmmakers achieved with 2 wordless moments and impeccable acting by Affleck.
  DKR was also the comic that originally killed Jason and that Batman was also "reborn" again by becoming a father figure to Carrie Kelley.
  http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qL6ui...
  1. residentgrigo
    September 4, 2016
    Especially as "A Lonely Place of Dying" had the same arc with his introduction to Tim or that the epilogue to Squad set up this scene too. Barry and Bruce were also introduced as best friends after his return in 2009/10. So even the core modern comics support the DCEU´s narrative decisions. Geoff Johns is involved both instances after all.
residentgrigo
September 3, 2016
That's how it starts...
http://www.adventuresinpoor...
1. AquaCthulhu
  September 4, 2016
  Ah! This is what that scene in BvS evoked! I couldn't quite put my finger on it 'til now.
Carl
September 3, 2016
Your entrance was good...his was better.
http://media.giphy.com/medi...
1. Knight Radiant
  September 3, 2016
  Much better.
2. Zoom
  September 3, 2016
  lol no not really
3. Bats2012
  September 3, 2016
  You can actually see what's going on
  1. residentgrigo
    September 4, 2016
    You actual can´t due to the hard cut. Burton´s Batman films have rather weird editing and mediocre action but i still like them. Snyder´s choreography is a noted highlight of his films, he does as much practical work as possible and all his actors are crazy trained too.
4. looks
  September 4, 2016
  like a school's stage play in comparison tbh
YOU ARE THE BEST
September 3, 2016
I love you @BatmanNewsCom:disqus !!!
IamTheOneWhoKnocks
September 3, 2016
By the way...Suicide Squad is expected to surpass MOS this weekend in the box office....this movie has had some serious legs! Safe to say it might have passed BvS as well if it opened in China.
1. residentgrigo
  September 4, 2016
  I don´t think that a random property C list comic adaptation (A list to me) could make 150+ mil. in China but they sure loved Ant-man. Still "only" 105 mil. AoU though made 240 mil. It´s the current record holder.
  1. IamTheOneWhoKnocks
    September 4, 2016
    Don't know exactly why, but this movie to me feels like it would have done great in China. I think is the esthetics, Chinese people love that kind of art.
    1. residentgrigo
      September 4, 2016
      The colors were very Wushu, i guess. (I am a Hong Kong film fan.):
      https://media.giphy.com/med...
Shubham Bhattacharya
September 4, 2016
The Batman Fan made teaser !
https://youtu.be/4HFJc-wt3PI
Bob Harris
September 4, 2016
Does this site have a forum?
1. Carver
  September 4, 2016
  Yessir.
  http://batman-news.com/cate...
Schuyler Finley
September 4, 2016
Seriously, dude. It's too early in the morning for this crap.
1. Schuyler Finley
  September 4, 2016
  Because I wanted to see new comments. And I was bit cranky earlier because my cousin wouldn't let me go back to sleep.
2. residentgrigo
  September 4, 2016
  Not in my timezone but i do have a headache.
  http://www.the-isb.com/imag...
  1. Schuyler Finley
    September 4, 2016
    It was 8:30 in my area.
residentgrigo
September 4, 2016
This fan concept is pretty close to the 90s comics (but the beard is very Future´s End and L&C 2015):
https://www.instagram.com/p...
1. Kriss_Kringle
  September 4, 2016
  Man,that looks cheesy as hell.I really hope they're not making the suit black just for a nod to the comics.There's really no sense for something like that.
  1. residentgrigo
    September 4, 2016
    The black suits is confirmed and Zack will have zero problem going full bible with the look.
    Reborn comic Clark used guns at the very start, as his powers only gradually returned, so let´s see about that and the bestselling Superman story of all time deserves to be porperly adapted. I waited for 20 years after all. (The 2007 toon film is a mess btw.)
    Our version of The Reign of the Superman will now be the last act, as it will need to come after his resurrection. The DCEU Flash is clearly inspired by him though, so there is that.
    http://www.warnerbros.com/s...
    1. Kriss_Kringle
      September 4, 2016
      I don't know if it's confirmed.He said it when the bloggers where invited on set,but more or less jokingly.He'll probably have longer hair and even though Henry posted that black piece of suit online,I've seen photos of him from the set of the JL film and he wore the regular blue one,so I'm not quite sure what to make of it.
      Not very fond of Flash's costume either,to be honest.The grey areas aren't to my liking and the arrow shaped crotch plate basically looks like it's pointing to his dick.The back of the helmet is a big prolonged,which reminds me of Green Goblin's suit from the first Spider-man film and a xenomorph.
      I hope it's a prototype and not something we'll see a lot of.
      1. residentgrigo
        September 4, 2016
        Barry´s suit is a confirmed prototype, but he can keep it for all i care, as it looks liked an improved suit from DCU Online and Injustice. The Knightmare design will have to come into play too, as that scene was taken out of JLA by Snyder himself.
      2. Kriss_Kringle
        September 4, 2016
        I posted the Instagram photos on a forum,but now when I checked for the link,they were deleted by Henry or whoever uploaded them in the first place.They were of him taking photos with two kids and there was a green screen in the background.He had the classic S curl and lots of product on his hair.
        I'm not entirely sure it was from the set of JL or an older one from BvS.Might be the latter,though.
Carver
September 4, 2016
All of what you said your opinion, and you're welcome to it. But you can't present it as fact because it's not fact just like me saying, "it's the greatest movie ever created" isn't fact. Explosions may not excite you, but someone else may have enjoyed it very much. You may not care for the Batman presented, but I know I can speak for many others like myself who loved him and thought he was the best Batman to date. Again, neither of us is right or wrong, but you can't act like your opinion is the only option. Opinion isn't fact.
1. Carver
  September 4, 2016
  Well I again have to disagree with you my friend. Logic and reasoning in and of themselves are not fact. Logic and reasoning are simply roads by which someone draws a plausible conclusion. I read all you said, and because you were logical in the things you've argued against, I cannot say that your opinion isn't reasonable. However you cannot say that what you've argued is fact. Fact by definition is, "indisputable". Because there is dispute and so many people have logically and reasonably reached a different conclusion, neither views are factual. They're both simply opinion based.
  1. Carver
    September 4, 2016
    What is an example of a fact that is not true?
    1. Carver
      September 5, 2016
      How then does fact not being equal to truth apply to movies?
      1. Carver
        September 5, 2016
        I'll agree to those facts. There were cuts that shouldn't have been made, it hasn't been well received, etc. The things I'm talking about are the subjective parts of the film. For example, was I entertained and did I enjoy it regardless of the cuts and what critics and other movie-goers? Well then yes I did. I can't and won't deny there are things that are at the very least questionable. But overall you can't say that I should not have enjoyed the movie because of the bad. That's what makes us different, I'm sure there are films out there you adore that I may not be a fan of, but that doesn't make you wrong for liking it or me wrong for disliking it.
residentgrigo
September 4, 2016
Squad just broke 673 mil, so it is guaranteed to reach the 700 mil. milestone too. Well done Mr. Ayer. Your film + Rebirth also lead to crazy numbers for the Squad and Harley comic reboots, slow clap.
The average gross of a DCEU is now also only 40 mil. below the MCU gross. It´s a genuine race now and the importance of outside the box movies again proved real.
http://www.boxofficemojo.co...
http://www.boxofficemojo.co...
(WW will have strong competition during the release, as MoS once did. Let´s see about that.)
1. krampe1995
  September 5, 2016
  iam actually kinda shocked that the movie makes so much money. i didnt like it all tbh
Alexander B Perkins
September 4, 2016
Does anyone know whether or not Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner are still together? I'm thinking they could work it into Batman's story line where Bruce and Selina (played by Jennifer Garner) were married and had kids together. Selina retired the mantle of Catwoman, and she wanted Bruce to retire as Batman. When he didn't, she filed for divorce, taking their daughter, Helena, and son Damien with her. This could be part of the reason he became bitter and more violent. It could also turn out that he had another son from a previous relationship that he never knew about, a son named Terry. This could set up a future in the DCEU where Helena Wayne becomes Huntress, Damien takes on the role of Robin, and Terry follows his father's shoes as Batman.
1. Bruce Wayne
  September 6, 2016
  Sounds like a terrible soap opera.
  1. Alexander B Perkins
    September 7, 2016
    Do you have any ideas? Casting, plots, which rogues should be used, how to make the DCEU interesting to a much wider audience?
royal emperor
September 5, 2016
somehow i love everything about BvS (concept art, the gorgeous hi res images, the batmobile etc )except for the movie.. the irony :D