Batman vs. Superman: Fans won't influence film

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   
That's the spirit! Fight for that creative ability! Yes indeed... Just say NO to stupid things like what generations of fans may like. After all, this guy has Man of Steel and Dark Knight to his credit. He knows what an audience loves better than they do!


LONDON (AP) — Super heroes don't bow to fan pressure — that's according to screenwriter David S. Goyer, who is co-writing the new "Batman vs. Superman" movie.

He's currently working on the script for the upcoming comic book character showdown with director Zach Snyder.

Goyer says "if I try to think about 'well, what would the fans like...?' then you stop being creative."
Source

....and they actually wonder why sales for tickets are way down and attendance to movies has gone badly for years? This is a mystery? They openly state what we want or care about is of no concern to them...and they have to ask why we give THEM no concern in return?

Batman vs. Superman? How about Logic vs. Arrogance. There won't be a Superhero showdown if the second one carried the day. Fans don't *WANT* to see two Superheros they grew up with, trying to kill EACH OTHER. Is anything even remotely sacred anymore or is destroying everything of any meaning from the past simply the point at all costs?

How about entirely new movies rather than part xxxx of old ones? I'm not sure Hollywood would know a new and novel idea if it was handed to them with a bow around it.




posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:23 AM
link   
If it is anything like the latest Superman/Jesus movie I will not be watching.
I did enjoy the comic books where they had a rumble though, can't remember what it was called but I will go for batman v superman
.
But I always thought it silly..Superman could kill Batman in a second.
edit on 26-9-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


Well, yes, there is that too. Whatever fancy or goofy tricks they play..for movie lore, it still comes down to a real simple fact. Superman is..well... Super. Batman is a mortal man dressed up in a really cool costume of body armor. Super beats Armor every time...unless kryptonite comes off the 'ol bat belt. Then I guess it might be half way even for a short time.

That's a one trick pony though (And it's Super-Pissed after that)...as Lex Luthor learned a couple times,...lol



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
I'd rather see Batman vs Predator.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:35 AM
link   
I read a few days ago how Marvel succeeded where DC is still trying to learn to get up and walk, about their movies...

I'm glad I"m a Marvel fan and not a DC one... hehe

They can creatively sink that movie...



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   

boymonkey74
Superman could kill Batman in a second.
edit on 26-9-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)


You are SO wrong!!! Supes doesn't kill!!!


Oh, wait... Now he does...



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000
How about entirely new movies rather than part xxxx of old ones? I'm not sure Hollywood would know a new and novel idea if it was handed to them with a bow around it.


Original scripts scare them, often because they aren't politically correct or send the opposite message of what the financial backers want sent.

I'm also sick of seeing these mega-stars in every other flick. That's what breaks the bank in many cases as they're so damned expensive.

I want to see some new faces. They work harder and are cheaper as well.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   
This..




posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


plot one - batman gets kryptonite = short movie

plot two - batman doesn't get kryptonite = even shorter movie



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


I'd have to agree on the mega-stars too. One of the more attractive things about Terminator 2 was the use of a kid right off the street with minimal acting help before filming. That gave it the look of being authentic the over-done super-stars lost the ability to match a long time ago.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Your getting old wrabbit. The superman vs batman thing has been done in comics more than a few ways. Supermans death just as many too. I don't care honestly I liked Marvel better anyway.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


In the old cartoons, batman always had kryptonite on him at all times. Just incase superman needed a backhand to the mouth.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000
They openly state what we want or care about is of no concern to them...and they have to ask why we give THEM no concern in return?

I'm actually going to defend Zack Snyder on this one.

Many film makers spend years to decades doing a lot of things they don't want before ever getting anything close to what they want. Sam Rami almost had his career ruined early on because of studio involvement, and Rami's run on the Spiderman franchise was likely ended by back lot politics, it certainly suffered in quality.

Studios pay a pile attention to what audiences 'want' and that's why they make the decisions they do. Script pitches are worded as ... 'a high concept coming of age disney story crossed with Die Hard' for a reason, because they're driven by audience sales. You almost don't see a script sale that can't be related to something that has done well.

Audiences are to blame for the lack of new comers and originality in the industry, because they won't go and see a film without it starring Angelina Jolie, co-starring Al Pacino, and being directed by a fireball artist on a streak. That's why a very small group of people in big films make all the money because they're literally a brand.

When Hollywood doesn't go high concept they get punished. Look up the ticket sales of films such as Memento and Fight Club and compare them to some of the highest grossing films of all time. Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull is in the top 50, Independence Day is up there, Fast & The Furious 6 ... Feel like taking rat poison yet?

Whilst I think investors over rate the value of bankable talent, and I don't believe tickets sold equate to quality, audiences are the ones training Hollywood not the other way around. Audiences don't support intelligent original films (low concept) so Hollywood doesn't make those films.

I think Zack Snyder is probably making a mistake and perhaps Goyer too, but its been earned after two long successful careers ushering in a new explosive era of cinema.

Okay I done. *Breathes*



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Pinke
 


I'd disagree entirely with the idea that new ideas can't go anywhere or that risky films by Hollywood's standards can do very well. Ask Mel Gibson about how going off your own direction and laughing at convention works out. In fact, his raging success with Passion of the Christ is #8 for most profitable films of all time. That was even an extreme Christian movie. A double whammy and one I understand he was told he was insane to attempt before it became an all time record breaker.

Not a single movie in the top 15 is a sequel and while a few are made from very well known books? I don't immediately see a remake from an old one either ...though I'm no expert to say none couldn't have an older version I never heard of.

15 highest profit films to date

6 of the top 15 all time movies were sequels making under half for what has worked the best in movie history.

Perhaps original ideas have some room left to go. I can say I haven't been to a theater but a couple times in several years for lack of anything worth what I'd pay that money for. Redbox? perhaps... Theater? Not for this junk.

They can write movies for each other or they can write movies for the audiences. They seem to be choosing each other. Whatever... it goes with the award shows they have for each other that fewer and fewer people are bothering to watch, too.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I'm wondering when the wack-a-doodle writers over at SYFY are going to get a chance at the big screen. Sharknado 2: It's Hammerhead Time. (in 3D)
edit on 26-9-2013 by TDawgRex because: spelling



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I love Superheroes and Superhero movies but in the past year I have gone to see ZERO in the theater. I have not been to one since the Avengers. I will wait till they are on demand or whatever media they decide to change to!

Marvel was right to gather their characters back up and under one license, DC should do the same and stick to the history or at least stay true to what has been written!



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


How the hell is he being creative, did I miss the part where he went back in time and invented both Batman and Superman and erased every comic they've ever been in? What a chump.


Fanbois should boycott the film.

I wouldn't have paid to see this movie either way.

Yet we all know droves will go see whatever crap they roll out next.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Pinke
 


I'd disagree entirely with the idea that new ideas can't go anywhere or that risky films by Hollywood's standards can do very well. Ask Mel Gibson about how going off your own direction and laughing at convention works out. In fact, his raging success with Passion of the Christ is #8 for most profitable films of all time. That was even an extreme Christian movie. A double whammy and one I understand he was told he was insane to attempt before it became an all time record breaker.

Not a single movie in the top 15 is a sequel and while a few are made from very well known books? I don't immediately see a remake from an old one either ...though I'm no expert to say none couldn't have an older version I never heard of.

15 highest profit films to date

6 of the top 15 all time movies were sequels making under half for what has worked the best in movie history.

Perhaps original ideas have some room left to go. I can say I haven't been to a theater but a couple times in several years for lack of anything worth what I'd pay that money for. Redbox? perhaps... Theater? Not for this junk.

They can write movies for each other or they can write movies for the audiences. They seem to be choosing each other. Whatever... it goes with the award shows they have for each other that fewer and fewer people are bothering to watch, too.


Gibson also made the little heard of but incredible "Apocalypto". No one went to see it because Rob Schneider took out a page in the NY Times to complain about the ethnocentrism of "Passion" and how it accurately portrayed the JEWISH people yelled for Christ's death. Pilate washed his hands of it. I consider Pilate to be one of the most unfortunate characters of the NT. It seemed he really didn't want to kill Jesus. But since he upset the high priests who had quite a racket going with selling sacrificial animals for way over market value...Pilate didn't want the riot that came in 69-70. Hell, it was bad enough to be governor over a prefecture that would be like watching over snake handlers in West Virginia with all of the landscape looking like western Kansas...when you could be hanging in Rome with all the orgies and good food and all...

Back on topic:


The Dark Knight Returns-
Frank Miller.

Whoever has not read it. Do so. Then feel free to comment. It's over 25 years old. And yeah...Batman kicked Clark's ass...



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Unless my timeline is way off didn't Superman give Batman a Kryptonite ring "just in case?" Even if not there is no way the Bat would confront Supe's w/o it, would be an instant death sentence.

How about "Batman vs Brainiac" (the super smart green guy from the year 3000.) Then Superman could swoop in and save the Bat.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by the owlbear
 

Apoco-what? lol... Yeah, I missed that one too. I also wasn't one of his fans on Christ. If I wanted to watch 2+ hours of flogging and torture mixed with total boredom in foreign languages? I'd tune in to coverage from the UN General Assembly floor. At least that's timely....but one can't argue the success of it.

Then he also made We Were Soldiers and Braveheart. I'd consider them both defining movies for their selected topics. A couple Vietnam vets, including my Father, mentioned back when it came out that it was as close as they'd seen to the real thing on screen. That is his success I think. Good old fashioned hard work to make the film accurate to the topic by research and caring to get it right.

If more Hollywood studios focused on that and less on retreads of what they figure will work just because the last one did...or a couple back, in some cases, ...they may have a much better time in box office take.




top topics
 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join