'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Apologist Puncher Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:51 pm

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/01/17/batman-vs-superman-delayed-10-months-will-be-released-on-may-6-2016/

Batman Vs Superman Delayed 10 Months, Will Be Released on May 6, 2016 – Head To Head With A Marvel Movie
Posted on January 17, 2014 by Linda Ge

Does this have anything to do with those Ben Affleck injury rumors? Warner Bros announced today that Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel follow-up, the Batman-Superman (-Wonder Woman, and more) film, has been delayed 10 months.

It was originally supposed to be released on July 17, 2015, but will now come out on May 6, 2016.

Here’s the official statement:

We are happy to take advantage of these coveted summer dates, which are perfect for two of our biggest tentpole releases. We share the fans’ excitement to see DC Comics’ most popular figures, Superman and Batman, together on the big screen for the first time, which will now be arriving in theatres in May 2016.
Marvel has also staked out the Mary 6, 2016 date for an as yet unannounced film, so are we about to be in for a head-to-head showdown between the two rivals? They might move it, but it’s a date they’ve owned since Iron Man. Looks like DC’s just thrown down the gauntlet.

Meanwhile, Joe Wright’s Peter Pan prequel is moving into Batman-Superman’s vacated July 17, 2015 date.

I don't think this is such a good idea....

thecolorsblend Fri Jan 17, 2014 11:08 pm

July 2016 seems like a better window right now, especially since WB's had good fortune in releasing DC movies at that time.

non_amos Fri Jan 17, 2014 11:15 pm

But it's still going up against a Marvel film! Is that really good?

Comicbookfan-V2 Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:32 am

Well after the news involving Affleck's leg injury many assume that was the reason why the film's production/filming is being delayed for the next 10 months yet some folks already suggesting that he should be recast considering that they're still putting some heat on Affleck for playing Batman.

But if you ask me if this is somehow a MOS sequel then they should live up to the idea and make a well, "Man of Steel 2" film with only Superman and you know, without Batman. If they want a "Batman vs. Superman" how about reintroducing Bats first in a solo film and if they went to bring on Wonder Woman and other heroes it's very simple... Introduce them in solo films and then we can talk "Justice League"! Now with BvS or MOS2 (Whatever their calling it) being push back to 2016 this is the studio's opportunity to build things up and not rushing things up to speed, in other words... Do like Marvel did with their "Avengers" setup. And speaking of which, now that they don't have to worry about competing against the next "Avengers" installment I hope that the studio will finally get on the ball and get their heads in the game.

That shouldn't be so hard is it?

thecolorsblend Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:05 am

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:If they want a "Batman vs. Superman" how about reintroducing Bats first in a solo film and if they went to bring on Wonder Woman and other heroes it's very simple... Introduce them in solo films and then we can talk "Justice League"!

Counteroffer: How about you go fuck yourself? I'm sick of that line of "thinking". You and your buddies always have fucked up every major attempt for a Superman/Batman team-up movie of some description since 1996. On each occasion, WB caved. A Superman/Batman team-up movie, the only team-up movie I EVER gave a fuck about, was always delayed.

So no, the excuses end now. I've waited over half my life for this team-up and I haven't gotten it because of you brats. Fact is you and your douchenozzle buddies don't want team-up films. Your retarded excuses have been weighed, weighed in the balance of found pathetically wanting. You don't want it. Stop with the bullshit excuses.

You and your ilk have caused enough damage. Now shut the fuck up and let the adults talk.

Comicbookfan-V2 Sat Jan 18, 2014 10:51 am

Dude, what is your deal? I mean seriously!!! You didn't think I wanted to see a "World's Finest" movie as the next guy? Whatever happen to introductions first then conjoin later? It's better to have a film with characters that we know about and their history rather than a film with characters that we don't know about or their history except maybe from a comic book stand point which BTW doesn't count.

So quit bitchin!!! Rolling Eyes

thecolorsblend Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:14 pm

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Dude, what is your deal? I mean seriously!!! You didn't think I wanted to see a "World's Finest" movie as the next guy?

No, actually. I don't.

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Whatever happen to introductions first then conjoin later?

It never gets delivered upon. There's always some bullshit reason to do it later.

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:It's better to have a film with characters that we know about and their history rather than a film with characters that we don't know about or their history except maybe from a comic book stand point which BTW doesn't count.

So quit bitchin!!!

A reboot of Batman is redundant at this point. Audiences already have a pretty good idea of where he's coming from thanks to Nolan. Superman was the one who needed the reintroduction. And thanks to Zack Snyder, he's finally gotten one. Superman's in the public eye now like he hasn't been in decades. Now's the time. Team 'em up.

Plus, WB's approach conveniently bypasses comparisons to how Marvel has done it. It's the right move for WB to take. Individual franchises would cost a fortune, take forever and have a 50/50 chance of profit. This allows them to build the CDCU around Superman, as they should, without wasting time and money. If you've got a problem with this, it's because deep down inside you don't want DC team-ups. Simple as that.

non_amos Sat Jan 18, 2014 8:55 pm

non_amos wrote:

But it's still going up against a Marvel film! Is that really good?

I think I commented on that quickly because I was in a hurry to get to work. Anyway, the Marvel film set for the same date is as yet, an 'untitled Marvel film'. So we don't even know who it's about! Now, if it's something like the proposed Dr. Strange then Superman/Batman will be safe. But if Marvel Studios throws us a curve ball & it's IRON MAN 4 then we have a problem! So far it's not known if there even will be an IM4. But when you think about it, it's been too much of a cash-cow for Marvel for them to just let go of it.

I'd be fine if it's a HULK solo film with Mark Ruffalo. I mean, Marvel finally got the Hulk PERFECT. Now they just want him to be a supporting character in Avengers?! Yet they're coming out with Guardians & Antman? And put the Hulk on the back burner?! Are you freakin' kidding me?!

Now, if it were Hulk on the same day as Supes & Bats, I could deal with that. Supes/Bats would probably win the box office but I'm sure Hulk would do well too. Why would I like this? Well, obviously I'm a big Hulk fan but Superman too so it'd be like having your cake & eating it too, the best of both worlds! And they'd certainly get my hard-earned dollars!

But knowing Marvel it's probably some obscure character. But I wonder. Question

Comicbookfan-V2 Sun Jan 19, 2014 1:35 am

thecolorsblend wrote:
A reboot of Batman is redundant at this point. Audiences already have a pretty good idea of where he's coming from thanks to Nolan. Superman was the one who needed the reintroduction. And thanks to Zack Snyder, he's finally gotten one. Superman's in the public eye now like he hasn't been in decades. Now's the time. Team 'em up.

Be that as it may, but somewhere around the line I assuming that the Batman where getting in this film is not the same one we saw in "The Dark Knight Trilogy" although I personally wish it where so! But since this is going to be a different Batman that exist outside the Nolan films then he must have a different background yet slightly similar to how it was dispatched in "Batman Begins".

Plus, WB's approach conveniently bypasses comparisons to how Marvel has done it. It's the right move for WB to take. Individual franchises would cost a fortune, take forever and have a 50/50 chance of profit. This allows them to build the CDCU around Superman, as they should, without wasting time and money. If you've got a problem with this, it's because deep down inside you don't want DC team-ups. Simple as that.

Am, last time I checked the WB studio has been in business for like 75 years or so and they spent money on making movies as well as gaining it back from the those films due to box office gross. Even if doing DC based solo films will cost them a fortune I doubt they'll go bankrupt overnight, not if they gain those amounts back from box office grosses. Hell, even "Green Lantern" earn back what was spent to produce it despite of it's under-performance at the box office.

Also, I don't see taking a page book from Marvel is considered copycatting/ripping off, now if WB/DC Entertainment produce films based on characters that are similar to the ones from Marvel then we can talk about ripping off someone else's idea along with the possibility of copyright infringements.

thecolorsblend Sun Jan 19, 2014 2:46 am

Fuck's sake, so this is what we've come to. Okay...

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Be that as it may, but somewhere around the line I assuming that the Batman where getting in this film is not the same one we saw in "The Dark Knight Trilogy" although I personally wish it where so! But since this is going to be a different Batman that exist outside the Nolan films then he must have a different background yet slightly similar to how it was dispatched in "Batman Begins".

It probably isn't different enough to justify a brand new origin story. That would be at least $150 million and two years down the tubes to tell a story that most people are already pretty well conversant with.

Let's say the last Batman movie came out in 1987 and a WB set up a new one to come out in 2006. That's the picture perfect scenario where you want to retell the origin story. I'm sure we can all think of a superhero who probably could've used a Snyder/Cavill reboot back in 2006 if we tried real hard.

But that's the scenario we're looking at. TDKRises came out less than three years ago. It's pretty fresh in peoples' minds. The costs and expenses you'd go throw are a risk in and of themselves. But the fact that it's for a character that most people already know plenty about means it's a waste of time. Period, end of discussion.

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Am, last time I checked the WB studio has been in business for like 75 years or so and they spent money on making movies as well as gaining it back from the those films due to box office gross.

That doesn't make pissing nine figures down a rate hole a good idea or a worthwhile investment.

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Even if doing DC based solo films will cost them a fortune I doubt they'll go bankrupt overnight, not if they gain those amounts back from box office grosses. Hell, even "Green Lantern" earn back what was spent to produce it despite of it's under-performance at the box office.

It's probably not a wise idea to bring up GL in this discussion. It cost $200 million to make that thing. The worldwide gross was $221 million. That's a flop. Money was lost with Green Lantern. What, you think WB gets to keep everything north of $200 million and one cent? Think again. There are marketing budgets, distribution costs, probably financial partners and other shit. And this is not to speak of what the exhibitors get. Bottom line? GL fucking TANKED it at the box office. ANY movie studio can only take so many losses of that caliber no matter how long they've been in business.

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Also, I don't see taking a page book from Marvel is considered copycatting/ripping off,

Frankly, I don't either. But plenty of people are bitching and complaining about the notion of Batman and Superman teaming up for a film because "Marvel did it first". And I notice you and your whiny fanboy mafia have been pretty fucking quiet about your role in that. But anyway, the comparisons are undesirable enough as it is. You think WB flacks WANT the talking heads on Entertainment Tonight to say shit like "And like Marvel has done before them, Warner Bros are FINALLY starting to experiment with superhero team-up films"? I guaranfuckingtee you they DON'T. If they develop a bunch of expensive and time-consuming individual bullshit franchises just to pacify you and the other jackoff whiners, the media narrative WILL BE that WB is copying Marvel. In fact, that's probably inevitable anyway but the World's Finest approach allows them to bring SOME originality to the table while also honoring a comic book legacy. There's legitimacy to the approach WB is taking. If they just copy whatever Marvel's doing, they're SUNK as far as establishing their own narrative when it comes time to promote the movie.

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:now if WB/DC Entertainment produce films based on characters that are similar to the ones from Marvel then we can talk about ripping off someone else's idea along with the possibility of copyright infringements.

'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016 600ef910

thecolorsblend Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:11 am

thecolorsblend wrote:
Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:Also, I don't see taking a page book from Marvel is considered copycatting/ripping off,
Frankly, I don't either. But plenty of people are bitching and complaining about the notion of Batman and Superman teaming up for a film because "Marvel did it first". And I notice you and your whiny fanboy mafia have been pretty fucking quiet about your role in that. But anyway, the comparisons are undesirable enough as it is. You think WB flacks WANT the talking heads on Entertainment Tonight to say shit like "And like Marvel has done before them, Warner Bros are FINALLY starting to experiment with superhero team-up films"? I guaranfuckingtee you they DON'T. If they develop a bunch of expensive and time-consuming individual bullshit franchises just to pacify you and the other jackoff whiners, the media narrative WILL BE that WB is copying Marvel. In fact, that's probably inevitable anyway but the World's Finest approach allows them to bring SOME originality to the table while also honoring a comic book legacy. There's legitimacy to the approach WB is taking. If they just copy whatever Marvel's doing, they're SUNK as far as establishing their own narrative when it comes time to promote the movie.

Fuck it, I'm coming back to this. Everything I'm about to say proceeds from the assumption that MOS II will predominantly be a Batman and Superman team-up film. Other characters may have cameos or whatever but it's Superman and Batman's film.

Assuming the above holds true, I'm going to put my ego on the line here and make a prediction. MARK MY WORDS. When the hype machine for MOS II finally gets underway (and probably even long before that), the marketing department will mount a full court press centered around Superman and Batman as legacy characters with a long, rich, established history of teaming up together in comics and thus the unprecedented historical value of teaming them up in feature film.

The implication will be ever so delicately put forth by Snyder, Goyer, Cavill, Affleck and probably others that the Avengers had their little movie and that's cute but the Avengers will never be able to match Batman and Superman, both as individual icons and as longtime historical associates.

No comparison. Ever.

Something this cool, this historic, this unprecedented, this new DESERVES A MOVIE UNTO ITSELF. Shit, we even got a couple of other superheroes to swing by and pay homage to, let's skip the bullshit and call 'em what they are, THE WORLD'S FINEST.

That's my prediction. If I were a betting man, I'd tell you to lay money on WB hyping the historical input of all this, the epically unprecedented epic of unprecedented epicness of these two epic characters teaming up and using that as the MOS II's calling card. "Together again for the first time EVER" and shit like that.

MARK MY WORDS.

Rduce Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:10 am

Depending on which rumor you wish to believe, clearly Ben was walking around at the SAG Awards, I feel this has been done to SLOW things down. They were too much in a hurry to get another movie out there and they just need to take a long deep breath and figure what they really are doing. Superman was being pushed into the background with all this talk of other heros being considered. It makes one wonder however, how they were going to explain why none of these heros showed up when Zod and his minions were trying to destroy the Earth, but that is to be seen.

So, slowing things down, getting "their vision set" and taking the time to polish the story is a good thing, specially if this film is going to open the door to a JLA movie.

I take no stock in any other rumor other than they just want to get it right.

Apologist Puncher Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:16 pm

Not buying any of it:

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=93171

EXCLUSIVE: BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN Update; Plus WB's Plan To Best Marvel

My source, has provided me with some new information regarding Zack Snyder’s untitled Superman/Batman film. Hit the jump to find out which actor is playing Lex Luthor, the extent of Ben Affleck's injury, and WB's plans to establish their own calling cards.
By nailbiter111 - 1/19/2014

Let's deal with Joaquin Phoenix first. Two days ago, in Variety's article regarding Batman Vs. Superman being pushed back 10 months they reported that the main villain role, "is still in Joaquin Phoenix’s court." This is twice that Variety has mentioned Phoenix for the part, yet they haven't revealed who the main villain is. Well, my source, General Napier, has informed me that Phoenix is "very close" to taking the role, and that the main villain is Lex Luthor. So, put two and two together and you have Joaquin Phoenix as Lex Luthor.

Here's a small tidbit about the Man of Steel. General Napier tells me, Henry Cavill will be sporting a new haircut in Zack Snyder’s untitled Superman/Batman film. His Kryptonian locks will be getting a trim. The shorter 'do will resemble Superman's look in Alex Ross and Mark Waid's Kingdom Come, minus the grey hair. An image of Kingdom Come Superman is in the banner image above. Oh, and that hairdo includes Superman's trademark "S" curl, which was absent in the first film.

[Hosted by imgur.com] As for Ben Affleck's rumored rib injury, which was first reported by Batman News. Even though Ben was seen last night at the 20th annual Screen Actors Guild Awards walking around just fine, General Napier has heard that Ben Affleck suffered a musculature injury. Supposedly the injury isn't too severe. He's expected to be back at full-health sometime in April. At the moment, he supposedly can't perform certain movements for the fight sequences, and a stunt double will be used. My source wanted me to stress, Affleck's injury is NOT the reason for the film's delay, and even speculated that this information could be circulating Warner Bros. as a diversion from the behind-the-scenes issues.

The reason for the delay is multifaceted. While I'm not at liberty to discuss most of those issues at this time, I can tell you that one issue is budgetary. There's a concern regarding Wonder Woman's home, Paradise Island (aka Themyscira). Executives are debating whether to feature the island, which would require massive VFX, or merely referencing it.

Last week, Mario-Francisco Robles of Latino Review reported that "Batman vs Superman and Justice League are going to be shot back-to-back." He also said, Batman vs Superman would end with an "insane cliffhanger/teaser that leads right into Justice League. I'm told by General Napier that shooting Batman Vs. Superman and Justice League back-to-back is being considered but no official decision has been made at this time. But, I was also contacted by another source, who requested anonymity, and he told me Justice League is a go, and will be released one year after Batman Vs. Superman.

As for the cliffhanger rumor? General Napier, tells me that's very much true. Cliffhangers, will actually be one key component in WB's master plan to dethrone Marvel Studios. WB realizes that Marvel films are famous for their mid- and post-credits scenes, and have no interest in copying from Marvel's playbook. WB's plan, is to end each of their films with a cliffhanger, setting up the next film in their cinematic universe. WB also wants to do short films for their lesser known characters. These short films would be played at the end of each film. That's a pretty interesting way of taking on Marvel's trademark post-credits scenes.

I'm told by my source, that the marketing campaign for Batman Vs. Superman will still be starting up this year. Photo releases can be expected in the coming months and a viral site will be launched with a "choose your side" angle. That's about it. In the near future, be on the lookout for official casting news pertaining Joaquin Phoenix, Jason Momoa (despite his denials) and Josh Holloway.

Apologist Puncher Wed Aug 06, 2014 5:57 pm

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=105439

Someone was going to have to move, and as it turns out, it will be Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. Captain America: The Winter Soldier earned over $700 million at the worldwide box office earlier this year, and the fact that it's coming off the back of Avengers: Age of Ultron could propel Cap's third outing to the $1 billion mark. While the appeal of a movie starring both the Caped Crusader and Man of Steel (not to mention Wonder Woman) is undeniable, it would have not been smart for Batman V Superman to battle it out with Captain America 3 on May 6th, 2016. Ultimately, you have to imagine that both releases would have suffered and performed nowhere near as well as they deserved to. Instead, it has now moved to March 25th, 2016, meaning we get it around six weeks sooner than expected. I'm not sure about you guys, but I think I'd call that a win/win for everyone. Oh, and yes, Batman V Superman will indeed be released in 3D as expected!

thecolorsblend Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:12 pm

Marvel fans are starting to become about as aggravating as Batman fans. Surely you've all seen the end zone dances over this, right?

Apologist Puncher Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:23 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:Marvel fans are starting to become about as aggravating as Batman fans. Surely you've all seen the end zone dances over this, right?

Pettiness on the interwebs??

Color me shocked....

But really, who gives a fuck? I knew one was going to move, and the Bros. Warner moving it up makes more sense. Give it a head start and let it make as much $$ as they can. Hell, wouldn't it be something if it was #1 all the way up to 'Cap 3'?

Something a film hasn't done for 6 straight weeks since 'Avatard', I believe.

thecolorsblend Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:53 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:
thecolorsblend wrote:Marvel fans are starting to become about as aggravating as Batman fans. Surely you've all seen the end zone dances over this, right?

Pettiness on the interwebs??

Color me shocked....

But really, who gives a fuck? I knew one was going to move, and the Bros. Warner moving it up makes more sense. Give it a head start and let it make as much $$ as they can. Hell, wouldn't it be something if it was #1 all the way up to 'Cap 3'?

Something a film hasn't done for 6 straight weeks since 'Avatard', I believe.

I s'pose. I guess I was hoping BvS would take the wind out of Cap's sails. Kind of irritating though because, um, wasn't WB there first?

Still, it makes longterm strategic sense. Assuming that nine movie cycle is real, WB's finally got a game plan together. Two movies per summer beginning in 2017 is pretty damn ambitious.

non_amos Thu Aug 07, 2014 1:28 am

I found this out over at Singer Homo Hype on my phone at work today. And yes, I too am getting really pissed off by all the gloating by Marvel apologists!

Look, Winter Soldier was good, really good, I'll give you that. The next installment will probably be equally as awesome. But whether Cap is good & whether I like it or not is really not even the issue.

My issue is with how so-called 'fans', who should be rejoicing that not only did we get a top-notch Superman film last year but now we're getting freaking Superman and Batman! Not to mention Wonder Woman & the other 'shared universe' characters that will be making appearances. But are they rejoicing? Some might be but when I read their comments sections it's overwhelmingly "Superman is inferior to Captain America", "Cap would've destroyed it at the box office", ad nauseum. So most of these morons actually want this film to fail, Cap or not!

I'm quite frankly tired of Henry Cavill being criticized as not being Superman, yada yada yada! How we didn't get a real Superman film, more ad nauseum!

Let me see here. What exactly is a Superman film to these imbeciles? Well, it's either Donnerverse immortalized or what Bryan Singer tried to give them, SINGERMAN PACKS. But think about it. The Superman film franchise was in development hell for almost 20 years! We finally get a film that was so wrong that it not only divided the fanbase but caused us to have to wait several more years for a proper reboot!

So Zack Snyder came along & tried to give us what he felt fans really wanted, a film where Superman actually PUNCHES someone! But what is fanboy aftermath? Forever harping on the killing issue but besides that, many of them felt like MOS truly sucked!

But fast-forward to now. BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN attempted to get off the ground years ago! It didn't. An homage was even paid to it in I AM LEGEND. So what's my point? Forget Marvel vs. DC for the moment. You'd think that FANS IN GENERAL would want to support this! A lifelong dream come true!

But instead we get continual incessant whining from 'fanboys' about everything from Ben Affleck to everything else which, if you read their comments, they want this project to arrive D.O.A!

And I for the life of me can't understand why they can't just be grateful?! Proud

thecolorsblend Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:21 pm

I'm right there with you. And I'd like to think we're pretty even-handed around here. The entire basis for the Realist movement was that we're intellectually honest with this sort of stuff. If MOS was egregiously bad or Cavill didn't cut it as Superman, we would've been the first to say so. Under the circumstances, I never saw Cavill wouldn't kill it and make us accept him as this generation's Superman or that the final movie wouldn't be awesome. But if both of 'em had sucked, we would've been the first to say so.

So if WE can be happy about the final product... I dunno, that tells me a lot. It's been long time since I've felt like I was on the same page with fandom about pretty much anything but I REALLY don't understand the heat BvS is taking. It makes me miss the days when people would shit talk a movie before it came out, see it anyway, love it and act like they never badmouthed it in the first place. Seems like those days are over because the usual suspects haven't stopped whining and complaining ever since MOS was first announced.

non_amos Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:10 am

SHH had yet another article on there today, this time about filming an action scene. Wasn't really much to learn there but as usual, I had to read the comments. Just more of the same old, same old with very few voices of reason.

Ya know, I haven't checked out comments at duh Homopage in some time but I'm willing to bet that even they are not this filled with hatred towards this project as those cum stains on humanity! I mean, it's like they have this vehement hatred towards this project. Why? Because it's not Marvel? That would be my best guess.

But let's look at the bigger picture. Forget for the moment who plays who in this film, who directs what, who is owned by what company, etc. Put all that crap aside & look at the bigger picture. And what is that? Simply put, we're getting the 2 most well-known, most iconic comics characters of all time on the big screen together for the first time ever! Not the comics, not the animated features, not even some TV series but instead, on the silver screen! SUPERMAN AND BATMAN! As Stan Lee would say, "NUFF SAID!" So they don't like Ben Affleck. Why? Because he made a few bad films 10+ years ago & also the fact that he was banging Jennifer Lopez? Yeah, I honestly believe some of them have an issue with that but they wouldn't if they actually liked girls! And these same morons thought MOS sucked. BJ the Bartender should've been given the opportunity. Not!

So the point is, Superman & Batman together for the first time ever in a major motion picture should be HUGE! Avenger's huge even. But I fear that it'll fight to find it's place at the box office due to all this garbage! And if that happens, I just don't know what to say. This should be bigger than Avengers yet a lot of these pricks don't even care.

I really do believe the 'voice of reason' in fandom is found at places like this forum.

thecolorsblend Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:52 am

Preach it! The last time I dropped in on the Younis page, the consensus looked like BvS is going to be COOL... or, lacking that, definitely worth watching and getting excited for.

Don't get me wrong here, I give the Eunuch ZERO credit for the about face... except for banning the Apologists he once held in his thrall. He did that and in so doing the leftovers expressed a positive outlook. However low their IQ's might be (and they are definitely low in most cases), the Eunuch page members know enough to be excited about what's coming. Divorced from Apologist despair and Prima Donner nostalgia, they're free to love and enjoy the Snyderverse. And well they should.

Think about who made up SHH's bread and butter all through that Apologist/Realist bullshit ages ago. It wasn't OUR side. In fact, the Apologists over there had several tactics for getting Realists banned. My personal favorite was baiting the Realist, editing the post that called the Realist out, running to a mod and pretending to be the victim, at which point said Realist was history. They had the run of the place in no time.

Unlike the Eunuch page, SHH never had any economic incentive to change. Hell, if anything their economic incentive is to keep the Apologists, Prima Donners, whatever's left of the Nolanites and the Marvel Zombies all happy... and clicking those ads. Eunuch has the sword dangling over him that WB might not let him renew his licensing deals for Superman merch if he pisses in Snyder's corn flakes too much. I think you could fairly argue the Eunuch was never an Apologist to begin with. He was a capitalist. He was following the money. And I don't criticize him for that. But he wasn't honest about it and I DO criticize him for THAT.

But I digress. My point is that the powers that be over at WB clearly don't have the same type of leverage over the "powers" that be over at SHH, hence the acid bath comment sections. It's helpful to remember that you're seeing a coalition at work over on SHH. Apologists, Prima Donners, maybe a few Nolanites and several Marvel Zombies. They're united by jackshit other than an agenda to see bad things happen to the DC Cinematic Universe. As long as the subject sticks to that one subject, they tend to be fairly united. But you'll notice they often tear each other up the minute ANYTHING else is on tap. Why? Because the "consensus" over there is a complete illusion. They're only united on one issue. They're at absolute cross purposes on EVERYTHING ELSE.

My point here is that it may seem like a mathematical majority of fans oppose the DCCU. But they don't. There's simple an unintentional coalition dominating the discourse over it in certain forums. But they don't represent fandom at large and they for motherfucking SURE don't reflect what wide audiences think.

Sorry to write War and Peace here but obviously there was a lot to say.

tl;dr- Fuck you. Read it.

thecolorsblend Mon Aug 18, 2014 9:19 pm

Speaking of shit I don't get...

Captain America- Winter Soldier Domestic Box Office- $259,746,958
Man of Steel Domestic Box Office- $291,045,518

This, by the way, in spite of the fact that Man of Steel didn't have an "Avengers bump" like the Winter Soldier did.

So I'm wondering why the hell anybody assumed Cap 3 would've kicked the fertilizer out of Batman vs. Superman if they'd been released on the same day in the States. Most likely both films would've suffered. But if there was going to be a decisive winner and if history is an indicator, Batman vs. Superman would've wiped the floor with Cap 3.

Any other analysis is based on fear, wishful thinking or the abject detachment from logic and reason that our fandom is kinda sorta known for.

I just don't get it!

non_amos Tue Aug 19, 2014 1:01 am

I hadn't really thought about it that way but MOS did clearly make more than TWS, at least domestically. However, I'm sure haters of MOS would point out that TWS made more world-wide than MOS but even then we're not even talking 800 million, at least not the last figures I saw; haven't checked lately.

So technically MOS was a bigger hit in the US than TWS yet you wouldn't know it by going on these various forums & comments sections. TWS literally blew them away it was so good but MOS? That's not the Superman they knew!

No disrespect to Christopher Reeve but perhaps if MOS had gone in this direction they might have been more satisfied?

Yes, please let Cavill rescue Frisky from a tree, by all means! Rolling Eyes

thecolorsblend Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:16 pm

non_amos wrote:I hadn't really thought about it that way but MOS did clearly make more than TWS, at least domestically. However, I'm sure haters of MOS would point out that TWS made more world-wide than MOS but even then we're not even talking 800 million, at least not the last figures I saw; haven't checked lately.

Oh, I didn't bother comparing the international grosses. The reason for that is because it's not the point. The domestic release date was moved. People are saying it's based on fear that BvS would've had the shit beaten out of it by Cap. It's only logical then to look at each film's domestic grosses.

And the domestic grosses show an unknown, rebooted Superman beating the piss out of a post-Avengers Cap. And the only reason it's not an even worse ass-kicking is because MOS was up against WWZ in the second week. If MOS had the customary two weekends to itself, it WOULD have cleared $300 million in the US. Count on it!

non_amos wrote:but MOS? That's not the Superman they knew!

No disrespect to Christopher Reeve but perhaps if MOS had gone in this direction they might have been more satisfied?

Yes, please let Cavill rescue Frisky from a tree, by all means!

Here's another one. Superman's real debut in STM is a big moment. The helicopter crashes, the masses in the streets are moments away from throwing trash cans through store windows and looting shit, cops can barely contain the crowd, dozens or even hundreds of people are in immediate danger of losing their lives and this is most assuredly a job for Superman.

And it's totally derailed by...

The excuses people make for this defy words. "Yeah, it ruins the seriousness of the moment but, come on, IT'S SUCH A CLASSIC FUCKING MOMENT!!!"

And indeed it is. We've all grown to love it, haven't we? But if Lois & Clark, Smallville, MOS or even STAS tried something like that, they would've been burned in effigy by the very people defending the pimp in STM. NOBODY seems to recognize the contradiction there!

It's like anything; I'll let the opposition choose the standard Superman media should aspire to. Let's just be sure to apply the same standard to everything, mmmkay?

Rduce Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:53 pm

Winter Solider made more world wide and cost less to make so basically it was more profitable than Man of Steel. I think WB blinked first and did not want to chance going up against a post Avengers Age of Ultron Cap 3. Man of Steel did okay, but it was pretty much split with the fans. It was you either loved it or hated it and to save the franchise we are getting Batman tossed in to save Supes ass, which is why we do not have an honest to goodness Man of Steel 2 film, but a hybrid Justice League launch.

World War Z did nothing to cut into the profits of Man of Steel, that sounds a lot like those tards who swear Returns would have done better if Pirates had not opened the next weekend. You loved Man of Steel, good for you, but just as many did not. WB is just trying to cover their ass and not get their two biggest superhero icons having their asses handed to them by Marvel.

Sponsored content

'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Mytwo cents

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016

Well

Re: 'Superman V. Batman' DELAYED Until 2016