|
|
Post by politicidal on Aug 17, 2017 1:50:29 GMT
Says Ben Affleck. TEXT: Justice League will have a more comic book Batman, says Ben Affleck Anticipation for the Justice League movie is ramping up, with fans hoping for a course correction in the DC Extended Universe. In a new interview with Entertainment Weekly, star Ben Affleck plays up the idea of November’s team-up movie taking a mulligan on the Caped Crusader after his brutal, nonsensically angry depiction in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. In fact, the actor wants fans to know they’re getting the comic book Batman this time. “’BvS’ departed a little bit from the traditional Batman,” says Affleck. “He started out with all this rage directed at Superman, because of his coworkers who had died in the fight Superman had with Zod. He was holding on to a lot of anger, in a little bit of an irrational way, whereas this is a much more traditional Batman. He’s heroic. He does things in his own way, but he wants to save people, help people. This is more in keeping with the canon of how Batman’s usually been portrayed, and how he’s portrayed vis a vis the Justice League in the comics. This is more the Batman you would find if you opened up your average Batman comic book. Not that it’s average.” Not unlike Joss Whedon’s first Avengers, which was all about disparate heroes putting aside their differences to work together, Affleck sees the Justice League itself in the same terms as the United Nations. “I think it’s a really cool story,” Affleck adds. “Actually, it’s sort of a story about multilateralism. It’s not a bad theme to have! He’s put in this position of having to reach out, find other people, convincing them to do something. Part of the drama of the movie is the question of whether or not the team is going to come together. It’s very different from the tenor of the last movie.” As for the persistent rumors dogging Affleck (who turned 45 yesterday) that he will not portray the character again in Matt Reeves’ The Batman, the actor’s Oscar-winning brother Casey Affleck added fuel to the fire by telling Boston’s WEEI 93.7FM, “He’s not gonna do that movie, I don’t think… is that breaking news? I was just kinda making that up!” We’ll see how things pan out, but news of Daniel Craig returning to Bond today gives us hope for Batfleck. Fueled by the hero’s restored faith in humanity and inspired by Superman’s selfless act, Justice League sees Bruce Wayne enlist the help of his newfound ally, Diana Prince, to face an even greater enemy. Together, Batman and Wonder Woman work quickly to find and recruit a team of metahumans to stand against this newly awakened threat. But despite the formation of this unprecedented league of heroes—Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Cyborg and The Flash—it may already be too late to save the planet from an assault of catastrophic proportions. Directed by Zack Snyder (Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Man of Steel), the screenplay is by Chris Terrio from a story by Snyder and Terrio. Filmmaker Joss Whedon is directing the additional photography for the sequel and is overseeing the completion of its post production following Snyder’s family tragedy. Justice League is produced by Charles Roven, Deborah Snyder, Jon Berg and Geoff Johns. The executive producers are Jim Rowe, Wesley Coller, Curt Kanemoto, Chris Terrio and Ben Affleck. Read more at www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/879907-justice-league-will-have-a-more-comic-book-batman-says-ben-affleck#essCHG2YqstYlceV.99 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 5:41:36 GMT
Understatement of the fucking millennium.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 17, 2017 6:23:42 GMT
Understatement of the fucking millennium. ^^enter a self-certified Batman expert to educate us. Now tell me weirdraptor: I am utterly confused as to what the "traditional" Batman is - is it the original Batman of B Kane, the stealthy detective Batman...? - is it the goofy, dancing 60s Batman of A West (hated by B Kane)? - is it the weird, gothic Burton-Batman? - is it the cool cat, neon-light Comic Batman of Joel Schuhmacher as in Batman and Robin, who you like so much? - is it the murderous old amok-fascist Batman as seen in Millers TDK Returns...? - is it the emotionally unstable, edgy Nolan Batman...? it seems this is one of the most diverse characters ever; so what is the traditional one...? But if in view of the facts you should realize that this is just another example of your obtuse, foul mouthed, low effort thinking, please don't bother and remain silent...  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 8:51:19 GMT
well obviously the traditional batman isnt angry etc. Did you even read the post Tristan?
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Aug 17, 2017 10:08:11 GMT
Well, I assumed he had decided to stop brutally scarring and murdering criminals at the end of BvS when he spares Lex Luthor of all people. Brutally scarring and murdering people is just a phase some people go through, you see. Like listening to screamo, only not as morally reprehensible. No harm, no foul, Batfleck.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 17, 2017 10:34:18 GMT
well obviously the traditional batman isnt angry etc. Did you even read the post Tristan? traditional Bats isn't angry you say? Well "obviously" Batman seems like the archetypal example of an angry comic book super hero. This is because his entire motivation to hunt criminals is fueled by his parents being murdered and the natural, ensuing anger. You might have noticed this back story in one or two Bats movies (sans the goofy Schumacher and 60s ones).
In the most famous source materials and lore Bats is even more angry and brutal than we saw in BvS (eg in Miller where he kills and beats up Supes), thus giving him titles like The Dark Knight. The point being:
(i) Speaking of a "traditional" Batman without any indication and definition which parts of the lore should define the tradtion is uninformed, lazy BS, especially with a character so diversely depicted in the past, ranging from from dancing buffoon to fascist. I primarily see the Dark (angry, brutal) Knight as traditional Bats, which however may depend on the personal POV.
(ii) Thus stating that "BvS" departed a "little bit from the traditional Batman" may be lazy, but arguable. However, responing to that "understatement of the fucking millennium" in view of the Bats history is as clumsy as it is stupid.
Apart of this, only a fool would not notice that these characters go through arcs (ie character development): e.g., loner Bats stops maiming people because of his experience with Supes and wants to found a league. Clark is angry but ends MoS with a big smile. The raptor was always too stupid to understand the concept of arcs.
QED. You were saing, Clark?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Aug 17, 2017 10:44:01 GMT
well obviously the traditional batman isnt angry etc. Did you even read the post Tristan? LOL. Well obviously you have never seen a Batman film or read a graphic novel. Batman is fucking angry at the world because of his losses, its his prime motivation factor.
The B v S Batman was based on Miller's The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel (THE most famous and recognized GN). In that GN Batman was exponentially more furious and brutal than in the film, murdering the Joker and the Mutant Leader and trying to kill Superman!
Did you even read the lore, Bizzarro?
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Aug 17, 2017 11:42:17 GMT
well obviously the traditional batman isnt angry etc. Did you even read the post Tristan? LOL. Well obviously you have never seen a Batman film or read a graphic novel. Batman is fucking angry at the world because of his losses, its his prime motivation factor.
The B v S Batman was based on Miller's The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel (THE most famous and recognized GN). In that GN Batman was exponentially more furious and brutal than in the film, murdering the Joker and the Mutant Leader and trying to kill Superman! Well, that's ironic, considering the entirety of your second paragraph. He does not kill The Joker, Joker kills himself to frame Batman when Batman refuses. He fights Supes, but not for a second is he trying to kill him. In fact, he even tells Superman that he wants him to live for years knowing who's the one guy who beat him. As for the mutant leader, Batman soundly kicked his ass, but it's doubtful he was killed considering the following two issues are all about whether or not Batman can cross that line. On that note, Bats uses rubber bullets in that GN, which I personally don't find as furious and brutal as the flesh shredding actual rounds Batfleck uses. Where do fake nerds get their misinformation? |
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Aug 17, 2017 12:22:11 GMT
LOL. Well obviously you have never seen a Batman film or read a graphic novel. Batman is fucking angry at the world because of his losses, its his prime motivation factor.
The B v S Batman was based on Miller's The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel (THE most famous and recognized GN). In that GN Batman was exponentially more furious and brutal than in the film, murdering the Joker and the Mutant Leader and trying to kill Superman! Well, that's ironic, considering the entirety of your second paragraph. He does not kill The Joker, Joker kills himself to frame Batman when Batman refuses. He fights Supes, but not for a second is he trying to kill him. In fact, he even tells Superman that he wants him to live for years knowing who's the one guy who beat him. As for the mutant leader, Batman soundly kicked his ass, but it's doubtful he was killed considering the following two issues are all about whether or not Batman can cross that line. On that note, Bats uses rubber bullets in that GN, which I personally don't find as furious and brutal as the flesh shredding actual rounds Batfleck uses. Where do fake nerds get their misinformation? Don't wet your fanboys panties, kiddo. I am a busy man and granted my GN-experience was some years ago. Apart form that, thank you for proving the point. The point was whether Bats is angry and brutal outside of BVS. He is.
First Bat shrows a bat-projectile at Joker and deliberately DESTROYS his left eye (!) which shocks the Jocker ("are you f* gone insane" or sth). Then they fight and Batman BREAKS the Joker's neck - he is not dead immediately of course (like in real life).
But just watch that scene:
LOL, you are the very first person "soundly" denying that he killed him! It was more than implicit that? Bats deliberately frees and then lures him into a trap, with the effect that Bats brutally breaks Mutant's bones and beats him up, leading to even his tough Mutant gang-homies looking away. As from that moment the Leader is out of the story and Bats is the Mutant leader - but I am sure the Mutant Leader is just on a SPA vaccation with some Bat angels sing him a sweet lullaby! Sure, if it helps you sleep at night, kiddo.
Regardless, even if he survived, look at this (the point)
Bottom line: So essentially you confirm the point, and if you do not find these scenes more gruesome and sadistic than anything that happens in BVS, you are probably a little sociopath.
Where do you butthurt fanboys get your debating skills?
|
|
gromel
Sophomore
@gromel
Posts: 279
Likes: 119
 
|
Post by gromel on Aug 17, 2017 13:24:36 GMT
He broke Joker's neck to paralyze not kill. Then Joker somehow moved his own neck and killed himself out of spite.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jedan Archer on Aug 17, 2017 14:04:11 GMT
He broke Joker's neck to paralyze not kill. Interesting, from a rational interpretation of the dialogue one must arrive at an entirely different conclusion:
Batman after brutally piercing Joker's eye:
Batman: No more! All the people I've murdered...
... by letting you live.
Joker: It's finally here, isn't it? The moment we've both dreamed about!
Aww, the smoking gun! In a court of law, well, this would be irrefuatble evidence that you intended to KILL the person. Apart from this, the legal concept called Dolus Eventualis aplies. You may not really have wanted to kill, but you know and accepted that your action may result in the death of your victim: murder. Regardless, the POINT: incredibly fucking brutal for a CBM - and probably the most famous Batman story ever!
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Aug 17, 2017 14:58:01 GMT
I think Mr. Affleck is talking about the traditional version of Batman that appeared in the comics for several decades. These comics had mass appeal and sold in large numbers because you could get them in every 7-11 and every other store in the country.
This was before the super hero comics industry was taken over by wanna be hipsters who wrote comics and "graphic novels" for a small group of adult comic fanboys. This is why when a comic book movie comes out they usually try to follow the more original version of the super hero. This is why a comic book movie will sell more tickets in one weekend than there are comic books sold in an entire year.
That's why the movie makers give more weight to what the movie audience wants than to what was in the latest "graphic novel" that nobody read.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Aug 17, 2017 20:45:51 GMT
well obviously the traditional batman isnt angry etc. Did you even read the post Tristan? I always thought of Batman as a sad, angry man. His parents were killed right in front of him. He trained for years to fight crime and take revenge on the kind of people that mimic the man that killed his parents. As I heard it put in a review on BvS, there is only one thing that separates Batman from being a protective vigilante and then turning into a murdering psychopath: his decision to refrain from killing at all costs. Otherwise, he attacks, hunts, and locks up criminal after criminal because he wants to protect his city from the same tragedy that hit him as a child. It takes discipline for Batman not to kill. I'd say that he is a very angry man. That encompasses Nolan's trilogy, most of Burton's two films, the Arkham video game series, and most of the graphic novels/comics. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Aug 18, 2017 0:21:59 GMT
Here's the question: Was this always the direction they were planning to take Batman or is this simply DC doing damage control based on how fans reacted to the more brutal Batman in BvS?
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Aug 18, 2017 1:33:38 GMT
Here's the question: Was this always the direction they were planning to take Batman or is this simply DC doing damage control based on how fans reacted to the more brutal Batman in BvS? I lean towards the latter since a lot of what WB/DC has done aside from Wonder Woman was damage control. Perhaps the whole redemptive arc and even "Martha!" was a part of the plan but it got screwed up horribly wrong during development. |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Aug 18, 2017 1:40:56 GMT
Jedan Archer
If you think breaking someone's bones is worse than ENDING THEIR LIFE, being a sociopath is probably only one of your brain's abnormalities. The things he does to The Joker are brutal, but he does them in defense of others while Joker is on a full-on killing spree, and Batman STILL stops himself from killing him. In BvS, the only one going on a killing spree is Batman himself: blowing up, machine gunning, and crushing petty thieves with his car for absolutely no reason (he could have waited for the kryptonite to be delivered and then steal it without a brutal car chase, which is what he ends up doing anyway thanks to Superman). He even kicks already subdued criminals into the path of grenades!
You mean other than every character in the comic, who act like Batman's faux killing of The Joker is the first time he's ever killed? Batman is wrestling with killing someone (Joker) for the first time when he just killed Mutant Leader one issue ago? The same Mutant Leader he came to fight using rubber bullets instead of actual ones? Yeah, we don't see Mutant Leader again. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly starring Mutant Leader wouldn't make an entertaining comic.
You mean your GN-experience of reading quick wikipedia summeries so you can back your bloodlust with supposed comic faithfulness? And I myself never denied he was brutal or angry, just that he's not a crazed serial killer in a bat suit like in BvS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 18, 2017 5:38:54 GMT
Here's the question: Was this always the direction they were planning to take Batman or is this simply DC doing damage control based on how fans reacted to the more brutal Batman in BvS? that is answered in the movie, skataar. Batman starts out as a angry, brutal vigilante-loner but EVOLVES into a more reasonable, less brutal guy who wants to bind forces (league). The branding fetish and the corny "You must save Martha" events (ie we are all fighting the same cause to save the innocent we love) are key scenes for understanding this. This is called an character arc, leaving no real questions to be asked. You have it too with Supes btw who starts out edgy and angry, but ends MoS with a big smile. I personally could really live with the edgy, brutal vigilantes a la Miller and not seeing Bats/Supes degenerate into your friendly beefcake-in-tights vigilantes next door. But in the end these movies are directed at children too and not realistic crime dramas (alas). |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Aug 18, 2017 9:33:12 GMT
I liked having a blood thirsty Batman. Granted it didn't make sense for him not to kill the Joker.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Aug 18, 2017 22:14:56 GMT
Here's the question: Was this always the direction they were planning to take Batman or is this simply DC doing damage control based on how fans reacted to the more brutal Batman in BvS? that is answered in the movie, skataar. Batman starts out as a angry, brutal vigilante-loner but EVOLVES into a more reasonable, less brutal guy who wants to bind forces (league). The branding fetish and the corny "You must save Martha" events (ie we are all fighting the same cause to save the innocent we love) are key scenes for understanding this. This is called an character arc, leaving no real questions to be asked. You have it too with Supes btw who starts out edgy and angry, but ends MoS with a big smile. I personally could really live with the edgy, brutal vigilantes a la Miller and not seeing Bats/Supes degenerate into your friendly beefcake-in-tights vigilantes next door. But in the end these movies are directed at children too and not realistic crime dramas (alas). That is not answered in the movie at all. Batman goes from a vengeful killing machine that brands criminals and rams them with the batmobile... to a vengeful killing machine that chokeslams criminals and throws grenades at them. Remember that the warehouse scene happened AFTER the Martha moment... and he's still every bit as brutal as the Batman at the start. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 18, 2017 22:48:21 GMT
that is answered in the movie, skataar. Batman starts out as a angry, brutal vigilante-loner but EVOLVES into a more reasonable, less brutal guy who wants to bind forces (league). The branding fetish and the corny "You must save Martha" events (ie we are all fighting the same cause to save the innocent we love) are key scenes for understanding this. This is called an character arc, leaving no real questions to be asked. You have it too with Supes btw who starts out edgy and angry, but ends MoS with a big smile. I personally could really live with the edgy, brutal vigilantes a la Miller and not seeing Bats/Supes degenerate into your friendly beefcake-in-tights vigilantes next door. But in the end these movies are directed at children too and not realistic crime dramas (alas). That is not answered in the movie at all. Batman goes from a vengeful killing machine that brands criminals and rams them with the batmobile... to a vengeful killing machine that chokeslams criminals and throws grenades at them. Remember that the warehouse scene happened AFTER the Martha moment... and he's still every bit as brutal as the Batman at the start. yeah he is still brutally effective when fighting, that does not exclude the ongoing character arc as portrayed in BvS. Batman mellows down on the vigilante loner thing and stops branding enemies, and he starts trusting other superhumans (instead of trying to kill them) and tries to form the league. ARC as defined under writing theory. Bats is still a brutal street fighter when he needs to be. That makes him together with Logan, Rorschach etc by far the most interesting super hero character BY FAR. His arc may go on in this regard, eg by him establishing his no killing rules etc. I hope they don't pussy down on the fighting though, that warehouse fight was one of the best fighting scenes in all CBM - the moment Batman is reduced to a weird, bat-dancing, my-little-pony-playing gnat will be the death of The Dark Knight. This is what Lego Batman is for, let the DC live action films be for grown ups. |
|
