• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Grading & Discussion

Grade the movie...


  • Total voters
    224
Given what people are saying about Wondy on the DVD cover I don't even want to ponder the implications of the positioning of Black Panther on that cover.
The Flag Waver, The Iron Man, and the "Penis Between Us". Haha

Or would that be p*ssycat? To use an outdated term. OH GOD! THAT'S EVEN WORSE!

You seem to be confused as to what a "blu ray cover" is.

If you visit your local Best Buy, I'm sure you could find an employee to explain it for you.

Why would I go to a electronics store when I can just go over to my shelf. Save gas and all that.

I was under the impression the person between the two title characters was the 3rd most important character in each respective movies. Wasn't that what you all were talking about? I mean, it's not like WW's name is in the title of BvS. And Black Panther was a bigger player than Sharon Carter, whom you suggested would be on the CACW cover. As if Sharon = WW in standing or importance.
 
And Black Panther was a bigger player than Sharon Carter, whom you suggested would be on the CACW cover.
What? Of course not - I was mocking The Lensman's absurd equation of the false advertising BvS blu ray cover with the fact that the story of CW happened to feature a whole lot of Avengers. He made it seem as though it was some craven and contrived corporate mandate to have all those characters in the movie, despite the fact that, as of the end of AoU, Cap regularly works with and leads those same people. :rommie:
 
One of the great things about Civil War was that all of the characters (aside from Spider-Man (but he was fun)) had a legitimate reason for being in the story.

What's more. the placement of Black Panther in the photo actually makes a whole lot of sense to the plot of the movie.

Wonder Woman was great, but either give her more motivation for being there, or leave her out.
 
One of the great things about Civil War was that all of the characters (aside from Spider-Man (but he was fun)) had a legitimate reason for being in the story.

What's more. the placement of Black Panther in the photo actually makes a whole lot of sense to the plot of the movie.

Wonder Woman was great, but either give her more motivation for being there, or leave her out.
Idk, Hawkeye and Ant-Man were kind of shoved into the movie to add to the action scene in the airport. Along with Spider-Man as you stated. Hawkeye was retired and Scott was still a civilian. Everyone else though, was ok.
 
What? Of course not - I was mocking The Lensman's absurd equation of the false advertising BvS blu ray cover with the fact that the story of CW happened to feature a whole lot of Avengers. He made it seem as though it was some craven and contrived corporate mandate to have all those characters in the movie, despite the fact that, as of the end of AoU, Cap regularly works with and leads those same people. :rommie:

I was mocking the post that was all like "first it was Man of Steel sequel, then Superman guest starring Batman, then Batman guest starring Superman" nonsense by showing Cap doing the same. I never mentioned the cover because I could care less what's on the cover. Keep patting yourself on the back for nothing.
 
I disagree. I finally saw Civil War yesterday with my son who doesn't follow any internet discussions. He's nine.

I said that it was more of an Avengers film to me. He thought about it for a moment and said, no Daddy--the other super-heroes were in the movie but the story was all about Captain America's decision to help his friend and to go against the United Nations decision. That's why it was a Captain America film and not an Avengers film.

I agree with my son.

Also, we both agree that it was cool to see Spider-Man and Black Panther.
Captain America, Ironman, Bucky and Zemo were the only characters needed to tell that story. The rest could have been easily left out and not taken away from the main storyline.
 
Captain America, Ironman, Bucky and Zemo were the only characters needed to tell that story. The rest could have been easily left out and not taken away from the main storyline.

Except that any open conflict between Iron Man and Captain America by default will wind up entangling the Avengers. Maybe none of the others were individually necessary, but the Avengers as a group did need to be there.

Also because, while Zemo gives Steve and Tony the Lion's share of the blame, his beef is with the Avengers as a whole, and his goal (aside from revenge) is to stop something similar from happening again, therefore his plan has to affect the Avengers as a whole.
 
Captain America, Ironman, Bucky and Zemo were the only characters needed to tell that story. The rest could have been easily left out and not taken away from the main storyline.

See, this hypocrisy is what gets me. People complain that we should've heard from the other Avengers in Iron Man 3, Thor 2 and Winter Soldier.

Then when that actually HAPPENS in Civil War people complain the Avengers were there!

Just what do you want? This is a Shared Universe where characters do not exist in a vacuum.
 
Idk, Hawkeye and Ant-Man were kind of shoved into the movie to add to the action scene in the airport. Along with Spider-Man as you stated. Hawkeye was retired and Scott was still a civilian. Everyone else though, was ok.
Except we DID get the counter identity character to Ant-Man in the film. He became Giant-Man for a few minutes; and people like me who've been into comics since the silver age era - (well I was reading the 1960ies editions in the 1970ies when I was a kid collecting) was wondering if they'd ever work Giant Man into a film story/situation in any meaningful way - and for me Civil War delivered on that in a great way.
 
I can't wait to see the Extended Edition. Just like the LOTR movies I think they're going to be a much stronger product.

I still can't believe they didn't just release this as two movies if they had four hours of footage. You would have doubled your earnings. (Obviously this would have required a different version of the story with two climaxes. End Part One with Batman vs Superman, Part Two with Doomsday.)
Yeah, but The Lord of the Rings movies were actually... good. There's nothing from BvS and Kingdom of Heaven (another sh*tty movie) which warrants a longer version. Come on the WB is hyping, including their franchise, a house of cards.
 
Except we DID get the counter identity character to Ant-Man in the film. He became Giant-Man for a few minutes; and people like me who've been into comics since the silver age era - (well I was reading the 1960ies editions in the 1970ies when I was a kid collecting) was wondering if they'd ever work Giant Man into a film story/situation in any meaningful way - and for me Civil War delivered on that in a great way.

I thought the use of Giant Man was great as well. Hawkeye and Scott made perfect sense to me, especially since Scott had already been set up in his own movie. There was a lot going on and a lot of characters but the movie never felt bloated.

The biggest downfall of BvS for me had nothing to do with the main story but rather because there was just too much going on and it never really explored the issues that it purported to be about.
 
Yeah, but The Lord of the Rings movies were actually... good. There's nothing from BvS and Kingdom of Heaven (another sh*tty movie) which warrants a longer version. Come on the WB is hyping, including their franchise, a house of cards.
Kingdom of Heaven may not be your cup of tea but to deny the longer version is categorically superior suggests you've not seen it or refused to consider it on its merits. Unlike many "extended" cuts, Kingdom of Heaven is practically a different film altogether.
 
See, this hypocrisy is what gets me. People complain that we should've heard from the other Avengers in Iron Man 3, Thor 2 and Winter Soldier.

Then when that actually HAPPENS in Civil War people complain the Avengers were there!

Just what do you want? This is a Shared Universe where characters do not exist in a vacuum.
Um....I wasn't one of those people complaing about Avengers not appearing in other movies.If anything I consider that a plus. Perhaps you have me confused with another poster?
 
What? Of course not - I was mocking The Lensman's absurd equation of the false advertising BvS blu ray cover with the fact that the story of CW happened to feature a whole lot of Avengers. He made it seem as though it was some craven and contrived corporate mandate to have all those characters in the movie, despite the fact that, as of the end of AoU, Cap regularly works with and leads those same people. :rommie:

Here's a false advertising cover you can actually complain about. Charlie Sheen is barely in the movie. Everyone else named on the cover has a substantially larger role than him.

2qxc31h.jpg
 
Yeah, but The Lord of the Rings movies were actually... good. There's nothing from BvS and Kingdom of Heaven (another sh*tty movie) which warrants a longer version. Come on the WB is hyping, including their franchise, a house of cards.
I loved Batman vs Superman and can't wait for the extended cut.:shrug:

I'm also curious about the need from some posters to trash this movie for page after page. We get it. You hated this movie and LOVED Civil War. Move on already or at least take your gushing of Civil War to the appropriate thread.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top