Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)


Recommended Posts

I think the film will look great, it doesn't come out for another year, they're going to keep working on the CGI and other post-production work.   I think it looks great, then again I don't have a problem with Snyders style, it's his own, I can respect that.

 

I don't think it will change that much, the oil rig scene in Man of Steel for instance looked incredibly fake in the trailer and didn't change for the movie. The problem, as I said, is that he started employing an almost documentary style in terms of camera work -- shaky cam, lens flares, quick zooms etc, but then he'll add incredibly fake CGI on top of that, which just makes it even more jarring. I don't have an issue with CGI, it's understandable he'll use it, but I don't get why he mixes the 300-like CGI with a movie that strives for a realistic tone and appearance. It's for instance one of the things I hate the most about Watchmen, a movie I find in all other ways very good, and a pretty great adaptation, considering the limitations of the movie format and its running time.

 

On a side note, how freaking amazing would a 12 episode Watchmen mini-series be?

  • Like 1

The Dark Knight relied on practical effects because Batman has no superpowers. If you want a Superman movie, you have to have CGI, sorry. And I didn't see a single shot in the entire trailer that made me think "oh wow look at that blatant CG".

You've got to be joking, surely? The second scene in the trailer has a cartoon-like Superman descend from the sky and the entire background is CGI. Then there's the end of the trailer, which the CGI is equally poor. I'm critical of Marvel's CGI

Nope, actually never heard of it. Is it good?

Yeah. Collider Movie Talk, formerly AMC Movie Talk, is a YouTube channel that follows movies. There's a spinoff show called Collider Heroes that discussed the idea of a 12-episode Watchmen miniseries just last week:

 

(Jump to 52:30)

 

Yeah. Collider Movie Talk, formerly AMC Movie Talk, is a YouTube channel that follows movies. There's a spinoff show called Collider Heroes that discussed the idea of a 12-episode Watchmen miniseries just last week:

 

(Jump to 52:30)

 

 

Cool, I might give them a listen sometimes. My main problem with podcasts is that I usually listen to them while on the computer, and I tend to lose focus as I'm pretty much always doing something else at the same time. I have a very short attention span.

 

But yes, Watchmen as a mini-series, done on a premium cable channel or Netflix, that would be an amazing way to tell the story.

I just don't like Zack Snyder's style at all. DC had it right with the Dark Knight trilogy and now everything has become overly dramatic and emo.

I too don't care for Snyder's style, but I also never cared for the style of The Dark Knight trilogy either. And Nolan's Batman films were over dramatic too & very self serious.

I think Tim Burton's original Batman movie is aesthetically the best comic book movie I've seen.

 

 

It's a shame, as Zack Snyder's previous superhero movie, Watchmen, is one of my favourite films but it seems that was just a fluke.

 

You've lost me here. I think Watchmen is a pretty bad film. It completely butchers the source material & is visually bland as hell.

I too don't care for Snyder's style, but I also never cared for the style of The Dark Knight trilogy either. And Nolan's Batman films were over dramatic too & very self serious.

I thought the tone was just right, particularly for The Dark Knight. With Man Of Steel and what I've seen of Batman V Superman the drama is far too over-the-top and the characters far too one-dimensional.

 

You've lost me here. I think Watchmen is a pretty bad film. It completely butchers the source material & is visually bland as hell.

Just out of interest, have you seen the Ultimate Cut? That adds nearly an hour of extra footage. For me it's a film that had so much atmosphere and such compelling characters. Unlike most modern films every scene had room to breathe and it was all the more immersive because of that - it also wasn't all action, which was a refreshing change. I can't speak to how faithful it was to the source material but as a film I regard it as one of my favourite comic book movies.

 

I was hoping that there would be an Ultimate Cut for Man Of Steel, as every scene in that movie seemed rushed. The pacing was frenetic yet there was no character to it. Unfortunately Snyder has said that the pacing was deliberate and there likely won't be an extended version.

I thought the tone was just right, particularly for The Dark Knight. With Man Of Steel and what I've seen of Batman V Superman the drama is far too over-the-top and the characters far too one-dimensional.

 

 

Just out of interest, have you seen the Ultimate Cut? That adds nearly an hour of extra footage. For me it's a film that had so much atmosphere and such compelling characters. Unlike most modern films every scene had room to breathe and it was all the more immersive because of that - it also wasn't all action, which was a refreshing change. I can't speak to how faithful it was to the source material but as a film I regard it as one of my favourite comic book movies.

 

I was hoping that there would be an Ultimate Cut for Man Of Steel, as every scene in that movie seemed rushed. The pacing was frenetic yet there was no character to it. Unfortunately Snyder has said that the pacing was deliberate and there likely won't be an extended version.

 

Yea, I recently give it another go with the Ultimate cut, though I gave up about 2 hours in.

 

I agree, Man of Steel did feel very frenetic and the action scenes became very tiring. I expect it will probably be the same here.

Yea, I recently give it another go with the Ultimate cut, though I gave up about 2 hours in.

Fair enough. :)

 

I agree, Man of Steel did feel very frenetic and the action scenes became very tiring. I expect it will probably be the same here.

Yeah. Mad Max: Fury Road proved that you can have an all action film with limited dialogue and still make it compelling, whereas films like Man Of Steel and Age Of Ultron fell flat. To me Superman seemed like an extra in his own film - Zod was the more compelling character.

  • Like 1

Batman looks obese and over-weight, rather than looking athletic.

You really pulling the last strings of an olden sweater....

You cannot complain about trailer, because it is pretty decent.

You cannot complain about affleck. Since, it looks like he is doing an ok job...

So.... you got nothing.

Ohhh. Wait. you can call him fat. Score!

Good job not impressing anyone ;)

  • Like 3

Why does Jesse feel like he's playing more of a joker than lex

 

 

Take the Nolan one for example.  Muscular, yes, but hardly as intimidating.

 

I'd still run the other way.

  • Like 1

IMO, this is by far the best looking Batman ever. I haven't really liked any of the past live action Batman portrayals. Animated and video games are a different story, but live action this is the best. Bale could have been good but I seriously tore my hair out at the sound of his awful Batman voice.

  • Like 1

I believe the first major difference between this and Nolans batman suits are the armor.  If you go back and look at the suit Affleck is using, it's got nowhere near the "armor plating" look to it that the above Nolan suit does.  Guys, that's 90% Ben, he's buffed up, look at the comic con panel when he's standing next to Harvy, he's f'ing huge man.   The new suit has very little "padding" and "armor"  It's more like the traditional comic/animated version where it's really just a thin suit and it's shape is mostly just how batman is physically as appose to any rubber or Kevlar armor/padding making him look built/buff.

The difference between this and Nolan's batman is that his batman was more the "real life" batman. Example his suit was pretty much retrofitted from something else, and no real over the top comic book moments. 

 

Do you think Superman would fit in Nolan's films? No.. 

 

Anyways, Superman > Batman.

The difference between this and Nolan's batman is that his batman was more the "real life" batman. Example his suit was pretty much retrofitted from something else, and no real over the top comic book moments.

Batman has had numerous uniforms ranging from plain to heavy armor, even in Nolan's films there were mods, so all of them are actually canon.

Do you think Superman would fit in Nolan's films? No..

Yes. They could easily have, but didn't. A pity.

Anyways, Superman > Batman.

You are clearly not a serious comic/graphic novel reader as Bats has taken on Superman & metahumans several times and either beaten them or fought them to a draw. More often than not it was superior preparation and/or trickery that won the day.

Batman isn't just physically tough, he excells at using superior tactics and strategy. Brains over brawn.

  • Like 1

Dude, I've been a Superman and Batman fan my entire life!! Haha, my apartment is littered with Superman stuff (along with BTTF lol). And I know he's beaten him.... TDKR etc..

 

Mind you, above post was all my opinion. Personally, I don't think Superman would've fitted in Nolan's Batman Universe - same with the Keating Universe. Like, there's no magic\aliens\powers in those versions\universes. Hopefully someone kinda sees where I'm coming from. I dunno, The Avengers, that's all BS, same with any Superman movie. Catch my drift? That's all I was trying to say haha. 

 

Either way, I prefer Superman over Batman and can't wait for this movie lol.

I'm much more interested in talking about the possible story than how people think Ben looks (fat or buff),  I'm hearing rumors of a possible doomsday as the final bad guy in this movie?  People have said that the final 25mins of the film is a giant fight, and has to be when WW joins in, as per the trailer.   And I doubt she gets in the middle of the initial batman v superman fight, that's probably around the middle point of the film I bet, as much as Snyder wants to make it sound like their fight is the whole movie, I think it's just one fight of a few we'll see.

  • Like 2

Well we know for sure that it won't be the geeky clumsy mild mannered type :p I think he will just be a "normal" type of guy, more or less how he was in man of steel.

 

 

As for Ben and his size, I think it looks spot on for Batman, definitely preferring his build to Bale's, although the suit is what is adding the muscle definition but I don't really have any issues with that.

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!