Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)


Recommended Posts

This is how batman should be, the final full trailer with the fight scene was perfect. Sorry Nolan fans but the fights in his version of batman was weak.

MPAA has announced that the 'Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice' home video Ultimate Edition (Director's Cut)  will be rated R.

 

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/batman-v-superman-r-rating-directors-cut-1201714130/

 

Shut-up-and-take-my-money-628.jpg
 

Edited by DocM

That makes the best sense though, I mean it's smart to go with PG-13 in the theaters to maximize box office returns and slip the R rated version in for the adults who are the ones buying the Blu-ray versions of movies anyways, kids don't bother with this anymore, they'd just stream it off of whatever service has it.

I was having this discussion with some friends on Facebook.

I'm REALLY torn about it. 

 

In one hand, I'm loving the gritty feel we're getting with some of the stories. You expect Batman, The Punisher, and (obviously) Deadpool to be wicked violent so an R-Rating seems appropriate to give fans the violence they're expecting.

 

But on the other hand... Superman? The DC version of Captain America? Mr. Truth, Justice, the American Way, and Watch Your Language, Lois? Should he ever be R-rated? The first Superman movie in this new universe took me by surprise at the end. Not because it's unrealistic that Superman would find himself with that choice to make, but that the writers gave him that choice. The last Rambo movie had some do-gooders travel to a violent part of the world where they wanted to make a stand against violence. One of them finds himself with a life-or-death situation and ends up killing a bad guy. So yea, point made. But it was a Rambo movie, exactly where you make that kind of point. Superman isn't supposed to represent that (in my opinion, at least). He's the guy that always finds another way, that always (somehow) finds a way to stay upbeat and squeaky clean. The bottom line being: yes, you can write those stories because those situation are realistic, but this is fantasy which means you just don't for the sake of what that character stands for. Save those scenarios for the "alternate universe" comics that are known for shaking things up. But for the mainstream, keep Superman the one ultra do-gooder, can't do no wrong, always on the side of right, hero.

There was really no reason to show wonder Woman in this or any other trailer. They should have kept her a secrete. I just think back to the "Tomorrow Land Teaser" ... and how excited I got from how little they showed us.

  • Like 2

 

8 hours ago, McCordRm said:

I was having this discussion with some friends on Facebook.

I'm REALLY torn about it. 

 

In one hand, I'm loving the gritty feel we're getting with some of the stories. You expect Batman, The Punisher, and (obviously) Deadpool to be wicked violent so an R-Rating seems appropriate to give fans the violence they're expecting.

 

But on the other hand... Superman? The DC version of Captain America? Mr. Truth, Justice, the American Way, and Watch Your Language, Lois? Should he ever be R-rated? The first Superman movie in this new universe took me by surprise at the end. Not because it's unrealistic that Superman would find himself with that choice to make, but that the writers gave him that choice. The last Rambo movie had some do-gooders travel to a violent part of the world where they wanted to make a stand against violence. One of them finds himself with a life-or-death situation and ends up killing a bad guy. So yea, point made. But it was a Rambo movie, exactly where you make that kind of point. Superman isn't supposed to represent that (in my opinion, at least). He's the guy that always finds another way, that always (somehow) finds a way to stay upbeat and squeaky clean. The bottom line being: yes, you can write those stories because those situation are realistic, but this is fantasy which means you just don't for the sake of what that character stands for. Save those scenarios for the "alternate universe" comics that are known for shaking things up. But for the mainstream, keep Superman the one ultra do-gooder, can't do no wrong, always on the side of right, hero.

Shouldn't it be that Marvel has a version of Superman since Superman came sometime before Cap? Just saying :D

 

And I'm really not happy with this gritty "realistic" stuff DC and WB are doing with their movieverse. I mean, I get it, they want to be different than Marvel. But come on. Superman? Snapping necks and killing people. Yes he shouldn't  have been put in that position to begin with. But I also feel its the whole "ugh everyone thinks Superman sucks or that he's boring because he's so hard to write for" (which is a ###### excuse, if you are a good writer, no character is boring) so they are trying to avoid that by having Superman be all emo and kill people. Or at least, killed a person. But let's be honest, Superman has killed in the comics plenty. Just not so avertly in your face like in MoS.

 

In any event, I am looking forward to the movie bigtime. Even though some advanced screenings apparently - didn't have a very good word of mouth. (Note: they didn't say it was bad, just to long and to confusing apparently)

The more "realistic" version of batman is gone with Nolan, just look at the fight in the final trailer, that's not "real" batman, that's comic book and videogame batman. Let's not mix being gritty with being real, if anything batman should be on the darker side of things, and it can have a R version with a bit more added to the fights, like batman breaking some arms and legs, etc.

5 minutes ago, George P said:

The more "realistic" version of batman is gone with Nolan, just look at the fight in the final trailer, that's not "real" batman, that's comic book and videogame batman. Let's not mix being gritty with being real, if anything batman should be on the darker side of things, and it can have a R version with a bit more added to the fights, like batman breaking some arms and legs, etc.

Which fight are you talking about in that trailer? Where he stops sups punch?

18 minutes ago, Circaflex said:

Which fight are you talking about in that trailer? Where he stops sups punch?

No he's talking about Batman literally going Arkham beating up like 8 dudes easily.

 

And let's be clear - just because Nolan's Batman universe is over (until that big pay day comes I'm sure) doesn't mean the gritty realistic Batman is gone. Just because he's fighting 10 guys and easily beating them down doesn't mean they aren't making the entire movie more grounded etc. I mean, it's not Batman 89 or (thankfully) Batman and Robin cheesefest levels. But its still way more realistic and gritty than anything else Marvel is doing. Other than Deadpool which isn't even Marvel itself.

I don't see how this is any more grounded than Marvels stuff, i'd say that they're both pretty close to the source material now. Nolen level of real world are far off from these new batch of movies, for starters you have superman AND WW in them, so there's your alien and supernatural/magical elements that you'd never have seen in the Nolanverse.

 

Anyways, this is going to be a great movie, can't wait to see it.

12 hours ago, George P said:

The more "realistic" version of batman is gone with Nolan, just look at the fight in the final trailer, that's not "real" batman, that's comic book and videogame batman. Let's not mix being gritty with being real, if anything batman should be on the darker side of things, and it can have a R version with a bit more added to the fights, like batman breaking some arms and legs, etc.

The "real" Batman you say?

 

For me that's

 

Some-Days-You-Just-Cant-Get-Rid-Of-A-Bom

 

or

 

5ef7d675dcddbabf625384561661c2d6.thumb.j

 

or maybe the Brave & the Bold Batman.

 

Batman-The-Brave-and-the-Bold-The-Videog

 

None of the others really capture the character (disparate as the interpretations were, they were still the same character at heart), realistic take or not. I'm open to the new version, because I care about a real Batman, rather than a real Batman. If that makes any sense - realistic doesn't matter to me; true to the character does.

  • Like 1
On 2/25/2016 at 5:03 PM, McCordRm said:

I was having this discussion with some friends on Facebook.

 

I'm REALLY torn about it. 

 

In one hand, I'm loving the gritty feel we're getting with some of the stories. You expect Batman, The Punisher, and (obviously) Deadpool to be wicked violent so an R-Rating seems appropriate to give fans the violence they're expecting.

 

But on the other hand... Superman? 

>

Superman has killed in the comics. In Superman #22 "The Price" he traveled to the Pocket Universe and ended up executing its versions of General Zod, Zaora and Quex-Ul with Kryptonite. As she dies, Zaora offers him pleasures he has never dreamed if he'll stop, but Superman doesn't relent. 

 

Canon for over 20 years.

 

opXxn9y.jpg

Edited by DocM
On 2016-02-26 at 11:24 AM, DConnell said:

The "real" Batman you say?

 

For me that's

 

Some-Days-You-Just-Cant-Get-Rid-Of-A-Bom

 

 

For me, that's:

 

1943, which introduced the Batcave (which wasn't in the comics until after this came out) & skinny Alfred (he was fat in the comics until after this came out):

 

BATMAN+1943+SERIAL.jpg
 
And:
 
1949:
 
Batman%2Band%2BRobin%252C%2Bc%2B%25284%2
  • Like 1
On 28/2/2016 at 5:29 AM, Thomas the Tank Engine said:

 

For me, that's:

 

1943, which introduced the Batcave (which wasn't in the comics until after this came out) & skinny Alfred (he was fat in the comics until after this came out):

 

BATMAN+1943+SERIAL.jpg
 
And:
 
1949:
 
Batman%2Band%2BRobin%252C%2Bc%2B%25284%2

They should go back to this look, but make the narrative modern & "dark".

On 2/28/2016 at 5:29 AM, Thomas the Tank Engine said:

 

For me, that's:

 

1943, which introduced the Batcave (which wasn't in the comics until after this came out) & skinny Alfred (he was fat in the comics until after this came out):

 

BATMAN+1943+SERIAL.jpg
 
And:
 
1949:
 
Batman%2Band%2BRobin%252C%2Bc%2B%25284%2

Is that Batman, or Fatman? :p

 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • 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!