Batman Vs Superman Comic Con Trailer

New trailer: Though as trailers occasionally do they reuse some of the footage and a Jeremy Irons Monologue from the first one(But then agian: I am a fan of a good irons monologue)

This really seems to be selling the Batman Vs Superman concept-which you know is whats on the tin so can't fault it,. It does a good job of telling a story with bits of how a very decadent Lex luthor is involved in this and pushing them agianst each others -its not a horrible trailer, but like a lot of them more then 2 minutes is about all you can get.

This is most notable in that there is a couple of seconds i think here and there for Diana, and a couple of seconds of Wonder Woman....

And split this is Castor Snap Judgement: she looks Not great. Not terrible, but like a lot of stuff in Man of Steel Looks a little weightless. Even when its her in a costume it really looks CGI, and as if she has been told to go a certain number of feet from a knockback and stoped. It looks ehhh.

A lot of the stuff in the supergirl isn't great and i am not going to say its realistic-but yeah.

and she didn't talk or explain how she is involved in the plot which seems really mano e mano. Which agian you know i don't get mad at a Pink Panther movie for not having Ubergirl stuff. But if there going to do this, hope they do it well.

(i also think theres maybe a half second of what i am guessing AquaMan. That and some of the design work some of which i am guessing is from Theylmacria stuff is good but very CGI)

The trailer was not that bad.

I liked Batfleck. I thought he looked good.

Lois is a different Lois than we are used to.
Is she Superman's confidant?

Ma Kent's attitude is terrible.
I can't see that kind of advice helping Clark at all.

In the three seconds of Wonder Woman all I see is Xena.
Is Wonder Woman an Amazon or a Superhero?

Gotta agree. The trailer wasn't terrible.

In fact, a lot of it had been seen before, as you do with trailers.

The best thing about the trailer, like Markiehoe said, is Affleck as Batman. He looks pretty good.

But that is really all I can say that I enjoyed from the trailer.

The story looks like its really trying to be profound and epic, but the premise is (from what can be garnered in the trailer) weak to me. Maybe I will be proven wrong when the film is released. As we don't really know what the story is (yes I know it is based on the Miller comic, but not a shot-for-shot re-telling like Watchmen was).

Wonder Woman (all 5 seconds of her) looks lame. I just CANNOT see Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman/Diana Prince. At all. Her vibe just brings up images of Xena. And so much for her "buffing up" (though who really bought into that?).

Don't know what Mother Kent is talking about either, telling Clark that he can do what he wants, etc. Clark gets his moral compass FROM the Kents. No, he is not Space Jesus. He gets that morality from the upbringing of the Kents.

And....ah meh nvm lol. Its Zack Snyder and Warner Brothers. Enough said.

I'm sure people will rave about it when it's released. I'll watch it. It will look good that is for sure.

Would it be the tone and story I would have chosen to tell for the premier icons of Comic-dom? Absolutely not.

Peace.

/K

fats wrote: Xena was what i saw as well, and what's with the energy charge from the bracelets.

Fats

If those energy charge thingies (bracelets?) are Amazonian, then they've definitely colored outside the lines. I give the writers and director a fair bit of latitude in major movies. I actually liked most of the inventions in MOS. But as far a changing canon, Amazonian bracelets projecting energy or a Sue Storm kind of force field or whatever it is that we saw --- that's just wrong for WW!

Now, that said, the idea of energy bands that can project power or provide a shield is very cool for a female superhero. I can see a lot of interesting things they could do with that -- if we weren't calling her Wonder Woman. It's a very cool "power", something beyond mere technology like Batman's toys.

I suspect I'm going to have to greatly expand my horizon if I'm going to enjoy this movie. And I do want to enjoy it. (Or watch it when I'm very stoned.)

kikass2014 wrote:
Don't know what Mother Kent is talking about either, telling Clark that he can do what he wants, etc. Clark gets his moral compass FROM the Kents. No, he is not Space Jesus. He gets that morality from the upbringing of the Kents.

And....ah meh nvm lol. Its Zack Snyder and Warner Brothers. Enough said.


Would it be the tone and story I would have chosen to tell for the premier icons of Comic-dom? Absolutely not.

Peace.

/K

Well I'll defend that-since the 40s some of the best superhero comics and the stuff people remember has been some varaition of "Superman uses his power for EVIL!!!" and that can be an intresting idea when done right, and not I am destroying Jimmy Olsens presents. It goes to the basic nature of the character as someone you can not check someone with no restraints other then his moral code-and suggesting that even his parents revel that is self imposed-okay. I'll buy that.


And the concept that The movie is adressing the fact that Superman destroyed metropolis in the last one- agian I'll go for clever.

And yeah...i think would rather see this then have him fighting Mechino or Braniac.

But There seems to be a lot of clever ideas -also looking at it agian-really Zack Synderish. The last one was a little bit but yeah boy does this movie look like 300 in the action scenes-which may help with the Xena comparisions, which probably an inspiration--though to a degree that's two degrees of inspiration as Xena has a lot of Wonder Woman in her(okay confession:once went to a comic convention on the development process of a wonder woman movie-with the producer and creator of Xena on the panel)
. Synder is a director i don't hate, and i kind of like a lot of his stuff-but i don't think i have seen an action scene he has done with a woman which i actually like. His over stylization and emphasis on just toughness(which is a trait he shares a lot of the time with Xena)...ehhh..
My thoughts at least.

Early this morning on a Radio Station here in my place there was a brief comment about the tráiler and they we're a pair of things to remark about what they say.

Good part: The best applauses they gone for when WW apperared.

Bad part: Her role in the film is described (hope they're wrong) like a Cameo as they do with Aquaman and The Flash that seem to be part of movie as well.

I thought the trailer was awesome. If you are comic book fan, I don't know what else you could possibly want?

- The two most iconic superheroes of all time on the screen together at the same time? Check.
- The most iconic female superhero of all time included? Check.
- A realistic interpretation of how the world would really react to Superman's arrival on Earth? Check.
- Lex Luthor pulling strings and manipulating everyone? Check.

Don't even get me started on the WW/Xena comparisons. It's like people don't know that Wonder Woman was around about 50 years before Xena and was wearing Amazonian battle armor as early as the 1980s. If anything, Xena copied Wonder Woman, not the other way around.

"I thought the trailer was awesome. If you are comic book fan, I don't know what else you could possibly want?

- The two most iconic superheroes of all time on the screen together at the same time? Check.
- The most iconic female superhero of all time included? Check.
- A realistic interpretation of how the world would really react to Superman's arrival on Earth? Check.
- Lex Luthor pulling strings and manipulating everyone? Check."

At the end of the day, this really comes down to personal taste. No one is really "right" when it comes to stories and characters as iconic as this. But I'll take each of these points you make, as a comic book fan of 30+ years, and point out what I would have wanted:

"- The two most iconic superheroes of all time on the screen together at the same time? Check."
Nope. Big Blue in this incarnation is not the iconic Man of Steel of pop culture and history. Batman is Batman I guess. He can be dark and brooding. I can give that. But Superman is bright, vibrant and full of life. The hero other superheroes look up too.

"- The most iconic female superhero of all time included? Check."
Again, this is SEVERELY tarnished by a huge miscast. So ye, check in the sense we have the image of WW included (on-screen for how long no one really knows), but to a lot of people, Gal Gadot is NOT Wonder Woman (looks or acting wise). The most widely know depiction of WW in mainstream is Lynda Carter. Gal does not even come close to matching that (costume or otherwise). In the comics, WW is different still, being depicted in a more athletic style. Either way, Gadot is neither. Bottom line, WW has curves. Gal Gadot is a stick (this is not to say she is not attractive).

"- A realistic interpretation of how the world would really react to Superman's arrival on Earth? Check."
Wait what? This is a comic book. Was the Reeves/Donner version of Superman unrealistic? Not imo. In fact, during the making of Superman, they used the word "verisimilitude" as almost a mantra. They just didn't dwell on the little details. It is a comic book adaptation. They just got on with good adventure, characterisation and storytelling. Not saying it was perfect, but when I think of Superman, that was much more faithful in terms of tone then MOS and BvsS looks to be.

"- Lex Luthor pulling strings and manipulating everyone? Check."
Fair point. Can't really say anything against that. Iconic villain doing the iconic mastermind thing.

I guess, and I may be wrong, but, judging from your second point, and the general buzz around here, a lot of it comes down to this - "SQUEEEEEE we are getting Wonder Woman on the big screen for the first time."

But the whole thing (not just WW) is, to me anyway, off-key. They may as well have called them Blooperman, Sackman and Super Doll. They don't really look or feel like the iconic characters they are suppose to be. And just to show this is not just about Gadot as WW, lets take Affleck as Batman. Affleck is enormous compared to Cavil (see them at the panel). Batman is not suppose to bigger then Superman. This looks wrong. Reeves was huge. He "looked" like Superman.

Look, I'm not saying the film will be terrible. I generally like the look of Snyder's films. Hell, I'm a big fan of Sucker Punch, faults and all.

But to say, "If you are comic book fan, I don't know what else you could possibly want?", well, there is a lot more I would have wanted from this film that I won't be getting.

Peace.

/K

At the end of the day, this really comes down to personal taste. No one is really "right" when it comes to stories and characters as iconic as this. But I'll take each of these points you make, as a comic book fan of 30+ years, and point out what I would have wanted:

True. No disagreement here.

"- The two most iconic superheroes of all time on the screen together at the same time? Check."
Nope. Big Blue in this incarnation is not the iconic Man of Steel of pop culture and history. Batman is Batman I guess. He can be dark and brooding. I can give that. But Superman is bright, vibrant and full of life. The hero other superheroes look up too.

That is your opinion. There have been many different interpretations of SM over the years. In fact, in the beginning, the so-called "golden age", he killed criminals as a matter of course. That doesn't sound very "bright, vibrant, and full of life." He's also had other, darker, interpretations over the years. I don't know why some people feel the need to cling to some particular version of a fictional character they have built up in their heads. The SM in MOS was not a fully formed hero. Why are you unwilling to give him a chance to get there?

"- The most iconic female superhero of all time included? Check."
Again, this is SEVERELY tarnished by a huge miscast. So ye, check in the sense we have the image of WW included (on-screen for how long no one really knows), but to a lot of people, Gal Gadot is NOT Wonder Woman (looks or acting wise). The most widely know depiction of WW in mainstream is Lynda Carter. Gal does not even come close to matching that (costume or otherwise). In the comics, WW is different still, being depicted in a more athletic style. Either way, Gadot is neither. Bottom line, WW has curves. Gal Gadot is a stick (this is not to say she is not attractive).

Again with the blanket statements that haters like to throw around. "Huge miscast"? "NOT Wonder Woman"? How do you know? Have you seen the movie? I've expressed my concerns about her casting in the past but I'm willing to at least see how she does before writing her off. As for her looks, there have been many different artists who have drawn WW over the years, why does the one you have built up in your own mind get to take precedence over all the others?

"- A realistic interpretation of how the world would really react to Superman's arrival on Earth? Check."
Wait what? This is a comic book. Was the Reeves/Donner version of Superman unrealistic? Not imo. In fact, during the making of Superman, they used the word "verisimilitude" as almost a mantra. They just didn't dwell on the little details. It is a comic book adaptation. They just got on with good adventure, characterisation and storytelling. Not saying it was perfect, but when I think of Superman, that was much more faithful in terms of tone then MOS and BvsS looks to be.

Come on, how do you really think the world would react if a super powered guy showed up on earth out of nowhere? Do you really think everyone would just cheer and accept him? Look, I loved the Donner movies as a kid and I can still appreciate them for what they are. However, I can also admit that they haven't aged well. If Donner was going for verisimilitude, then why did he have SM turn back time by flying around the earth really fast? Even my kids thought that was silly when I showed them SM: The Movie last year.

"- Lex Luthor pulling strings and manipulating everyone? Check."
Fair point. Can't really say anything against that. Iconic villain doing the iconic mastermind thing.

At least we can agree on something.

I guess, and I may be wrong, but, judging from your second point, and the general buzz around here, a lot of it comes down to this - "SQUEEEEEE we are getting Wonder Woman on the big screen for the first time."

We are on Superwomenmania.com. Is there a point here?

But the whole thing (not just WW) is, to me anyway, off-key. They may as well have called them Blooperman, Sackman and Super Doll. They don't really look or feel like the iconic characters they are suppose to be. And just to show this is not just about Gadot as WW, lets take Affleck as Batman. Affleck is enormous compared to Cavil (see them at the panel). Batman is not suppose to bigger then Superman. This looks wrong. Reeves was huge. He "looked" like Superman.

The key is in bold. "To you".

Also, where did you get that "Batman is not supposed to be bigger than Superman"? Is this some comic fan rule that I missed?

Look, I'm not saying the film will be terrible. I generally like the look of Snyder's films. Hell, I'm a big fan of Sucker Punch, faults and all.

I've never seen Sucker Punch so I can't comment on that one. However, the other Snyder movies that I have seen I've generally enjoyed.

But to say, "If you are comic book fan, I don't know what else you could possibly want?", well, there is a lot more I would have wanted from this film that I won't be getting.

It's totally your choice whether or not you go see the movie. It sounds like what you want is a return to the Donner Universe. I'm sorry but DC/WB already tried that with SM Returns and the result was catastrophic.

Peace.

Peace.

One thing that struck me about this trailer.

Well not so much the trailer but where its not: We don't see a link to it on the front page.

This is our first look ever at a big screen live action Wonder Woman...and while this thread is here, its not big or anything like that. We see Gal Gadot on screen for like five seconds? Sure.

She to Thin? Maybe(though she looks pretty good in the comiccon photos-taken about a year after the movie wraped). Maybe that this movie has been in for works forever and we still haven't heard her say 2 words The Special effects and look? Not Great. Sure Honestly looking at the trailer, i am not sure i wouldn't prefer the movie just be Superman and Batman Mano O Mano, which is in someways a more compelling idea then A Battle Royale. That looks intresting. But this...

Honestly i am not complaining to Lfan or anyone-but yeah after this Supergirl and the other things in the work..i am not sure it really merits it.

@Jdrock24

This is not a personal attack btw. You asked "If you are [a] comic book fan, I don't know what else you could possibly want?", implying that we should be happy with what we are getting. That seeing Superman, Batman on screen together, with Wonder Woman, is what all comic book fans dream of.

Yes that is great. Visually speaking. But as a comic book fan, to me (and I imagine others) this is not the Superman and Wonder Woman that I certainly grew up with.

You say "That is your opinion. There have been many different interpretations of SM over the years. In fact, in the beginning, the so-called "golden age", he killed criminals as a matter of course. That doesn't sound very "bright, vibrant, and full of life." He's also had other, darker, interpretations over the years. I don't know why some people feel the need to cling to some particular version of a fictional character they have built up in their heads. The SM in MOS was not a fully formed hero. Why are you unwilling to give him a chance to get there?"

The "killing" you refer to stopped around 1940. And as for the earlier stuff, well Siegel and Shuster have been noted to say that they created Superman to be a villain, so maybe that personality was influenced by that in a manner of speaking. The point is this, what do people think of when you mention Superman? It certainly isn't killing.

On the Gal Gadot point, I am by no means the only person to think she is miscast. And I don't have to see the film to say that. I have seen pictures of her, both as Gal Gadot and Wonder Woman. And I'm sorry, but no matter how you dress it up, she does NOT look like Wonder Woman. Can she "act" the part of Wonder Woman is what you are implying by asking "have I seen the film?". The answer to that is, I don't know. I have seen her act though.

On the reality point. I mean really? Did you not see the point I was making?

You say I want a return to the Reeves/Donner stuff but it ain't gonna happen. That it has not aged well. Personally I think its still a fine film. And ofc we are never going to get that. You point out "I'm sorry but DC/WB already tried that with SM Returns and the result was catastrophic." Superman Returns was utter rubbish and that fault lies with Bryan Singer. Singer messed that up and has continually messed up X-Men with his bullcrap. The guy is a hack and that is why Superman Returns was a failure.

However it is interesting to note that Supergirl manages to capture the tone of the original Donner/Reeves film in this day and age. Even if you have not seen the pilot, the 6 min promo clip showcases it well enough. And judging by the general response to the pilot, it seems to work. So it can be done.

Look, I get it. You are really looking forward to the film, and by the sounds of it, it is everything you wanted. I am sure the film is going to be good. Like I said, I'm a huge Snyder fan (I own all his films) and visually I would be hard pressed to find a better director at this moment in time. He is fantastic with visuals.

But, again, to say this is what all comic book fans should want and accept, I'm sorry, but on that I have to disagree.

Peace.

/K

@ kikass2014

I get it. I really do. Your answer to my question "What more could comic fans want?" seems to be the following:

1. A "real" Superman that doesn't kill.
- Even though SM killed Zod in Superman II and various other times in the comics, writers (both comic and screen) should never have the creative license to have him do so because the majority of the public is against it. A more convenient option (such as turning back time by flying really fast, phantom zone, etc...) should always be used to get Superman out of tight, moral situations. Did I get that right?

2. Someone other than Gal Gadot playing Wonder Woman.
- Even though we haven't seen her performance yet, the role of Wonder Woman should be immediately recast because Ms. Gadot does not "look like" her. I haven't seen one second of any Fast & Furious movie (they have never interested me) so I know exactly zero of her acting ability. Simply put, she is an unknown quantity, much like Chris Hemsworth in Thor before he was cast. People were willing to give him a chance but Gal gets no such consideration.
As for her looks, she looks pretty good to me in the Wonder Woman costume from what I have seen. You may disagree and that is fine but to simply write her off already seems pretty disingenuous to me.

Look, I understand the deep affection people have for these characters. I have them also. However, the difference seems to be that I am willing to wait and see how this movie is going to turn out before condemning it. Generally, I like to be positive about comic book projects until I see the final result. Projects about superheroines especially since they are so few and far between (<-Hopefully that is changing!)

I am the same way about the Supergirl show. I have seen the pilot and it is fantastic in my view. However, I can also appreciate the fact that it is not written for me. It is mainly a show to attract young females, the polar opposite of my demographic (old male). It is the same with MOS and BM v SM. It wasn't really written for my demographic (although I loved MOS). Sure, the Dark Knight references are cool to old comic book fans like me, but I know that the goal is to attract young people to the characters. If they wanted to attract my demographic, they would probably have SM towing around planets like he did in the Silver Age.

Anyway, there is nothing personal about this. Everyone is entitled to their opinions and, of course, are free to express that opinion whenever or wherever they want.

@Jdrock24

I am sure we can have many a discussion on the topic of comics and characterization, and we will probably agree and disagree on a number of them But thinking on this topic, maybe I have been a little to harsh on Batman Vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice, and even on Gal as WW. Though that films title will never sit right with me

I recently saw her in some of the comic-con panels, and I have to say, I'm with you now on willing to wait and see

And you are completely correct in saying:

"I am the same way about the Supergirl show. I have seen the pilot and it is fantastic in my view. However, I can also appreciate the fact that it is not written for me. It is mainly a show to attract young females, the polar opposite of my demographic (old male). It is the same with MOS and BM v SM. It wasn't really written for my demographic (although I loved MOS). Sure, the Dark Knight references are cool to old comic book fans like me, but I know that the goal is to attract young people to the characters. If they wanted to attract my demographic, they would probably have SM towing around planets like he did in the Silver Age."

I too understand these films are not written for me (does that make us too old? lol )

Anyway, like I said, the film will look great, and probably contrary to how I may have come across, I am looking forward to seeing it

Peace.

/K

P.S. Your assertion that for me a "real" Superman is one that does not kill is false. That wasn't the point I was trying to make. But that is for another time Thank you for the stimulating debate. I appreciated it very much