Comparing Batman Begins and Man of Steel

With Man of Steel, the main character isn't developed as much. Clark barely does anything to further his character between the flashbacks, and adult Clark, whom the film is ostensibly about, is pretty much pointless until he puts on the suit. Unlike in BB, the flashbacks don't work symbiotically with the present-day scenes. Like, in BB, Bruce being confronted by fear triggers flashbacks about childhood fears. In MOS, it's just random infodumps that say "Clark's life is hard, feel bad for him." Man of Steel doesn't have that illusion of immersion in it's world. Despite the many locations, it feels like a really contained film that doesn't take you anywhere. It just feels like moving through set pieces. The supporting characters don't really have a lot of personality other than reacting to Superman. Perry White is just "stern boss who yells at Lois." Lois is just "spunky reporter who follows Superman and falls in love." Metropolis isn't really given an identity, it's just an interchangeable city where disaster strikes. It kind of just makes the film feel thin, stiff, and emotionless.

I dunno, that's just my assessment. I feel like Goyer's understanding of Batman and Nolan's attention to character and theme made BB great. With MOS, Goyer just tried to use the same tricks without understanding why they worked, and Snyder, who is more about style than substance, didn't provide the counterbalance that Nolan did.

DIME FOR MAN OF MUDDER BOSTING :DDDDD

>>77457292
>>77457314

I was with you until you said that the guy who made Batman only fight crime for a year before giving up understood the character.

>>77457510
shut up buddy

>>77457292
>>77457314
I like MOS but this was insightful as fuck.

>>77457510
Do you not understand how movie franchises work

>>77457610

I didn't know there was a rule in movie franchises that said the hero had to give up after a year.

>>77457666
Well now you do, satan.

>>77457314
>Snyder, who is more about style than substance
>implying Nolan is in any way about substance

>>77457875
Yeah, but Nolan HAS style. Snyder doesn't.

>>77457875
>>77457924

I think what you mean to say is that Nolan has style over substance and Snyder has slow motion and explosions over style.

>>77457924
I think Nolan has subtle style. Like, yeah, his Gotham wasn't the gothic german expressionist/deco city Burton's was, but that's because such a set wouldn't work in his films.

But Gotham still has character. Like, the walled-in narrows of the first film. The second film kind of got rid of a lot of the more claustrophobic elements of the first, but the cinematography kind of evoked neo-noirs, which was pretty cool at a time when most cape films had that more dazzly Spider-Man-esque action sequence thing going on. The films also captured well the dichotomy between the city's rich financial sector, and the poor (mostly the first and last films).

Also, rewatching the films, even though everyone complains about the fight scenes, they are actually fucking great in the first two. I dunno if they hired a new choreographer for the last or something, but it isn't until Rises that they look kinda funny.

Snyder, on the other hand, has that really stylized Hollywood look, though he toned it down a little for MOS. But when it comes to substance, the only work where he couldn't rely on direct translation of some work to carry the story was Sucker Punch, and well...

Begins just stole everything from Year One and shoehorned Scarecrow in.

MoS was inspired by the comic it took its name from which was a great idea because Byrne really understood Superman and modernized him for fans of the time perfectly.

However it ended up being a mistake because "fans" from modern times DON'T understand Superman because all they've read is All-Star.

Everything in the movie was very deliberately done to re-educate viewers on what Superman is in modern times. He's cool because he's so powerful, but even with all his powers he can't do everything. Just like in the comic Superman is forced to kill Zod to show that someone like Superman can kill while still keeping a no-kill code. This totally flew over peoples' heads because they were expecting Silver Age Superman when that hasn't been him for a very long time. Like Begins it is a more cynical take on the character, which perhaps is not your preferred version, but it is definitely the one needed to make Superman popular in the public again.

There are many flaws with the storytelling in this movie but the basic plot is not one of them. It's not the movie's fault people were going in with a certain expectation, like how people originally expected Returns to be Superman's Batman Begins and it ended up being Silver Age, but that was before All-Star Superman so it wasn't popular back then.

>>77458111
>they are actually fucking great in the first two

Mind elaborating? I think in the first one the choreography is ok but hampered by the obvious lack of mobility in the suit, but even by the second movie a lot of the fights use camera tricks to try and make you forget that a henchman could easily shoot him. Like, in the first movie Batman is leaping through shadows like a ninja, people are spraying their guns in vain and failing to hit anything and shit. And in the second movie Batman walk around and punches people and the armed henchman wander into the shot just in time to get punched. Like, their guns don't work unless the audience is looking at them or something.

Or, like that part where Batman is fighting the SWAT guys at the end, there's a part where they all point their guns at him and tell him to stop fighting or they'll shoot. Was there anything preventing them from doing that before Batman got them all tied up like he wanted? Nothing but plot, really.

>>77458184
>modern is automatically good and silver age is automatically bad
>there is nothing to a movie besides just the broadest sense of what type of feel it's going for
>Superman killing Zod is the problem and not how it was handled

yeah, nah

>>77458184
>Begins just stole everything from Year One and shoehorned Scarecrow in.
Begins was heavily influenced by Year One, as well as the other myriad of comics that have episodes from Wayne's development into Batman.

Obviously, YO is the biggest influence, but it's not just a direct adaptation. The crux of the film is Wayne dealing with his pain and fears and turning them into a force for good. Attacking the corrupt root causes of evil instead of just living a revenge fantasy in which he goes after muggers. And struggling with the paradox in which the only way he can vindicate his parents' legacy and make Gotham safe and defeat the forces that killed them is to pretty much abandon his legacy as their son by being Batman instead of Bruce Wayne. All this stuff has basis in the comics, but Goyer and Nolan crafted it deliberately, borrowing from the comics when it suited them, which is far from just adapting a story and sticking another villain in it.

I think the problems I noted in MOS have little to do with whether it was "modern" or "Silver Agey." It's all about development of characters and theme, and construction of the narrative.

Like, in BB, the flashbacks made sense. In MOS, they come up for no reason and don't work thematically. Like, they raise the question of "should Clark use his powers to help people" WAY AFTER we already see Clark do that at the beginning of the movie, way before this flashback. They raise the question of "should Clark use his powers pettily on bullies" WAY AFTER the scene in the diner, when Clark is already fighting supervillains instead of humans. Other things are just pointless. In BB, everything had a purpose.

Also, killing Zod doesn't establish anything about the "no-kill code," because the film didn't say anything about his attitude toward killing beforehand. The theme wasn't set up, so it meant nothing. Other than "he killed someone, so this is a serious movie."

>>77458266
Well, the thing about a gang of armed mooks being unable to shoot one guy being silly just comes with the territory. It's the same in the comics. Artists can just draw the panels in ways to obscure the fact. But the character is just unrealistic and couldn't exist in real life, so you just kind of have to accept the fact that he is 2spooky2getshot.

What I mean, though, is how they sort of did that horror-movie thing where you see quick flashes of Batman from the perspective of the mooks as he jumps into and out of shadows and freaks 'em out. That scene at the docks when the guy just looks up and sees this crumpled mass in the ceiling, that descends upon him is cool. Like, yeah, the part in Lau's office in TDK makes no sense when dodges bullets by running behind glass, but fuck, it looks cool and evokes this Batmany feeling. I have a strong inclination to think the mechanics of the magic cables in the semi scene and the SWAT scene don't make sense, but whatevs, it was badass and carried this forceful impression of Batman's abilities.

this is the real batman versus superman

>>77458684
>What I mean, though, is how they sort of did that horror-movie thing where you see quick flashes of Batman from the perspective of the mooks as he jumps into and out of shadows and freaks 'em out. That scene at the docks when the guy just looks up and sees this crumpled mass in the ceiling, that descends upon him is cool

Yeah, and they stopped doing that int he second one. Instead he just walks up and punches people.

>Well, the thing about a gang of armed mooks being unable to shoot one guy being silly just comes with the territory

There are ways to do it more convincingly though, as Begins proved.

It's similar because the script and concepts for the movie were already done by Nolan, his wife and Goyer. The film seems heavily Nolan-inspired because, surprise, Nolan and his team were the ones pitching the vision and script to WB. This was right before filming commenced on TDKR, when they brought in Snyder to do production work, film and finish work on the movie. This information, and more involving the production of the movie, is all in the art book.

>>77457314
tldr; Man of Murder

>>77458698
no-murder vs necksnapper

by logic who will wins?

>>77459272
Depends on how much prep time Batman has.

>>77458184
>like how people originally expected Returns to be Superman's Batman Begins and it ended up being Silver Age

If it were silver age it would have had more fun and fantastic elements.

>>77459244
Nothing in the post pointed to the death of Zod as the reason the film sucked.

>>77459272
>>77459324
>I'm not prepared to kill you, but I'm prepared to not have to save you either.

>>77461436
>not have to save you

that was pretty bullshit considering Ra's was killed by the train tracks being blown up by a plan that Batman came up with. Batman might not have physically killed him but he definitely conspired to have him killed.

>>77461506
Yeah, it didn't bother me enough to seriously hamper my enjoyment of the film, but it did seem kind of dumb and a bit contrary to the whole lesson Batman learned of choosing justice over revenge and not being an executioner.

But I can kind of see the other side, too. Like, this wasn't an act of petty revenge against some lowly thief or murderer, this was a guy who wanted to kill an entire city, and Batman saved his life once, only for him to come back and start that shit again. So, it wasn't really a revenge killing or execution, but just Batman being like "enough of your shit, this is what happens when you're a tool." In fact, that would had been a great line instead of the "I don't have to save you either" thing.

File: 1446052625942.jpg (585KB, 1342x1528px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 1342x1528px

>>77458184
>However it ended up being a mistake because "fans" from modern times DON'T understand Superman because all they've read is All-Star.

And Earth One, and Birthright, and Grounded, and Injustice, and Action Comics, and a billion other interpretations and takes of the character that were much better written.

Fuck you. But thanks for getting me one step closer to bingo I guess.

>>77461639

Yeah, it makes sense to kill him, but it doesn't make sense to act like not saving a man from a deathtrap that you set up is somehow better than just stangling him or whatever.

They also kind of fucked up when he refused to kill the Joker under any circumstances but then pushed Harvey to his death 5 minutes later.

>>77461679

I can't even look at the "he saved us" square without laughing my ass off. What has this place done to me?

>>77461679
>Why couldn't Zod terraform Mars
Because there's a bunch of crazy powerful green people living there.
And if not green people, then equally and potentially more powerful white people either of which would have put up an even better fight than Supes did because Zod wouldn't have gotten the Terra-Juice-Roids

Also, I'm pretty sure he just wanted to wipe out humanity to spite Clark by that point

So disappointed that Zod's ship never remained in orbit to become the Watchtower.

>>77461831
>They also kind of fucked up when he refused to kill the Joker under any circumstances but then pushed Harvey to his death 5 minutes later.

I think this made sense. Like, killing Joker wouldn't had been to stop an immediate threat to life, it would had just been an execution. He threw him off a building, and then caught him. There's also the fact that he didn't want Joker to win by "breaking his rule."

When he killed Two-Face, it was in the immediate defense of Gordon's son. Which kind of makes it a Pyrrhic victory, because he was forced to kill the "White Knight," so even though Joker lost, in the end, he still won a little bit.

>>77462093
>Dark Knight takes White Knight
>Feelsmate

>>77457292
A Zack Snyder movie is more style than substance?

What a bold statement.

>>77457292
>>77457314
You make a very good point, but the problem is Bruce had to become Batman, but Clark was born Superman, there was no need to show him becoming what he already was.

>>77462895
I felt they didn't know how to give Clark an interesting personality.