by the fans for the fans

I think the better way of looking at it is that success isn't guaranteed no matter who's behind the production. While I don't mind the idea of seeing a live action movie series, I think it would fair better as a live action TV series. Why? Because there's a lot to tell and it lessens the hell of trying to cram a bunch of shit into four two hour movies or however many the Macross Saga requires.

Another reason is the writing for television series seems to be significantly better than the writing for movies these days. In fact there hasn't been many decent movies out in recent years at all, sad but true.

I'll watch Civil War after I get around to watching Winter Soldier, i.e. once both are available on Netflix

It's interesting to note though that Civil War is a cinematic competitor BvS, and despite having many more characters involved, apparently makes a lot more coherent sense. I haven't seen either one of them but Angry Joe was pretty impressed with it.

I still haven't seen Star wars yet

ds55 wrote: I still haven't seen Star wars yet

People either love it or hate it because it followed the same formula as Episode IV A New Hope. Well after Episodes I II and III, Star Wars needed to play it safe. VII did what it needed to do, and did it well. It is a good movie.

Hmmm o I might go see it with my granddaughter

ds55 wrote: Hmmm o I might go see it with my granddaughter

Well I could make one minor gripe about it, same as with the first Star Trek reboot, and that is "Small World" syndrome. Characters who could conceivably be millions of light-years apart just happen to be a 10 minute walk away from each other because plot convenience. In both cases, it's highly improbable, but I guess not entirely impossible.

I am not a fan of Batman or Superman, so I won't watch the movie in the cinema. In general I prefer optimism over pessimism and idealism over cynicism. So of these two characters, I prefer Superman. As a teenager, I liked the nineties Superman animated series better than the Batman series. Batman was too dark for me.

Could that be part of the problem for the 2006 and 2013 Superman movies and for BvS? That the focus is too much on the downsides of superheroism, where Superman always tended to be on the plusside? Using what worked for Batman movies on Superman, thereby ignoring the difference in fanbases?
Surely there could have been ways to get the two characters to meet without focusing on the damage caused by superheroes - indirectly criticising the very concept of the genre?

Besides, if people have no affinity with superheroes at all, they still tend to know three names: Superman, Batman, Spider-Man. You have two out of three in the same movie. But is that enough? No, apparently, there had to be a third character in it - one that for some reason had not been given a solo movie previously.
As if the creators of the movie did not even believe themselves it would be good enough.

Nothing against the character called Wonder Woman - but it would have been better if she had been kept out of this movie.

Peter Young wrote: I am not a fan of Batman or Superman, so I won't watch the movie in the cinema. In general I prefer optimism over pessimism and idealism over cynicism. So of these two characters, I prefer Superman. As a teenager, I liked the nineties Superman animated series better than the Batman series. Batman was too dark for me.

Could that be part of the problem for the 2006 and 2013 Superman movies and for BvS? That the focus is too much on the downsides of superheroism, where auperman Always tended to be on the plusside? Using what worked for Batman movies on Superman, thereby ignoring the difference in fanbases?
Surely there could have been ways to get the two characters to meet without focusing on the damage caused by superheroes - indirectly criticising the very concept of the genre?

Besides, if people have no affinity with superheroes at all, they still tend to know three names: Superman, Batman, Spider-Man. You have two out of three in the same movie. But is that enough? No, apparently, there had to be a third character in it - one that for some reason had not been given a solo movie previously.
As if the creators of the movie did not even believe themselves it would be good enough.

Nothing against the character called Wonder Woman - but it would have been better if she had been kept out of this movie.

That's pretty much what I'm gathering about it. Batman and Superman conceivably should provide plenty of contrast to each other, but in this case, Superman is just as dark and brooding and depressing as Batman is. What a downer!

And the various character's various motivations make little to no sense. It turns out that intelligent writing is still important to people. Who knew?!

Alpha Bravo wrote:

Peter Young wrote: I am not a fan of Batman or Superman, so I won't watch the movie in the cinema. In general I prefer optimism over pessimism and idealism over cynicism. So of these two characters, I prefer Superman. As a teenager, I liked the nineties Superman animated series better than the Batman series. Batman was too dark for me.

Could that be part of the problem for the 2006 and 2013 Superman movies and for BvS? That the focus is too much on the downsides of superheroism, where auperman Always tended to be on the plusside? Using what worked for Batman movies on Superman, thereby ignoring the difference in fanbases?
Surely there could have been ways to get the two characters to meet without focusing on the damage caused by superheroes - indirectly criticising the very concept of the genre?

Besides, if people have no affinity with superheroes at all, they still tend to know three names: Superman, Batman, Spider-Man. You have two out of three in the same movie. But is that enough? No, apparently, there had to be a third character in it - one that for some reason had not been given a solo movie previously.
As if the creators of the movie did not even believe themselves it would be good enough.

Nothing against the character called Wonder Woman - but it would have been better if she had been kept out of this movie.

That's pretty much what I'm gathering about it. Batman and Superman conceivably should provide plenty of contrast to each other, but in this case, Superman is just as dark and brooding and depressing as Batman is. What a downer!

And the various character's various motivations make little to no sense. It turns out that intelligent writing is still important to people. Who knew?!

As opposed to those who just want to see Batman and Superman beat the holy frack fracking frackedy frack out of each other for two hours on screen, or brood to one another about who has it the hardest? Meh, I'll pass on that. I've never been huge on the super hero types to begin with, and this is why I find characters like Rick Grimes so much more interesting. Hell even Negan is much more fascinating than both Batman and Superman combined.

But Aquaman was always the most boring and uninteresting now he's getting his own movie? FML!

LadyGrimes wrote:
But Aquaman was always the most boring and uninteresting now he's getting his own movie? FML!

This.