I liked Civil War. Action scenes are top-notch. Liked it better than either Avengers. As a movie, I think Winter Soldier is better but that's not saying anything bad on CW. There are some great surprises in CW.

This is something I don't understand. The reasons for fighting have the same lapses in logic as BvS. The movie looks lighter but there weren't many laughs. Tony doesn't have his charisma, but that might be character development. I'd put BvS and CW on the same level. I actually thought CW was long. It's weird to me people hated BvS and love CW. I'm seeing it again tomorrow.

Remember to stay after the credits!

I will see it Saturday or Sunday. I think people will respond better to Civil War simply because the character motivations and plot points have been developed over the last 5 years and 12 films. That makes them believable. BVS wanted to cram all of this confrontation into one movie and it just feels half ass. It was always going to feel half ass and there was no way around it. They should have at least made a solo Batman film and a MOS sequel before jumping to a Batman vs Superman movie.

(05-06-2016 02:02 PM)TigerNK Wrote:  I will see it Saturday or Sunday. I think people will respond better to Civil War simply because the character motivations and plot points have been developed over the last 5 years and 12 films. That makes them believable. BVS wanted to cram all of this confrontation into one movie and it just feels half ass. It was always going to feel half ass and there was no way around it. They should have at least made a solo Batman film and a MOS sequel before jumping to a Batman vs Superman movie.

You'll like it.

As far as a solo Batman or MoS sequel... That was the original story. The idea for the MoS sequel was have Batman fight Superman. But Batman is more bankable. And Ben Affleck is a more important star for WB. So they made it a movie of equals. BvS may have needed to treat Batman the way Spider-Man is treated in CA3. Not too much screen time and pop him in when not expected. But that would have been a different story I guess.

I loved CW might be my favorite marvel movie yet. I disagree with not a lot of laughs part of your review to me the action/humor ratio was perfect. They nailed the newcomers Spiderman and Black Panther are fantastic in this movie.

Just saw the movie and it was awesome!

I also disagree with Lat about the lack of humor. It may not be as funny as the Iron Man movies but there are a ton of light moments throughout the movie that breaks the constant tension that exists thru the movie. We also relate to the characters a lot more cuz Marvel invested the time to develop these characters and hence we know their motivations.

BvS has a decent plot but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. If a movie wants to be dour and dark then execution and acting has to be similar to let's say any of the Nolan Batman movies. BvS frankly left me bored and I feel I would have been better of watching the movie from the comfort of my home.

It was good but not great. A little long winded but there is some excellent filmmaking going on. It wasn't as fun as Avengers 1 or as well made as Winter Soldier. It's in that same range as Age of Ultron. I expect Infinity War 1 and 2 will be better movies since they won't have to setup anything and can just tell the story.

It did have some of the same issues as BVS, but it also had better actors playing better developed characters with better dialogue and better direction. It is clearly the superior film, but unfortunately that isn't say a whole lot.

(05-08-2016 04:16 PM)TigerNK Wrote:  It was good but not great. A little long winded but there is some excellent filmmaking going on. It wasn't as fun as Avengers 1 or as well made as Winter Soldier. It's in that same range as Age of Ultron. I expect Infinity War 1 and 2 will be better movies since they won't have to setup anything and can just tell the story.

It did have some of the same issues as BVS, but it also had better actors playing better developed characters with better dialogue and better direction. It is clearly the superior film, but unfortunately that isn't say a whole lot.

Out of curiousity, who were the bad actors in BvS compared to CA?

I don't know if the cast of BvS was less talented than CA.

181 million opening weekend will pass 700 million globally by end of Monday will trot pass a billion quickly

I'm not necessarily saying the CW actors are better overall actors. I'm not sure how one could determine that anyways. Put it this way: Downey as Stark is infinitely more likeable and watchable than Affleck as Batman. Evans as Cap is infinitely more likeable and watchable than Cavill as Superman. Rudd is great as Ant Man. ScarJo, Renner, Cheadle, Bettany are all solid actors playing likeable, well developed characters.

Marvel is fantastic with casting. They absolutely nailed the casting of Black Panther and Spider Man. Black Panther will be a HUGE hit for Marvel.

(05-08-2016 09:10 PM)TigerNK Wrote:  I'm not necessarily saying the CW actors are better overall actors. I'm not sure how one could determine that anyways. Put it this way: Downey as Stark is infinitely more likeable and watchable than Affleck as Batman. Evans as Cap is infinitely more likeable and watchable than Cavill as Superman. Rudd is great as Ant Man. ScarJo, Renner, Cheadle, Bettany are all solid actors playing likeable, well developed characters.

Marvel is fantastic with casting. They absolutely nailed the casting of Black Panther and Spider Man. Black Panther will be a HUGE hit for Marvel.

COME ON MANE.... Your bias is coming out.

CA:CW provided a brooding Tony Stark. He was depressed the whole movie. Very un-Iron Man. So I don't provide any spoilers, literally Tony Starks lives out a Country and Western song in CA:CW. I don't think RDJ's performance is as enjoyable has it has been. He is at his best interacting with Tom Holland as Peter Parker, but most of this movie he seems to be at home in BvS. Ben Affleck has gotten nothing but kudos for his turn as Bruce Wayne/Batman so that comment seems really out of place.

Chris Evans did what he does, but there was nothing stand-out. He did his thing like Cavill did his. Comparing them is basically saying a beefcake out acted another. Neither one of them is winning an Oscar. Cap has shown more charisma in other movies. He kinda played the movie understated as well. His best two scenes were with Spidey and the one with the biggest laugh of the movie, and NK, you're grinning and nodding.

Rudd was a trailer's amount of screen time. Chandle was fine, but what got me is he was looking old. He's about 50 but he looked much older. That is irrelevant but I thought that and how much I'm glad they replaced Terrance Howard. Vision was good. But acting wasn't as much the thing as the sight gags.

I didn't fine anything special about Chad Boseman. I don't think Black Panther was truly defined.

The Olsen triplet couldn't hold her accent and that distracted me. But her and Bettany had good chemistry.

The movie was entertaining. I stand by my original assessment. They colored by numbers and they hit a story that was similar to BvS. If writers didn't call CA out but they did BvS for the motivation to fight, I think fingers need to be pointed.

(05-08-2016 09:41 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(05-08-2016 09:10 PM)TigerNK Wrote:  I'm not necessarily saying the CW actors are better overall actors. I'm not sure how one could determine that anyways. Put it this way: Downey as Stark is infinitely more likeable and watchable than Affleck as Batman. Evans as Cap is infinitely more likeable and watchable than Cavill as Superman. Rudd is great as Ant Man. ScarJo, Renner, Cheadle, Bettany are all solid actors playing likeable, well developed characters.

Marvel is fantastic with casting. They absolutely nailed the casting of Black Panther and Spider Man. Black Panther will be a HUGE hit for Marvel.

COME ON MANE.... Your bias is coming out.

CA:CW provided a brooding Tony Stark. He was depressed the whole movie. Very un-Iron Man. So I don't provide any spoilers, literally Tony Starks lives out a Country and Western song in CA:CW. I don't think RDJ's performance is as enjoyable has it has been. He is at his best interacting with Tom Holland as Peter Parker, but most of this movie he seems to be at home in BvS. Ben Affleck has gotten nothing but kudos for his turn as Bruce Wayne/Batman so that comment seems really out of place.

Chris Evans did what he does, but there was nothing stand-out. He did his thing like Cavill did his. Comparing them is basically saying a beefcake out acted another. Neither one of them is winning an Oscar. Cap has shown more charisma in other movies. He kinda played the movie understated as well. His best two scenes were with Spidey and the one with the biggest laugh of the movie, and NK, you're grinning and nodding.

Rudd was a trailer's amount of screen time. Chandle was fine, but what got me is he was looking old. He's about 50 but he looked much older. That is irrelevant but I thought that and how much I'm glad they replaced Terrance Howard. Vision was good. But acting wasn't as much the thing as the sight gags.

I didn't fine anything special about Chad Boseman. I don't think Black Panther was truly defined.

The Olsen triplet couldn't hold her accent and that distracted me. But her and Bettany had good chemistry.

The movie was entertaining. I stand by my original assessment. They colored by numbers and they hit a story that was similar to BvS. If writers didn't call CA out but they did BvS for the motivation to fight, I think fingers need to be pointed.

If anyone's bias is showing it's your's

I'm truly as unbiased as they come. There are more DC comics in my collection than Marvel. I grew up on Reeve as Supes and Keaton as Batman. He'll, I used to love watching the cheesy 60s Batman reruns at my grandparents house on Sunday nights.

I'm a cinema geek more than anything. Certainly not a biased comic book guy (haven't read them in a decade). Marvel simply has the faith that their source material is good enough and they just need it to be brought to life with well cast actors and good filmmakers. Thats why Deadpool was huge for Fox, because they just followed the Marvel formula and made a true Deadpool movie. I truly think the folks at WB think that comics are just for nerds and they are constantly trying to make them "cooler". They have zero faith in their source material.

If you can't take a step back and come to terms with the fact that Marvel is currently much better at making movies, you need to point that bias finger back at yourself.

(05-08-2016 10:10 PM)TigerNK Wrote:  I'm truly as unbiased as they come. There are more DC comics in my collection than Marvel. I grew up on Reeve as Supes and Keaton as Batman. He'll, I used to love watching the cheesy 60s Batman reruns at my grandparents house on Sunday nights.

I'm a cinema geek more than anything. Certainly not a biased comic book guy (haven't read them in a decade). Marvel simply has the faith that their source material is good enough and they just need it to be brought to life with well cast actors and good filmmakers. Thats why Deadpool was huge for Fox, because they just followed the Marvel formula and made a true Deadpool movie. I truly think the folks at WB think that comics are just for nerds and they are constantly trying to make them "cooler". They have zero faith in their source material.

So, we've discussed this before.

You're speaking of two movies made by a filmmaker I don't think you are enamored with, Zack Snyder. Snyder has his talents. You also can't say he's not true to the source material when every Batman movie since Batman 1989 is living off The Dark Knight Returns. BvS was inspired by TDKR. Your criticism about MoS and BvS comes back to Zack Snyder. He is a filmmaker who was allowed to tell his story and you don't like his method. You ultimately believe WB (and not DC, which is an important distinction) made the wrong direction in how to trust with their Superman/DC franchise.

They aren't trying to make them "cooler." They are trying to go with what worked in the Dark Knight trilogy and 300/Watchmen. Their Marvel style movie was Green Lantern, and we know how that went.

Deadpool wasn't Fox doing a Marvel style film either. Deadpool was public pressure causing Fox to throw a little bit of budget at a filmmaker and star and ending up with a good product and a well-done marketing campaign.

Quote:If you can't take a step back and come to terms with the fact that Marvel is currently much better at making movies, you need to point that bias finger back at yourself.

We aren't talking about Marvel making movies versus WB making movies. We are talking about Captain America 3 and Batman v. Superman. CACW will be the biggest movie of the year in all likelihood. All with a story and themes similar to what happened in a movie that was reviled by many.

Similar, but also very different. There has been a tension growing within a handful of movies, that has lead to this point in CA:CW. To say the same thing in BvS is just false.

It wasn't the dark nature of BTDK that made it such a huge hit. It was incredible acting, great story lines and one of the best directors in the business. Snyder may try to replicate that, but the simple fact is that he can't. If you can't have the formula of 300, sex and violence in a R rated setting, he is out of his depth.

CA:CW is a much better story line because it has far more reaching, and very current themes. It isn't just about one vs one, with the very limited ethos that each possesses.

You can argue until you are blue in the face, but the simple fact is that you have you preconcived perception and nothing is going to sway you from that fact.

I went into BvS wanting to like it. While I was somewhat impressed with Ben's run as Batman, the only character that I really liked was Wonder Woman. I am looking forward to her movie, as long as they get the right director and story line and she could have an incredible movie. The movie itself was very plodding and they worked to hard to make the movie. My friend, who is the biggest Superman fan I know, fell asleep. He admitted it was only the second movie he has ever fallen asleep in at a theater.
I went into CA:CW expecting a solid movie. I was blown away. It was much deeper, more captivating and just a better made movie than I was expecting. Yes, Stark is more serious than he has been, but that is also straightforwardly explained. There is a very straight line between the two sides in the movie, which you find yourself having a hard time being neutral with those sides. There is still quite a bit of humor in the movie, with some great onliners, which was totally missing in BvS.

I would see CA:CW 10 more times before I would see BvS if I had the choice. I will go with any of my friends that want to see it, but I doubt I would even see BvS at the discount theater if it even shows up there.

Lat, as far as your last line.... that is very much the same thing as saying Star Wars is the same as Star Trek. With the very strong exception of the last two ST movies, the other ones were horrible. I would even put SW 1-3 above most of them!!

But, I am sure if you are a Trekkie, you are going to come up with some lame argument as to how I just don't understand the depth, the character driven conflict, the deep reaching themes or whatever BS I have heard from trekkies to try to defend the horrible movies that were the ST compendium.

(05-08-2016 11:50 PM)tigernole79 Wrote:  Lat, as far as your last line.... that is very much the same thing as saying Star Wars is the same as Star Trek. With the very strong exception of the last two ST movies, the other ones were horrible. I would even put SW 1-3 above most of them!!

But, I am sure if you are a Trekkie, you are going to come up with some lame argument as to how I just don't understand the depth, the character driven conflict, the deep reaching themes or whatever BS I have heard from trekkies to try to defend the horrible movies that were the ST compendium.

I hope you find the help you need...live long and prosper.

(05-08-2016 11:50 PM)tigernole79 Wrote:  Lat, as far as your last line.... that is very much the same thing as saying Star Wars is the same as Star Trek. With the very strong exception of the last two ST movies, the other ones were horrible. I would even put SW 1-3 above most of them!!

But, I am sure if you are a Trekkie, you are going to come up with some lame argument as to how I just don't understand the depth, the character driven conflict, the deep reaching themes or whatever BS I have heard from trekkies to try to defend the horrible movies that were the ST compendium.

Since I don't want to ruin CA:CW by giving away too much of the plot...

You know how people don't say Rouge Nation and Spectre are similar because they just happen to be spy movies, they have many of the same beats? That's the thing before BvS and CW; not the fact they are superhero versus movies. Star Trek and Star Wars both have "Star" in the name and are popular; but they aren't the same. I'm not compare them because of genre.

It's a matter of consequences being the motivation and the catalyst.

Maybe CW did it better to folks, but the similarity is there.

BvS - boring
CW - fun

Sometimes it's as simple as that. Someone needs to tell Snyder you can make a dark character driven film without sucking the soul out of the paying audience. He's lucky the DC characters have a lot of goodwill that allowed the movie to open huge.

I heard CW was an amzing movie and maybe the best Marvel movie ever made.

I heard that Batman v Superman was a stinker.

I'll go see CW, will not pay for Batman.

(05-09-2016 01:17 PM)tiger1016 Wrote:  BvS - boring
CW - fun

Sometimes it's as simple as that. Someone needs to tell Snyder you can make a dark character driven film without sucking the soul out of the paying audience. He's lucky the DC characters have a lot of goodwill that allowed the movie to open huge.

Rationale I accept.