I thought people were done crying about this?

Just wait for the Ultimate Edition.

@from_beyond: How is that an 'overstatement' ? We already got a Superman movie, We already have a BAtman movie. Wonder Woman has been established (not to mention her movie is being filmed rn). Suicide Squad is coming later this year. Hell just for fun let's mention the DC characters that we already have in a cinematic universe: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash, Cyborg, Suicide Squad, Alfred, Perry White, Lois Lane, Doomsday, Zod, etc etc etc. Let me say it again: DC cinematic universe is alive and well!!!

BvS made a not much under half a million dollars before it's second weekend!!!!!!!! WTF are you talking about? It's still in theatres. 'struggling' ? No.

@from_beyond: um, I agree with your general premise here but I mean the numbers just don't back up what you are saying imo. We had Superman Returns which got lukewarm reactions and only made $390m I think followed by a lukewarm MoS which made $670m followed up by BvS which even includes Batman and WW and which opened with $420m ww and still doesn't look like it will cross $1b. So if you take out Batman and ww I don't see any stand alone Superman movie making a billion no matter how good it is. Iron man 3 was people around the world greatly enjoying RDJ as Iron Man as well as Avengers building up a lot of worldwide attention which the first two Iron Man movies didn't have. Domestically IM3 made less than $100m more than either of the first two did but internationally it made $300m more than the first two did combined. Superman should not have that much of a problem bringing in international numbers at this point. So if Superman can't break $1b with Batman I simply don't see him doing it by himself no matter who directs it. I think part of the problem is that Superman as a character just doesn't translate into good movies on the big screen the way other characters do. He lacks humor(like IM and Spiderman usually bring) and the ability to be used as a great story telling tool the way Batman does.

Man of Steel made $668 million, which is more then the average stand alone movie in the MCU.

• Iron Man - $585 million
• The Incredible Hulk - $263 million
• Captian America: The First Avenger - $370 million
• Thor - $449 million
• Iron Man 2 - $623 million
• Ant-Man - $519 million
• Thor: The Dark World - $644 million

The only stand alone movies to make more were Iron Man 3 and Captain America 2. Man of Steel also made more money then all of the X-Men films except Days of Future Past and Deadpool. It made more money then the first Batman movie in the Nolan trilogy, which only made $374 million. If you add inflation the Spider-Man movies would be at a million, but Spider-Man's bad movies (ASM 2) barly made more then Man of Steel. Man of Steel had about the same review as ASM 2. Imagine how much more money Superman could make if he actually had a good movie.

Look at the numbers. Thinking Superman is not profitable is ridiculous.

@from_beyond: sorry. make an argument. not trollish absolute statements. saying "denial at best" isn't an argument. it's like groaning. yeah I can tell you don't like it but you're not saying anything substantial.

@invain: I know that and that is exactly my point. I didn't say he wasn't profitable either so that is just not relevant to what I am saying. What I'm saying is that he isn't up there with Batman and Spiderman when it comes to big screen marketability. He isn't even close. He is back there with Marvel's average solo franchises.

If Superman in a bad movie can make close to the same as Spider-Man in a bad movie wouldn't he be on the same league? And he made more then most of the Avengers solos.

His name is *Zack. And here, I'll fix the title for you.

Hey Warner Bros; How do you possibly make the biggest movie of all time fail?

It's hard to know what he'll do

Let's examine some stuff that Warner Bros completely ****ed up on:

• Shoehorning the Justice League into the film
• Making Zack Snyder cut 30 minutes from the film
• Have someone (Terrio) come in to rewrite parts of the script
• Force an Aquaman, Flash, and Cyborg cameo

People do realize that Lois's side plot was apart of the bigger picture of the movie, right? It wasn't there just to be there.

Really though, they should not have someone like Snyder helm the DC universe. Regardless of your thoughts on his movies, Warner Bros. really should have considered a better director to steer this new franchise, given Snyder's shoddy track record with films.

Do I really need to make an argument for it? RT ratings, audience reception and financial disappointment isn't enough for you? If it's not, then I have nothing more to add. I would have given more credibility to your argument had you called the movie mediocre. But by calling it a success you have exaggerated how the movie is really doing and that to me is outright denial.

Don't be condescending. We do know how movie's work. You're not the only one who understands movies here. If you're going to pull the "Zack is just the director, blame it on the writers" then why is Snyder commenting and saying that it's his ideas?

"I don't feel the need to explain how Lex figured out their identities because it's ridiculous" does this sound like someone other than Zack saying this?

"Superheroes lose all their credibility talking" does that sound like the scriptwriter? No, it's Zack. Don't tell me it's not Zack's fault.

And I hope you do realise that the script writer has very little power. It's the director's vision that matters. The scriptwriter doesn't agree and he's fired. Which I doubt seeing as he works under the director.

@invain: I say no for two reasons 1. I think both of the amazing Spiderman's suffered from coming out so soon after the original trilogy(as well as being poor movies). People were tired of Spiderman movies imo and they still did $700m+. That on top of the first 3 doing $1.2b+ in today's dollars. We know what even decent Spiderman movies can do. Superman had two chances under two different directors after having made no movies in over 30 years and still couldn't do $700m. Now he is being paired up with Batman and ww and may still not do $1b. Spiderman already proved he can break $1b by a lot by himself(in today's $). Even Spiderman 3 which was generally hated still did $890m(back in 2007).

@invain: i don't see a reason to compare MoS box office to any film that came before 2013 (besides maybe avengers and TDKR), there's too many factors to consider

Not really...

The director's job isn't merely to visualise the script. The director's job is to "direct the creative aspects of the movie."

"I don't feel the need to explain how Lex figured out their identities because it's ridiculous" does this sound like someone other than Zack saying this?

"Superheroes lose all their credibility talking" does that sound like the scriptwriter? No, it's Zack. Don't tell me it's not Zack's fault.

@petey_is_spidey: yes really, inflation is a pretty major thing to consider.

ASM 2 came out in 2014.

Seems like a loop hole to deny that the movies had close to equal ratings and equal box office reception.

How about this.

• Batman Begins 2005 - $374 million
• Superman Returns 2006 - $391 million

It seems that the last Superman movie that was actually somewhat well received made more then the Batman movie from that time period.

@blackdog2009: Define failure? Ok.

Failing to make $1 billion with the two biggest superheroes of all time, one of the largest marketing campaigns of all time, and one of the largest production values of all time.

On top of that, it failed to receive any halfway decent reviews that would allow it to be advertised to the general public well.

When Iron Man is making more money than Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman together, you are a failure.

There ya go.

@invain: I was referring to this specific part

"And he made more then most of the Avengers solos."

Those two quotes are completely idiotic. Even I'll admit that. Despite being one of my favorite directors (yeah I said it), he can say/do some pretty dumb crap at times.

However, if a studio forces something upon you that you didn't initially want, there's nothing you can do about it. This was originally supposed to be Batman v Superman with a little WW (I don't know how they were going to initially fit her in). However, due to studio greed, impatience, and plain old stupidity, they felt the need to take away 30+ minutes of the film for JL set up.

WB don't even know what they want. They had to postpone the film nearly a year because they were divided on the script Goyer provided. They overloaded Goyer with potential projects which shifted his attention from dedicating time to Batman v. Superman.

Outside of the Nolan trilogy, WB and DC have only put out crap film. Firing Zack Snyder will be a big mistake because instead of looking in the mirror and figuring out how they BOTH can improve, WB will be like "Whelp, we got rid of that guy, so what other crap films can we put out" (I loved both BvS and MoS by the way).

You wanna know why the Nolan Trilogy was so good? Because WB barely did anything. They did minor meddling in Begins, but after that they gave Nolan the full reigns.

Inflation is the only big factor, and even considering that, only the Spiderman films can compare to MoS. Not too much changes in 5 years to make up for a $150 million + difference.

Even if you do add inflation $668 million in 2013 is more then $449 million in 2011. The MCU movies are five years older at most and with the exception of Iron Man the oldest ones didn't even break $400 million.

I am confused about what you are trying to say. So pardon me if I make some inaccurate assumptions about your position. You said Superman can't make a billion with even Batman in the movie. But seeing that BVS was also a Batman movie, I can turn around and say that Batman can't make a billion even with Superman. But we know that's factually incorrect because Batman has made a billion. So what's the conclusion here? With Bad movies, even popular heroes struggle to make a billion. Since all recent Superman movies have had lukewarm reception, it is not logically accurate to imply that Superman can't make a billion. He needs a good movie first in order to cross a billion. To simplify, I will use my position as equation. Here is what we have seen so far:

Batman + Good movie + NO hype < 1 billion (Batman begins)

Batman + Good movie + Hype = 1 billion (Example TDK and TDKR. Hype created by Batman Begins and amazing quality of TDK)

Batman + Bad/Average movie < 1 billion (Example BVS)

Superman + Bad/Average movie < 1 billion (Examples BVS, MOS)

So we need to see the following equation for Superman to determine whether Superman can be just as profitable as Batman and Spiderman.

Superman + Good movie + Hype

So unless we see the above equation executed, we can't reach a definite conclusion.

@from_beyond: I sort of agree with that but that's the point here. That not only do we not know what a 'good' Superman can do but I think it goes to the core of the other point I am making here which is that its simply much harder to make a 'good' Superman movie than a good Spiderman or Batman movie because of his character. His character is a hindrance to his movies imo. What we have seen is TKDR which imo was good but not a great movie and IM3 which again was by no means great both do $1b+ at the box office. Superman is both not that marketable in today's movie industry but also harder to make a good movie around as a character imo which is partly why people aren't that interested in paying to see him on the big screen. BvS suffered in large part according to most reviews due to Superman's role in the movie. People found the Superman related parts of the movie boring unless he was fighting Batman.

Everyone on comicvine seems like a studio executive or some type of analyst nowadays because of they have rotten tomatoes and box office numbers. It didn't used to be this way. For whatever reason BvS seems to have taken a lot of hate.

I think the reason MOS and BVS had bad portrayal of Superman is because of Snyder and his crappy vision, character development and story telling. I mean, Snyder had freaking Batman in the movie and the novelty of seeing Superman and WW along with him and still managed to mess up the movie. I will like to see someone like Russ Brothers or Matthew Vaughn to make a Superman movie. If the movie still doesn't turn out to be good, your argument will have some validity. But until that happens, we can't make a definite conclusion.

I'm not about to argue against you because I thought the movie was really good. I loved it. I'm more interested in his claims of superheroes losing credibility in their costumes, and for not explaining how Lex knows their identities.

That was my biggest flaw in the film, and the former I can see hurting the franchise in the long run.

Many companies do that with films (get too involved). A great director can work around it. Those quotes prove that a large part of the film was based off of his own ideas. Gonna blame WB for Zack's own ideas too?

It wasn't his idea to have "Dawn of Justice" in the movie.

It wasn't his idea to rewrite the script, creating some of the confusion that people have.

It wasn't his idea to cut out a large portion of the film in a panic.

@from_beyond: While a great Superman movie may not be impossible to make I do think there is a strong case for saying its harder to make a great movie around him than Spiderman or Batman for reasons I have already mentioned. Superman is like that wrestler that the wwe is determined to get over as a baby face but the general audience just doesn't resonate with.

Cameos were only for a few minutes. He could have executed them in a fashion so that it wasn't confusing to the audience. Also, did he not know that Warner Bros are expecting a 2.5 hours a movie? He could have made it in a fashion that it wasn't so confusing. He used the same excuse for Watchmen. I could have excused him if BVS was just one bad movie that Snyder made. But it is fourth movie in a row that has mediocre to bad quality. I was hoping people will wake up to the fact that the problem is with Snyder after BVS failed. But it seems like that's not enough. Oh well people will probably change their mind when Justice League bombs. The sad thing is, that will kill DCU so it may be too late.

But they were his ideas that decided how the JL members were introduced (he could have done a better job with that).

What parts were rewritten? How do you know those are the parts that caused confusion?

Most of the movie which was cut out were more/longer dream sequences, and those was one of the negative aspects for the movie.

@from_beyond: Thank you. Somebody gets what I'm saying.

The same could have been said about GOTG. Anyway, we will have to disagree on this point.

Well, as for his movies being "bad", that is completely your opinion. Many consider Watchmen a top 10 CBM ever, MoS a top 2 Superman movie, and a lot of people really enjoy and loved BvS. Saying his movies don't resonate with audience is one thing, but to just plainly say his movies are bad is your opinion.

And what do you mean did he not know WB wanted a 2.5 hour movie? He's the director, and as the director he is in charge of executing the film in his vision. If anything, WB should have gave him leisure to make it as long as he wants. Sure, a 4 hour movie would have been overdoing it, but 3 hours isn't over the top, and as the Studio, they shouldn't be dictating everything he does from the movies length to who will make cameos to how it is written. WB meddles too much. They did the same thing with Green Lantern.

Also, I'm confident if Snyder had his complete way, there would be no dream sequence, cameos, and stupid email messages.

Lastly, how were the cameos confusing for the audience? Sure, they had no business being where they were (or in the movie at all), but they were pretty cut and dry; WW opens emails, looks at videos, and wham! That's it! HOW IS THAT CONFUSING!

I can only speak for myself, but I'm pretty convinced expectations vs reality has a lot to do with it. Example: I went into AoU thinking it's be something special. I saw the trailers and was assured THIS MCU movie had a villain and some real stakes for our heroes. I was psyched. It did not deliver at all what I'd hoped. I left being disgruntled. No RT rating or anything can convince me AoU was anything other than mediocre. I wasn't sorry I spent the time and money to see it, it wasn't horrible but I expected more. I went into Ant-Man with no expectations other than to have some fun at the movies. That's exactly what I got and I left the theatre happy. Was Ant-Man really any better than AoU? Probably not, but my Ant-Man experience was much better personally than my AoU experience. Fast forward to BvS. I'm expecting to get blown away. Again, while I'm not sorry I saw it and it had some memorable bits, it wasn't what I'd hoped. I wanted a "Wow" factor. I needed more than leaving the theatre saying "Good actions scenes and WW was fearsome." I liked it, tbh, but I didn't want to use the word "liked" to describe this film. I wanted to use words like "awed" and "Blown-away." Which I can't. That said, I do think some of the criticisms are unfair and off base. I think many MCU movie have the same flaws and somehow "get away with them."/are judged less harshly. What i can't do is tell someone who didn't enjoy the film that they should have. If they didn't like it, they didn't like it.

Sorry man, you're in the minority here. The majority of people didn't like BvS, and thought it was a bad movie. Most people who liked it were just excited to see Bats+Supes or just like action.

Other than the cameos, that stuff was his idea.

@from_beyond: Except we have only seen one GotG movie and it had a wide range of likable characters and was by most measures both a critical and commercial success. Superman movies always revolve around Superman and are kind of solemn and not that interesting imo.

70% of people on RT liked it(people who gave it a 3.5/5 or higher), it got a 3.7/5 fan rating on RT, got a 7.3 on IMBd, and a 7.4 on Metacritic. Sure, people didn't think to highly of it, but the majority of people liked it and rated it in the 7 range, which I honestly expected.

7 range means they thought it was an ok movie. They didn't like it, but didn't hate it. It's like getting a B- in school. A decent mark at best.

@petey_is_spidey: I think we kind of covered on here quite a bit though that both of those rating systems are flawed and open to manipulation. The Tuesday that BvS came out it had 115k reviews and was at 85% approval. Since that Tuesday(two days before it officially even opened in the us) it has only added 75k reviews and its overall approval % has plummeted to 70%. Which means that less than half of the people who posted a review on rt since then actually gave it a thumbs up.

Those websites aren't reliable. Iron Man 3 has a 79% Audience Rating on RT, Deadpool is in the Top 250 movies of all time on IMDB (it's a good movie, but Top 250 of all time? Really?)

You say that your are sure that if Snyder had his way then there would be no dream sequences. But dream sequences were Snyders idea. It was confirmed by Deborah Snyder. The problem with you is you are making assumptions about what Snyder did and didn't do in the movie. You are assuming that everything bad with the movie is Warner Bros fault and not Snyders. If you make these kind of biased and inaccurate assumptions, you will never see anything wrong with Snyder.

You claimed that MOS is a top 2 Superman movie, but that still doesn't change the fact that it was an average movie.His last four movies have been mediocre to bad which include the likes of Sucker Punch, MOS, Legend of Owl and BVS. He has been pretty consistent with his mediocrity. You asked me what do I mean when I say that he should have known WB wanted a 2.5 hours movie. It's pretty known to all directors like Studios prefer 2.5 hours movies or less so that they can fit in more shows during the day, that translates into bigger BO gross per day. Are you telling me that Snyder didn't know that? He knew he had to make 2.5 hours movie. It is more than enough time to tell a good story involving multiple characters. But he failed. In other words, long running time is just another excuse to defend Snyder. Finally, you can make all the assumptions in the world, the fact remains that he WAS the director of the movie and end result is HIS responsibility.

I guess I'll just wait for the Ultimate edition, though, I didn't hate the movie.