Re: Batman vs. Superman (2016)
No, but, seriously, let's go through this step by step.
For one thing, "they should just drop this thing." The film is almost ready to begin shooting. That means they've most likely already spent millions in pre-production, not to mention making all the deals with the various locations that they'll be shooting in. This thing is happening, like it or not. I'm also curious as to how this is an "insult to Superman." Because Batman and Wonder Woman are in it? We don't know anything about their roles in this film, and yet, people are making it out to be "the caped crusader is totally hijacking the Man of Steel's movie." You say a bunch of characters are being introduced, but, the fact of the matter remains that, outside of one member of Batman's supporting cast, so far, who, outside of he and Wonder Woman, are being introduced, that are not Superman based characters? If two is "a bunch," then color me surprised, considering the fact that, for all we know, one of them may only be appearing for a few minutes.
As for the "no stand alone films" thing, I wish you people would stop and think about things critically, for a minute. Marvel's formula worked, that's a fact, but, just because it did, that doesn't make it the only formula that works, just the only one that's been proven to work, so far. I'm going to make this as clear as possible, so I'll never have to repeat myself, though, I'm sure I will, anyway.
MARVEL's formula is not the only one that works.
MARVEL's formula is not the only one that works.
MARVEL's formula is not the only one that works.
MARVEL's formula is not the only one that works.
Now that that's out of the way, how, may I ask is the cast bad? Affleck? He's been on a roll, lately. The Town, Argo; non-directorial lay, I thought "State of Play" was fantastic. The guy's not the same actor he was ten years ago, and, frankly, I've never seen an actor who didn't have at least one bad film or project under their belts. Eisenberg? The dude was nominated for an Oscar. Is he my first choice to play Lex? Nope. Does that make him a bad choice to play Lex? Also nope. Gadot? Is she unproven? Yes, I'd say so. Does that make her bad? I really can't say that it does. Was she fantastic in those Fast & Furious movies? I'd put my money on "no," but, then, who is? Going to a movie where street racers drive fast cars and blow **** up to gauge an actor's dramatic prowess, is like visiting a mime school to gauge the students' skills as conversationalists. All I know is that the casting people must've seen something to convince them that a model with a few bit parts in action movies was right to bring one of the most iconic female characters of the 20th century to life.
Also, look at their track record, so far. One movie isn't much, but I can honestly say that, of all Man of Steel's issues, casting was not one of them. What roles were turned down, though? I've heard nothing of the sort, and, as far as the script being garbage, I really can't say, but, if it's undergoing rewrites from an Oscar winner, it probably won't be for long.
I see what you're saying here, but I think your mistake is that you're looking at this as someone who liked MOS.
For a lot of people, myself included, the movie was ****, so why shouldn't people be cynical? Obviously you liked the film so you're going to give them the benefit of the doubt, but most aren't going to.
And why should they? You expect people to have faith that they're going to do right, based on what? Snyder/Goyer had their shot and they disappointed a lot of people, so they get another chance to screw it up? That's crazy. Would you let the creative team that put together Green Lantern have another turn at the wheel? Well, if you liked GL I'm sure you would, but most wouldn't.
What is anyone expecting? That this sequel is going to be their "Wrath of Khan", like Singer was saying his next Superman was going to be?
I said this before and I'll say it again:
Wrath of Khan was light years ahead of Star Trek:TMP because THEY BROUGHT IN A WHOLE NEW PRODUCTION TEAM.
They didn't say, "Well. we'll keep Robert Wise and his guys and hope for the best", they looked at the numbers, saw that there was an audience, brought a new team in and spent less money. Bully for them, and us. I don't see that happening here.
I also believe that the only reason they're keeping Zack Snyder is because they CAN"T get anyone else. They can't just get a nobody to direct this, and what self respecting (and career minded) director is going to come in and want to clean up his mess?
Again, you liked the casting for MOS, and again a lot of people didn't. IMO everyone was horrible in that movie. Everyone. Now I don't think anyone of them are bad actors, they just weren't (IMO) right for their roles, and if anyone agrees with that, they're not going to be too keen on the new choices.
For the record, I had no problem with BA as Bats. When I heard the news I thought, how bad could he be? Could he be any worse than George Clooney? That's how low the bar was set (for me).
The others? Well you can get Oscar nominated/winning actors and actresses all day long to be in your movie, but that doesn't make them right for the part. Which is what this film seems to be doing; frontloading a movie with big names (except WW?) to make up for their shortcomings.
Not a great sign, and certainly not enough to have faith in their "vision".
You also seem to be making the case that Marvel's formula isn't the only one that works.
Well for right now, at this moment, that's the ONLY one that there is, and the ONLY reason WB/DC isn't following it is because they don't have the luxury of one thing:
Time.
That's right. Time is not on their side. They know they have to play catch up with Marvel or risk waiting too long and it's too late. They want to jump on the bandwagon feet first before the public (bless 'em) grows weary of superhero flicks. Because no one knows when that will be, or it ever happens. Strike while the iron is hot, so to speak. But they can't.
I mean come on, does anyone really believe this PR speak that they moved up BvS because they want time to achieve their "artistic vision"? That's nonsense. They moved it up because they're too scared to go up against Avengers 2 in the summer and Star Wars VII at Christmas. So then they pick Marvel's sweet May spot and hope for the best. But guess what? That's when Cap 3 comes out.
So who blinks? My guess is DC. It has to be. Why would Marvel move their date? They have absolutely nothing to lose.
Look I'm glad you and (some) others liked MOS, and are looking forward to this new movie. I really am. I wish I liked it and shared your excitement, but I don't and probably never will. I'm in the Riddick camp that's only interested in seeing the Batfleck costume and Batfleckmobile. After that, I'll just forget this movie altogether.
Just like MOS, GL and TDKR.
Cool. Yah, i was psyched for MoS, and loved it. Saw it 4 times in the theater, and seen it several more times since. I think its a great. Very much a Superman movie I expected to see. Was it like 100% perfect?....No. But Henry was just such a great Superman. He was like born to play him. My only wish was they didn't kill Zod because I thought Shannon was awesome as Zod and would have loved to seen him come back to role someday. But they clearly have other things in-mind for the future. Zod was just chapter 1. And I would loved to see more about Jor-El and what it was like to see Zod and him be friends and then Zod changed once Krypton started to die. I just really enjoyed the Krypton Snyder created. Thought it was well done 
With Adams' success in American Hustle, she's an even bigger draw, so I can see why they want to hang on tight to her.
