Saber Forum

Suicide Squad, the latest entry into the DCEU is almost among us and so far the entries have been critically and generally received quite mixed. Some people love the darker grittier tone and deconstruction of the superhero that occurred in Man of Steel and BvS, while others felt those movies strayed too far from the ideals set forth in the original material.

With the MCU riding high on its success and so much (perceived) pressure for Suicide Squad to succeed both financially and with critics and fans, I thought this an appropriate time to ask: What is the best DC movie ever?

RULES:
1- You cannot include any of the DC animated movies (yes, that includes The Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke)
2- If you're a Marvel fan, no knocking those people who love the DC movies
3- If you're a DC fan, no knocking those people who love the MCU
4- Give reasons as to why you made your pick (let's create a discussion)

So, my choice for best DC movie ever was difficult to decide on. Superman (1978) gave us the definitive portrayal of Clark Kent/Superman, a bench mark by which all subsequent Superman actors are judged. It hasn't aged well in certain places though, but I still massively enjoy it. And Batman (1966) is just so much campy ridiculous fun. You cannot help but smile just at the thought of anti-shark repellant or Adam West running with a giant bomb over his head.

Constantine, V for Vendetta and Watchmen are all solid entries as was Nolan's Bat-trilogy (with the exception of Rises which was the weakest of the three in my opinion). Unsurprisingly, the decision came down to Batman (1989) and The Dark Knight (Joker vs Joker). Keaton was more menacing in the suit and more tortured as Bruce Wayne and has the best "I'm Batman" delivery outside of Kevin Conroy. But Ledger gave arguably the most definitive portrayal of the Joker in live action. 1989 version is a bit camp in places, but does well to invoke the Gothic nature of Gotham. The Dark Knight has Gary Oldman AND Liam Neeson.

This is so hard..............


The Dark Knight gets the win for me (just).

I'm going to have to pick Batman (1989), with Man of Steel in a very close second. Both of these movies resonate with me on a deep, deep, level.

I was born in 1989 and five years later I lost my dad, being five years old I was naturally confused and angry as something had happened to me that hadn't happened to anyone else I knew; Father's day instantly became the worst day of the year. Now, before I had even known there was a Batman movie, I was knee deep into The Animated Series of the early 90's, which became my coping mechanism, as well as the Spider-Man comics my older brother bought and read with me. I had no trouble Identifying with these characters who had suffered such a loss in their lives. However, it wasn't until I saw Batman that all of that confusion and frustration finally made sense, because as time went on I had become more insular and unwilling to allow others into my world; I had an extremely difficult time making friends or even caring about having friends to begin with.  It was because of these characters that therapists, as well as my family, finally had a through line into getting me to talk about how  I was feeling. So while I would never tout Batman as a character that deals with his issues in a healthy manner, the character represented a justification for what I had been feeling and holding in for so many years.

Later, I come to find that I had been misdiagnosed ADD and ADHD several times before one intelligent doctor surmised that I was in fact on the autism spectrum; something my mother had suspected since I was a child and wound up explaining a ton of my behavioral quirks. When MoS released I couldn't help but understand everything that Clark/Kal felt about himself regarding his place in the world, his purpose, the inherent alienation because he knows he's different.

I don't think I could ever pick a favorite company, both have enriched my life with the characters they create and stories they tell, but Superman and Batman are truly my Yin and Yang.  :)

Also, based on early reviews of Suicide Squad it is becoming more and more apparent that if it isn't touched by Marvel critics will refuse to like it on the sole principle that "Marvel does it better" and that hurts. Not me, it hurts the genre, if Marvel is the only studio putting out CBM the whole thing will fall apart. I applaud DC for taking their universe in a completely different direction, because just like Batman and Superman, Marvel and DC are two sides of the same coin.

The funny thing is, comments made by David Ayre are just inflaming the whole imaginary divide that exists. It is entirely possible to like both companies. Or prefer one over the other. Personally, I'm a Marvel fan. I don't love everything they do though. I do love a number of DC titles, but not all of them. There are so many titles it's impossible to like everything that one company produces. In movie terms, the MCU has had longer to hone their craft and have a team dedicated purely to making this product the best it can be. I haven't been blown away by the DC movies so far, but fully admit that they haven't been awful. However, just because I haven't enjoyed them, I hold nothing against those who do.

I think the best thing DC could do is hire different directors for it's projects, have a Godfather overseeing the entire franchise (like Kevin Feige at Marvel) and Warner Bros should create a studio dedicated to just making comic book movies.

I feel a little bit sorry for DC as they are in an impossible position. Back in 2008 when Marvel launched phase 1 that was to culminate in the Avengers, everyone (so-called experts in the movie industry) said that it was a bad idea and couldn't be done. "that's not how movies are made and business plans are written". And yet, we all know the success that the MCU has become. Meanwhile, DC was lagging behind. Partly due to be cautious and partly because Marvel Studios is an independent studio whereas DC is part of Warner and doesn't have resources dedicated just to making comic book movies. With each Marvel movie that came out, comic book fans kept asking why DC wasn't doing the same (with the exception of the Nolan bat-trilogy).

Eventually, DC are now in a position that if they follow the Marvel template, they wil be accused of copying and unoriginality. If they do something different, people complain that the movies aren't "like Marvel". Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Personally, I don't mind dark and gritty, so long as it is suits the character. Plus, variety is nice. That is something Marvel has been experimenting with (Winter Soldier is a political thriller, Ant-man is a heist movie, Guardians was a space opera). I think DC are trying something different with Suicide Squad and i hope it's good as i've been looking forward to the movie all year.

New member here! Been lurking for a while and this topic was enough to get me to finally jump in and discuss! I'm a huge superhero and movie fan hoping to start a career in filmmaking (I've gotten to work on some pretty cool stuff so far and am hoping to move to LA in the near future) and am excited to find some like-minded people to nerd out with.  ;D

I'm also very happy to see a topic dedicated to looking at DC positively because, while I am more of a Marvel fan, I love DC as well, and have been disappointed by many of their recent entries because I want them to succeed in the same way Marvel has.

Anyways, for my pick I have to go with SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE. Enough has been said about Christopher Reeve's masterful performance that will likely never be beaten, but I think what this movie best captures is the down-to-earth, good-natured decency that is so integral to Superman. Complaints of it having not aged well are certainly warranted and his traveling through the time stream in the third act is definitely jarring (though the second film explores the consequences of this in an interesting way, however I do feel like it compromises Superman's character a bit), but they don't change the fact that this film is a concentrated dose of everything Superman stands for and, like the tagline says, definitely makes you believe a man can fly.

It also finds a great way around a complaint that is often lobbied at Superman as a character: that he's boring and too perfect (I think these complaints often misunderstand the charm of the character, but I can definitely understand how he can be a major turnoff for some). By focusing on his romance with Lois the film finds a relatable, human desire that makes him easy to empathize with, and the chemistry between Reeve and Margot Kidder is electric, making it a treat to watch them interact. I've heard it said that the romance in this film is the A plot while the villain is the B plot, and I believe this is an apt description of the movie's appeal.

Let's not forget either that this movie set the standard for superhero films for years to come. After a relatively positive reception to 1966's BATMAN: THE MOVIE, this came in and was a smash hit with audiences, tapping into a desire for hope and optimism in a torn 1970's America that was met by another certain space opera that we all love. Without the success of this film, it's likely that we would not have Tim Burton's BATMAN, Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN, or Christopher Nolan's DARK KNIGHT Trilogy (the first entry of which even borrowed structural elements of SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE for the origin story of its Caped Crusader), or any of the many superhero movies we see today. This is a landmark superhero film; the one that arguably started it all.

For all of these reasons, I think SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE is the best DC film, and I'm rooting for DC to capture this same magic with audiences again (I have high hopes for WONDER WOMAN)!

DC's Kevin Feige is officially Geoff Johns, he is now the President of DC Entertainment. Starting with BvS he will be hands on with all of the films as Executive Producer. I also remember hearing that he is writing the batman movie alongside Affleck, as well as writing the story for Aquaman with James Wan.

Hope you don't mind me entering the discussion, but I think this is a good point to make about DC's reception. However, I think what's been killing them is that they haven't sold people on the characters.

Whenever something is successful I often see studios taking surface-level characteristics to try and recreate its success (in this case, the "light, joke-y" tone of Marvel), but I don't think this is what brings people on board. Yes, tone is important, but people ultimately respond to characters.

I think a lot of Marvel's success comes from how well they set up the characters in Phase 1. IRON MAN had a billionaire playboy learning to take responsibility for his actions, THOR had the son of a king learning the humility necessary to wield the great power he's been given (and dealing with his jealous brother), and CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER had a kind, decent, and humble man wanting nothing but to do good for the world receiving the power necessary to do so, and influencing others along the way. This all culminated in THE AVENGERS, which featured all of these characters putting their differences aside to work together to save the world.

Because they put in a lot of character work, Marvel made people fall in love with these characters, many of whom were considered obscure at the time (think back to the 2000's; would you even think Thor, Captain America, or Iron Man would be popular?). While I do think they've become somewhat lazy with their stories since THE AVENGERS (IRON MAN THREE and GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY being the exception to this), they still have the same, lovable characters and keep them true to their core characteristics, which keeps audiences coming back again and again. They also happen to be great at introducing characters in general (such as the Guardians of the Galaxy, or Black Panther and Spider-Man in CIVIL WAR), so people will keep coming back for new characters as long as its associated with Marvel.

A more apt way to think of Marvel is less "jokey and fun," and more "characters you love to spend time with." This is the same appeal that TV shows have (I once visited a drama development executive at ABC who told me casting is everything when it comes to a successful TV show, as audiences will follow good characters played by great actors anywhere), which I think leads to their long term success, even though it's possible people will get tired eventually if they can't step their stories up.

However, I don't think DC has sold these characters the same way Marvel has. Many people complain that these characters aren't true to their core characteristics (Superman is morally conflicted and mopey, Batman is a murdering psychopath, etc.) and, for the most part, they're right. While what DC is doing is a great basis for deconstruction, it's not great for introducing characters. This is because a deconstruction does exactly what it sounds like it does: deconstruct a character to show how unrealistic they are. THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS did this for Batman, and WATCHMEN did it for the whole comics medium in general.

By going with a deconstructionist route to these characters you can definitely make interesting movies (and Zack Snyder never fails to make an interesting movie), but you won't be able to get audiences on board to follow these characters through thick and thin. Rather than building a foundation, you're tearing it down. To be literal, who wants to live in a house that's being taken down in front of your eyes?

I'm very hopeful for DC, and from the trailers and online buzz about SUICIDE SQUAD it seems like they may have sold audiences on Harley Quinn, but I'm worried that they'll take the wrong lessons from Marvel by just trying to appear more fun rather than giving the audience characters they can love. I have high hopes for WONDER WOMAN, but SUICIDE SQUAD and JUSTICE LEAGUE seem like a very nervous course correction to me. Maybe once they get past those they'll figure it out (or maybe even figure it out with them; I'll have a better idea when I see SUICIDE SQUAD), but I feel like we're going to go through a long transitionary period for the DCEU before we start getting the movies audiences want, if they even figure that out (and I really hope they do). Hopefully audiences will still be willing to give them a chance by then.

Firstly, LivingBrain, welcome to the madhouse. I'm glad you decided to break radio silence and join us.

I totally agree with everything you said about Superman '78. It is still my favourite Superman movie and still the best portrayal of the character in any incarnation (including tv and animated). The one scene that perfectly encapsulates how great and subtle an actor Christopher Reeve was is after he has been flying with Lois and then comes to her apartment as Clark Kent. Lois goes to get a cardigan and Reeve takes off his glasses and smiles. Instant transformation from Clark Kent to Superman and he wasn't even in the suit! I also love the anger in his face after Lois dies and he flies off into the clouds yelling (his Wrath of Khan moment! lol). As a movie, it is still one of my favourites, even if parts are little dated. That being said, I don't mind dated as I still love and appreciate Adam West's Batman too.

I know that Geoff Johns has been put into that position, but I don't think it is quite the same shepherding role as Feige. However, it is definitely a good thing, as I loved Johns' run on Green Lantern. Some of the best comic storylines from either DC or Marvel from the past 10 years.

my main issue/complaint about DC is that they seem to be in a rush to catch up with Marvel, even if they aren't really in competition (that perception is more from the fans). I agree wholeheartedly with what you said about Marvel's approach. If you look at the phase 1 movies and compare them to the phase 3 ones, things are darker and grittier (for a Marvel movie) and stakes were higher (especially in Civil war) because of all the character groundwork that has been laid and developed in the previous instalments. Whether you agree with Stark or not, you understand why he acts/believes what he does. Same with every other character. The main complaint thrown at the MCU is that their villains are weak (apart from Loki. And Red Skull). This is true, but the upshot is that they have spent loads of time developing the characters.

I wasn't the biggest fan of BvS. I didn't hate it. I just found it uneven and some of the acting (eisenberg) out of place. However, the recent Honest Trailers from Screen Junkies did point out some good points, namely they included several storylines that could have made great individual movies all in one. BvS had to:

Introduce a new Batman
Be a sequel to Man of Steel
Introduce Wonder Woman
Set up a future Justice League movie
Have the two lead superheroes meet, disagree, fall out, fight and then team up to fight a bigger threat
Financially prove that DC can make a movie that will compete with the MCU
Appeal to critics
Appeal to fans

All this in ONE movie. Ambitious, yes. But ultimately the execution is what caused the divisiveness among fans and critics. Personally I think they should have done a Man of Steel sequel laying breadcrumbs about Batman and the upcoming conflict. Then have a solo Batman movie with a Wonder Woman cameo, with a few more breadcrumbs. THEN have BvS with thee justice league cameos. However, hindsight is a wonderful thing (although as excited as I was, I did have misgivings about the movie beforehand).

With all that being said, I want all comic book movies to do well. If all CBM do well then the bubble will not burst. However, apart from Deadpool, Civil War and BvS (financially) I think this year has been quite bad for big budget movies. I hope Suicide Squad is good, then comes Assassins Creed before we get to Dr Strange.....

Question - as great as Margot Robbie looks as Harley Quinn, is it just me or is anyone else upset she's not doing the voice from the Arkham games?

I think to an extent there may be some business competition from the studios, but I think most of the creative voices are friendly. A lot of the competition is definitely from the fans, but Zack Snyder calling Ant-Man "flavor of the week" a while back or all of David Ayer's shots at Marvel show that some of those in charge have that edge to them. I think you're right that a lot of it is fan perception, but it's. It entirely clean behind the scenes.

As far as Harley goes, I'm not too disappointed in her not using the Arkham voice. A lot of this has to do with that I don't like the Arkham games' portrayal of Harley, but some of it has to do with that I like seeing what different spins artists put on characters. What is it that you like about Arkham Harley?

It can get a little irritating, which I think adds to her character, but general audiences might not be so willing look past it.

In a recent USA Today interview she had this to say regarding the voice of Harley Quinn:

“[Quinn’s] got a very high-pitched voice, which for the lighthearted stuff, the crazy stuff, works really well. But when it’s a pretty raw emotional scene, you lose the gravity when you’re speaking in such a high voice.”

She said that she landed on a combination of the original animated Harley Quinn and Lorraine Bracco’s famous performance on The Sopranos:

“[Lorraine Bracco is] nuts in some scenes, completely crazy, but it’s never a high-pitched crazy doll voice. It comes from a very real deep primal place. My spectrum goes from Lorraine Bracco to animated Harley, and it’s just a roller coaster between those two throughout the film.”


Tara Strong.  ;)

Lol compelling reason!

I really like that interview with Margot. It looks like she did a lot of research for the character.

To be honest, I get uncomfortable with Arkham Harley. Her portrayal feels exploitative at times and I'm not a huge fan of it. I do like her in Arkham Asylum because she's very proactive in the story, but she got more infantile as the series went on and the player was given more opportunities to humiliate her. She's definitely always been infantile and provocative, but I feel like those games just turned it up to 11. Do you feel the same way?

Kevin Feige has already gone on record saying tha he wants DC movies to succeed as there are certain section of the general oublic who cannot distinguish between a marvel character and a dc character. All they see are superheroes. So if any movie isn't well received it affects the whole genre. Obviously Feige wants to be more successful, but not to the detriment of DC. Some fans get waaaaay to militant/territorial/tribalistic about their preferences though. It's almost like supporting s footbal team (soccer from our American readers).

I like Harley's voice and characterisation in the Arkham games. I fully understand why Margot went a different route with her protrayal, but still, there's a part of me that wishes for the Arkham harley voice in the movie.

I never watched the Sopranos, but i loved Lorraine Braco in Goodfellas (amazing how many actors from that movie ended up in the show!).

I am pretty excited to see what the new Joker will be like. It seems like Jared Leto is combining elememts from Caesar Romero, Nicholson, Ledger and some of the comics to come up with a new take. Time wil tell if that works.
Fingers crossed.

Nothing really compares to what the Nolan trilogy did for DC movies at least in my mind.
They are the last DC movies I really got excited about seeing.
Ledger's joker is by far my favorite, and he's the reason his movie is my #1

Nicholson is worthy an honorable mention.
I didn't hate Man of Steel, it's not my favorite, but it is a movie I'd watch if I see it on.

Currently Wonder Woman is a contender for taking the number one spot, but only time will tell.

Recently picked up a beautiful Wonder Woman comic to add to my collection.
 ;)

Dude, I'm looking forward to WONDER WOMAN also! Have you seen this poster?

(http://www.cosmicbooknews.com/images1/wonder-woman-movie-poster-high-res.jpg)

It's freaking gorgeous! I love it!

Yeah, I love the poster.
Love the Power. Grace. Wisdom. Wonder tagline also.
High hopes!

Batman & Robin




No, not really.  :P

Seriously, this is a tough call.  So many good ones to choose from.  If I had to choose one from the list, it would have to be Superman (1978) with Christopher Reeve, Gene Hackman, Marlon Brando and so many other wonderful people.  It was written by Mario Puzo and directed by Richard Donner, who never should have been fired from the sequel.

Why?  Because it's awesome!  It's also slightly older than I am, so I watched it a LOT growing up, so it's near and dear to my heart.  The technology used to bring it to life was just amazing and groundbreaking.  Nobody had actually made a man look like he was flying before.  The team who brought it to life, including Christopher Reeve himself, who was a trained hang glider pilot, was amazing.  The story is good and the acting is great, particularly from Christopher Reeve.  Sure, the plot is outrageous and unbelievable, but it was just the thing Superman needed for his big screen debut.  Add to that an amazing score by John Williams and it's pure gold.

Honorable mentions include Tim Burton's Batman, (1989) which also has an awesome score by Danny Elfman, Batman Returns and Nolan's Batman trilogy. I love them all.

Confession: I really like BATMAN AND ROBIN.  :-X

It's definitely cringeworthy but I love it as a weird 90's version of the 60's TV show, and I like the Nightwing influence in Robin's costume along with the subtle shades of blue in Batman's (not their ice suits though; those are bizarre...).

And awesome to see another SUPERMAN lover!  ;D

Christopher Reeve Superman vs Michael Keaton Batman is the versus movie I would love to have seen.

Now THAT would be fascinating!  :o

What would motivate Keaton's Batman though? I know Reeve's Superman would definitely not like Keaton's extreme methods, but Keaton's Batman seems like someone that only sticks to their own city rather than taking on larger threats. Superman would probably have to do something in Gotham to get his attention.

Batman & Robin is a fun, if incredibly stupid film.  "We have precious minutes to save the city, everyone back to the Batcave for new costumes and vehicles!"

I was 18 years old when it hit theaters and I've always liked it, it just can't hold up to the very serious films that preceded it.  I get that there was some blowback from parents on Batman Returns, but I would like to have seen what Tim Burton would have done instead of Batman Forever.  Granted, I like Batman Forever, it has just the right amount of seriousness and camp.  B&R got way too campy.  Everyone was doing one liners, not just Schwarzenegger.

Reeve's Superman VS Keaton's Batman is an interesting thought.  They were gearing up for a Superman flick in the 90s, though I never cared for their choice of Nicholas Cage to play Superman.  If I remember correctly, it was all leading towards a clash with Batman, either in that film or in a sequel.

BATMAN RETURNS is my favorite Batman movie, so I would've loved to see what Burton would've done too. I read an interview once where Michael Keaton said BATMAN BEGINS would have been the third Batman movie he wanted to do, but it didn't quite work out that way.

I realize you said animated movies didn't count, but I do want to say DC Animated is some of the best out there.
Prefer it to anything Marvel has done in the same medium. 

No offense to Keaton, he's a terrific actor and he was great as Batman, but he was too old for Batman Begins.  I'm not saying he was too old to be Batman, but they wanted a young Batman for that film.  Unless he meant the fifth film in that series that never got made and eventually became Batman Begins.

Interesting side note: Christian Bale auditioned for the role of Robin when Keaton was still attached to Batman Forever.

I haven't been too warm on many of their recent efforts, but UNDER THE RED HOOD, JUSTICE LEAGUE (plus UNLIMITED), BATMAN BEYOND, and, of course, BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES are hands down the best superhero animated efforts. THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS is a solid adaptation as well.

The only animated series Marvel has done that can really compete with DC Animated is THE SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN. Other than that, there's really not much.

all true, which is why i cut them out of this discussion. In purely animated terms, Dc kicks Marvel's ass. But this is live action.

I am very tempted to revise my answer and say Batman (1966), purely because it is without a doubt iconic in its campiness and is very memorable.

Who doesn't love Batman with Adam West and Burt Ward?  Not only do I have the movie, I have season 1 of the TV series on DVD.  I need to get the other seasons.  :)  It's just a totally awesome and fun series and movie.  And, the funny thing is, people are like "that's nothing like the comics."  Have they tried comics from the time of the series? (silver age) I think they'd change their answer if they did.  ;)

The movie was definitely a giant leap forward for the characters in terms of what they got to use.  The sporty Bat Cycle, Bat Copter and Bat Boat were all added for the movie.  None of those vehicles could be added on a TV series budget but, since they were built for the movie, they just had to be maintained and operated thereafter.  Plus, the movie has Batman's four greatest villains from the series all working together.  Indeed, the movie is wonderful and it definitely deserves a spot as one of the best live action films that DC comics has produced.  :)

It deserves it for this scene alone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIPZROBiNik

I'm always surprised by how well the jokes still hold up in that movie. And, camp aside, I do love that Batman isn't tortured by his parents' death. All of the darker versions of Batman are definitely more interesting, but I love how Adam West's is truly heroic and committed to using his resources for the good of others. He's a genuinely great guy, and I love that.

Needs to work on his dancing though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsYA8Gr5NTY

HA!  The bomb scene.  I love it.  :D

Indeed, a lot of people forget or are unaware that the Silver age Batman comics were very cheesy indeed. It was only when Writer Dennis O'Neil and artist Neil Adams started work on the character that he moved away from the campy tone he was known for. And then some young upstart called Frank Miller got his hands on the character and the rest is history.

some days you just can't get rid of a bomb!

Yeah, I have some Silver Age Green Lantern (Showcase omnibus reprints) and I just got Flash: The Silver Age Vol. 1 recently for my Kindle.  I love comics from that age, but they're cheesy as hell.  I've also seen some Batman and Superman from that age.

By the way, the most underrated DC live action movie, in my opinion, is Green Lantern.  I really like that film.  I recently picked up the extended cut on Blu-Ray.  It's a good cut, it has more of Hal, Carol and Hector as children.  It also has an extended conversation between Hal and his nephew.  Obviously, these cuts were made to keep the focus more on the action.  ::)

the only good part about the green lantern movie was the part on Oa with the other members of the Corps and the guardians. The rest of the movie disappointing

Well, Suicide Squad definitely captured the look and feel of the comic book in the way that only a SS movie could have, but I can imagine that not connecting well with general audiences; the same goes for the humor employed. There is actually quite a bit of humor in the movie, but I think some would consider it "dark comedy", which my wife and I enjoyed immensely.

It doesn't top my list of favorite DC movies, but it is a SOLID addition to their library.

If any of you go to see it, I sincerely hope that you enjoy yourselves.  :)

I was definitively desappointed by this movie .... Next !!!!

Care to elaborate?

I'd like to compare what I saw, to what you saw.

Scratch that, It's probably better that we don't discuss the details of the movie here.

No details ;)

It is a general feelings:

Warner always make great teaser ... so, as a DCU big BIG fan, i am always exited ... and, unfortunately, i am almost always disappointed ...

All the last movies including Dark Knight Rises have disappointed me (but The Dark Knight was a very great movie) ... and i am afraid about WW and JLA ...

Why i am disappointed? Generally because the story or some part of the scenario ...

I find it's generally best to go into these movies with little to no expectations.  When I saw Man of Steel the first time, my appreciation of the film was ruined by my own expectations from years of reading Superman comics and watching various live action and animated versions of Superman.  However, I watched it again not long ago and I left my expectations at the door.  I found it to be a much more enjoyable film the second time, and I was able to see how a different director's version of Superman was still good to watch.  And, that's what you get when you watch one of these films, you get someone's idea of how it should be done.  If you go to watch the movie expecting it to be a certain way, you'll almost always be disappointed, unless the director's vision matches yours.  Though, sometimes, studios make boneheaded choices to cut a movie down, ensuring that you're not even watching the director's vision.  But, that's a whole other issue.

If I didn't go into a movie a little excited or with the bare minimum of expectation that it will be entertaining, then I would probably stop watching movies altogether. However, it is hard sometimes to keep expectations low when a comic character that I have loved since I was 4 years old is made into a movie. And then you find out who is writing and directing the movie. And then you hear the casting news. And then you see a trailer.

Unless you are a general movie goer who only knows when new movies are coming out when the first trailer hits (which is impossible these days unless you have no online media presence whatsoever) then it is hard to avoid any fore-knowlegde of movies coming out. I do think some comic book fans do need a time out on he naughty step before watching a movie because they have built it up so much in their minds. And if the movie is bad, we should always remember that making a great movie is hard. Think about how many movies are released every year. What percentage are good? What percentage are great? What percentage will have an effect on the industry/audiences and go on to be considered a classic?

That being said, from what I've heard about Suicide Squad BTS is that there was a lot of meddling by studio executives. This is nothing new in Hollywood. However, my only complaint about execs meddling is when they do it. If they have input/notes to give during the writing/storyboarding/pre-production phase, then great. THAT is the time to ensure the director you have hired is going to make a product you are happy with. However, once filming has begun, LEAVE THE DIRECTOR ALONE. It's unfair to go to him after he has started filming and move the goalposts.

With all this in mind, I am still interested to see the movie and will give it a chance like I did with Ghostbusters, Fantastic Four, BvS and every other movie I have seen that I heard wasn't good before I saw it.

And now....some more Adam West
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJlHjf_E--4

Well, obviously you're going to go to a movie expecting to enjoy it, or at least hoping to. You don't go spend money on a movie thinking it's going to be a crap fest, otherwise why bother?

What I mean by keeping expectations low is that some people apparently expect movie makers to follow what is in their head as far as what should or shouldn't be done with the story and characters.  If you go in expecting a director to have made the exact same choices you'd have made, it just won't work.  However, that seems to be what some people expect.  They think this director who has never met them and did things as he/she saw fit should have done this or that, just because the viewer wants it.  Then the viewer gets unhappy, sometimes even mad because the movie didn't follow the script in their head.  Those are unrealistic expectations, in my opinion.  If a movie is bad because it's poorly written, poorly acted and/or the studio went in and messed it all up, then that's one thing.  If you are butthurt because the directors didn't do what you wanted them to do, then yeah you should probably just stop watching these movies.  Sorry if that seems harsh, but that's reality.

With Suicide Squad, I've seen the trailers and I personally don't get the hype.  It just doesn't look good to me.  Though, sometimes, I will watch a trailer and not be impressed, only to wind up enjoying the film.  Other times, it's the opposite.  And, of course, trailers can be dead on sometimes as far as how I will or won't enjoy a film.  But, I'll see it, likely when it's on streaming or disc.  I don't need to go to a theater to see it.  However, as someone who hasn't read Suicide Squad comics, (but I am familiar with some of the characters, particularly Harley Quinn) I won't have a whole lot of expectations as far as what they should have done.  So, if I like it, it will be due to it being a good movie to me.  If not, then for the same reason.

You're absolutely dead on with this. One of my biggest pet peeves is when people want a movie to go their way and then lambast it for going a different way. I think it's much more fun to see how a filmmaker interprets material rather than strictly adhering to it. For example, I love comparing Burton's Batman, to Nolan's Batman, to Snyder's Batman, or Raimi's Spider-Man, to Webb's Spider-Man, to Marvel's Spider-Man, etc. It's fascinating to see what specific aspects of a character or material are considered most important to a director, as it's a window into an individual's worldview. I love it.


Trailers are tricky. I once visited E-Film (one of the top color correction facilities in the world that also cuts together about 90% of the trailers you see in theaters) and they told me that they rarely see the directors working on trailers. It's most often the marketing team, whose goal is to just get your butt in a seat rather than give you an accurate representation of the movie. Occasionally a director will give input on trailers (like James Gunn for GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY), but it's very rare, as they're usually ridiculously busy working on the film itself.

All of this is to say that I think trailers should be thought of as their own separate work from the film. You can enjoy them and let them hype you up, but always remember that the movie itself could be completely different because different creative voices are working on it.

Personally, when it comes to film expectations, I do expect a lot, but the only reason I do that is because I want to love a movie. I don't go into any movie wanting to hate it, I just want something good. I just can't bring myself to enjoy sitting in front of a screen for two hours numbly consuming something; I need to have it cause some kind of reaction in me.

Now, even with my high expectations, I am pretty lenient. If a film is terrible but has one masterful performance from an actor I will recommend it for that reason, or if the plot is stupid but the action scenes are impeccable I will likewise recommend it for those. A good example of this is FURIOUS 7, which is a very dumb movie, but the car chase on the mountain is straight up one of the best action sequences of last year and should be studied in film schools, plus the sendoff for Brian at the end is gloriously sentimental. Those two things alone make me love that movie and, as a result, make it worth recommending.

While I do expect a lot, I also understand that filmmaking is incredibly complicated, so as long as a movie does one thing really well I recommend it. However, I do like it when something great comes along, so I search for those movies every year and, whenever I find one, I talk about it until people get sick of me.  :D

That's my approach to movie watching in a nutshell. I'll never not watch something, and I always enjoy going to the theater so much that even if something is terrible I could have fun (at home I'm a bit grumpier), but I do hope to find some form of greatness in everything I see.