Batman v Superman's Move Matters, But Not for the Reason You Think

Batman v Superman's Move Matters, But Not for the Reason You Think

It's really Batman v Superman v Captain America v timing.

Read Full Article

403 Error: Access Denied

This page is available to site staff members only.

If you feel you are getting this message in error, please contact a site administrator for assistance.

Blocking Bob's articles thanks Escapist now go do all the older ones as well :)

What's with the 403 message?

Does Bob know something sinister about BvS that the Escapist doesn't want us to know?

Very interesting to say the least. While his thoughts have been mixed on the production of the movie he's not exactly wrong in calling it "Biggest Thing Ever: The Movie" I mean Batman, having the biggest superhero video games, two genre defining film series, what's considered to be one of the best if not the best superhero cartoon ever, and Superman, a cultural icon that rivals that of Mickey Mouse, the original superhero movie that is considered legendary by most people today, and the progenitor of the superhero comic book. The movie may be great, it may be terrible, but there really is no denying that this is one of those cultural touch stones. The first time the two biggest superheroes on the planet share the screen in a mainstream live action blockbuster.

Now, if only the VIDEO GAME industry would do this.

Having 6+ months of no A/AA/AAA game releases is retarded.

It makes NO sense to only release major titles in the winter/fall.

Bob should clarify that Captain America: The Winter Soldier came out March 26 internationally and April 4 in the United States. Since the article is largely about the American box office (the one all the trades use for their "showdowns"), it's inaccurate to keep calling it a March movie.

Beyond that, March has already been proven as a month of breakout hits (e.g. billion dollar Alice in Wonderland, Oz the Great and Powerful), so beyond the shock of a movie like this being taken out of its traditional May to July slot, I can see what Warner Bros. is aiming for here.

So during the (now) brief period when Disney/Marvel's Captain America 3 (not the final title) and Warner Bros/DC's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (unfortunately, the final title)

Anyone else here who doesn't really see the issue with "Dawn of Justice" as a title? As far as I know whacky names are pretty much a superhero staple, then again I'm more of an outsider looking in with that particular "scene".

So yeah, my point is: what's so bad about "Dawn of Justice" as a title compared to names like "Iron Man", "Wonder Woman" or titles like "The Winter Soldier"?

It's about friggin' time Hollywood managed this. I love me some Summer blockbusters, but same with the game industry, normally a hole bunch of stuff comes out all at once and then we're left for most of the year to rewatch/replay content over and over. I certainly have games and movies that I'm happy to enjoy again, but I never understood how spacing things out was SUCH a bad thing. Occasional luls I can deal with, but forced luls just gets annoying.

MovieBob:
Sure, open your studio's big-budget action movie against a rival studio's big-budget action movie and you might get the satisfaction of getting say "We're number one!" for a week or two; but neither of you will make as much money splitting an audience as you would have opening uncontested... and if the other guy's movie bombs bad enough it might take the career-viability of a star, filmmaker, effect-house, etc that you might have needed to work with in the near future down with it.

So during the (now) brief period when Disney/Marvel's Captain America 3 (not the final title) and Warner Bros/DC's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (unfortunately, the final title) were scheduled to open "against" one another on May 6, 2016 as the "summer kickoff" movie that year, it was never a real possibility that they'd be fighting for screen-space. There's too much money involved for even penny-pinching Marvel Studios to risk opening a sequel to half (or less) the box-office of its predecessor just to net a week or two of every entertainment news outlet running with CAPTAIN AMERICA DEFEATS BATMAN AND SUPERMAN! headlines with accompanying panels of said characters fighting from one of the crossover comics as though every single one of them thought of it first. Nor was Warner Bros. going to forego even the remote possibility of their first big superhero team-up equaling or surpassing the initial take of The Avengers.

One of them was always going to move.

When Marvel tapped Captain America 3 to fill what was previously an "Untitled" May 6 date, it was an act of celebration (and investment confidence) after the unexpectedly massive performance of The Winter Soldier: Their movie had done Summer-style business in a March slot, so now it gets a Summer-intro slot next time. That Batman v Superman had already "called" that spot back when it was just "Untitled" was noteworthy for the show-offishness on Marvel's part, but it was always a calculated risk: Box-office or not, the optics are that Batman and Superman are both "bigger" pop-culture fixtures than Captain America in most people's minds regardless of who they actually prefer. The news would break good for them no matter what -- if Warner Bros "blinked" and moved, they get the "DEFEATED! KA-POW!!!" headlines, but if they blinked it would've been received as obvious: "Of course Captain America cedes to the two biggest superheroes in history. Duh."

There's something in this depiction of the events I think either could have been better stated or should be clarified.
Marvel laid out a schedule for film releases. WB/DC moved DoJ to one of Marvel's already announced dates.
No matter what Marvel slotted in that date (and it's my contention that they already knew what that would be and were waiting for the Box Office returns on Captain America II to announce it) it was never incumbent on them to move on behalf of what was effectively WB/DC's publicity grabbing stunt. Marvel's announcement wasn't "celebratory." It was planned and inevitable. And completely fair of them. The "optics" of it didn't matter. And WB/DC "calling it" when it was untitled was just them being jerks for press, not the other way around. Marvel doesn't need to "show off." They satisfy more than they disappoint with their films. While some of the MCU films may have had less overall appeal than others, none have been panned so negatively as Man of Steel. (But then expectations of it were significantly and justifiably high.)

And while MovieBob contends "one of them was always going to move," I feel confident that WB/DC never had any intention of remaining on that date because it simply stank of the type of publicity practices in which they engage. And MovieBob is absolutely right about the utter futility of splitting potential box office earnings for the sake of a headline. WB/DC definitely care far too much about being in the news, but they care even more about the money they want to make.
Of course DoJ was also moved from a date that would have put it 2 weeks prior to Ant Man... You think the optics of a head to head with Captain America would've be bad, just imagine the headline "Ant Man Towers Over Batman/Superman in Box Office!"

I'm just saying, frame the "competition" for what it is:
Paycheck vs Passion.
Anyone who pays attention can tell which is which.

Uriel_Hayabusa:
Anyone else here who doesn't really see the issue with "Dawn of Justice" as a title? As far as I know whacky names are pretty much a superhero staple, then again I'm more of an outsider looking in with that particular "scene".

So yeah, my point is: what's so bad about "Dawn of Justice" as a title compared to names like "Iron Man", "Wonder Woman" or titles like "The Winter Soldier"?

You aren't comparing apples with apples because none of Marvel's titles have been that silly. "The Winter Soldier" makes perfect sense from the comics. But imagine that after Iron Man 1, Marvel had announced a movie titled "Iron Man v Thor: Avengers Assemble" that is *not* an actual Avengers movie.

I don't remember if there were specific metrics for how the whole thing is calculated and set, but I think a good part of the problem could be solved if ticket prices could be lowered. It might not mean the same level of profits and could force studios to scale back on what content they actually feature, but it might help to know how many people, if any, base their movie-going schedule on costs and if dropping prices means more attendees over a movie's lifespan to help even things out. I for one would love to see as much of this stuff as I can, but it's becoming increasingly ridiculous to try and justify supporting specific franchises at $12-$14 just for a ticket, especially ones who's installments are revolving around "fixing things" (looking at you X-Men).

Nuxxy:

Uriel_Hayabusa:
Anyone else here who doesn't really see the issue with "Dawn of Justice" as a title? As far as I know whacky names are pretty much a superhero staple, then again I'm more of an outsider looking in with that particular "scene".

So yeah, my point is: what's so bad about "Dawn of Justice" as a title compared to names like "Iron Man", "Wonder Woman" or titles like "The Winter Soldier"?

You aren't comparing apples with apples because none of Marvel's titles have been that silly. "The Winter Soldier" makes perfect sense from the comics. But imagine that after Iron Man 1, Marvel had announced a movie titled "Iron Man v Thor: Avengers Assemble" that is *not* an actual Avengers movie.

Marvel titles aren't silly? I don't know about that. One could make fun of them the same way Bob made fun of "Dawn of Justice" if one felt so inclined. For example:

"The Winter Soldier", eh? So is there also a Spring Soldier, a Summer Soldier and an Autumn Soldier?

or

"The Dark World"? So Thor is going to Hyrule? LMAO Witty aren't I

Now, just to be clear: I agree that Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice doesn't exactly roll of the tongue; but I also think it doensn't matter much. Movies can go wrong for plenty of reasons, and if it turns out to be a dud it likely won't be because the title sounds more than a little unwieldy.

Tanis:
Now, if only the VIDEO GAME industry would do this.

Having 6+ months of no A/AA/AAA game releases is retarded.

It makes NO sense to only release major titles in the winter/fall.

While I think it's ridiculous that everyone only saves their releases for Fall and Christmas, I do kind of want to analyze why; speculatively.

First is a simple measurement of opportunity.
"We could release it now, but the Holiday Season proves to boost sales significantly across the board!"
(Which incidentally, is also why the shittiest games of the year tend to launch in January and February)

The problem with that reasoning, in theory, is that there is a lot of untapped demand during the Summer, and everyone feeling the drought knows it. But nobody in AAA does because the sales data that shows it doesn't exist; it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. So, May becomes the cut-off point.

The other big deterrent, I think is E3 in June.

Put simply, it's a big attention magnet for NEW unreleased games. While it would seem natural to plug a new release there, the fact that it's everyone's show ruins it. Why? Because AAA games make the bulk of their cash in the first week, and that's when the bulk of advertising is done. Grabbing and holding the public's attention during a big expo is just too risky. (not just during the show, but before as well; speculation is a hell of a drug)

As for the rest of Summer...I've got nothing. There's probably some sort of marketing monkey business behind it, but even after E3, there's at least two full months of dead air; usually until mid-September.

Uriel_Hayabusa:

So during the (now) brief period when Disney/Marvel's Captain America 3 (not the final title) and Warner Bros/DC's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (unfortunately, the final title)

Anyone else here who doesn't really see the issue with "Dawn of Justice" as a title? As far as I know whacky names are pretty much a superhero staple, then again I'm more of an outsider looking in with that particular "scene".

So yeah, my point is: what's so bad about "Dawn of Justice" as a title compared to names like "Iron Man", "Wonder Woman" or titles like "The Winter Soldier"?

I don't think the Dawn of Justice part is the problem. In fact that's what I refer to the film as ...it's the entire mouthful that's the issue. Sounds like a Square kingdom hearts title... (Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days ...What?!?) Had it been called Man of Steel or Superman: Dawn Of justice(or simply Dawn of Justice or World's finest like the animated film)....but WB wants you to know Batman is in it since Superman now needs the big brother is saving lil brother out treatment Marvel normally gives to it's lesser properties with Spiderman. (Spider pops up in new comics in first couple issues. Issue 1 if you really suck like Superpro.)

DC is going for it's big guns and doesn't want to leave anything to chance. So the whole Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice is just awkward. Even odder is not Batman And Superman....it's V. (not VS...which makes it sound like a court case.) This was an older title back in the late 90s of Batman vs Superman...not sure why they are so hell bent on calling a movie that. (Not like Alien Vs Predator where that is literally the entire movie of these critters fighting with humans caught in the middle.)Something tells me they aren't going be fighting each other for the entire movie. It will probably a scuffle of the length Thor and Ironman had. At best their ideologies will be pitted against each other for majority of the movie. It's all just too busy and awkward of a title.

Captain America:Winter Soldier....Let's you know it's part of the same saga...and what it's about. There's nothing busy or awkward about it. I don't see how these remotely compare.

Uriel_Hayabusa:
Marvel titles aren't silly? I don't know about that. One could make fun of them the same way Bob made fun of "Dawn of Justice" if one felt so inclined. For example:

"The Winter Soldier", eh? So is there also a Spring Soldier, a Summer Soldier and an Autumn Soldier?

or

"The Dark World"? So Thor is going to Hyrule? LMAO Witty aren't I

Now, just to be clear: I agree that Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice doesn't exactly roll of the tongue; but I also think it doensn't matter much. Movies can go wrong for plenty of reasons, and if it turns out to be a dud it likely won't be because the title sounds more than a little unwieldy.

Now you're just being facetious, not proving a point. I can do that too.

Green Lantern? That must mean there is a Pink Lantern too? And a Periwinkle Blue, right?

Batman? Just wait for the rest of Noah's Ark. Rhinoman, Octopusman, Kangarooman, Cockroachman, Earwigman.

The movies explain it all perfectly. "Winter Soldier" is the codename given to Bucky after he was changed into an assassin.

The Dark World is Swartelfheim (Realm of the Dark Elves), literally ripped out of Norse mythology, so perfect for a Thor movie.

"Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice" is long and clunky...even you admit that. And to a lot of people it feels symbolic of all the news that seems to surround it - the whole production feels like it might turn into a clunky mess. It might not. I guarantee you MovieBob will be one of the first to cheer if it hits it out of the park. So will I. This isn't Marvel vs DC. This is a simple desire to see superhero movies be the best they can be. WB/DC doesn't have the best track record for non-Batman franchises. For the first movie featuring their "holy trinity", they could have at least chosen a title that does roll off the tongue.

Uriel_Hayabusa:

Nuxxy:

Uriel_Hayabusa:
Anyone else here who doesn't really see the issue with "Dawn of Justice" as a title? As far as I know whacky names are pretty much a superhero staple, then again I'm more of an outsider looking in with that particular "scene".

So yeah, my point is: what's so bad about "Dawn of Justice" as a title compared to names like "Iron Man", "Wonder Woman" or titles like "The Winter Soldier"?

You aren't comparing apples with apples because none of Marvel's titles have been that silly. "The Winter Soldier" makes perfect sense from the comics. But imagine that after Iron Man 1, Marvel had announced a movie titled "Iron Man v Thor: Avengers Assemble" that is *not* an actual Avengers movie.

Marvel titles aren't silly? I don't know about that. One could make fun of them the same way Bob made fun of "Dawn of Justice" if one felt so inclined. For example:

"The Winter Soldier", eh? So is there also a Spring Soldier, a Summer Soldier and an Autumn Soldier?

or

"The Dark World"? So Thor is going to Hyrule? LMAO Witty aren't I

Now, just to be clear: I agree that Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice doesn't exactly roll of the tongue; but I also think it doensn't matter much. Movies can go wrong for plenty of reasons, and if it turns out to be a dud it likely won't be because the title sounds more than a little unwieldy.

As you said, for an outsider looking in it is a difficult distinction to make. Comics have had some strangeness in their history to be sure.

Part of it is the presentation. The "v" rather than "versus" or "vs" is an odd choice that makes it sound like a court case rather than a superhero battle. Which, who knows? Maybe Bruce Wayne will be suing Superman for wrecking the entire planet? I dunno, but it's an odd choice.

It is also very on-the-nose. "Oh, a movie that will feature many of the characters who make up the Justice League? It's like the Justice League is dawning... I KNOW, WE CALL IT DAWN OF JUSTICE!!". Again, not unheard of in superhero comics but those aren't the tropes comics fans typically like to celebrate. We like to celebrate the creativity and uniqueness of comics, not the simplest expressions and literal interpretations. We celebrate Watchmen because it's a landmark that can be interpreted and discussed and theorized about. It's the same reason society celebrates great novels or films and glosses over the trashy romance books or straight-to-video sci-fi trash. Same medium, technically, but a world of difference in execution.

As was already pointed out, the MARVEL films haven't gone with anything as silly. Winter Soldier as a title is perfect. Fans of the comics knew immediately what was coming and it's still a provocative descriptor for folks unfamiliar with the property. Same with Thor's sequel. It evokes something you will know if you're into comics and it's vaguely mysterious to a non fan. If it were taking the Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice approach it would have been titled "Thor vs Malekith: Svartalfheim Threatens". A much more literal descriptor, but much less interesting and WAY too on-the-nose.

Hopefully that helps illustrate why comics fans have taken some issues with the title. Beyond that, Superman and Batman books have often been called "World's Finest" in the comics. Which seems like an easy choice for a film ostensibly billed as vehicle for those two characters. Of course since they seem to be throwing every possible character in there, who knows what the better option even could be? Bottom line, I hope it's good and I'm hopeful that despite the title it turns out to be a great time.

Tanis:
Now, if only the VIDEO GAME industry would do this.

Having 6+ months of no A/AA/AAA game releases is retarded.

It makes NO sense to only release major titles in the winter/fall.

Yeah! You hear that, game developers? Enough with the summer droughts! You made Yahtzee feel compelled to play E.T., and he still called you out in that video!

wait wait wait... so that thing I've been advocating for years in films and more recently in games (spreading dates out to maximize sales/box-office profits in off-months when there's no competition)... IS ACTUALLY DOABLE? Well... color me not-surprised for having pointed out something that seemed bloody obvious a long time ago.

Personally, I would rather have seen the DC/Marvel showdown. But I suppose it'd be cooler for it to be bigger films overall. And as much as I want to be excited for the Bats v Sups movie, I just can't get excited for it yet. Once actual footage is shown public (ie, not convention exclusive) then maybe I can muster up SOME excitement. Until then, it's still all just overbloated hype for a concept and nothing more.

Nuxxy:
Green Lantern? That must mean there is a Pink Lantern too? And a Periwinkle Blue, right?

I know it's not your point. But there actually are Pink Lanterns. And Red Lanterns and Blue Lanterns, even Yellow Lanterns.

I kind of wish Video Game publishers would keep an eye on the changing film landscape and take note too.

Would be nice if they'd start splitting up the AAA releases throughout the year and avoid the typical September-November traffic jam.

Never did make sense to me why big movies/games cannibalize sales in this way. Far better to run unopposed.

Sidmen:

Nuxxy:
Green Lantern? That must mean there is a Pink Lantern too? And a Periwinkle Blue, right?

I know it's not your point. But there actually are Pink Lanterns. And Red Lanterns and Blue Lanterns, even Yellow Lanterns.

But Pink Lanterns aren't called pink lanterns. They're Star Sapphires! Ya know...cause they're women and all so they can't just be pink lanterns. They need a girly name too.

I assume that's why they're called Star Sapphires that is.

I also really don't understand why people find the title so weird. I've seen peoples excuses and they just ring sort of hollow.

No matter how much you try to convince me I will continue to say that Thor: The Dark World and Captain America: The Winter Soldier sound incredibly silly to say out loud.

From The Article:
Alice in Wonderland 2

From The Article:
Alice in Wonderland 2

From The Article:

Alice in Wonderland 2

Yeah, the pushback to March is really interesting in light of Winter Soldier's success there, but really, the true eyegrabber here is

From The Article:

Alice in Wonderland 2

Batman Vs. Superman is going to be a horrible film and possibly under perform horribly. It's almost a certainty. There are at least 5 new characters, not nearly a talented enough team. (I gave Sucker Punch another chance recently. The only way I could remotely enjoy it was by pretending I was watching Heavy Metal.) There is zero set up like Marvel did with the Avengers. Which is like building a Skyscraper without a foundation. They want to fast track this ad they are doing it wrong. Marvel was very smart in getting genre directors to work on the films which more often than not has paid off big time. For all Whedon's faults he knows how to make a ensemble flick. Dawn Of Justice is going to suck horribly. it's pure maths

Uriel_Hayabusa:

So during the (now) brief period when Disney/Marvel's Captain America 3 (not the final title) and Warner Bros/DC's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (unfortunately, the final title)

Anyone else here who doesn't really see the issue with "Dawn of Justice" as a title? As far as I know whacky names are pretty much a superhero staple, then again I'm more of an outsider looking in with that particular "scene".

So yeah, my point is: what's so bad about "Dawn of Justice" as a title compared to names like "Iron Man", "Wonder Woman" or titles like "The Winter Soldier"?

I thought the issue was that it was just a long title with a rather blunt beginning. "Batman v Superman" just sounds incredibly off and makes the film (had I not done any research into it), sound like a two hour long fight scene between two enemies which realistically shouldn't be able to put on a fight for that long. Then "Dawn of Justice" which is just added fluff to what we know about the film thus far (yes, I know the film is a Justice League prequel). It's not a Justice League movie and if it's a prequel then I doubt the film's story will revolve around the forming of it (especially when two members of the trinity are fighting each over).

OT: There's going to be an Alice in Wonderland 2? That's sad, and a little late isn't it? It will have been over half a decade between movies.

Uriel_Hayabusa:
Snip

The overall issue seems to be how it fits. While "The Winter Soldier" is an actual military term born out of investigations into Vietnam and later Iraq, and also fits the movie due to it being a character's name, Dawn of Justice is neither relevant to the movie (even less so now that there are a whopping 5 standalone or duo movies before Justice League by the looks of it) and is the most generic title since Rise of the Guardians.

Evonisia:

I thought the issue was that it was just a long title with a rather blunt beginning. "Batman v Superman" just sounds incredibly off and makes the film (had I not done any research into it), sound like a two hour long fight scene between two enemies which realistically shouldn't be able to put on a fight for that long. Then "Dawn of Justice" which is just added fluff to what we know about the film thus far (yes, I know the film is a Justice League prequel). It's not a Justice League movie and if it's a prequel then I doubt the film's story will revolve around the forming of it (especially when two members of the trinity are fighting each over).

OT: There's going to be an Alice in Wonderland 2? That's sad, and a little late isn't it? It will have been over half a decade between movies.

There are quite a few problems with BvS:DoJ besides its length, and they become more apparent when you attempt to make a more cohesive title.

1) Just say Batman v Superman. On its own, the concept is one that gets the point across, but of course, it's always less what you say and more how you say it. This feels like a monster bash title, like Godzilla vs. Mothra, and gives it more of a B-movie feel, one that's only offset because of its A-list icons. Then, as has been pointed out in this very thread, the "v" versus, well... "vs" makes it sound more like a legal battle than a physical one, which could very well happen (and might actually be awesome), but could potentially be misleading depending on what type of trailer DC/WB decide to go with. Very few movies survive or even thrive off of misleading presentation. Audiences don't usually like going in to one movie expecting to see another, even if that movie was good (this coming from someone who genuinely liked "The Village" even with all of its Shyamalan-esque problems).

2) Just say Dawn of Justice. This is easily the better selling title, but considering the content of the movie, it feels contradictory to what audiences will actually see. The emergence of the Justice League seems like it will be a by-product of the more immediate clash between Batman and Superman. Perhaps the League will form in the final act, or the foundations for the League will be set in the final scenes, but that's not what the movie's about. Dawn of Justice, while a solid title, would have been better for an actual Justice League movie, not its build-up.

3) Rearrange them to be Dawn of Justice: Batman v Superman. Strangely enough, the problems with BvS:DoJ disappear significantly when you reverse them, and here's why. Batman v Superman, while shlocky, actually makes a better subtitle than it does a main. Also, because most people when talking about works that have subtitles tend to drop the subtitle in casual conversation for the sake of brevity, you get the full weight of the title (DoJ:BvS) with the better main title (DoJ), rather than their current title (BvS:DoJ) leaving you with the sillier but more factual main title (BvS). The semantics of word order don't seem like they should be that important, but they actually are. It rolls off the tongue better than the opposite, even though it's the same words and the same exact amount of syllables, and it somewhat negates the issue that just saying Dawn of Justice by itself would have (A movie advertising the emergence of the League that's actually just about a clash between Batman and Superman) because of the modifying subtitle. Of course, as Zontar pointed out, Dawn of Justice is undermined by the amount of related movies that will come out before the actual Justice League movie does.

I initially thought the issue was the length of the title, but then I switched them. And it sounded so much better. Instead of a "Batman and Superman duke it out, something, something... yada yada... and now Justice League" title, it instead pitches a "The unprecedented and major alliance of superheroes worldwide was catalyzed by the historical event of two major superhero figures in conflict with one another" title.

fieryshadowcard:

Evonisia:

I thought the issue was that it was just a long title with a rather blunt beginning. "Batman v Superman" just sounds incredibly off and makes the film (had I not done any research into it), sound like a two hour long fight scene between two enemies which realistically shouldn't be able to put on a fight for that long. Then "Dawn of Justice" which is just added fluff to what we know about the film thus far (yes, I know the film is a Justice League prequel). It's not a Justice League movie and if it's a prequel then I doubt the film's story will revolve around the forming of it (especially when two members of the trinity are fighting each over).

OT: There's going to be an Alice in Wonderland 2? That's sad, and a little late isn't it? It will have been over half a decade between movies.

There are quite a few problems with BvS:DoJ besides its length, and they become more apparent when you attempt to make a more cohesive title.

1) Just say Batman v Superman. On its own, the concept is one that gets the point across, but of course, it's always less what you say and more how you say it. This feels like a monster bash title, like Godzilla vs. Mothra, and gives it more of a B-movie feel, one that's only offset because of its A-list icons. Then, as has been pointed out in this very thread, the "v" versus, well... "vs" makes it sound more like a legal battle than a physical one, which could very well happen (and might actually be awesome), but could potentially be misleading depending on what type of trailer DC/WB decide to go with. Very few movies survive or even thrive off of misleading presentation. Audiences don't usually like going in to one movie expecting to see another, even if that movie was good (this coming from someone who genuinely liked "The Village" even with all of its Shyamalan-esque problems).

2) Just say Dawn of Justice. This is easily the better selling title, but considering the content of the movie, it feels contradictory to what audiences will actually see. The emergence of the Justice League seems like it will be a by-product of the more immediate clash between Batman and Superman. Perhaps the League will form in the final act, or the foundations for the League will be set in the final scenes, but that's not what the movie's about. Dawn of Justice, while a solid title, would have been better for an actual Justice League movie, not its build-up.

3) Rearrange them to be Dawn of Justice: Batman v Superman. Strangely enough, the problems with BvS:DoJ disappear significantly when you reverse them, and here's why. Batman v Superman, while shlocky, actually makes a better subtitle than it does a main. Also, because most people when talking about works that have subtitles tend to drop the subtitle in casual conversation for the sake of brevity, you get the full weight of the title (DoJ:BvS) with the better main title (DoJ), rather than their current title (BvS:DoJ) leaving you with the sillier but more factual main title (BvS). The semantics of word order don't seem like they should be that important, but they actually are. It rolls off the tongue better than the opposite, even though it's the same words and the same exact amount of syllables, and it somewhat negates the issue that just saying Dawn of Justice by itself would have (A movie advertising the emergence of the League that's actually just about a clash between Batman and Superman) because of the modifying subtitle. Of course, as Zontar pointed out, Dawn of Justice is undermined by the amount of related movies that will come out before the actual Justice League movie does.

I initially thought the issue was the length of the title, but then I switched them. And it sounded so much better. Instead of a "Batman and Superman duke it out, something, something... yada yada... and now Justice League" title, it instead pitches a "The unprecedented and major alliance of superheroes worldwide was catalyzed by the historical event of two major superhero figures in conflict with one another" title.

Only problem with that is a lot of the time the subtitle becomes the main title. Especially when the main title is the same for the series like James Bond, Harry Potter and Captain America. Everyone calls it Winter Soldier because they don't want to call it Cap2. So most people will probably call it Dawn of Justice when it comes out just because it is more unique than using Batman for the millionth time. Then again they may call it something else, who knows we may just abbreviate it and all call it DoJ. That sounds nice.

lacktheknack:

This is what I took away from this also. Where could they even go with this sequel? Alice is going off to be a businesswoman in the East Indies. The Wonderland world is more or less settled into Happily Ever After mode. It'd be like Home Alone 4 or something.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here