Which will be better Batman v Superman or Avengers AoU

Really? Fantasic!! I feel like (at the very least for the Dark Knight Trilogy) Goyer gets associated with Nolan and is thus "loved." If you look into his history though, his scripts are mostly shotty.

I'm not familiar with Chris Terrio, but I'm excited that it's not Goyer penning the upcoming film.

I don't think anyone saw Superman snapping Zod's neck.... pretty sure.

Meh, didn't do it for me. I only liked a handful of parts in that movie (Mostly Hulk and Captain America parts). Loki lost all credibility as a villain the moment he got thrown around like a rag doll. Also Whedon is not a great action scene director. He basically shot every Avenger do a cool move

This scene stood out like a sore thumb. Also Im pretty sure there was a scene where Hawkeye shot an arrow without looking. No heart in those fight scenes. IMO of course. Im much more exited to see Zack's work with the whole box of crayons known as the JL.

@mrnoital: Doesn't mean bad either. It means it made a lot of money.

Yo nice profile pic bro

Batman vs. Superman because its the first time they are in a film together.

@onemoreposter: Argo is an Academy ward nominated or winner--I forget--for its script, so it might be good. But Affleck is Batman and Terrio is Affleck's guy so I don't see much room for Superman to get much love.

I know the movie will be better, it will be funnier since Argo was hilarious when it needed to be, but I can't help thinking that this will be a Batman is awesome movie...and I guess Superman has to be here too.

Avengers will be the biggest crowd pleaser, and will make more monies. I garuntee supes will get his butt kicked by everyone and thats going to annoy me lots.

Judging by the growing sales of Marvel on it's movie franchise and of the growing number of fans worldwide I think AoU may have a better sale.

The only real question is does the world had enough of Batman and Superman movies?

People bitch about everything in my experience. As Ben Affleck said...

Avengers will be good meanwhile BvS might be good

@fallschirmjager: Surprisingly accurate haha, you are wise beyond your years Affleck.

Avengers.

So the guys at DC deciding BvS would be a good idea... the only thing we need to know is what they're smoking.

I think Avengers

Ofcourse it was a brilliant idea. Batman movies and Superman movies generally bring in a lot of money. Batman got over a billion from his last two movies and Superman got nearly 700 million. Just from putting Batman and Superman in the same movie will make them over 1 billion, especially with the attention TDK brought to Batman and people's curiosity to see how well Ben Affleck does. It doesn't matter how bad you think he will do, you're still going to go and watch it. And to have these two actually fight? I can almost garuntee that is making over 1.5 billion, easy. People have been waiting decades to see Batman and Superman fight on screen, much less be in the same movie period.

Then you include the fact that you have Dwayne hyping he will be a DC character, DC getting tons of respect for Arrow and Flash, plus they are getting two more shows Constanie and Gotham(which is basically drawing more attention to Batman). And then the follow up of Superman snapping Zods neck. I don't see what part of that was a bad idea.

lol even I was shocked when it happened.

Financially; I already predict it'll be a great success. I strongly dislike MOS - although, as you explained, I'll be watching BvS on it's release date because it's Batman and Superman. You could have a little child play Batman and everyone would still go in there. Although who the heck thought Zack Snyder would do an at least decent job in directing? I'm not prepared for a final 45 minutes of eye candy from yet another blockbuster. Blow this, blow that.

@testament: thank you

I really want it to be BvS. Avengers movie wasn't THAT great. And MoS wasn't THAT bad.

.....you do realize that Zach Snyder was the same one who directed Watchmen(the best Superhero movie hands down in terms of story) and 300 right? How is Batman v Superman a bad idea?

If Avengers is more like Winter Soldier then it has a chance. I'm still leagues more excited for BvS. Man of Steel is one of my favorite superhero movies ever AND Ben is a great actor who could possibly be the best Batman we've ever gotten. BvS has more running for it imo.

It's a bad idea because, besides Watchmen, Zach dedicates a bulk of his runtime towards action, explosions and spectacle.

Ummmm now I'm fairly certain you are confusing Zack Snyder with Michael Bay. Man Of Steel didn't really have that much explosions or action. Most of Man Of Steel was his origins and the only real explosions we saw was from the beginning which isn't really counted since they were showing Krypton being destroyed. There was the oil rig scene but that was to show Superman as a character before he became Superman and I'm pretty sure that was suppoed to be a follow for Aquaman. There was only one explosion with him and Zod really. Him vs Faora and Nam-Ek had about 2-3 explosions or so. That isn't a lot of action or explosions. Some even complained that there wasn't enough action since his fight scenes were probably around 10 minutes in total out of a 143 minute movie. I'll add the fight with Jor-El and Zod and that would only be about 15. I don't see whats wrong with spectacle. It's not like their were just random explosions going on every second.

You compare that to Avengers, all Iron-Man movies, Thor(probably) and and especially Captain America, that's nothing.

His other modern time movie was Sucker Punch but it's basically a movie in war so explosions are expected.

And people want to see a movie with a lot of action. I don't see how he's bulking anything when it was only for about 15 minutes...

I feel like this will be a repeat of the Avengers vs The Dark Knight Rises.

Age of Ultron will make more money, and will please nerdy fanboys (allowing them to further their Joss Whedon love) but overall, it'll be a fun popcorn flick. BvS, will be deeper in terms of themes and tone, as well as have better acting, but might have some flaws that people will judge it harshly on afterwards.

Michael Bay directed Transformers, and Zach Snyder directed MOS, Watchmen and Sucker Punch, right? Yep, I'm fairly sure I'm not confusing anyone. Really, 15 minutes? Far fetched, my friend - far fetched. The final battle scene with Superman vs. Zod and Faora lasted at least 35 minutes, combine that with 10 minutes of action in the beginning at Krypton... that's at least 45 minutes of action. At least.

I voted for BvS, but that's really more what I'm most excited about, not which will be better. I'm extremely excited about both movies, and I have a lot of faith that they'll both be excellent.

The final battle was with Superman and Zod, not Superman, Zod, and Faora. The full battle between Superman and Zod at the end of the movie was only 5 minutes and that goes with him vs Faora and Zod. The first battle scene happened at 1 hour and 33 minutes.

That last battle that was supposedly 35 minutes started at 2:02:12(literally when he first hit Superman) and ended at 2:07:42(the point where he snapped his neck). That's 5 minutes and 30 seconds...not 35.

As I said before, the last one doesn't really count since it was the ending of Krypton. It's not like they could have shown it blowing up and then have Superman talking about how he remembered it. They needed a story for Jor-El since he was a key within the movie. It wouldn't make any sense for him to just pop up in the middle of the move out of no where.

I'm just talking about fight scenes alone. Scene's where action is going on doesn't make any sense to bring up when we are talkign about super powered beings trying to take over a planet and Superman has to flight them.

Avengers had more action than Man Of Steel so if you're going to complain about man of steel then complain about Avengers also. There were tons od dialouge in the movie and not just action. 45 minutes wouldn't even be half of the movie. No one wants to go see a Superman movie with no action it in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=067jwuudPMA&list=UUUF7Q-OzCLtflQ6faSlWu9w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oJN-loLv4Y&list=UUUF7Q-OzCLtflQ6faSlWu9w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vu3f68phiE&list=UUUF7Q-OzCLtflQ6faSlWu9w

BvS & AoU but if I had to chose one it will be BvS

You just showed me Zods fight and if you add the time up that's only 5 minutes and 16 seconds....

Then you showed me a fight with him figjhting Nam-Ek and Faora for only 2 minutes. What was your point?

I don't get people saying the entire DCCU will suck because ONE movie was DECENT. Iron Man 3 was much, much worse than MoS and Captain America 1 was pretty terrible. Thor 2 sucked.

Both will be great to watch.

I'm more excited for BvS.

I believe that both will be good. Batman vs Superman has to be great if they want the DCCU to be successful so failure is not an option.

Tell me: What was going on in the film in the last 40 minutes - besides Clark talking to his mother in the end and going to the Daily Planet? What was happening before that?

Avengers no doubt. BvS has too many shotty actors and is overcrowded.

Marvel has a tried and true formula that hasn't gotten old...yet. Also, Joss > Zack.

Oh yeah, I'm also one of those people who believe a compelling villain absolutely MAKES a comic book movie, the lone exception being Iron Man 1. I have more confidence in James Spader as Ultron, than Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor. I also suspect Ultron will be given more room to be awesome, whereas Luthor will be taking a backseat to the much-hyped Batman vs. Superman battle.

It's the last 40 minutes..where the action finally starts because I started pretty late. I don't understand why we need to see more "story" when we already got plenty of knowledge of:

• Where Clark grew up.
• Why Zod and his army is mad.
• What the world engine does.
• A possible introduction to Aquaman.
• How Clark grew up and him not wanting to expose himself.
• How Krypton came to an end.
• etc...

prior to the fight scene. There wasn't much to discuss. What did you want? Him to defeat Zod and his army in 15 minutes and then they show some love story between him and Lois? There was already plenty discovered with Superman throughout the movie. Apparently all you saw was action and for some reason want to complain about action...in an action movie...with people and superpowers.

A city was getting destroyed. How long do you really expect that to last? How could you possibly change the plot of that? Zod only came to Earth to inhabit it. Let me hear something in which you can make that shorter and still good.

Explain to me what happens with the last 40 minutes of Avengers. That movie was also about the same thing and the same stuff happening and that had way more action that Man Of Steel. Or the entire movie of Captain America.

You people LOVE to complain about Man Of Steel but never say anything about Marvel movies. When Green Lantern came out the complaint was there was little action. When you get more action from a movie people complain about how it's too much. Have Captain America and Avengers have nothing but action and there's nothing wrong with it...

If BvS is overcrowded what is AoU? There are more characters in that than there are in BvS last time I checked. I don't get why people will say BvS is overcrowded and not AoU. In the 1st Avengers movie Hawkeye was pretty much wasted and Thor could've used more screen time too. Now you add even more heroes to the team don't know how Whedon will handle that. Still looking forward to the movie tho.

@jack_donaghy: because those are heroes who have worked together before and fit nicely. Bvs is introducing a bunch of new characters, even aquaman. Unlikely they will all fit into the plot and story nicely without feeling forced.

Avengers:

• Captain America
• Iron-Man
• Hulk
• Thor
• Black Widow
• Hawkeye
• Scarlet Witch
• Ultron
• Quicksilver
• Ant-Man
• Nick Fury
• (probably more than I'm missing)

Batman v Superman

• Superman
• Batman
• Wonder Woman
• Alfred(But mentioning him would be like mentioning Jarvis which makes 0 sense)
• Lex Luthor
• Cyborg(May just be a cameo)
• Aquaman(May just be a cameo)

So Avengers isn't overcrowded?

@wardemon32: I just explained it above. In avengers everyone fits and has a nice role. They are forcing more and more in bvs though.

Why is it forcing for BvS but not AoU? Whedon has to introduce Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to the team. As well as flesh out Ultron and further flesh out Hawkeye. Not to mention like wardemon32 said there will probably be more additions like Vision. Don't see how BvS is more crowded than that but you seem stuck in your opinion of this so whatever.

@jack_donaghy: those character all fit and have their places. It seems like bvs is just adding more as they go, when its really about bats and supes

Avengers can have a lot of people because its about the avengers. But in a bvs movie anyone else is forced in.

@jayc1324: I doubt Cyborg and Aquaman will have even 4 minutes of screen time combined.

@entropy_aegis: I hope not

"Godzilla 2" is my most anticipated film as well as "Skull Island" and "Mad Max"

Bu i gotta say Avengers has the upper-hand in this contest.

Batman V Superman doesn't look promising at all.

Aquaman and Cyborg have NOT been confirmed to appear, much less have any significant amount of screen time that detracts from Batman and Superman. We might see a Vic Stone cameo but that doesn't mean we'll see Cyborg tagging along.

Lastly, as mentioned before, WB has yet to give any official word on Aquaman being casted or even appearing in the film. Not sure why people keep saying the movie is overcrowded only to use rumored and minor roles as evidence of such.

I am a bias Marvel fanboy who is a Anti-Batman guy and isn't a huge Superman fan. I think Avengers A.U. will be better than the Batman overshadowing Superman film.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if the DC film beats the Marvel film. (+)