Originally Posted by
Schumiac
Realisticly Batman has no chance against Superman, which is why I always root for and get a kick out of it when he does beat Superman. And it is never shown to be easy. Wasn't at all easy in the movies also (and the least we talk about it the better as was a horrid movie that did neither franchise any good).
Superman franchise doesn't take off like Batman where it comes down to movies, as I think they fail to make him interesting enough. When you have God-like powers, and are a boy-scout, there isn't that much going on to create an interest.. I am not saying they can't make him interesting, he does need better screenwriters and less posing around. Maybe focus on Clark Kent more to let us know the character better, but not on the "good son" "pretend- clumsy goof ball" parts of him. Just him as a more complex person than that, a person that feels real and relatable (I think that is why Aquaman and Wonder Woman did well too).
I don't think Affleck's Batman helped the Batman franchise either, too cold, not much character, so-so stiff acting. Nolan's was great because you had a good screenplay, great director and a great actor all at once and a great villain esp in Joker (Bane was a bit meh after that and of the three movies the weakest one... but still managed. I am not a big fan of Bane in general though). Nolan's Batman managed to be relatable and cool.
DC has a lot to learn from Marvel where it comes to doing movies right. (and I love the dig at DC in Deadpool, which funny enough felt more of a dig at Batman, but Batman at his worst IMO)