[Movies] The DC Cinematic Universe - The David Zazlav Dumpster Fire.

[Hailey Knight]

I'm laughing so hard. WB/DC is so stupid. How do I know?

Reports are saying they plan to release an R-rated version of Batman v Superman that they already had, and had cut down to PG-13 for that version of the movie.

Cause we only wanted to see Deadpool for the R-rating, RIGHT?! I'm really glad I read that this morning. The decisions going on with this movie franchise are always good for a laugh.

 

[bhamv3]

I'm laughing so hard. WB/DC is so stupid. How do I know?

Reports are saying they plan to release an R-rated version of Batman v Superman that they already had, and had cut down to PG-13 for that version of the movie.

Cause we only wanted to see Deadpool for the R-rating, RIGHT?! I'm really glad I read that this morning. The decisions going on with this movie franchise are always good for a laugh.

Called it!

Sort of.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

*sigh*

 

[filmfanatic]

Looks like James Gunn was right.

 

[evilmike]

*sigh*

Would it help if I suggested that this was the best live action version of Earth-3 that we are likely to get?

 

[PatrThom]

Would it help if I suggested that this was the best live action version of Earth-3 that we are likely to get?

You are so wrong.
At least, I hope you are.

--Patrick

 

[Hailey Knight]

Looks like James Gunn was right.

I figured he'd be right, but I never suspected "will go back and alter an existing film" levels of right.

 

[Celt Z]

I figured he'd be right, but I never suspected "will go back and alter an existing film" levels of right.

It's a Zack Snyder film. I'm sure that stuff was sitting around, waiting to be used.

 

[Hailey Knight]

It's a Zack Snyder film. I'm sure that stuff was sitting around, waiting to be used.

Discarded scenes, certainly, but I wonder if those were all for content, or if they'll be altered to promote R-rated content. It's not hard to throw in some CG blood and dub in a curse here and there.

 

[GasBandit]

Discarded scenes, certainly, but I wonder if those were all for content, or if they'll be altered to promote R-rated content. It's not hard to throw in some CG blood and dub in a curse here and there.

 

[PatrThom]

Discarded scenes, certainly, but I wonder if those were all for content, or if they'll be altered to promote R-rated content. It's not hard to throw in some CG blood and dub in a curse here and there.

There's also the chance that someone will go all Topher Grace on the film and improve it greatly.

--Patrick

 

[PatrThom]

There's also the chance that someone will go all Topher Grace on the film and improve it greatly.

For @Zero Esc and others: Topher Grace edited together all three Star Wars prequels into one 85min film which removed The Silly and more clearly showed the journey from prodigy -> Jedi -> Sith.
Here's a link to an article about the project and also a link to the trailer itself (which is not embeddable).

Too bad nobody else will ever see it because Disney.

--Patrick

 

[Mathias]

Given how 50/50 split audiences were on Man of Steel, many of whom like myself disliked it so much that they have no interest in this one, I don't like Superman/Batman's chances. It'll still make money, but I don't think it's going to make near the amount of money that WB originally had hoped. Not when Deadpool is raking in the dough and Civil War is on its way, both of which manage to capture the essence of their respective characters almost spot on.

Man of Steel was probably the best Superman movie made thus far...[DOUBLEPOST=1456591226,1456591022][/DOUBLEPOST]I'm really not getting the hate for Bats vs. Supes.

It actually looks like it's going to be really good. No worse than the Marvel flicks.

 

[Terrik]

 

[Hailey Knight]

It's going to have a tough climb for making its money back one way or aqother. The over-budget of the movie alone is over $400 million, and likely advertising has put it past the half-billion point. That's insane. It has to do better than a lot of movies of its kind just to break even.

 

[blotsfan]

I'm really not getting the hate for Bats vs. Supes.

It actually looks like it's going to be really good. No worse than the Marvel flicks.

I think some aspects of it are cool, but it looks like they're trying to cram too much stuff into it.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

Man of Steel was probably the best Superman movie made thus far...

I've made my points far too many times. I'm not getting into it again. As a film on its own, it was quite good with great special effects. But it's a terrible Superman movie.

 

[Ravenpoe]

I've made my points far too many times. I'm not getting into it again. As a film on its own, it was quite good with great special effects. But it's a terrible Superman movie.

This was my experience. I really enjoy Man of Steel as a fun action movie. I'm disappointed in its take on superman, though.

 

[Mathias]

I've made my points far too many times. I'm not getting into it again. As a film on its own, it was quite good with great special effects. But it's a terrible Superman movie.

And there are better Superman movies? They all pretty much suck up until this one. Superman Returns was alright in the same way the first Spider-man was alright.

 

[GasBandit]

And there are better Superman movies? They all pretty much suck up until this one. Superman Returns was alright in the same way the first Spider-man was alright.

Ah, I see. You liked Man of Steel because you don't like Superman movies.

 

[Hailey Knight]

I think some aspects of it are cool, but it looks like they're trying to cram too much stuff into it.

I'd be much more open to it if not for this. Batman, Superman, Luthor, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Doomsday, Darkseid, allegedly GL and Cyberguy. Which would be fine if this was an established universe like Marvel, where Civil War makes sense because 80-90% of these characters have been introduced in other movies, but this is the second movie in this DC series.

They're delaying Justice League from what I hear because WB is concerned about this whole venture now. I think that's a good thing--do some of the individual movies first.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

And there are better Superman movies? They all pretty much suck up until this one. Superman Returns was alright in the same way the first Spider-man was alright.

I don't think any of them are the perfect Superman movie, honestly. The Christopher Reeve movies haven't aged particularly well, but there are scenes that I enjoy I'm at least the first three (let's just not talk about the forth).

The closest on-screen adaptation of Superman (for me) was the animated series.

 

[Hailey Knight]

The closest on-screen adaptation of Superman (for me) was the animated series.

That and Batman TAS are just so amazing. Even their crossover episodes were great, like when Luthor has a business venture with Bruce Wayne and makes the idiot mistake of hiring the Joker to kill Superman, or when Ra's Al Ghul wants to drain Superman to feed his own immortality. I think there was one other crossover, but that was great stuff.

 

[jwhouk]

And there are better Superman movies? They all pretty much suck up until this one. Superman Returns was alright in the same way the first Spider-man was alright.

...


Sorry, I can't hear you over the DA-dat-dat-dat-DA, DAH DAH DAH playing in the background...

Someone check Chris Reeve's gravesite; he's probably doing a 1000 RPM's again...

 

[Sparhawk]

Someone check Chris Reeve's gravesite; he's probably doing a 1000 RPM's again...

You know, between Chris Reeve, Walt Disney, and all the Founding Fathers, we could probably power the entire country for free from all their spinning.

 

[Celt Z]

You know, between Chris Reeve, Walt Disney, and all the Founding Fathers, we could probably power the entire country for free from all their spinning.

If only we could harness the power of disgust.

 

[Mathias]

Ah, I see. You liked Man of Steel because you don't like Superman movies.

I just plain don't like Superman. Dude, Man of Steel did Superman (arguably the lamest developed superhero out there) a great deal of justice. It explored the only concepts that make Mary Sue...er Superman interesting: his loneliness and Demigod status. Bats Vs. Supes is going to expound further on the second one. I'm not really trying to start a pizza/steak war here, but it's funny you guys are praising the ridiculous Marvel movies and bashing Man of Steel/ DC to death. They're all stupid as hell if you want to argue semantics. I think the only comic movie worth its salt is Watchmen. The only "good" Marvel movies thus far have been Guardians of the Galaxy, the first Ironman, and Winter Soldier. Everything else has been mediocre at best.[DOUBLEPOST=1456664285,1456663989][/DOUBLEPOST]

I don't think any of them are the perfect Superman movie, honestly. The Christopher Reeve movies haven't aged particularly well, but there are scenes that I enjoy I'm at least the first three (let's just not talk about the forth).

The closest on-screen adaptation of Superman (for me) was the animated series.

Here's the thing about Supes. I know he's your favorite, so please just take this as my opinion. I've always considered him post golden era to be lame. He should be able to leap tall buildings, outrun speeding locomotives, etc..., and that's it. No flying. Not impervious to heavy arms. Not utterly invincible. Not a complete boyscout. That and his upbringing is what makes him interesting - reflections on the human condition, not fighting back, deciding to be a good guy. I think Man of Steel did a great job of exploring the only interesting things Superman has to offer.


I agree though, the Superman animated series (and Batman) were amazing.[DOUBLEPOST=1456664403][/DOUBLEPOST]

...


Sorry, I can't hear you over the DA-dat-dat-dat-DA, DAH DAH DAH playing in the background...

Someone check Chris Reeve's gravesite; he's probably doing a 1000 RPM's again...

Only redeeming thing about Reeve's movies is the theme (which still gives me goosebumps). It's amazing.

 

[Hailey Knight]

I just plain don't like Superman. Dude, Man of Steel did Superman (arguably the lamest developed superhero out there) a great deal of justice. It explored the only concepts that make Mary Sue...er Superman interesting: his loneliness and Demigod status. Bats Vs. Supes is going to expound further on the second one. I'm not really trying to start a pizza/steak war here, but it's funny you guys are praising the ridiculous Marvel movies and bashing Man of Steel/ DC to death. They're all stupid as hell if you want to argue semantics. I think the only comic movie worth its salt is Watchmen. The only "good" Marvel movies thus far have been Guardians of the Galaxy, the first Ironman, and Winter Soldier. Everything else has been mediocre at best.

I think you hit the point of it with calling the Marvel movies ridiculous. They're fun movies. The tone for Batman vs Superman seems pretty grim and unappealing. Even when serious stuff is happening with the Marvel movies, it's still set in the vantage of an adventure, except perhaps Winter Soldier, but that did what it did so well that it worked. If the most recent Batman vs Superman trailer was the only trailer, I think people here would be more on board with it.

I guess one thing is, some of us aren't just looking at the movie, but how WB seems to have no clue what they're doing around it, such as having Justice League planned for 2017 (possibly not anymore thanks to Batman vs Superman test audiences, who praised the Batman side of the movie but had little interest in the Superman stuff) or announcing a rated R version within days of Deadpool's record-breaking opening weekend. That isn't to say it'll be bad. There have been plenty of great movies that had asshat producers and problems behind the scenes or went way over-budget. Maybe Batman vs Superman really will be the intelligent superhero movie WB wants it to be, like The Dark Knight. Or it could be shit show. Or a bit of both.

Right now, all the stuff around it, the overarching plans of what to include, and the lame earlier trailers put most of us in a bad view. And then Bowielee challenged us all that we'd see it despite our griping, so of course we can't go now .[DOUBLEPOST=1456664856,1456664488][/DOUBLEPOST]Aaand the day after I post about Batman vs Superman being too cluttered, the Russo brothers announce that Avengers: Infinity War will have 68 Marvel characters.

 

[Mathias]

Studios are money grubbers and suits react to quarter to quarter trends. This isn't anything new to Hollywood.


Comics always start crossovers, adding a million characters, and come up with ridiculous story arcs, but fundamentally the only thing that hooks people in are origin stories, and how superheroes deal with their new found powers. That's why reboot after reboot always fairs better than the sequels do.

 

[AshburnerX]

The only thing I have to say about the Marvel movies is that they don't act like they are embarrassed of their source material and each movie has worked entirely because they were willing to accept the silliness with the seriousness. The DC movies, on the other hand, have done EVERYTHING they could to distance themselves from their source, to the point I have to wonder why anyone had faith in the project to begin with.

As for Watchmen... it's only good if you watch the version with the Black Freighter pieces interlaced into the movie.

Aaand the day after I post about Batman vs Superman being too cluttered, the Russo brothers announce that Avengers: Infinity War will have 68 Marvel characters.

I imagine it's going to be 68 because all the main guys are going to be bringing in a few of their supporting characters and we're going to have more than one villain.

 

[Hailey Knight]

I imagine it's going to be 68 because all the main guys are going to be bringing in a few of their supporting characters and we're going to have more than one villain.

It's just a lot for a couple movies. In a book, you have a lot more space to work with, but a movie needs to focus.

On the upside, Marvel shouldn't need to use Avengers 3 and 4 as set-up movies for anything, so they shouldn't have the problems that plagued Age of Ultron.[DOUBLEPOST=1456666926,1456666685][/DOUBLEPOST]Actually ...

Comics always start crossovers, adding a million characters, and come up with ridiculous story arcs, but fundamentally the only thing that hooks people in are origin stories, and how superheroes deal with their new found powers. That's why reboot after reboot always fairs better than the sequels do.

This gets into what I'm really frustrated with, another thing bugging me with Batman vs Superman. As Ash said, wondering if anyone had faith in the project--it's felt like a set-up movie for Justice League, the way Ultron felt like a set-up movie for Marvel phase 3. Let a movie be a good movie, and then have the sequel build off those elements, rather than making a crap movie with the foundation elements needed for that later-on good movie. I feel like the industry learned the wrong lessons from Batman Begins.

Throwing in other DC heroes and Darkseid makes BvS feel like just a set-up movie. That's why Ultron was such a mess. Iron Man 2, as well. Hopefully Guardians 2 will be a fun movie that builds off the first and not a set-up movie before Avengers 3/4. Hopefully Civil War will be a solid Captain America movie and not a set-up for Black Panther, Spider-man, etc.

 

[HCGLNS]

The only thing I have to say about the Marvel movies is that they don't act like they are embarrassed of their source material and each movie has worked entirely because they were willing to accept the silliness with the seriousness.

A great comic book author once said that the more serious you make a super hero the less believable it becomes. Marvel has embraced that in it's movies, they are silly and light and popcorn for all. WB has gone the opposite way and it detracts greatly from their films, they're too serious and we're too cynical to accept them. The best Batman movie thus far will always be 1966, anything else and the audience steps back and questions everything.

 

[PatrThom]

Studios are money grubbers and suits react to quarter to quarter trends. This isn't anything new to Hollywood.
Comics always start crossovers, adding a million characters, and come up with ridiculous story arcs, but fundamentally the only thing that hooks people in are origin stories, and how superheroes deal with their new found powers. That's why reboot after reboot always fairs better than the sequels do.

I can't say I agree with many of the things you've said about the character (though that's probably more because the character has gone in a multitude of different directions depending on who is writing him that month AND because I probably haven't read a Superman comic since the "Death of" arc), BUT I want to state that I am behind you 100% with the studios/suits comments and also to say that the thing that hooks a viewer about a hero story are the origin/dealing-with-it stories. I would also add that we also tune in because it's cool to watch the hero use his abilities (smashing things, unleashing beams of awesome might, doing the Big Comeback, whatever).

For me, the ideal Superman movie is one that shows what he goes through in order to fit in with humanity more-or-less undetected (probably with flashbacks to his time with the Kents showing the amusing/serious moments where he learned to use/hide his abilities) balanced with his continual victories with his internal struggle against the temptation to actively abuse his abilities.

--Patrick

 

[ThatNickGuy]

I just plain don't like Superman. Dude, Man of Steel did Superman (arguably the lamest developed superhero out there) a great deal of justice. It explored the only concepts that make Mary Sue...er Superman interesting: his loneliness and Demigod status. Bats Vs. Supes is going to expound further on the second one. I'm not really trying to start a pizza/steak war here, but it's funny you guys are praising the ridiculous Marvel movies and bashing Man of Steel/ DC to death. They're all stupid as hell if you want to argue semantics. I think the only comic movie worth its salt is Watchmen. The only "good" Marvel movies thus far have been Guardians of the Galaxy, the first Ironman, and Winter Soldier. Everything else has been mediocre at best.[DOUBLEPOST=1456664285,1456663989][/DOUBLEPOST]

Here's the thing about Supes. I know he's your favorite, so please just take this as my opinion. I've always considered him post golden era to be lame. He should be able to leap tall buildings, outrun speeding locomotives, etc..., and that's it. No flying. Not impervious to heavy arms. Not utterly invincible. Not a complete boyscout. That and his upbringing is what makes him interesting - reflections on the human condition, not fighting back, deciding to be a good guy. I think Man of Steel did a great job of exploring the only interesting things Superman has to offer.


I agree though, the Superman animated series (and Batman) were amazing.[DOUBLEPOST=1456664403][/DOUBLEPOST]


Only redeeming thing about Reeve's movies is the theme (which still gives me goosebumps). It's amazing.

See, and that's the thing: written properly, Superman isn't a straight-up boyscout. He's a good guy who tries his best to live up everyone else's expectations. My take on him is similar to the animated series: he's the humble farm boy that was raised right. His greatest power isn't all his abilities, it's that most times, he knows what's the right thing to do. He's the inspiration for everyone else around him to be a better person. You're right that his upbringing is what makes him interesting because that's what I think people keep forgetting. Yeah, he's Superman with all these god-like powers. People say, "Well how do I relate to that?" To which I say: that's what Clark Kent is for. He even sees himself as Clark first before Superman or even Kal-El. The animated series captured that incredibly well, with the second episode where he accidentally rips the wing off a plane and says, "Nice one, Clark" to himself. And yeah, Man of Steel definitely did explore that in some ways. I won't deny that. But so did the Christopher Reeve movies. But it was more in Reeve's acting than the writing itself.

But here's the other thing about Man of Steel: it's bleak. It's dour. Its entire aesthetic is colour washed. They not only tried to make a movie for people like yourself who don't like or "get" Superman, but they tried to "Batman" him up. And Superman isn't Batman, nor should he ever be. You can have darker, mature stories with him, but he himself should never be a dark character. Man of Steel was a pretty decent film, but it didn't capture the essence of Superman. It wasn't just the necksnapping scene that bothered me. It was also where he blew through a gas station with Zod (and there were cars parked outside, so it was populated). Or instead of turning the other cheek like the Clark I know would have done, he did petty revenge with a trucker and impaled his truck on a pole. Yeah, the guy was a dick, but not enough to potentially ruin his entire career. Petty revenge isn't Clark. And some people have defended both of those things with, "Oh, well, he's still learning how to be Superman." But you'll notice I said Clark, not Superman. That's not Clark Kent to me. He would've already had his values of life and decency already heavily. The movie wasn't consistent in what they were trying to TELL us about him and what they were SHOWING us. You can have both his father figures drill it into our head how he's this great Christ figure. But all the Christ imagery in the world won't help if you don't back it up.

And that's the thing the Marvel movies, even the admittedly mediocre ones, do that Man of Steel didn't: they captured the essence of these characters. They know they're inherently silly in some ways and embrace that. They've adapted these characters with only minor tweaks at best. You mention Winter Soldier as one of the best ones and I'd agree wholeheartedly (personally, I think the first Avengers is in the top 3, not Iron Man, but that's personal opinion). And look at Captain America. He's written a lot like I imagine Superman to be: humble, kind, brave, inspirational, knowing when to do the right thing. And they don't drown us out with how great he is. They show us. Like Superman, he was a good guy before he was fully powered or had the outlet. That's how Superman should have been written and he really wasn't. The Captain America movies are better Superman movies than Man of Steel.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

Aaand the day after I post about Batman vs Superman being too cluttered, the Russo brothers announce that Avengers: Infinity War will have 68 Marvel characters.

Yeah, but as you said yourself, they earned that. They're not doing like DC is doing and introducing them all in one fell swoop. These will all be characters we've seen throughout the Marvel movies and - I assume - the TV shows. Assuming all the Avengers shows up, that's over a dozen (not including who else they haven't announced yet):

-Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Black Widow, Hawkeye, War Machine, Falcon, Scarlet Witch, Vision, Black Panther, Captain Marvel, Ant-Man, Wasp, Winter Soldier, Dr. Strange, Nick Fury, Maria Hill

Then the Guardians: Star Lord, Rocket, Groot, Gamora, Drax (plus, I imagine others introduced in GOTG or that join the team like Yondu and Warlock)

And I'll bet we'll see some villains return, so Thanos (obviously), Nebula, Loki.

I'll also bet we'll see, say, other side characters like Pepper, the Warriors 3, Heimdall, Sif, etc.

So right there, that's around 30 characters. They didn't say it was necessarily just heroes. There's a chance the Defenders (Daredevil, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Jessica Jones, Punisher) will appear, too. So that's around 35 accounted for right there. Maybe they'll toss in Coulson and his team from SHIELD to add another half dozen. Or more if they add in guys like Deathlok. Once you start adding them up, it doesn't seem impossible to reach 68 characters.

Really, the The Infinity War is a culmination of everything in the Marvel Universe, so it'll be similar to the first Avengers movie, where it's a big celebration of just being able to pull it off. So some characters might be little more than a cameo.