|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 16, 2023 8:15:53 GMT -5
It's one of those things that I just can't wrap my head around, how do you screw up making these characters work? You even have a successful blueprint with the Justice league cartoon and how Marvel constructed their films. The DCEU had their structure and storyline drawn out for several films when Nolan, et al. created it. Once the series launched the solid arc was seen in Man of Steel, Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and the original intent for Justice League, which was destroyed by talentless Joss Whedon, Hamada, et al., trying to Marvel-ize a series that stood on its own. Eventually, the fan movement convinced WB to ask Snyder back to complete that first arc as it was meant to be with his Justice League, which succeeded. Outside of that, the studio had gone off the rails with their Marvel-izing through Saturday morning-like schlock such as Shazam and its sequel, chopping up the first Suicide Squad and out of a long-worked deal with Dwayne Johnson, finally produced Black Adam, which tried to move the DC films back to its proper course, but even that was hobbled by a level of silly crap indicative of influences from the other side of the street. In the grand scheme of things, WB had their strong DC film universe with a few Marvel-ized missteps, but did not learn their lesson from said missteps (biggest of all, allowing Gunn to drop Henry Cavill when WB had agreed to bring him back), and are now trying to launch a new film universe, headed by Gunn (and his partner) who is best known for silly MCU crap. I do not see that being what Zaslav envisions. I point to most of the Snyderverse when I say, "How do you mess up these characters?" The first Shazam movie was pretty good, I loved Gunn's Suicide Squad and Aquaman and the first Wonder Woman were decent but the rest were dour and absolutely joyless from start to finish. I did feel bad for Cavill(and to a lesser extent Afleck for similar reasons), he looked the part of Superman and there were a few scenes where he was allowed to shine but so much of it was just overwrought and "edgy". Superman is supposed to smile and he's not burdened by his abilities he genuinely enjoys being a superhero and none of that ever made it onto the screen under Snyder. And it never would have had the chance to under him, Snyder doesn't do hopeful, bright and uplifting...he does nihilistic, dark,washed out color pallets and "edgy". The guy who made a great remake of Dawn of the Dead , a decent film out of Frank Miller's 300 and a just passable adaptation of Moore's Watchmen just doesn't have the right sensibilities to bring the characters of the DC Universe to film. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jul 16, 2023 11:08:56 GMT -5
The DCEU had their structure and storyline drawn out for several films when Nolan, et al. created it. Once the series launched the solid arc was seen in Man of Steel, Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and the original intent for Justice League, which was destroyed by talentless Joss Whedon, Hamada, et al., trying to Marvel-ize a series that stood on its own. Eventually, the fan movement convinced WB to ask Snyder back to complete that first arc as it was meant to be with his Justice League, which succeeded. Outside of that, the studio had gone off the rails with their Marvel-izing through Saturday morning-like schlock such as Shazam and its sequel, chopping up the first Suicide Squad and out of a long-worked deal with Dwayne Johnson, finally produced Black Adam, which tried to move the DC films back to its proper course, but even that was hobbled by a level of silly crap indicative of influences from the other side of the street. In the grand scheme of things, WB had their strong DC film universe with a few Marvel-ized missteps, but did not learn their lesson from said missteps (biggest of all, allowing Gunn to drop Henry Cavill when WB had agreed to bring him back), and are now trying to launch a new film universe, headed by Gunn (and his partner) who is best known for silly MCU crap. I do not see that being what Zaslav envisions. I point to most of the Snyderverse when I say, "How do you mess up these characters? I do not. The "Snyderverse" was the film universe DC needed, but never had due to misguided and/or embarassing live-action adaptations decades after decade, only starting to get it right when Nolan directed his Batman movies. You cannot buy a story if the a character is acting like the ice cream vendor throughout it all. No one reacts that way. According to what rulebook? If he's the character from the 1950s, then he's a Superman who smiles. Superman was not consistently like the Weisinger period's kiddie exaggerations, and that was not going to work with a modern audience who does not experience life that way, which is one of the many reasons 2005's Superman Returns (despite the deadbeat daddy sub-plot) failed. Being a note-for-note tribute to the Donner Superman was not what anyone wanted to see in this period. If being "dark" and/or "edgy" meant someone could not create superhero content, then Miller would have failed with DKR, Adams and O'Neil would have struck out with their Batman and Green Lantern stories (especially in contrast to what was happening for most of the previous decade of both characters), and Englehart's 50's Captain America arc--with two right wing, openly racist extremists causing havok as Cap and Bucky would have been rejected by readers of early 70s Cap comics. No one is asking for Christopher Reeve, Adam West, or the kind of interpretations both actors' projects were known for. Being tone deaf to the way the changing world sees heroic fiction was played out when Batman was blushing when Batwoman hinted at marriage, fought aliens, Robin being jealous because he thought he was being replaced, or Weisinger still had Superman "fighting" circus strongmen, Luthor trying to "kill" Superman with Kryptonite (after failing for decades) and Lois plotting to marry Superman for the trillionth time. They were the very kind of sugary cereal plots that made comic book fans disrespect Superman and comics in general in the early Silver Age. That applies to film adaptations as well, which is why Snyder's (and Nolan) DC adaptations have such a strong fanbase (believing they are the best version of the characters yet) and WB made the unprecedented move to finance Snyder's Justice League film; people wanted to see that vision / arc carried out as it was meant to be, and that included all interpretations of the characters as well. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 16, 2023 11:43:28 GMT -5
I point to most of the Snyderverse when I say, "How do you mess up these characters? I do not. The "Snyderverse" was the film universe DC needed, but never had due to misguided and/or embarassing live-action adaptations decades after decade, only starting to get it right when Nolan directed his Batman movies. You cannot buy a story if the a character is acting like the ice cream vendor throughout it all. No one reacts that way. According to what rulebook? If he's the character from the 1950s, then he's a Superman who smiles. Superman was not consistently like the Weisinger period's kiddie exaggerations, and that was not going to work with a modern audience who does not experience life that way, which is one of the many reasons 2005's Superman Returns (despite the deadbeat daddy sub-plot) failed. Being a note-for-note tribute to the Donner Superman was not what anyone wanted to see in this period. If being "dark" and/or "edgy" meant someone could not create superhero content, then Miller would have failed with DKR, Adams and O'Neil would have struck out with their Batman and Green Lantern stories (especially in contrast to what was happening for most of the previous decade of both characters), and Englehart's 50's Captain America arc--with two right wing, openly racist extremists causing havok as Cap and Bucky would have been rejected by readers of early 70s Cap comics. No one is asking for Christopher Reeve, Adam West, or the kind of interpretations both actors' projects were known for. Being tone deaf to the way the changing world sees heroic fiction was played out when Batman was blushing when Batwoman hinted at marriage, fought aliens, Robin being jealous because he thought he was being replaced, or Weisinger still had Superman "fighting" circus strongmen, Luthor trying to "kill" Superman with Kryptonite (after failing for decades) and Lois plotting to marry Superman for the trillionth time. They were the very kind of sugary cereal plots that made comic book fans disrespect Superman and comics in general in the early Silver Age. That applies to film adaptations as well, which is why Snyder's (and Nolan) DC adaptations have such a strong fanbase (believing they are the best version of the characters yet) and WB made the unprecedented move to finance Snyder's Justice League film; people wanted to see that vision / arc carried out as it was meant to be, and that included all interpretations of the characters as well. The general audience vehemently disagreed that the Snyderverse was what was needed, which is why their box office was generally poor, and the Snyder cut of JL was the most rejected of the bunch. In a time when streaming numbers were absolutely huge because we literally couldn't leave the house to watch anything else it got beat out by a critically panned Tom and Jerry film that had zero marketing. It's okay that you liked them, but they did not catch on with the general audience. And there is a big difference between the joyless characterization we got in the Snyder films and the characterization of West and Reeve...it's not an either or situation there is a middle ground like what we saw in say Batman the Animated Series. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jul 16, 2023 13:26:40 GMT -5
The general audience vehemently disagreed that the Snyderverse was what was needed, which is why their box office was generally poor All films directed and/or produced and/or co-written by Snyder made billions collectively, but I'm talking about the undeniable fanbase the films have. Further, during the media interviews surrounding Black Adam, the announcement that Cavill was returning as Superman in the film was not only endlessly covered news, but had fans rejoicing anywhere it was discussed. That happened because Cavill's Superman was embraced. No one was looking for a return to Reeve (or Reeves, for that matter). Where is this "most rejected" evidence, as the reports in the wake of ZSJL's release indicated that it was a hit, and again, WB would not have spent money on an allegedly "released" film to make another (the equivalent of two movies) if there was not audience support for it. Yes, the difference is that the DCEU characters felt like versions of the characters from their best published periods set in a realistic landscape, instead of the once silly-to-asinine adaptations made by a fearful Hollywood who only thought "comic books = silly" (most 20th century comic adaptations). BTAS is one interpretation--one apeing the Tim Burton freakshows which left much to be desired. WB's animated Batman was tolerable once integrated with the JL in Justice League / Justice League Unlimited series, where he was no longer borrowing heavily from that Burton-like characterization. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 16, 2023 14:25:30 GMT -5
The general audience vehemently disagreed that the Snyderverse was what was needed, which is why their box office was generally poor All films directed and/or produced and/or co-written by Snyder made billions collectively, but I'm talking about the undeniable fanbase the films have. Further, during the media interviews surrounding Black Adam, the announcement that Cavill was returning as Superman in the film was not only endlessly covered news, but had fans rejoicing anywhere it was discussed. That happened because Cavill's Superman was embraced. No one was looking for a return to Reeve (or Reeves, for that matter). Where is this "most rejected" evidence, as the reports in the wake of ZSJL's release indicated that it was a hit, and again, WB would not have spent money on an allegedly "released" film to make another (the equivalent of two movies) if there was not audience support for it. Yes, the difference is that the DCEU characters felt like versions of the characters from their best published periods set in a realistic landscape, instead of the once silly-to-asinine adaptations made by a fearful Hollywood who only thought "comic books = silly" (most 20th century comic adaptations). BTAS is one interpretation--one apeing the Tim Burton freakshows which left much to be desired. WB's animated Batman was tolerable once integrated with the JL in Justice League / Justice League Unlimited series, where he was no longer borrowing heavily from that Burton-like characterization. The Snyder cut was a big failure, Tom and Jerry was streamed more times than it. There was supposed to be a limited theatrical release that summer and a traveling show with all kinds of props and animatics of the proposed follow up and both were canceled because of how few people streamed the Snyder cut. #ReleasetheSnydercut was a lot like "It's Morbin Time!" it was an internet meme that didn't actually represent a large number of people. People didn't like the dark and brooding tone of the Snyder films, while Man of Steel was successful at the box office it had very mixed reviews from fans and critics and Batman/Superman: Dawn of Justice which should be a license to print money had the largest single week drop off at the box office... twice. And the theatrical cut of Justice League did even worse. At the end of the day though what is the biggest sign that the Snyderverse wasn't successful is the fact that WB is doing a hard reboot. If these films were big hits at the box office and really had armies of fans just hanging on the edges of their seats waiting for the next installment why would WB choose to throw that money away? The answer? Because they weren't huge money makers and there isn't a large number of people clamoring to see more. Again, it's okay to like something that didn't gain wide recognition from the general audience( I loved the Disney John Carter film and the Last Star Fighter is an all time favorite of mine for instance) but you also have to be okay with accepting that your opinion is an outlier when faced with the very obvious objective facts of reality. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jul 16, 2023 21:12:44 GMT -5
The Snyder cut was a big failure The reports at the time of its release say the opposite, and again, you've yet to demonstrate this (nonexistent) "failure" of its release, and referencing a Tom and Jerry cartoon is not relevant to the performance of another film. Who are these "people" you're writing about, since Man of Steel was successful (as you admit[/i]), and its follow up-- Dawn of Justice surpassed its success with Affleck being cited as one of the best actors ever to take on the Batman role. Then, there's Wonder Woman--a part cast by Snyder, while her characterization and approach was established in Dawn of Justice, and built on in her solo film--a film co-produced / written by Snyder. Each film was a success, with the new, stronger characterizations celebrated. No one was thinking about--or looking for Adam West, Reeve, Carter or any other type of portrayal, or setting, and they most certainly were not wanting DC films to ape the largely cartoonish MCU. A film which falls squarely on Joss "The Avengers" Whedon's shoulders, as he not only destroyed the film by not following what Snyder intended (the latter having to leave the production because of his daughter's death), but abused the actors and many production staff (which made the production a bigger disaster while he was running it), which was well covered in the wake of his numerous scandals. The then-WB brass did not listen to the audience, but to a loud minority who wanted everything to be produced and written like an MCU film, which was a belief and recipe for disaster. Disaster is exactly what happened thanks to the attempt to Marvel-ize DC films which were (with Snyder) and remain among the best superhero movies ever made. Funny how you completely skipped over the "how and why" of the theatrical JL's failure being tied to the attempt to Marvel-ize it, as it bore no resemblance to what Snyder intended at all. Not at all true. One, reboots occur with regularity: 1. The Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies were also hits (with the criticized 3 earning more than the near-universally praised 2), yet in less than a decade later, the same studio wiped that slate clean to start the Marc Webb Spider-Man films with Andrew Garfield. 2. The Daniel Craig Bond films' plots completely rebooted and openly contradict the EON Bond films starring Connery/Lazenby/Moore/Dalton and Brosnan, (also successful, with Brosnan's last being the highest earning of his run) with familiar details shared more with the Fleming novels than the original film continuity, and that reboot occurred only four years after the last Brosnan film. 3. Star Trek, anyone? The ghastly J.J. Abrams film series is a complete revisionist version of the classic TV series, even with Nimoy's appearance as an elderly Spock. The rebooting continued through Discovery and Strange New Worlds--both having no connection to the Abrams continuity and SNW's show runners are now saying the series is in a different continuity from the original series. 4. There is no "hard reboot" of DC movies, as a recent Deadline article from June of this year revealed Gal Gadot is still in talks with WB about continuing as Wonder Woman, while Gunn is on record as playing with the idea of keeping Ezra Miller on as The Flash. That's not a "hard reboot" unlike legitimate hard reboot cases presented in the three examples above. The objective facts are that all I've posted as they are part of the historical record, while it clear your sweeping, details-free "people didn't like", "...the theatrical cut of Justice League did even worse" (as noted above, you completely skipped over the "how and why" of the theatrical JL's failure being tied to the attempt to Marvel-ize it with Mr. Avengers Whedon, as it bore no resemblance to what Snyder intended at all), along with the "hard reboot" yet never mention Gadot's WB talks or Gunn being open to keeping Ezra Miller. You can hate Snyder and his DC films as much as you clearly do, but sweeping judgements and a lack of easily found facts deflate your entire argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Aug 26, 2023 16:20:09 GMT -5
Streaming on HBO Max checking it out for the first time.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 27, 2023 7:47:25 GMT -5
Streaming on HBO Max checking it out for the first time. I'm doing the same, my first reaction: How do the cgi babies look THAT bad!? That Batman chase scene was pretty cool and I loved the driver just looking at Batman and deciding to throw himself out of the car rather than Batman beating him up and then throwing him out of the car. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 27, 2023 9:34:51 GMT -5
Nik Cage as Superman fighting the giant spider was a nice easter egg...but again the cg looked really rubbery.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 27, 2023 10:48:36 GMT -5
I enjoyed the movie. Yeah , the cgi was underwhelming. The ending pointed the way to recasting all of the DCU.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 27, 2023 12:07:23 GMT -5
I enjoyed the movie. Yeah , the cgi was underwhelming. The ending pointed the way to recasting all of the DCU. I kind of wish they had gone all the way with that, it's the perfect story to signal that things are changing but instead they revealed that Bruce Wayne was George Clooney at the end? Sure, it was a fun easter egg but I think it would have been better to shoot Bruce from just behind and just show us Barry's reaction to it being a different Bruce since they haven't cast a new Batman actor. |
|
|
|
The Flash
Aug 27, 2023 13:04:37 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 27, 2023 13:04:37 GMT -5
I enjoyed the movie. Yeah , the cgi was underwhelming. The ending pointed the way to recasting all of the DCU. I kind of wish they had gone all the way with that, it's the perfect story to signal that things are changing but instead they revealed that Bruce Wayne was George Clooney at the end? Sure, it was a fun easter egg but I think it would have been better to shoot Bruce from just behind and just show us Barry's reaction to it being a different Bruce since they haven't cast a new Batman actor. That’s actually a good idea. I had the Clooney cameo spoiled for me before I saw the movie.  |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 27, 2023 13:44:12 GMT -5
I kind of wish they had gone all the way with that, it's the perfect story to signal that things are changing but instead they revealed that Bruce Wayne was George Clooney at the end? Sure, it was a fun easter egg but I think it would have been better to shoot Bruce from just behind and just show us Barry's reaction to it being a different Bruce since they haven't cast a new Batman actor. That’s actually a good idea. I had the Clooney cameo spoiled for me before I saw the movie. I somehow managed to avoid them all so the easter eggs were pretty fun for me. |
|
