Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I like the back and forth here. It lets me explore both sides of the issue without having to do all of the thinking for myself. I won't have a final opinion until the movie actually comes out and I see it (which will probably not be right away)

Now I'm actually wondering about the age of Batman in the comics. Say he was 25 when he started... which assumes that he dropped out of college and spent several years training. Say he worked alone for at least three years before Dick came to live with him. At that point, Dick would have still been a young teenager (too young for emancipation and still needing a guardian). So say Dick was 14 or 15 when that happened. Bruce and Dick work together for a few years at least... Dick is shown as still being Robin in college, right? So maybe four or five years there? So he'd be at least 32-ish by now (if not older).

Factor in time for Jason Todd, Tim Drake and Damian Wayne as Robin, and I would think that he'd have to be pushing 40 in the comics. It's hard to say how much time actually passes, since the characters don't age normally. Jason was Robin from 1983 to 1988. Tim's first appearance was something like 1989, and he was Robin until well into the 2000's. Bruce would have to be in his 40's right?

Meanwhile, Superman doesn't really age at all... but neither does Lois. They both still look like they're in their earl 30's.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I have always seen THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS and its bitter, miserable, joyless, solitary Bruce Wayne as a total failure to understand the character. BATMAN BEYOND, in contrast, struck me as the right approach. What would Bruce do if he couldn't be Batman anymore? He would pass the mantle onto a trained successor and serve as mission control at home base.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I mean, I always just sorta assumed that Batman and Superman were the same age.  Is Superman really supposed to be Dick's age?  Because that just seems bizarre.  Also, is there any continuity where the two of them are friends because if they're the same age, I could see that.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It suddenly struck me today... They're releasing Batman v Superman on Easter weekend!

Will that help the movie or hurt it? And while I'm asking questions, does Ben Affleck look a little botox-y to anyone else lately?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Ugh.
http://collider.com/best-superman-movie … superman-1


Seriously, the Donner movie was not good. It was horribly written, horribly directed and horribly cast. The only reason for its popularity is that there weren't a lot of superhero movies at the time. For the past few decades, it's been riding on nostalgia, and the fact that this is the only Superman that a lot of critics know, and therefore any Superman that isn't cartoonishly, stupidly bright and sunny becomes "grim".

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Weekly Planet, one of my favorite comic podcasts, did an entire episode about the Donner Superman.  I've never had any fondness towards those movies, and I don't really want the movies to be like them.  I group them in with not really seeing my version of superman on film yet.  I still say Smallville is the closest they've gotten yet.

In other news, they cast JK Simmons as Commissioner Gordon.  I really like him as an actor, but I think that's a really bad fit.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

The Weekly Planet, one of my favorite comic podcasts, did an entire episode about the Donner Superman.

Okay I listened to the first half of the podcast, and it's actually about all the Christopher Reeve Superman movies.  I've only listened to the first part of the Superman stuff (most of the first part of the podcast is recent comic movie news), but one of the guys definitely hates all the movies.  But one thing he didn't hate, necessarily, was Reeve in the role.

So, Informant, this is for you.  If Christopher Reeve was cast in Man of Steel, do you think he would've done a good job with that script?  Same question, I suppose, with Brandon Routh....who, again, I thought was a pretty decent Superman in the boring Superman Returns (which they lumped in and review apparently).

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

No. Christopher Reeve was a bad Superman. He was physically wrong for the part, and his instincts about the character were wrong. The only reason that anyone gives him a pass is because he fits the role when it is written/drawn by people who based the character on his portrayal. It is a cycle of suck.

Routh... That is harder. I like him, but I don't know if he is Superman. Of course, he would have to bulk up more than he did for Superman Returns. I think he has some Clark Kent quality, but... I don't know. It would be interesting to see him try it with a good script.

Welling did a good job with him. And despite my early reservations, I really like what Cavill brought to the role. It was a quieter take, which was interesting. George Reeves was a whole different ball game... And of course, there was Affleck.

http://images.fashionnstyle.com/data/images/full/41228/ben-affleck.jpg?w=600

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Ha, I'd forgotten that Affleck played Superman.

See, I didn't love Reeve either.  Although he did something that is still sorta amazing to me - I think he played Clark and Superman very differently.  I sorta see his Clark Kent as the sort of bumbling oaf that couldn't possibly be Superman.  I don't know what kind of cinematic tricks they used, but his Clark seemed lanky and unable to control his body.  He reminded me of a friend of mine who is physically imposing but just a complete klutz.  But his Superman didn't seem that way at all.  Most other versions of Clark (Welling, Routh, and Cavill) just look like Superman in glasses.  To the point where they didn't really even bother with the Clark Kent persona for most of Man of Steel.

But, yeah, those movies are so bad.

I'd like to have seen Routh work with the Man of Steel script.  I'm not sure he has the acting chops, though.  I haven't seen him really do anything serious.  Even his work on Arrow/Legends is done with this boyish fun.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I thought Reeve was good even if the movies were mostly bad.  He was a better actor than the Supermen who have come after him.

As for being physically wrong, Superman shouldn't be huge and muscular.  His strength doesn't come from his muscles.  Having essentially unlimited strength means there's no real way for him to work out and make his muscles bigger.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The problem with Reeve's portrayal was that there was no real character. He was playing a character as Clark Kent, and he was playing a character as Superman. There is a definite line between the two, because he played them as two separate people. I equate that movie with the old Batman TV series. It was just too much.

Superman is very muscular in the comic books. That is what the character is supposed to be. Reeve was a fairly average build, obviously sucking in his gut. And his movements weren't strong enough either. He practically pranced through some scenes. I would probably put him down as the worst actor to play the role.


I don't think it's fair to say that they didn't bother with the Clark Kent character in Man of Steel. The entire movie was Clark Kent figuring out how to become Superman. I don't think that Clark should be bumbling and lanky. That guy would be drawing way more attention to himself than Clark probably should. I think the difference between Clark and Superman should be far more subtle than that. Man of Steel and Smallville had similar takes on the character.

I agree that Routh is probably better off playing less serious roles. I don't know that he has the authority for Superman, but he does roles like Ray Palmer well. Plus, he has brown eyes. Superman shouldn't have brown eyes, and the contact lenses were obvious and weird.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

I don't think it's fair to say that they didn't bother with the Clark Kent character in Man of Steel. The entire movie was Clark Kent figuring out how to become Superman. I don't think that Clark should be bumbling and lanky. That guy would be drawing way more attention to himself than Clark probably should. I think the difference between Clark and Superman should be far more subtle than that. Man of Steel and Smallville had similar takes on the character.

When I say "Clark Kent" - I'm distinguishing between the Clark Kent persona and the Clark Kent character that the world sees.  And what I mean is that Lois meets Clark before she meets Superman - so she's never fooled.  Just like Lois from Smallville wouldn't be fooled - she knew him without the glasses. 

And I know that the glasses have just become a part of the character that we're supposed to accept.  People just don't know.  But I think in today's society more than ever, it just doesn't make any sense.  I mean, Clark is a reporter - these guys show up on TV all the time now to talk about stories.  Clark probably has a facebook page.  At least a LinkedIn with his picture on it.  His picture is on the Daily Planet web site in the staff page and probably a hundred times by his byline.  There'd be a million posts on Reddit about him being Superman a week after his first story. It's just the way the world works.

So, yeah, the bumbling part is cheesy and works well for the 1970s.  But I think it's the only thing that really works in modern society.  And he'd have to be on 24/7 for it to work.  Because there are cameras everywhere.  There'd be people who would dedicate their lives to creating websites/networks to find out who this guy is.  Papparazzi, etc.  I bet even the Fortress of Solitude would have people camped out at it, waiting to see a glimpse of him.

So Clark would have to give off this pathetic look or people would know immediately.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think Man of Steel managed to play this issue well. It's impossible to believe that Lois would't know that Clark was Superman, so they didn't even pretend to make it work. In doing this, they made the story more believable (to me anyway). They have Clark wearing glasses, but Superman is never clearly seen by most of the people in the movie. He wouldn't be easily recognizable. Especially since his outfit would draw more attention than his face.

There are celebrities who can walk around without being recognized all the time. People whose faces are all over the place, all the time. They change their hair or their clothes, and you wouldn't even notice them on the street. With women, it's easier because of hair and makeup. But guys too. I think it's more possible to blend than people suspect. And while people might think that Clark Kent looks a lot like Superman, the same way Keira Knightly looked like Natalie Portman when they were younger, nobody would really think that these two famous people are actually the same person.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

And it worked in Man of Steel.  But in BvS, that's going to be a problem.  Clark is standing before the Senate.  He's standing around looking crestfallen in front of protesters and papparazzi.  He'd have his picture taken, and it'd be on every newspaper, TV station, and website on Earth.

I actually think the solution to the Clark Kent problem is to have him live a low-key life.  Maybe leave him in Smallville to either work on the farm or run the local general store or something.  I like the idea that the town sorta protects him.  Especially if Smallville and Metropolis are next door like in Smallville - he could be in Metropolis as fast as it would take any of us to be down the block.  So in that way, he isn't even hiding.  He's Clark Kent and then speeds off to be Superman.

Because, thanks to social media, there isn't really any need for Clark to need to work at a newspaper to be close to the action.  He could just have an RSS feed or something alert him whenever something goes wrong. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

That would work. I'd even like to see Clark happily live a quiet, normal life. I'm just not sure that the larger audience would go for it. They already complain about him not being true to the comic books in Man of Steel.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well there's a twitter feed called "Overheard in the Newsroom" and there was one a while back where someone said "since there aren't any more phone booths, where does Superman change?" and one of the other reporters said "change?  where would he work?" since print journalism isn't exactly the best line of work right now.  So I think re-doing Clark's day-to-day life would make a lot of sense now.  I don't think he'd do something like civil service (definitely not a cop.  maybe something like a firefighter but I doubt that too).  Journalism does seem to fit him, but I still say something like running a store would be something that would interest him.

Now it's cool that he leaves his hometown and goes to the big city, but I just think there's no realistic way he'd be able to live in the big city.  There's the bit in the Batman/Superman animated movie where Superman just flies in a window into his apartment and then looks out to see that Batman has tracked him - and they just sorta stare at each other through his window.  And that scene has always sorta stuck with me because I just don't think it could work like that.  Someone would definitely see him and be able to put 2 and 2 together.

I think, honestly, the best way for Clark to protect his identity would be to live at the Fortress of Solitude in his Superman persona and super-speed to Metropolis to live as Clark Kent.  And he'd have to be Smallville-fast where he could be there and back before anyone would even notice.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't see the Fortress as any kind of home really. It has always just seemed like a resource to me. A library/storage area. His living there would separate him from humanity.

There are a few ways that I could take the character.

1. He takes over the farm and provides produce for Metropolis-based restaurants.

2. He works as an independent journalist/blogger. Nobody probably cares to listen to Superman's opinions on anything. And voicing an opinion as Superman could be taken the wrong away anyway. Maybe running his own site would allow him to be Clark Kent to the world.

3. He could work at a normal, boring desk job in Smallville.


Things have changed a lot over the past few decades. Now, he wouldn't have to be in the city to make a living or to have his ear to the ground. Clark doesn't seem like someone who has always dreamed of living in the city either. So, why would he?

The problem is that while his life may need an update, I don't know how do do that without doing away with a lot of great, iconic supporting characters, or alienating the audience who expect certain things from Superman.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Why would he need a job at all?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

He still needs a home, food, internet, Netflix, etc. Being super wouldn't solve everything unless he stole money.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

He still needs a home, food, internet, Netflix, etc. Being super wouldn't solve everything unless he stole money.

He doesn't need to eat or sleep, so he doesn't really need a home.  I'm sure phone companies would be all over themselves to give him a phone with whatever internet service he needs, just so they can advertise that he uses their service.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

As far as I know, he still eats and sleeps. He should have normal bodily functions, aside from the boost that the yellow sun gives him.

Even without that, I think he would need a home. He would still have interests of his own, family heirlooms, someplace to keep his clothes, etc.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, he probably doesn't *need* a job, but I'm sure he wants one.  Bruce Wayne hates having to be Bruce Wayne, but I think Clark Kent likes being himself.  Batman is Bruce's life, but I don't think it works that way for Clark.  So I think he enjoys his downtime and enjoys being a normal guy.  After all, he's been a normal guy most of his life.

Would it be that big of a deal if Clark wasn't a journalist?  I don't think so.  Did he really show any interest in journalism at all in Man of Steel until the last two minutes?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

True. I think he could still be a writer, even if he's not a journalist. I don't know if he'd write fiction or non-fiction, but I could see him selling books. Writers can be a little less visible than journalists these days.

Restructuring his life a little bit could allow them to introduce Chloe Sullivan, probably. She can be Lois' cousin... Maybe Chloe is responsible for formatting Clark's books and running his website (stuff like that), and introduces Clark to her cousin Lois, who is another writer that she works with. Clark and Lois can still work on their own books at times, and together at other times.
But where would this leave Perry and Jimmy?

The newspaper world has given Superman a lot of characters with different perspectives. Cat Grant is another one. John Corben. So, how could we restructure his life while holding onto these established and beloved characters?

Because obviously, we're now in charge of this project. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Hahaha well they won't give us a damn project so let's just take one.

And I'm speaking more to how I think Clark would try and live his life in a modern world.  In Man of Steel, he meets Lois before ever working at the Daily Planet.  Jimmy and Perry are big parts of the story before he ever works there.  If they amended Clark's role and took out the Daily Planet part, I think he'd meet them naturally and *bam* they're all friends smile  I could see Clark and Jimmy becoming friends, not because they're co-workers, but because Jimmy has such a great nose for news and is such a big fan of Superman.  Clark could let him in on the secret to alert Clark of what's going on in the city.

And yeah he could absolutely write fiction.  I mean he's an alien who was raised on Earth.  I could see him ghostwriting a fictional series about Krypton based on the stories he invented in his head about his home planet.  And yeah maybe he publishes anonymously through Chloe or a contact from Lois until he meets Bruce.  And....

Bruce -  "you freakin' idiot - you're writing stories about Superman."
Clark - "I use a pseudonym.  And Lois and Chloe protect my identity."
Bruce - "So if anyone put two and two together, they'd go after...."
Clark - "Oh geez...."
Bruce - "Don't worry.  I already bought the publisher, purged any record of you, and I'll take care of publishing.  You're a good writer."
Clark - "Really?  You've read my stuff?"
Bruce - "I mean...it's all on my kindle.  Don't have much time for reading."

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I like this...

Clark - "I'm thinking of writing a book about a billionaire playboy who becomes a crime fighting ninja by night."
Bruce - "I'm thinking of writing a story about an alien whose friends and family never hear from again."
Clark - "I didn't know you could write."
Bruce - "Yeah. True crime."
Clark - "Right, right... I mean, it sounds more like fantasy to me."
Bruce - "Okay, I've managed to trace the components of the bomb from last night back through a dozen of Luthor's dummy corporations. I've forwarded the information to a contact of mine in Homeland Security. Luthor's already on his way to the airport, so I set off the fire alarm on his private jet, which should keep him tied up for a while."
Clark - "You did that all right now?"
Bruce - "While we were having this conversation."
Clark - "...okay. Should I fly somewhere and do something?"
Bruce - "You just keep writing those stories."
Clark - "I can shoot lasers out of my eyes."
Bruce - "Which is adorable."

I have to stop this now. I have real work to do. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

If Max Landis can get his Superman story printed, we can get something done, right?  This is gold!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm planning my Man of Steel rewatch, for before I go see BvS. I doubt that I'll be able to see BvS within the first several days of its release, but I don't want to be spoiled, so it can't be too long.

Anyway, with Easter falling on the release weekend, I will probably want to watch it before then. So I'm thinking of maybe watching it next week. If anyone here is planning to rewatch, maybe we can coordinate, so we can compare thoughts and notes, rather than relying on our memories of having seen it a while ago. I'd say that we could live tweet/post about it, but then we probably wouldn't be watching the movie smile

128 (edited by Informant 2016-03-12 11:49:00)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Oh! I know that most people probably aren't as into getting deals as I am, but I thought I'd post this anyway.

Best Buy has some DC related blu-rays on sale (like seasons of The Flash, Arrow and Gotham for $14.99, and some other movies/shows for low prices), and you get $8 to spend toward a BvS movie ticket with the purchase too, apparently. I have a $5 promo card for Best Buy, so I will probably get season 1 of The Flash for $10, which will give me an actual product to keep after seeing the movie, rather than just a ticket stub smile

http://slickdeals.net/f/8523437-select- … pickup?v=1

The Flash comes with a digital copy too... cool.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I read the prequel comics to BvS.  Pretty cool.

Although is it weird that Lex's wig bothers me so much?  The Lex I appreciate wouldn't mind that he's bald.  He's proud of it.  Like he's proud of everything related to him.

But if he's Lex Jr......why would he be bald?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

So it is a wig? I wasn't sure if he was going to lose his hair in the movie or if it was a wig.

I guess a wig could be like Clark's glasses. It makes people see him a certain way. With the hair, he looks like on of those stupid young techno wiz kids who you don't really have to take seriously, despite his earning a lot of money. Bald might make him seem more imposing.

But I just saw a picture of him from he movie, with very shortly trimmed hair... are you sure it's a wig?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm assuming its a wig.  But we saw him with a bald head in one of the first promo shots.  Unless something happens in the movie that makes him either shave his head or lose his hair, I assume it's a wig.  No idea.

I could see it being like the Bruce Wayne persona - where people underestimate him.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think he shaves it. At least, judging by the picture that I saw. I'd post it, but I don't know where it came from and I don't want to spoil anything by mistake. But if you search Google for "Batman v Superman Lex", it should be the fifth image result.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It's possible..  I still think it's a weird look for Lex, even though it's sorta canonical.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Lex, in various incarnations, has been conceived as someone who vowed revenge on Superboy because he thinks Superboy caused him to lose his hair. The more recent businessman-Lex has been characterized as someone who is simply jealous of Superman, but at times, he's impersonated his own son by transplanting into a younger clone body (with hair). There's certainly no default version of Luthor who's okay with being bald, although there are some who barely comment on it.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, I know Lex wouldn't prefer to be bald, but I just tend to like the Lex that doesn't mind being bald.  He makes the look his own instead of hiding it under a ridiculous wig.

Note - you guys know way more about comic Lex than I ever could.

And ireactions - I complimented a supplemental comic.  I've grown tongue

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Can I just say that it is really annoying how so many people around the internet have been pre-reviewing this movie? They go on about it being too jammed with heroes and villains. They go on about the movies that should have been released first, to establish characters. They go on about the tone of the movie. They go on about so many things that they can't possibly have an informed opinion about, just because it will draw clicks. It is really annoying.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, I'm seeing the movie Wednesday.  I've been pretty harsh about it, and I'm legitimately worried that it's going to disappoint.

But at the same time, I've been waiting for this movie for a long time.  I've been excited about seeing Batman face Superman on the big screen for a long time.  I WANT it to be good.  I WANT it to be great.  No one benefits from this movie being bad.  Not even Marvel fans - DC having a successful franchise would breathe new life into the comic book movie industry.  A bad comic book movie just decreases the lifespan of the entire industry.

So, yeah, I don't understand people who are hating on the movie if they haven't seen it yet.  After Wednesday, it'll be fair game.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I probably won't get to see it for a while. Be sure to let us know what you think... But with spoiler warnings. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

And ireactions - I complimented a supplemental comic.  I've grown tongue

There's nothing revolutionary about appreciating media tie-in material. Back in the day of STAR TREK and STAR WARS with reruns hard to find and home video a distant dream, novelizations and novels were often the only means of getting more of a property outside of theatre screenings and possible syndication. You're just catching up to the rest of the world.

I honestly don't know if I will see BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN in theatres. I barely go see anything in theatres anymore; haven't seen DEADPOOL or STAR WARS, mostly because I've got Netflix and Amazon to keep me busy and can watch at my leisure. I'm looking forward to CAP3 and I don't even know if I'll see that in the cineplex. I certainly hope B Vs. S is good.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

ireactions wrote:

There's nothing revolutionary about appreciating media tie-in material. Back in the day of STAR TREK and STAR WARS with reruns hard to find and home video a distant dream, novelizations and novels were often the only means of getting more of a property outside of theatre screenings and possible syndication. You're just catching up to the rest of the world.

Awww, I thought you'd be proud of me after all the crap I've taken for dismissing.....whatever it was I dismissed back in the day?  Fringe?  I don't even remember.

And yeah my buddy works for (company sponsoring BvS #secret) and I get to go to a special/free screening.  So that's pretty cool.  I'll post a spoiler review and a non-spoiler review smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

*ponders this*

To be honest, I can't remember you dismissing anything. I recall you saying you thought the STAR TREK rebootquel comics did a nice job of tying the NEXT GEN cast to the alternate universe movie. I do recall you saying that the AVENGERS movie couldn't depend too heavily on tie-in comics to show the team meeting for the first time and that it had to happen in an onscreen movie.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I thought the Star Trek reboot comics were really cool.  It gives the story so much more to work with and bridges the gap from the old universe to the new one.  But the key is that the movie doesn't depend on it to work.  If you're a hardcore fan, it makes the story better.  If you aren't invested enough, the movie itself can stand on its own two feet.

Enter the Matrix was another one that I thought was pretty good.  It tells a parallel story that criss-crosses with the main story at a couple different places, allowing for some context if you really wanted to know how Niobe knew when to save Morpheus.  If you don't care to know why, it doesn't hurt the story.

One recent example that I think did a bad job was the new Star Wars (don't worry, no spoilers).  After too much politics ruined the last trilogy, I thought The Force Awakens suffered from not enough backstory.  Not enough explanation.  In fact, not enough politics.  I had no idea who characters were, who the major factions were, why they were fighting, how factions were connected, etc.  And when I found out that a lot of that was delivered in comics/novels/other "new extended universe" materials.  So the movie actually suffered from a lack of context, and you're sorta dependent on extra materials to really understand what's going on.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I've seen a few early comments on BvS so far. People seem pretty positive about it.

If this movie can make Wonder Woman work, it must be good. That character rarely works in the comic books and is usually a disaster on screen. She tends to lack focus.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

http://www.hitfix.com/harpy/zack-snyder … in-the-bud

Their reporting is really sketchy, and the quote doesn't really even seem to support it (I didn't read the full story), but if their conclusion is correct (big if), that's....disappointing.  If we're going to get a brooding Superman and a brooding Batman, can't we have a wisecracking Flash?  I mean....isn't that how this happened? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtGHuM1GYMs

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think HitFix just needs to sit down (to borrow a phrase from Wendy Williams... I don't know why). Now that BvS is being seen and people are liking it, they need more click bait. Wonder Woman is out because people have already seen her, and footage from her movie. So they're picking something down the line. They're taking a quote where Snyder said that the Arrow/Flash universe is not the same style as the movie universe, and they're using that to make all kinds of assumptions about future movies.

Don't get me wrong. I think BvS will not be universally beloved, and I have my own concerns about some choices being made. But HitFix is just trying to go back to the well after getting a ton of publicity by crying wolf about BvS.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well I just think they need to make sure that all the movies don't need to be tonally like MoS or BvS.  Both of those movies are darkly colored....most of the scenes take place at night.  The reason the "Batman in the desert" scenes look so visually different isn't because it's (possibly/allegedly) a dream but because it's bright.  It looks like 90% of BvS takes place during night - which is fine because Batman looks a little silly during the day (see the end of Dark Knight Rises). 

But one of the things I like about the MCU is how the Avengers movies are the combination of these weird worlds.  A World War II soldier in a bright costume with a tech genius in a hot rod cyborg suit with a norse god and a green rage monster.  You have science and magic and a bunch of clashing cultures.  But it works.  One thing I was hoping to see in a Batman vs Superman movie was going to be the clashing of those two worlds.  Bright and sunny Metropolis vs. dark and gloomy Gotham.  It's what was pretty cool about the Batman/Superman adventures in the DCAU - those two cartoons seemed so different and mashing them together was just bizarre.  But cool.

Instead, they just brought Superman into a more sepia-colored world to make things fit a little better.  But Flash should be fun.  Even if Barry isn't as much of a jokester as Wally, I think it should be somewhat close to the tone of the TV series.  It should be fun.  And bright.  And exciting.  If it's a brooding story about Flash trying to go back in time to save his mom...it just might miss the whole point.

There's a difference between taking the material seriously and being too serious.  And they need to find that balance.  Because, in my opinion, these movies still need to be fun.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Okay, I see BvS tonight.  The reviews I've seen are.....bad.  I'm not going to let it cloud my judgment - I like movies that most people hate and vice-versa.  I do want to outline some of the stuff that bothers me about the way DC is doing this just go get it out of the way.  Some of these things might bother me when I see it - some might not.  We'll see.

- The age thing.  I've beat it like a dead horse, but it still bothers me that Clark and Bruce aren't the same age. 
- The unified tone.  Batman is night and dark.  Superman is daylight and colorful. To me, more than anything, the draw of these two fighting or joining forces is the idea that they're so tonally different. 
- We know Superman.  We don't know Batman.  I know using Nolan Batman wasn't possible, but it's weird that I'm supposed to get excited about Batman vs. Superman when a) I don't know this version of Batman and b) this version of Batman has a ton of history I have to catch up on.
- Everything about Lex.  Don't love the casting.  Or the look.  Or the personality.  Or the fact that he's Lex Luthor Jr.
- Cramming in Aquaman and/or Flash.

Hopefully some of these fears, based only on trailers, are alleviated.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I have seen some bad reviews, but I've also seen some really positive reviews. I think it will divide the audience. I think some will legitimately hate it, but I also think that some reviewers are going negative because it's been so cool to have the movie lately.

I haven't seen anything near the "disaster" that people predicted.

Based on a comment or two that I saw, I'm wondering if this is like a Batman movie with Superman as a secondary character.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

Based on a comment or two that I saw, I'm wondering if this is like a Batman movie with Superman as a secondary character.

Yeah that's what the trailers make it seem like.  Which, again, is a strategy I don't like.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

There appears to be a major difference between critic reviews and audience reviews. Interesting.