Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Batman v Superman rewatch thoughts:

Still great. And probably the most truthful exploration of the news media/public relationship that I've seen depicted in film. I'm not even joking. Superman saves 100 people, but the story is about the 10 that he couldn't. They want him to be a villain, so they report that while there is no evidence, there are still questions about his involvement in the bombing. The facts don't matter as much as the story. And the people either hate him because of the monster in the press, or they worship him in spite of it, an neither side is remotely realistic in their view of the man.

Great themes in the story. Great character arcs. It's just a great movie (talking about the Ultimate Edition here). I wouldn't put it on the same level as MoS, because there are some things that I would change with BvS (particularly in the Batman/Superman fight), but it's a very well crafted story and a well made film.

And the Wonder Woman arrival was just cool.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

And the Wonder Woman arrival was just cool.

What sort of ruins the whole arrival for me is the whole "Is she with you?" "I thought she was with you" back and forth....which literally only works for the trailer.  It's a cool line but makes absolutely no sense in the context of the movie.  Superman should be asking that, but Batman knows *exactly* who she is.  She isn't trying to hide her identity, and maybe he's trying to distinguish between Batman knowing Diana and Bruce knowing Diana.  But I don't think Bruce was supposed to be covering for her....I think it's a line designed for the trailer that they put in the movie and didn't edit out.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Maybe Bruce assumed that all superpowered people knew each other smile


Got my tickets for Wonder Woman. Going tomorrow! I hope this doesn't suck!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Haha, come now.  You can criticize that one line....it's all I ask smile

It's a great line for the trailer.  It just needed to be cut for the movie.  Or altered.  Clark could say "Is she with you?" and Bruce could says something else witty.  "I don't think she's with anyone" or "I think she's with us" or something.  Or even just that Batman smirk to let the other guy know that he knows something the other guy doesn't know (even/especially when he doesn't).

Have fun at Wonder Woman!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Hey, there are a few things I'd change about the movie (bigger than the "Is she with you" line). I acknowledge that. I would change the Save Martha scene a little, because I like the concept but the execution was a little off. And I'd change Superman's attempt to talk to Batman as he arrives at the battle, because the "We need to talk" and "You don't understand" thing is a peeve of mine from movies in general.

The movie is very, very good, but it isn't perfect

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Saw Wonder Woman last night, as most have said, great film. Limited CGI, intrigue and mystery, and period piece elements. Gadot did an excellent job as well, she's really right for the part. How ironic that the Justice League trailer preceded this film, and looked like even more of a mess than BvS.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Deep breath...

I saw Wonder Woman...

I didn't love it. <pounds head on desk repeatedly>



Spoilers below...



A couple of things to say before I go into my thoughts on the movie.
First, I've never been a huge fan of Wonder Woman. I've always found her to be a lot of iconic imagery without much character. Her story makes her unrelatable in the comics, and I've never understood why she is the big female icon, rather than one of the better female characters.
Second, I didn't love the movie, but I didn't hate it either. This isn't a negative review. I think Gal Gadot was great in the role.

I'm still trying to figure out where this movie is going to settle in my brain. I guess we'll find out in time.

What are some of the issues that I have with the movie?

Well, as I've said before, the interesting thing about Batman and Superman is that they've been done so many times before that the current franchise runners really can't fall back on the basic paint-by-numbers origin stories. They had to find a new style from which to film them, and a new hook by which to tell their stories. This means that the writers and director had to push that much harder to create a world for those characters.

Since Wonder Woman is such an unrelatable character by default, I really wanted something like Man of Steel, to make that character come alive for me and make me believe in the world that she lives in. While the opening scenes on Themyscira were beautiful and drew me into Diana's world, something shifted once they went back to the "modern" world. Suddenly, every character that surrounded Diana was comic relief, constantly bantering and joking in ways that made them feel like characters, rather than people. I couldn't imagine many of those characters existing off screen. They existed to serve Diana's character.
In Man of Steel, you get a sense of Martha's life without Clark around. You see Lois' life without him. Every character on screen has their own world and their own personality that makes the world full and complete. I just didn't feel that, even with Steve.

In many ways, Wonder Woman has a lot of the same problems that I find in Marvel movies. But I'd still say that this movie was better than the Marvel movies, because while I didn't like it *as much as* Man of Steel or Batman v Superman, I do think that there is more substance and more interesting ideas here. And visually, it just looks better.

Though I don't get why people are saying that it's so much more colorful than Man of Steel. Did I have my sunglasses on during the movie or something?

There was a moment that I thought the movie was taking a really interesting turn. As Diana tracks down General Ludendorff and kills him, she realizes that nothing changes. And Steve tells her that maybe it's not Ares, maybe it's just people. Bad people do bad things, and good (though still not perfect) people fight them, and that's the point of this. We keep fighting, because it's the right thing to do.

Right there, I thought that this was something unexpected and interesting, and a truly hero-creating moment. Diana can't rid the world of all evil and war by killing one bad guy, it has to be a life-long mission (especially since... spoiler alert... there's another World War).

Then the real Ares shows up, that moment from a few seconds ago passes, and we get a big battle that is exciting, but less meaningful than what almost happened.

It's almost like there was a whole other direction for the movie, and it was changed later in the process. In this alternate version, Steve's message to Diana sticks and she realizes that there is no simple way to kill one bad guy and be rid of evil. They off the general, and fight some soldiers as they work to blow up the poison gas, and the day is saved. Yay!
There was also this running question of what a normal life looks like in this world, in between wars. Neither Diana nor Steve know the answer. So in my alternate version, we leave with them together, off to discover what that normal life looks like and whether or not people are actually happy to be married.

There's no reason to not do this. Diana isn't frozen and thawed out decades later. She will live those decades, so why not with Steve? Why did he die in this movie, except because they want to set any sequels at a later point? Diana could have lived with him for at least a couple of years, and at most a few decades, and it wouldn't have done any harm to the character. In fact, I think it would have helped. Wonder Woman is always so unrelatable, but if she had that time with Steve and outlived him, we instantly have something that we can relate to!

This part frustrates me.

Instead, we get a big Ares battle, a dead Steve, and... I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out what I'm going to take away from it in the end. Maybe I need time to get past the "what I wanted to happen" part of my reaction.


Right now, my movie rankings are...

Man of Steel
Batman v Superman
Suicide Squad
Wonder Woman


But just to be clear, Wonder Woman still beats out the Marvel movies. I don't think it was bad. I don't think it was full of plot holes that render the whole movie useless. I don't think it was poorly acted or directed (though I strongly disagree with those who say that Jenkins did a better job than Snyder). It was a good movie. I just have to see where it settles once the dust clears.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, that's my question.  They have Chris Pine....could they bring him back?  She acts like she hasn't seen him in a while, but could he have survived?  Could the Flash have grabbed him out of time and brought him to the present day?  Could he have been, I don't know, recruited into the Green Lantern Corps?

Also....CAN SHE FLY OR NOT? Haha.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

And also....SMH.  We just can't agree on this crap wink

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Most comic book fans agree with you, if that makes you feel better. I don't know what it is. Part of me thinks that a lot of people have just gotten used to seeing Superman done poorly, so they have a hard time accepting a version that actually has some thought behind it. Another part of me gets that while I like layers and grounding and all of that, most people just want to have fun and don't think about it as much as I do... which sounds like I'm calling them stupid, but I'm not. It's just that different people process stories in different ways.

I don't know about Steve. Bringing him into the present would be too convenient, and I'd hate that. So now they're stuck with him being dead. He could become the Spectre, but that doesn't really make sense. I just don't get why they killed off Diana's main co-star and love interest when the story didn't really require it. If he were Lois Lane, he'd still be alive.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The more I think about it, the more the whole Ares sequence feels like the product of a rewrite. In the beginning of the movie, young Diana sees the god killer sword and is told that only the most capable warrior could wield it (or whatever the phrasing was), and that was not Diana.

Except, none of that is true. The sword is meaningless. The tower that holds the sword was just a waste of construction materials. And Diana is pretty much the only one who could wield the god killer, unless #patriarchy.

Every arc in the movie leads to the point where Diana kills the General and realizes that he was just a man, and then the movie goes totally sideways, with split themes that cancel each other out (is it man? is it Ares? It's both! So, neither!)

Did someone not think that the General was a big enough villain for Wonder Woman, after we had Zod and Doomsday?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Does anyone own Superman II? Not the Donner cut, but the original?

If so, could you tell me how things are left with Zod and his team? In the versions I'm seeing on YouTube, they die. In a later televised version, released years later, they're seen getting arrested. In the Donner version, I think Superman reverses time, so they're back in the Phantom Zone.

But I don't know which one is the "normal" version on the modern releases.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think the official version is that they are dropped down the cavern.  We don't see that they die, but it's pretty assumed I think.

Them getting arrested is a deleted scene, I believe, added to TV versions.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

That's what I thought. Thanks.

I'm in one of those conversations where people are insisting that the old movies are superior, because Superman would never kill. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

For whatever the reason, 17-24 minutes (depending on broadcaster) was inserted back into the film for TV back in the 1980's.  These scenes, including the arrest I believe, were shot by Donner.  That's why in many ways, the "Donner cut" might be further from the theatrical version but not as far apart from the broadcast one.  I saw it awhile ago, and compared it to the original, and frankly I barely see that much of a difference.  Still a good movie no matter what.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The weird part is that even without the arrest, people are arguing that Zod and his minions weren't killed by Superman. They say that Superman just threw Zod down a slide and never implied that he died.

If true, that would be the lamest ending to a movie ever. Like "I just sent Zod down a slide, Lois. I guess that means that the fight's over. We won. Let's go home, because Zod... went down a slide."

Sigh.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I heard separate rumors today that DC is looking into making a RED SON adaptation (live action?) and that the next Justice League trailer will feature an "evil Superman" tease at the end.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

If Evil Superman is featured in Justice League (something that I've always expected, but am wary of), I don't see how Red Son is an option for a live action movie. They can't keep making movies where Superman is twisted into something else.

I'm sure Warner has considered it. They seem to be taking the approach of throwing around a lot of ideas and seeing what sticks, which I kinda like. I just don't see this going anywhere.


I was thinking about another idea. What if Warner/DC released some smaller movies, in between the big blockbusters, to flesh out the DC universe a little? These could be small, character-driven stories that are set in the same universe but don't require the budget of the bigger movies. Like... a story about the Kents discovering an alien baby and how they deal with that situation. Something like that. I don't know. I was just wondering what an indie film would look like, but set in one of those comic book worlds.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm also hearing that Batgirl is picking up steam as well!  Ehhhhhhhhh

620 (edited by Slider_Quinn21 2017-07-06 09:46:05)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Bat-Family stuff is confusing to me.  If they exist, why weren't they helping Bruce in his crusade against Superman (or trying to talk him out of it).  I still think a line was needed to either explain why they were gone ("You're pushing away everyone like you did with Dick and Barbara") or ("Dick called again.  I don't know why you won't accept his help").

Or, if Bruce was too blinded with rage in BvS, why aren't they helping with the Justice League*?  I know they don't have powers, but you'd think he'd want people he trusts alongside him, even if they aren't necessarily in the front lines.

* I know they could show up or be referenced.  Basing this off the idea that we know they probably will not actually appear or we'd likely know that.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

All of the rumored Batgirl actresses seem pretty young. Younger than I'd expect for a post-Jason Batman story. So if the rumors are true at all, they're either going to be jumping back in time to tell her story, or she's going to be brought into the picture after Dick is long gone and Jason is dead.

So Dick may be the only Bat-family member in play right now. If he fell out with Bruce, Bruce may not have any idea where he is or how to contact him. Dick could be on the other side of the planet for all we know. Even if he were in Bludhaven, it would have probably taken him hours to get to Metropolis or Gotham to fight Doomsday, so it wasn't really an option. He probably wouldn't have been into the idea of killing Superman, so I wouldn't expect him to be a part of that story.

We're getting pieces of that story though. Jason is dead and Bruce is at a low point, isolating himself. They didn't directly mention the others, but his arc for that movie was definitely about his having cut others out, and then being open to finding others to work with. In the Justice League trailer, we have a reference to Batman working with other people *again*. So it's there, it's just not something that they're hitting very hard so far.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

All true.  It's just weird that in the ultimate "world building" movie, they didn't really flesh out the world of the main character.  I like little nods to a bigger world, especially when it's a world they hope to play in later.  I like in the Arrowverse how they've alluded to Batman (Jimmy referred to him as "Clark's friend" and Winn referred to him as "more of a frenemy").  Back when there were a ton of rumors that Nightwing would appear on Arrow, they had Oliver talk about going out with a buddy in Bludhaven.  Stuff like that is fun.

Even including the Gordon line, the impression I'm getting from the DCEU is that there was one Robin and he's dead.  I absolutely love the idea of doing Bat-Family stuff, and I want to see a Nightwing movie about as badly as anything (#PadaleckiForDickGrayson).  But if they're doing to do that, I need an explanation for where they were.  Even if it's a flashback movie for Barbara, I need to know why she wasn't in BvS/Justice League.  For Dick Grayson, it's gotta be critical if the relationship is *so* bad that neither wants anything to do with the other, and Alfred isn't even trying to make things right.

Not saying they won't, but I'm making my expectations known smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Jared Padalecki would be a good Nightwing, but I wonder if he's too old at this point. I guess he's ten years younger than Affleck, so that works. And I guess he could always play a couple of years younger than he actually is. So say Dick is around 30, Jason would probably have been mid-20's if he were still alive. Tim, if he ever appears, would probably be around 16 or 17.

It's not quite right, if I'm remembering correctly, but it could work.

There's a fair amount of negative space that Snyder played with when it came to some character development. A lot of the Batman history took place in that negative space, existing without being directly addressed in BvS and Suicide Squad.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I just think there's so much they could do with the backstory of a Batman who's operated for so long.  What's he done?  How many times has a saved the day?  How much do people know about him?  What were his big successes and big failures?  Who came into his life?  Who left his life?  How many of his famous Rogues' gallery has he fought? 

There are ways to dive into this with a line of dialogue here or there.  Ways to show bonds that were created and bonds that were destroyed.  I think Logan did a great job with that...by referencing just enough about the "Westchester Incident" without showing or telling us so much that it distracted from the plot of what we were watching.  But we got enough about it that we basically know what happened...it was mostly in subtext which made it so much better.  They could've done the same thing with Bruce/Alfred/Tim/Jason/Dick/Barbara/Damien/whoever.

The problem is that we've seen so much of Batman but know so little about him.  How long has he been Batman?  There's no real indication.  The furthest we flash back in the DCEU for Batman is the scene where he takes down Harley and Deadshot, right?  And those were relatively recent events, right?  We know he had a Robin and that he died (by Harley and/or Joker).  We can suspect based on some graffiti that Riddler existed in some form.  But even the dialogue in BvS is contradictory with itself - with Perry calling him "The Batman" (like he's well known) and Clark calling him "the Bat vigilante" (like he's recently showed up on the scene).  The police don't seem to be working with Batman (or all that familiar with his work), and yet the newspapers imply that his methods have gotten more violent (meaning his methods are familiar enough that they could tell the difference between him getting more violent and not).

The main evidence that Bruce has been around for a while is in a couple lines of dialogue, but the strongest is simply Ben Affleck's age.  If they'd cast Armie Hammer and kept the entire dialogue identical, I'd assume that Bruce has been active for a couple of years....certainly not a ton longer than that.

Sorry to get back into this.  I know it's all material I've covered before, but it's just something that gets at me.  I just feel like we should know way more about this guy than we do.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

There's not much more that I can say at this point, I suppose. We'll just have to see how they handle it going forward.

One interesting detail in Suicide Squad was when the Joker was on the floor with all of the guns in a circle around him, we get a glimpse of baby clothes also on the floor. What does this mean? How does it relate to Harley's dream for a normal life, and her reaction to El Diablo killing his own family? Is she upset for having killed a kid (Robin) or is she upset for having lost her own child?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

DC has the best posters.

http://cdn2-www.superherohype.com/assets/uploads/gallery/justice-league/20157765_1469237856503357_7577162083586035420_o.jpg

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Is that official?  Is that the first official reference to Superman being in this?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, it's from Comic Con, I think. Haven't we had official word on Superman already? I thought we did.

The new footage looks great too.

https://youtu.be/g_6yBZKj-eo

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

As far as I'm aware, Superman hasn't been in any of the official marketing.  The reference to him in the Comic-Con footage is the first we got (and it was great to hear reference to "The Lanterns" as well - it's starting to feel like a much bigger universe, which is cool).  And the thing at the end, if that's him.

My fear is that the climax will be another CGI funfest with fire everywhere against a gray army of meaningless bad guys and one CGI boss.  Like pretty much every superhero film has been recently (BvS, Age of Ultron, Wonder Woman, even Spider-Man Homecoming).

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

One thing is bugging me about the video from Comic-Con.  There's a Superman logo in London, there's a Daily Planet headline that ways "World Without Hope" and Bruce is talking about how much hope Superman inspired...and how "he made them see the best parts of themselves."

And my thought is....whaaaaaattttt?

I think that's how most versions of Superman would be described, and in most Death of Superman stories...I think the world would respond similarly.  The Daily Planet surely would.

But when you have a "realistic" and "nuanced" Superman, I don't think that'd be the case.  Superman was a controversial figure in these movies (as he would have to be).  Not just because of the Metropolis incident or the incident in the desert.  When he shows up to Washington, he's met with protesters that hate him.  Sure, he was also beloved/worshiped by some, but I don't think there'd be the universal solidarity with his passing.  Any tribute to Superman would be, if anything, controversial...even taking into account the way he sacrificed himself.

And Bruce's words are bizarre...because it's only Superman's sacrifice that made him see the best in himself....when he was alive, Superman made Bruce literally see the worst in himself.  Ten minutes before Superman died, Bruce was literally trying to murder him.

One of the things that bothers me about this portrayal of Superman is how they want to play both sides.  This Superman is layered and nuanced and much deeper than the Christopher Reeve Superman.  He's caused so much damage and pain and he lives with that pain....but he's also universally beloved and everyone (including his near-murderer) thinks of him fondly.The battles in these movies are huge and realistic and amazing and thrilling and destructive....but don't worry, very few people die.  Sure, Superman was under congressional investigation and strongly protested and was (at least, partially) responsible for a ton of deaths in more than one of his heroic actions...but he's universally beloved and internationally mourned upon his passing.

I just don't feel like there's any consistency in how we're supposed to see him.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Michael Jackson liked to share beds with little boys, and people still celebrate him.

I think that by dying, Superman changed a lot of minds. If people were like Batman and saw him as someone who wasn't brave or a hero because he was indestructible and didn't have anything to lose, they now know that he was willing to die for humanity.

Look at Chris Kyle. He is loved and hated. His memorial was a national event, where people lined highways to pay respect. Superman was kinda like that... Except the world now realizes that they have nobody to take his place and protect them from a universe of threats that even nuclear bombs can't stop.

Death has a way of cleansing reputations. That may have happened with Superman, and when he returns, people might look at him the way they do in the comics. I do hope that they keep a more layered reaction to him though.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

I think that by dying, Superman changed a lot of minds. If people were like Batman and saw him as someone who wasn't brave or a hero because he was indestructible and didn't have anything to lose, they now know that he was willing to die for humanity.

Well, I don't know about that for a couple reasons:

1. People don't change their minds easily, especially now.  I think if people hated Superman after Metropolis, everything that happened afterward would just back up that opinion.  There would be people who'd blame Superman for the explosion at Congress, and there'd be people that'd have "proof" that Doomsday and Superman were working together and Batman / the mysterious woman killed them both.

2. There were no witnesses.  No people were around.  The military would give their story, but that'd be the only story the people would hear.  I don't think Batman gives interviews (and he's feared too), and it's hard to tell what public persona Wonder Woman has, if any.  In Death of Superman, Clark died on international TV.  In this, he died under mysterious circumstances against an "unspecified" monster. 

It's obvious from the full military funeral and the Day of the Dead scene that a lot of people loved him.  No protests, apparently.  I just don't buy that it'd flip that fast.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't know that it fully flipped. We're seeing the official take on Superman, and the media's coverage of Superman. But we all know that the media's take isn't exactly the full picture. If you listen to the media, Barack Obama was one of the best presidents in US history, with absolutely no scandals during his time in office, and he gave healthcare to the masses.

I think there would still be plenty of people who doubt or dislike Superman, and probably all of the Justice League members once they come out of their closet. We just saw a trailer that was framing a very specific angle of the story.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Daily Planet headline could be a different part of the movie....maybe after Steppenwolf attacks.  That happens all the time.  The Superman symbol in London could also be something else....it doesn't even need to be sanctioned by the British government - it could be something else entirely.

And I get that Bruce was really upset and driven to madness by what he saw in Metropolis....and then he snapped out of it.  It's just weird that he acts like Superman was a beacon that gave people hope....when Superman basically drove him to an inch of murdering him smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, but that was the whole Batman arc for BvS. He hit his low point and was manipulated into fighting another good guy. *Batman* was manipulated! He allowed himself to be blinded by anger and pain and hatred. Then he reached a turning point and Superman was humanized within a matter of seconds.

Batman had to hit rock bottom, but he never really hated Superman or what Superman stood for. He hated what Superman represented to him and the monster that he created in his own head (and that Lex helped to create).

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, but it's just hard for him to say that Superman made him see the best in himself.  I mean maybe he prefaces it in the movie with "I was blinded, but..." (which is why I'm an a-hole for criticizing things out of context smile ) - it's just weird.  I'd actually really like to know where the other League members stand on Superman.  Barry knows about Batman (at least by reputation, he doesn't seem to know that Batman doesn't have powers based on the "I'm rich" exchange), but I'd like to see where everyone stands on Superman.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't understand some of the marketing of Justice League.  On one hand, the action looks great, and I think they're nailing a lot of the characters.  The threat looks real, and there seems to be a real need to get all these god-like characters together.

Then there's whatever they're doing with Superman.  I really don't understand where they're going with it.  He was "dead" in BvS...then immediately revived by the sun....then killed again....then the dirt on his grave started to levitate?

No one on Earth thought that Superman was going to stay dead (and the final shot is a clear indication that he might not have been dead at the end or if he was ever dead at all), but the marketing all went with the idea that he was dead.  Superman didn't appear in any of the marketing, despite Henry Cavill making some references to Superman on social media.  The first teaser didn't mention him at all, the first official trailer didn't mention him at all, and the Comic-Con trailer made a couple of references to him and a big tease that he's back.

And now I'm starting to see posters where Superman is just there.  No black suit or mullet or whatever.  He's back and part of the team....which the movie doesn't even seem to reference.

It sorta reminds me of the bizarre marketing for Kingsman: the Golden Circle.  In the first movie, Harry (Colin Firth) died, and the first teaser made a quick reference to him somehow being alive.  Seemed like it was going to be a major plot point.  But the first full trailer just shows Harry like he's part of the gang again.  There's literally no reference to the fact that he's back from the dead or he's a robot or that he was ever dead at all.

I think it's cool that Batman and Wonder Woman are joining forces to start the League to protect the world in Superman's absence.  But one of the big themes of BvS was Superman wondering if he needed to be Superman.  Instead of Death and Return of Superman, couldn't they have sent Superman into space after BvS?  Batman and Wonder Woman would still need to start the League, and there wouldn't need to be this weird cat and mouse with Superman being dead (or the crazy way they're going to have to handle resurrecting Clark Kent, if they do at all).  And him deciding to abandon Earth and then come back and save it would work better with the themes that Snyder is working with.

What do we think?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't think the point of Superman's "death" was to make us think that he was dead. I think they needed to show the world within the DC movie universe that he wasn't just doing what he did because nothing could hurt him. He did it because he was a hero, who really was willing to sacrifice himself for a greater good. We saw this with the line from Batman about Superman not being a hero. I think their world needed to see that Superman would fight for them, and save them, and sacrifice himself for them because they are his people, and they don't have to fear his motives. When he comes back, the world's view of him will probably be pretty different.

If they had just sent him off into space, I think that would have had the exact opposite message.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I agree there.  But at the same time, I think they could've done it a couple of different ways publicly.  Maybe they say Superman died while he's off finding himself.  Or searching for Steppenwolf.  Or whatever. 

Because when you look at it the other way, people were worshiping Superman before he *rose from the dead*.  It already made Clark uncomfortable before....now it's going to be a thousand times worse.  And since Clark Kent was one of two people that died in the Doomsday attack....I think resurrecting Clark in any meaningful way is going to amount to simply admitting that he's Superman.  I don't know if we'll ever get Man of Steel 2 so maybe "Clark" won't matter.  But this would be a little different from the first Death and Return of Superman because a ton of people died in the comic battle and as far as I can tell only two died in BvS (Clark and Superman).

The marketing, though, is still weird to me.  If we all know that he's not dead, why pretend he is?  And if you're pretending he is, why is he now appearing front and center on stuff?  It's like the Harry stuff in Kingsman....I feel like I missed something.

http://cdn2-www.superherohype.com/assets/uploads/gallery/justice-league-action-figures-2017/20638312_1402364949818333_1403954488773459728_n.jpg

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I get what you're saying.

I think from a marketing/storytelling standpoint, keeping Superman out of the press for a year allowed the audience to relate with the idea that he was gone. We always knew that he was coming back, so it doesn't really trick us into believing that he did die, but we did have a "Where is Superman" vibe, which adds weight when we do see him. A lot of the images that we're seeing with him are for merchandise, not the movie itself. Merchandise always messes up the vibe that movies go for with this stuff. smile

As for how they could have handled it differently in the story, I don't think that it would work to send Clark into space. It's too much like Superman Returns, and it doesn't fit this character right now. He doesn't have a space ship, or contact with other aliens. He wouldn't know where to go even if he did go off into space. And again, I think it would work against this portrayal of the character. He is grounded and human in most ways, not the super alien Superman that we see in other versions. I kinda hope they never go there with him.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, the toys and merchandise ruins a ton these days.  It sucks.

I'm also a little disappointed because I wanted to get black suit Superman, at least for a little bit.  Maybe we still will but seeing the same suit again made me a little sad.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Had an interesting thought.  I wonder if DC considered having Ben Affleck finish the shooting of Justice League before going with Joss.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

http://www.superherohype.com/news/40295 … t#/slide/1

"It’s an interesting product of two directors, both with kind of unique visions, both with really strong takes."


Sigh.

No, no, no, no, no...

No.

644 (edited by Slider_Quinn21 2017-08-12 15:39:09)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well that's the article I read before I asked my question.  They already had a great director on set who was a part of the process from the beginning.  I'm curious if they asked Ben if he wanted to finish - doesn't that happen a lot?  An actor with directorial experience directs certain scenes?  I swear Ed Norton's done it a couple times.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Affleck was probably dealing with other things at the time, so I'm not surprised that he wouldn't want to take that on. However, they probably had a second unit director already, or someone who could step in and quietly do the job. It was weird to go with someone who was so high profile.

I was fine with Joss stepping in to help carry out Snyder's plan, but if this has turned into Joss and the studio taking advantage of a horrible situation and stabbing Snyder in the back, that would be pretty messed up.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Superhero Hype also wrote that they're changing the tone of Cyborg's character to be "lighter" - http://www.superherohype.com/news/40288 … s#/slide/1

I've also heard a couple people speculate that, while there probably wasn't much (if any) reshot material in the Comic-Con trailer, the jokey scene at the end with Flash and Gordon felt like Whedon.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It is interesting that it's another well established actor who is talking about changing tones and all of that .

I think Snyder probably planned some changes in tone, which is why he was working with Whedon in the first place. However, I don't think it would be acceptable for Whedon to greatly alter the movie. I want the movie that Snyder intended to release.

I don't know if that Flash joke was Whedon, but it wasn't my favorite moment from the trailer. How can the Flash be in a position where everyone else speeds off without him noticing?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

I don't know if that Flash joke was Whedon, but it wasn't my favorite moment from the trailer. How can the Flash be in a position where everyone else speeds off without him noticing?

I thought that was weird too.  He also says that it's weird, but he doesn't say goodbye either.  I thought it'd end with "have a good night!" or something goofy like that.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Hopefully it will work better in the movie.

Ps- do you know what happens to a toad when it's struck by lightning?  smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

http://www.superherohype.com/news/40314 … k#/slide/1

Interesting comments from Affleck.  Sounds like they're revamping Batman a bit following BvS.  Makes sense from a real-world and in-universe perspective.