Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Oddly enough, my brother and I were discussing the Jonathan Kent death scene just a few days ago. We came to the conclusion that it was probably one of the more important scenes for Clark's overall arc, to get him from the life he needed to have as a child (protected, safe, secret) to the life that he has an adult (the hero).

It's a really layered scene, that people don't think about enough.

Jonathan and Martha needed to tell Clark to keep his abilities a secret growing up. They were his parents, and it was their job to protect him above all else. They were terrified of what would happen to him if anyone ever discovered his secret. So they hammered it into his head, over and over again, not to use his abilities.

As we see with the bus crash, that lesson goes against what his parents taught him about being a good person. It's not who they are, and it's not who he is. But they're parents and they're scared. Jonathan's reaction to Clark saving the bus was understandable, because at the moment when Jonathan is having that doubt, the only threat is to Clark, his son. Even Jonathan doesn't believe that Clark should have done nothing, but he's not sure what he should have done, because people saw it. Ultimately, saving the bus is what exposed Clark as an adult.

So, the tornado scene. Clark wants desperately to fight the lessons that he's been taught for as long as he could remember, but he's terrified. I've experienced moments of danger (when younger) that happened in such a way where my body and mind were at odds. I couldn't think or process, so I fell back on what I knew. When Clark does that, he falls back to doing what his father tells him to do (despite having been arguing with his father about this very subject only minutes earlier). Clark is still young, and scared, and his instinct isn't lined up with his teachings.

In that moment, Clark does what his father tells him to do. He plays it safe. He ignores his instinct and everything that he is as a person, and he follows orders. Because he does this, he loses his father. He loses everything that he had been taught, because it didn't matter. He played it safe, and he still lost. He let fear keep him from action that he knew was right, and his father died because of it.

But the scene is more than that. Because despite what Jonathan Kent taught his son out of fear of losing his son, Jonathan sacrificed himself for someone else. His actions and his words didn't line up. Jonathan, the man, was a hero. Jonathan, the father, was just scared. Every day. For decades.

The scream that Clark lets out when Jonathan dies mimics the scream that he lets out when he kills Zod. It's the loss of something vital to the core of who he is. Action or inaction, it didn't matter. He still lost. But without Jonathan's death teaching Clark that lesson, i'm not sure that he could become the hero that he was meant to be. Sure, Clark wanted to do something good, but that was a childish desire to act for his own sake. It was rebellion. At that point, he wasn't capable of being what he needed to become in order to use his powers responsibly and safely.

The scene can probably be discussed and perceived in different ways, if we really wanted to get into it. But I don't think that it was a scene that was ill-conceived or careless. I don't think that it was a scene that could easily be removed from the movie without removing something vital to the arc of Clark's character, as well as Jonathan's. It's easy to say that the scene could just be removed and that it was a bad scene, because most people don't need to character arc at all. A lot of people would be happy with the basic, cotton-candy version of the Superman origin that we've seen a hundred times before. But for this movie, and this Clark's development as a character, I think that losing that scene would do a lot of damage.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Henry Cavill has been fired????  If true, this is totally absurd. … up-1142306

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

If true, that's upsetting. Mostly because the biggest problem for the DC movies has been Warner Bros, not any of the actors or writers/directors. However... I don't know that I trust the report. It states that they want to shift the focus to a Supergirl movie, and that this would boot Superman because he'd be an infant when she's around. This isn't remotely true. In fact, you'd NEED an established Superman in order to tell a Supergirl story, and telling the story of her before that would mean telling the story of Krypton, without any superpowers at all.

And all of this is assuming that a Supergirl movie happens at all, which is unlikely since there is a Supergirl series, so this would cause the same issues that the Flash movie has had.

Cavill has never struck me as someone who wanted out of the role. His social media posts seem rather enthusiastic about the role, honestly. And his signing on to another project doesn't really impact the Superman productions at all. Especially since it's a Netflix series, so they're probably working around his prior commitments.

According to him, he's probably already contracted for one more movie at least:

This sounds like more bullsh*t news surrounding the DC movies. They've been unable to confirm that Affleck is leaving, and that rumor is nearly a year old. While I think that there are some major issues with the Warner Bros side of things (mostly, they have no idea what the f--- they're doing with comic book movies and they are constantly panicking and trying to adjust), I think that a lot, lot, lot of the news surrounding the DCEU has been crap. And it seems to be a constant cycle of the same rumors, over and over again, just swapping out names.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The main problem, in regards to the media, is the fact that no one is the face of DC right now.  I hate to keep harking on the Feige thing, but if Feige says something, it's news.  It's official.  At DC, it's the Wild West so rumors are free to run wild and rampant.

With dozens of ideas floating around tied to dozens of creatives, it's hard to tie down what's really happening at DC.  Only a couple of movies are official, and it does seem like DC is in the process of going from more of a shared universe to more of a multiverse concept with a standalone Joker movie and a potentially-standalone Batman movie among the likelier films to get made.

Rumors like this don't happen at Marvel - good or bad.  I think that's because everything flows through Feige.  If he hasn't confirmed it, it's not real.  When there's no one to confirm or deny, anything is potentially true.


Speaking of rumors, there was a thought that WB might want Kit Harrington star as Batman.  That's just such a bad idea that I'm hoping Informant's thoughts on the media is 100% right.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I do agree that they need to have a dedicated DC person/department. I don't think it would solve all of the problems, but it would probably help with a bunch of them.

The problem is that people expect Marvel-type news. They want a schedule 200 years in advance, and they want to know every detail of every decision made about those movies. The fact is, DC isn't doing that. They can't give us details on when Man of Steel 2 is coming out because they won't know until they have a solid idea of what that movie is going to be. It doesn't mean that it's not happening. It just means that nothing is set right now.

That's great in terms of quality of their products, but it's not great for the news outlets, who will then go on to publish any random crap they hear, because there's no news otherwise.

In general, I'm sick to death of the media. They report bullsh!t, knowing full-well that it's not true, but they also know that people will believe it, because they read it from a "reliable" source. And nobody goes back to check to see if those stories are altered later (official retractions don't happen as much as unadvertised rewrites these days).

I hate the media. Not just with entertainment, but in general. The big news outlets need to just go away.

And why is nobody else mentioning how stupid it is to say that Cavill's age would stand in the way of him appearing with a teenage Supergirl? Some of these geeky sites have to know Supergirl's story, and therefore know that this age issue is crap. Why aren't they saying it?

Now, all that said... if we have seen the last of his Superman, I think his arc plays well. It's not the complete arc that we were hoping for, but it does resolve his overall arc in a lot of ways. He went from being a lonely young man, scared of his own powers, to being a hero, surrounded by a team of friends and allies, celebrating his abilities. That's pretty solid.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The new rumor is that they're considering Michael B. Jordan as Superman.

Because that worked really well last time....

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, they’ve got a few existing options for a black Superman.  One is the bold choice to essentially make Obama be Superman.

Then there is Val-Zod who has a better story and a more direct tie to Supergirl:

And then there’s the Sunshine Superman, but he’s just silly. … 005-62027/

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I have nothing against Michael B. Jordan, and I'm sure that there are many characters that he'd be great for. But no. If these rumors were true (and I don't believe them), I'd probably just walk away. They have a good thing going in the movies, so if they choose to much that up for some silly reason, I'm out. The DC tv shows crumbled (at least a couple of them because of their over-politicization) and I find this whole environment exhausting.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Refreshing myself on the history, I believe Jordan would be good as Val-Zod.  It would be pretty easy to rework the Earth 2 story by just saying Kal-el disappeared and save the Darkseid / Apokolips invasion for later.  It could actually work as the soft continuation of the DCEU Warner seems to want; and Val had closer ties to Supergirl as they were both older when launched from Krypton.

As for the finale to the Kal-el arc, they could have the villain in full body armor (ala Darth Vader), and when he’s defeated we see through the crack in his chest plate that the S shield of Cavill’s costume is showing through.  It would still be open to bring Cavill back down the road as even the Earth 2 story had that initial evil Superman as just one of an army of clones Darkseid created.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The problem is, they already killed him off... and brought him back.
They already made him bad... and turned him good (though, very quickly)

They spent Suicide Squad and Justice League showing us a world without Superman. It wasn't good. So if they then turn around and boot Superman from the DCEU, they undermine everything that they've built.

I have no problem with them deciding to bring in some other characters, no matter how obscure. But they need to leave Superman alone.

It just doesn't make sense, which is why I have a hard time buying these rumors. If Warner is doing this to try to appease all of those people who whined about "Not my Superman" when they saw Man of Steel, why would they choose to make an even bigger move away from Superman, right as they've positioned Clark to become the person that everyone wanted him to become in the first place?

And again, why does a "teenage Supergirl" concept mean that Cavill is too old? Is there a continuity where she becomes Supergirl while he is still a baby? None of this makes any sort of logical sense, even from a panicked, reactionary position. Bringing in a new director to make a Man of Steel sequel, with Clark as he is now, seems to be the answer to everyone's problems. And it's what Cavill was talking about a little while ago... which is the only legitimate information we have on any sort of talks that have taken place.

I never believe news just because people tell me to. Every major news outlet is referring back to The Hollywood Reporter, which is itself basing its story on an anonymous source, who doesn't seem to know anything about the source material, or the contracts that are in place. They play down the comments from Warner Bros, but that is the only legitimate part of the whole story.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, I think WB has no idea what they're doing.  I think they gave Snyder the bandwidth to make his three-part story, and that's essentially all they had.  Without Snyder, they're scrambling for someone to have a vision.  In the mean time, they had Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman, which had their own separate visions that really didn't tie into the Snyder movies.  With Wonder Woman 1984 still keeping itself separated from the regular continuity (as another prequel), Aquaman doing its own thing, and the Joker movie being in a completely separate continuity (unless they surprise us all and end it with a Jared Leto cameo of Joker being someone like Jason Todd or Dick Grayson), they're moving away from a shared universe.

I don't think their strategy is a bad one.  All these movies don't have to tie together like Marvel does.  There's no need to shoehorn Cyborg into an Aquaman movie to make it work.  Wonder Woman has a huge hole to fill in her history, and doing a movie in the 80s makes sense.  And if Joker is an Elseworld, then it opens up the idea of doing other Elseworlds.  It might even make it easy to replace actors or follow the model from the animated movies (where each movie is its own thing, and voices are always changing).

But I'm still looking for someone to have a vision for where this universe/multiverse is going.  WB has been very reactionary, and it's messed with the tone of both the universe itself and the individual movies.  They're trying to copy everything about the Marvel model except for the stuff that makes Marvel feel cohesive - singular leadership at the top whose sole purpose is to keep the universe feeling connected and moving forward.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think you're looking for the wrong things from DC. So far, the movies have felt like the same universe to me, but more than that, they've felt like the comic books. Yes, different stories have different tones or even styles, but they still fit into the same world. Suicide Squad felt like BvS to me. Wonder Woman feels like Man of Steel (in terms of universes, not overall story).

But if you're looking for "Where is this going", I think you'll be waiting for a while. The DC universe isn't about where we'll be ten years from now. It's about the movie we're watching right now. This probably makes it look more chaotic than it is, in the press, because they're looking for "In six years, we'll have Darkseid show up, but we have to set up Jason Todd and Booster Gold first", and that's just not happening.

Shazam is in the DCEU. As is Aquaman. They might not have a ton of crossovers, but that's not any sort of correction. It's been the plan all along.

Anyway, does anyone follow Henry Cavill on Instagram? He is either trolling all of the people who are upset at his leaving (which would be out of character for him), or he is making fun of the needless chaos. … snwxs5vqh4

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'd be more inclined to believe that there's a singular vision for this if there wasn't a standalone Joker movie.  It's not a DCEU prequel because they're looking to hire someone to play Thomas Wayne, and they haven't approached Jeffrey Dean Morgan.

Then there's all the talk that the Batman movie is outside of continuity.  That Aquaman doesn't really connect to the DCEU (it, at least, has consistent actors). It seems, at least, that they wanted/still want Superman to appear in Shazam, and there's a lot of DCEU references in that movie.

It just seems inconsistent on whether or not they're committed to sticking with what was essentially Zach Snyder's universe.  I don't think they need to replicate Marvel - the way they're doing things is okay.  I just would like for there to be some sort of indication that they have a plan.  If they want to do a shared universe, cool.  If they want to do Elseworlds, cool.  But if they do a little bit of this and a little bit of that, I think they're going to lose the non-comic audience.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Joker movie is a different thing. I have no idea what it is, or how to judge it just yet. Sometimes it sounds cool, and like it could be disconnected from the Batman character entirely. It could just be a crime story, based on the character. But at other times, the movie sounds like a disaster, filled with poorly-conceived political commentary and horrible casting.

I guess we'll see.

Aquaman does connect to the DCEU. It features at least two characters/actors from Justice League. I don't see how that's viewed as any sort of step away from the established continuity. The movie is about Aquaman, and will be its own thing, but it's the same universe, the same characters, the same mythology created as a backstory in Justice League.

And the Batman movie... we know nothing about. There's talk that it's a whole new thing, with a whole new cast... but these rumors are born from not having any actual information. We have to separate out the wild speculation and sloppy ponderings from the actual reality of the situation.

Is it me, or could we just swap out comic book themes for politics and just as easily be talking about any other story in the news right now? smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The only reason I mention that Aquaman is a step away from the DCEU is that Wan has repeatedly said that it's "isolated" from the rest of the DCEU.  Which is I said, there don't have to be shoehorned Justice League cameos for no reason.  But if the movie doesn't address the growth Arthur's character went through in Justice League, it'll be weird.

I heard something about DC finally naming their universe officially "The Worlds of DC" - but that might be a more-inclusive label for all their properties, including animation, TV, and video games.

And, again, this is where a spokesman/figurehead/centerpiece would be beneficial.  Just someone to stand up when rumors happen and say "listen, I'm the only one who is speaking officially on this.  Cavill is not out.  Aquaman and Shazam are very much in our connected universe, which is proceeding.  The Joker movie is (blank).  We're excited about developing movies for (whoever) and you'll get more information on that when it's ready."

It doesn't have to be anyone with any real power at DC.  If they don't want a Kevin Feige, they don't need one.  But someone who can speak for the company when rumors start swirling.

But maybe they don't care.  Maybe they like the rumors.  Maybe they create the rumors themselves to float ideas.  I have no idea.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think they just mean that, like Wonder Woman or Suicide Squad, the movie is its own thing, while existing in that universe. Whereas Marvel will bring Spider-Man into Civil War and then his whole movie has to revolve around that Peter/Tony angle, Aquaman won't be feeding into any larger DCEU stories, or following up on any from before, which makes sense. It's very much in keeping with the comic books, whereas the Marvel approach is to create one large painting with all of these characters in different corners of the same canvas.

I don't think non-comic book people are going to follow the DCEU. I think that well probably dried up a while ago (at least for Batman and Superman), so they have to take those characters who have already been in a ton of movies, and try to play a different angle. This is another reason why the Aquaman/Shazam/Wonder Woman movies would be handled differently than the Batman/Superman movies.

It would be nice to have someone officially representing the franchise. I thought Geoff Johns was supposed to be doing that, but he doesn't seem to be.

That said, letting the press go crazy is sometimes a smart tactic. Warner can release all of these rumors about Cavill being fired, which will bring more support to Cavill (because people like him as an actor). Then the next Superman movie, which non-DCEU fans would probably not care about, suddenly becomes a rallying point... all while Warner Bros gets to shrug and ask what all of the fuss was about, because they never fired anyone. They have no movie in production, but they still have headlines.

Knowing how to manipulate the swarm of hack reporters is a talent that people underestimate.

TMZ is reporting that the whole thing is fake: … ch_Results

Negotiating in the press? Maybe. I love how they're keeping open the possibility that someone else would come in to play him. At face value, it seems like Warner Bros is trying to keep Cavill on his toes during negotiations. However, I'm inclined to believe that they're keeping the rumor mill spinning. Cavill has another movie on his contract (probably with a big pay raise over his previous movies). The Shazam movie would have been a new negotiation, and it (apparently) fell through (thought there has been some interaction between Cavill and Zachary Levi on social media). Cavill loves playing with the minds of the fans (as he did while teasing Green Lantern stuff before Justice League came out), so he knows what he's doing here.

People (and by this, I mostly mean entertainment reporters) need to spot BS. There were a lot of tells in that original report, which anyone with a passing knowledge of DC characters, or Cavill's position on the DCEU should have picked up on.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Firstly, it was The Hollywood Reporter, reporting on backroom Hollywood negotiations.  I don't see what the big deal is.  It's GOSSIP.  Also, the "news" that there is no active Superman project still stings, and, honestly, proves that Cavill's time wearing the cape is likely over.  They need a young director with a strong vision to come forward.  Heck, maybe this will do that?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

They've said repeatedly, they're working on the next Man of Steel movie. They have nothing to move forward with because they're trying to put the project together. There are about a hundred movies in the same position, which you'll be sitting down to watch in a couple of years.

And yeah, it's gossip. But it was sloppy gossip that shouldn't have been picked up by nearly as many of the media outlets as it was. Especially the geekier sites, which reported it despite the obvious flaws in the story. I can never understand why people will believe whatever they're told, regardless of how credible those reports are. If I could look at that report and tell that it was fake, the Hollywood Reporter, and all of the other people who make a living at this crap, have no reason not to do the same. Which mean, they reported it despite knowing that it stank.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

See, I really don't think anything nefarious is going on.  It could be nothing more than an adjustment to the way an industry like Hollywood releases news.  If WB is, in fact, leaking stuff to negotiate in the media, then there used to be a very simple way that this was done - they'd tell a reporter at variety or whatever and it'd get released as a rumor through an outlet or two.

Now any of us could have a web site or a twitter, and it wouldn't take much to start a rumor.  And with all these people trying to one-up each other for a scoop, some people could tweak the rumor to be "right" when it happens.  And it works the other way too.  People could make up a rumor, claim to be an anonymous source, and then get a story on a smaller site.  Then the bigger sites, trying for a scoop, report it.

I hope that they get it worked out.  I liked Cavill in Justice League, and I think he wants the role.  And it's a cameo...this is something they need to figure out.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Geoff Johns seems to have been, in practical terms, kicked to the curb except for projects that were already in development.  The exception may be the Berlanti shows, but time will tell.

Johns and Diane Nelson made a mistake in trying to fix the Justice League movie; they should have let it stand or fall for what it was, and then picked up the pieces afterward to do it right with the films that followed.  By stepping in, all Johns and Nelson accomplished was to take a share of the blame; and it cost them.

Johns was already on shaky ground after Green Lantern, though.  He fought tooth and nail to get it done his way; but because Warner only half listened to him, it ended up being messy.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

What did Johns want for Green Lantern?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Never saw any details leaked; just reporting about the struggle.

By the time Johns was given the Green Lantern comic, he was popular enough and established enough at DC Comics to have the freedom to do what he wanted; so I would say look to his comics run for how he would do it.  In those comics, Krona is not Parallax; Abin Sur dies of his own fear and paranoia that grew from a prophecy an enemy shared; Sinestro trained Jordan personally (which led to Sinestro being thrown out of the Corps when Jordan exposed that Sinestro was using his ring to control his home world like a fascist dictator).  That’s just a few things off the top of my head; but I feel confident Johns comics likely show what he wanted.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Joker. … ker-makeup