Abbott and Costello Meet Justice.
Wonder Woman (2017)
- Thread starter M.A.C.O.
- Start date
This Batman was the polar opposite of Bale's and we are talking about one whose meant to be a leading figure in the DCEU for most if not all of it. The film could of acted as a proper set up for BVS, and launch pads for Joker/Harley (especially Joker) that would of helped SS. Also seeing the death of Robin could of been something new for the mainstream masses. MoS did receive mixed reviews (I thought it was bloody brilliant) and a well received solo Batman movie would of generated more buzz for BVS and help counter the Affleck problem because he is amazing as the Caped Crusader. There was no need to make it an origin Batman movie but one like the Tim Burton film showing an already active Batman but this one would show his breaking point leading to the vengeful character for BVS.
Personally I would of loved the final scene maybe after the inital credits, skipping a few months after the events of the film showing Bruce Wayne seeing the message on the TV that the world saw from General Zod. A nice link showing despite coming after MoS, The Batman was infact set just before.
TBF do we know The Batman is set after MOS/BVS? they could do what they are doing with Wonder Woman and go back in time to tell the story?
The obvious answer is "Rise of Justice."
Is it bad that I think Justice League: Rise of Justice, sounds half decent
Last edited:
I figure that, even though the movie has a historical setting, they want us to see it as the beginning of a series that will continue, including movies set in the present and beyond. After all, Wonder Woman is the only part of the DCEU that's gotten overwhelmingly positive reviews, so its whole future may ride on this movie. So the marketers want us to associate Wonder Woman with the future, but the movie's set in the past, so the tagline is a way of compensating for that.
I would disagree, if you kinda squint at the continuity the TDK trilogy can easily work as a prequel to BvS. Begins is the most "comic-booky" of them, and can be taken verbatim as an origin story for Batfleck.
TDK then went more "realistic", but if you imagine he didn't retire after that, that he retreated deeper into the Batman persona and continued fighting crime, that he then encountered the neverending sequence of classic Batman villains with less and less "realism" that kept pushing him to his limits for years, and the tragedies he endured along the way, it's easy to see that he could end up in the same place as Batfleck is at the beginning of BvS.
(Even a lot of TDKR could fit, though that would take a wee bit more mental gymnastics
)
Not quite verbatim. There's a few pesky details here and there which don't jibe. (eg: Movies vs theater, alley vs street.)
As well as Wayne's parental obsession: Bale's was Thomas, Affleck's was Martha.
Real answer? At the time they made MOS WB had no intention of creating a shared universe of their own and thus had no real plans at the time for the other DC characters. They had no foresight or vision about it, and thus the decision was made after the movie to retrofit it into a Shared Universe starting with BvS.
Heck, some foresight would've solved a lot of things.
Clark suddenly starting to care about the brutal Bat Vigilante in Gotham? Batman has been retired ever since Robin died years ago and only came back out of it due to Superman's appearance. Clark knew about the Bat Vigilante from before but he wasn't as brutal as he is now, so people are wondering if it's even the same guy or not.
Joker still being alive despite Batman being okay killing people? Him killing Robin is what pushed Batman that far, and he beat Joker within an inch of his life before stopping. Joker's been in a coma ever since and only comes out of it when Batman comes out of retirement. Leto's metal teeth and stuff are due to the injuries he got from Batman. Harley has also been in jail for years until she's let out in SS.
Some minor tweaks like that would've solved a lot of things.
Iron Man 1 may have been made as a standalone movie, but they went into it with enough foresight to leave the door open for the Shared Universe concept.
Last edited:
The problem isn't so much continuity as it is setting the foundation of that continuity on Zack Snyder's nihilistic sensibilities which is too much of an, um, acquired taste. BvS got a razzie award for the worst movie of the year, after all. Real life is depressing enough. Most do not go to the theater to see Superman snapping necks and saying "no one stays good in this world". I know Logan's out and it's pretty depressing, but it's a one-off outlier. It's not the tone of most Marvel movies. Guardians of the Galaxy is more of what audiences would prefer to see.
That is not true, you can find a bazillion articles online published even prior to the release of Man of Steel with quotes from studio executives to producers that state the contrary....
None of which were reflected in the actual movie.
I'm hoping this movie will at least explain what Diana was doing in BvS, how she knew Luthor had a photo of her and why she felt it was so important to get it back when he still had a copy of it, etc.
I'm not SO opposed to heroes killing. I mean, the MCU heroes are pretty much killing machines and it doesn't make them less heroic.
SPOILER: She likes Steve Trevor.
I heard a rumor that what sours Diana on Humanity for so long is finding out that Steve is a German Double-Agent or that he's involved in some nasty stuff and he had been lying to her and using her for most of the movie.
It would be an intriguing twist, though I'm not sure many would agree.
Going back to WOnder WOman... this might change it in my mind WAY form being the D C Film Universe.
And glad to hear that they are coordinating so that Gal Gadot isn't the only one with an accent among the AMazons.
As Christopher said, I too think that WW will change the way we see the DCFU (or at least how it's talked about).
So far, the newly shown scenes are adding to the goodwill. It shoud open big...and if the movie is as good as the ads, will do better than expected.
And glad to hear that they are coordinating so that Gal Gadot isn't the only one with an accent among the AMazons.
As Christopher said, I too think that WW will change the way we see the DCFU (or at least how it's talked about).
So far, the newly shown scenes are adding to the goodwill. It shoud open big...and if the movie is as good as the ads, will do better than expected.
I just hope she keeps her accent in the movies going forward.
In real life she's sounding more and more American...
Batman killing people is a new thing to the DCEU Batman. Recall Alfred and Bruce's at the beginning of the film,
Alfred: New rules?
Bruce: We're criminals, Alfred. We've always been criminals. Nothing's changed.
Alfred: Oh, yes it has, sir. Everything's changed. Men fall from the sky, the gods hurl thunderbolts, innocents die. That's how it starts, sir. The fever, the rage, the feeling of powerlessness that turns good men... cruel.
The "Superman" coming to Earth is what brought Bruce out of retirement and compelled him to do something. As well as change his methods.
The Razzies aren't an measuring stick that should be used to denote truth and quality. Not only are they open to the public for voting (for a $40 dollar membership fee), but they're also subjective to the whims and wishes of who picks the films and for what categories. Case in point, Ghostbusters 2016. A far more divisive film among the general audience, celebrities, the media and social commentators, and yet GB 2016 was only nominated for one Razzie (worst screenplay). However, when it came time for voting, Ghostbusters single nomination was pulled from the list. With the pay for play voting process, GB's reputation among the audience and how people in the media (buzzfeed, salon, WSJ youtube celebrities, pop culture critics etc) castigated anyone who said anything negative about the film. It's not hard to surmise why TPTB only nominated GB for one award and then subsequently pulled it. GB would've swept the razzies and the outrage machine would've claimed the people who run the Razzies and their members are sexists, misogynists, racist and all manner of deplorable worlds you can think of.
I wouldn't say Logan is a one off outlier. It has several other comic book properties to rub shoulders with. I posted this breakdown in another thread.
We have the dark, gritty and sometimes mean and ugly superhero movies/shows.
-The Dark Knight, Watchmen, V For Vendetta, Logan, Daredevil (Netflix)
The global threat, action drama superhero movies. Where cause and consequences of the heroes failure can be devastating.
- Days of Future Past, X2, First Class, Captain America TWS, Man of Steel
The individual focus, action drama superhero movies/shows. Where the conflict revolves more around the hero's personal struggles first and an exterior antagonist second.
- Iron Man 1-3, Spider-Man 1-3 and TASM 1-2, Dr Strange, The Flash, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones
The action comedy superhero movies/shows. Jokes, one-liners, pop culture references with a mix of good action.
-Deadpool, Ant-Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, Supergirl
Then you're popcorn superhero movies. Turn your brain off and enjoy, if that's possible.
-Thor 1-2, Suicide Squad, Age of Ultron, The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises, X3, Legends of Tomorrow
This is how I break them down. Even if you don't agree, one can see that there is a WIDE net for superheroes and comic book properties. There's something for everyone and the general audience seems to be well satisfied with just about everything the various studios are putting out. However, there are no absolutes and the GA won't accept just anything put before them. Fantastic Four (2015) flopped hard, in an age where comic book properties are everywhere and new and untested IPs keep finding runaway success. Then you have films that perform below expectations and even their predecessors. Like TASM 2 (the lowest grossing Spidey movie), and X-Men Apocalypse (after Deadpool and DOFP killed it at the BO).
The audience well accept a lot of things, but the story and film experience the IP is offering what makes or breaks it. I say the audience and not the critics, because they have their own subjective tastes and personal snobberies. Plus, they don't always get it right.
See:
The Star Wars Prequels (all positive rated before Lucas rereleased TPM in 3D in 2011), the Hobbit Trilogy, Spider-Man 3, Iron Man 2, Prometheus, Jurassic World, Cloud Atlas, Ghostbusters 2016, Hunger Games Mockingjay Part 1 and 2, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull etc
We can rationalize that in our heads, but Clark acts like he'd never heard of the Bat vigilante before and was only paying attention now. The "Bat Brand" was the new rule Alfred was referring to, not killing in general.
And there's still no explanation for why he let Joker live when he showed no one else that mercy.
Which is ridiculous bullshit... why would anyone take that seriously?
In other words, Logan's popular, so it's okay when Logan does it. Gotta be on the right side.
Hell, anything to make Steve Trevor vaguely useful and interesting.