Yes, of course I know that. I made it perfectly clear that I was speaking about its selection as a representative still image. The fact that in-between frames look so weird is exactly why it's strange they'd choose one for that purpose.
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Yes, of course I know that. I made it perfectly clear that I was speaking about its selection as a representative still image. The fact that in-between frames look so weird is exactly why it's strange they'd choose one for that purpose.
Now you're trying to have it both ways just to win the argument.
As. Usual.
It would be a pointless exercise for anyone to interpret that the Superman II scene in question had any other intent than for Superman to kill Zod, which is exactly what happened in the film the public was meant to see. Superman is not a saint, and has killed in his two central titles, no matter how much some other member (not meaning you) constantly refers to his early years as some "rough draft" (absolutely absurd BS, as the creators knew what they wanted Superman to represent in the pro-vigilante / Great Depression / WW2 era, and its clear to anyone who actually read all of those issues), and he's killed since that period.
He's not the character from the Super Friends, or the worst of his late Golden / Silver Age incarnation, and he certainly was not that when he sent Zod flying / dropping to his death.
Quoted for truth.
The Arctic Police was shot completely by Donner. But in his defense, we don't know if it would have made the final cut. It certainly didn't make it into The Donner Cut, so chances are it would have hit the floor either way.
The Gotham-set tv show (which is set in the same universe as The Batman) has a new showrunner
https://deadline.com/2021/01/joe-ba...ollowing-terence-winter-departure-1234661907/
https://deadline.com/2021/01/joe-ba...ollowing-terence-winter-departure-1234661907/
.
Your Superman is so very very far from my Superman...
Maybe you'd prefer Ultraman?
Ray Fisher has posted a letter on Twitter that goes into more detail about what exactly happened with Walter Hamada, Joss Whedon, and Geoff Johns. And for the first time in all of this, I'm finally finding myself without any doubts about his story.
Have there been these kind of accusation about Johns in the past?
It will be interesting to see if anything more comes of this now that he's come out with a more detailed statement.
Have there been these kind of accusation about Johns in the past?
It will be interesting to see if anything more comes of this now that he's come out with a more detailed statement.
I still have no clue what exactly supposedly happened to him. There were issues, something problematic, something racist, something abusive, something unprofessional, something...
Yeah, I just wish he'd either come out with his side or shut up. Its all vague allusions at this point. I'm not going to say he's not in the right, but its getting really tedious at this point for him to basically just repeat himself. If he thinks the internal investigation was corrupted or overlooked things, go public with those things, its not like he'll ever be working with WB again, and I doubt he signed an NDA about the investigation. Even if he did, enough people "leak" things that he could get specifics out if he wanted to.
I'm just beyond tired of the ongoing antics, either spit it out or ride off into the sunset.
While I'm on the fence on this whole thing, I have to agree, that letter did not contain any new details on Geoff Johns, only a little bit more about Walter Hamada defending Johns to Fisher. And without knowing what Geoff Johns actually did (aside from "protecting the director"), even that doesn't appear to be much of an accusation.
Again, I'm on the fence. I can totally see WB dumping an actor they consider inconvenient in his pursuit of justice. After the last couple of years and the revelations about Hollywood they brought, it would be par for the course. But even without hope of further employment, Fisher keeps it way too vague.
Again, I'm on the fence. I can totally see WB dumping an actor they consider inconvenient in his pursuit of justice. After the last couple of years and the revelations about Hollywood they brought, it would be par for the course. But even without hope of further employment, Fisher keeps it way too vague.
It's possible that he's obligated to avoid specifics because of whatever non-disclosure agreement he signed in the settlement, and is just trying to maneuver around that to the extent that he can. I gather that NDAs like that are pretty common in business.
And now Ann Sarnoff, the WarnerMedia CEO has released her statement, standing by Walter Hamada.
One thing that is standing out in all of this, is that while we did start to see people come out on his side with Joss Whedon, we still have not seen a single other person come out on his side with Hamada and Johns.
He really does seem to believe what he says, but it still leaves the question of whether what they did was actually as bad as he thinks it was.
I still can't help but wonder if at least some of this is just him being over sensitive to how Hollywood works.
At this point the investigation is done, and I would think if things were really as bad as he thinks they were, we would have seen some stronger public actions taken.
One thing that is standing out in all of this, is that while we did start to see people come out on his side with Joss Whedon, we still have not seen a single other person come out on his side with Hamada and Johns.
He really does seem to believe what he says, but it still leaves the question of whether what they did was actually as bad as he thinks it was.
I still can't help but wonder if at least some of this is just him being over sensitive to how Hollywood works.
At this point the investigation is done, and I would think if things were really as bad as he thinks they were, we would have seen some stronger public actions taken.
To me it just feels like a new actor coming in from the stage, expecting everything to be as artsy and collaborative as live theater is, and getting clobbered over the head with how big budget movies actually work. He didn't have the clout to try and make the fuss that he made, and so is getting shown the door.
I definitely know she has praised Johns...but curious about her anti-Whedon stance (was it mild or serious, vague or detailed?). And just wondering how much of it is Fisher being NOT AT ALL in tuned with the greater genre as Whedon and Johns very much are.
Well, Patty Jenkins didn't like Whedon's Justice League, that has very little to do with Whedon's behaviour on set.
Those who did come out against Whedon's behaviour, that I can remember, were Jason Momoa and Gal Gadot.
Those who did come out against Whedon's behaviour, that I can remember, were Jason Momoa and Gal Gadot.
Gal apparently had her own issues with Joss that she had to go over his head for to get them resolved, but she claims she was satisfied in the resolution.
What's the exact problem people have with Whedon?
He killed Wash!!!!!!!!!