Yeah, Carwoman's head looks stuck on. And slightly too big.It looks fan made.
OK, I see.Yeah. Teen Titans was the first DC animated show in over a decade not to be part of the DCAU (well, almost -- Static Shock's first season was set in a separate reality where Superman was fictional, but it was folded into the DCAU in season 2), so some people had trouble adjusting to the concept of a DC animated show that wasn't part of it, even when it was drastically different in approach and style.
Depends on what it is, some things are always fun.Tell me... if something was fun the first time, does it generally feel equally fun after it's been done over and over and over again? Once you get to the point that everyone is doing it, it becomes predictable and ordinary.
I understand all of that, but it still seems weird to me that they're OK with half of the character.It's not like it's an actual legal ban or anything. Every one of these productions is owned by DC and Warner Bros., so it's nothing like the rights issues Marvel had with the X-Men and the Fantastic Four before buying Fox, say. As I understand it, it's simply that DC/WB doesn't want to have two different live-action versions of Batman competing with each other for the audience's attention at the same time. So as long as there are Batman movies being made, live-action DC productions can use the character, but they have to use him in a distinct enough form that it's not directly competing. It's bizarre, but that seems to be the idea.
Even if it's not a total ban, it's pretty clear they aren't allowing a regular Batman on TV on a regular basis. Gotham, Titans, and Batwoman all use elements of the Batman mythos, and use elements of the comics, but the only time Batman himself has appeared onscreen, it was a time exceptional situation, the series finale for Gotham, and a dream sequence where we never actually got a clear look at him in Titans. If the WB were OK with Batman on TV regularly, we'd probably have a Batverse on the CW instead of an Arrowverse.This hasn't been true for close to a decade, and yet the notion still won't die.
Character access is now entirely situational; for example, if Titans wanted their older Bruce to suit up on a consistent basis, I very much doubt that the writers would be denied the opportunity to make that happen.
Whether or not a given character or set of characters can appear in a particular medium is no longer something that is preemptively or universally prohibited, nor is access to a given character or set of characters something that ceases being offered based solely on whether or not said character or group of characters is being used in a medium other than the one that had already been using said character or set of characters.
The internet would have been put on life support had it been around during the era of Cecile B. DeMille.So the internet is in full panic mode about the 2:47 minute runtime but... TDK was 2:32, is an extra 15 minutes such a big deal??
I mean, do I miss the days when action movies were tightly paced 90 minute rollercoaster rides? Sure I do, but this was never going to be that kind of movie anyway...
Transformers: Age of Extinction: 2 hours 45 minutes - now that was tough to deal with.
I love intermissions. Still one of my favorite part of revisiting films like "Ten Commandments" and "The Sound of Music."The internet would have been put on life support had it been around during the era of Cecile B. DeMille.
"INTERMISSION????!!!! You mean the movie actually has to STOP and then START again?????"
I love intermissions. Still one of my favorite part of revisiting films like "Ten Commandments" and "The Sound of Music."
How was it?And "How the West was Won".
I remember seeing that in the theater as a kid.And "How the West was Won".
How was it?
That explains the intermissions.Generationally.
The West wasn't won in one night.That explains the intermissions.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.