DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond

[Nightowl1701]

Very fair point. I'm entirely receptive to whatever Gunn may come with, but Superman stories are always better when Lois knows, and a "Year 2" type of scenario makes that less likely.

The single best story decision Man of Steel made was to have Lois in on the secret from the beginning.

OTOH, while it's my strong preference, it's not an absolute requirement. Superman '78 remains the best adaptation of the character ever, and Lois doesn't know in that one. Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman managed a delightful and romantic first season, and a decent second, with Lois still in the dark.

So I'm open to anything, depending on the execution.

If I was doing it, my take would be: She figures it out early on (say, within a week of Superman's debut), but also realizes he has a damn good reason to be using this goofy reporter alias. So she doesn't let on that she knows. (Being an army brat gives you a great poker face.) Maybe shares it with Jimmy Olsen (and swears him to secrecy), but nobody else. In the meantime, until he mans up enough to tell her himself, well... if 'Smallville's' going to be posing as a hayseed klutz towards her, she's going to be posing right back; oblivious to any romantic overtures Clark may make, but absolutely thirsting for Superman. The classic Golden/Silver Age love triangle, but this time Lois is in on the joke and it's Mr. Only-one-sort-of-girlfriend-in-high-school who's clueless.

 

[Samurai8472]

Every time I think we've reached the bottom, it just keeps getting worse. What a fucking shitshow.

IMO I think it's because if Cavill and Gadot were in the movie they'd have to be compensated. Press tour etc etc.

Zaslav being a penny pincher and trying to wash most of the last 13 years from existence.

 

[The Realist]

Both timely and timeless, the new Pitch Meeting is for Superman Returns:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Entertaining as usual, but Lois and Richard aren't married.

 

[Christopher]

OTOH, while it's my strong preference, it's not an absolute requirement. Superman '78 remains the best adaptation of the character ever, and Lois doesn't know in that one. Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman managed a delightful and romantic first season, and a decent second, with Lois still in the dark.

Yeah, but those are older stories, from an era where that was the default. So it can't be held against them. What I'm saying is that, given how the storytelling has evolved since then, both in the comics and in screen adaptations, it seems regressive to go back to basics rather than taking advantage of modern developments like the marriage, Jon Kent, etc.

Plus, I feel secret identities are a discredited trope in this age when we've seen how toxic the secrets of the powerful can be, or the dishonesty of people in relationships. A lot of the classic "hide the secret identity from friends, family, and love interests" stories feel like gaslighting in retrospect. Superman's supposed to be a paragon of truth, so having him constantly lie and trick his loved ones is a pretty bad look (not to mention the gross professional conflict of interest of reporting on himself and lying about it to gain career success).

 

[Samurai8472]

Now when you look back at "Brightburn" you could say that was Gunn just getting his feet wet for a Superman type movie.

Incidentally, he's now unfollowed Warners and the Black Adam social media accounts. So I guess he's finally worked out where the hierarchy of power in the DC Universe really is.

They really screwed the pooch there. He thought he could save the DC universe with a potential and exciting Black Adam VS Superman and hype things up like one of his old wrestling matches.

Yeah, I LOVE connected universes, and it should be what Marvel and DC go for, but there is nothing wrong with the occasional stand alone film, and 3 of those four films are sequels anyway. Even if we don't get, for example, a Shazam 3 (which isn't even guarenteed to not happen, Gunn never said that everything is getting rebooted), if you liked Shazam 1 you're probably going to want to watch the sequel, same with Aquaman.

People that are trying to act like the films are worthless now wouldn't have survived the 90s/2000s. Imagine not watching Del Toro's excellent Hellboy films because they didn't have a final film, or not watching Blade 1 & 2 because he never meets Moon Knight or whatever. Does that mean these people are also never going to watch the Tim Burton Batman films ever again, because they never connected to anything? Will they throw away their copies of Wonder Woman and Aquaman because those characters never get a real finale? The Superhero universe concept is amazing and I'll always prefer it, but ignoring films because they might not be in one is odd.

No one is obliged to watch anything, and its fine to not watch any particular film for whatever reason you want, but this specific problem is just weird. I mean, I get that this attitude is coming mostly from Snyder Cultists, who never were ones for logic and also generally seem to love being hypocrites, but it still feels like a ridiculous excuse to not watch a movie. If they honestly think the films look bad then thats all the reason they need not to watch them, trying to use the lack of connection is just an excuse to complain about James Gunn and the final confirmation that they aren't getting anymore Snyder stuff.

There's also a bit of selfish need

"YOU(the studios) owe us. We've been reading the comics and following different media for decades. We want to see that random gang Superman stopped turn into a conflict for Steel to deal with"

 

[The Realist]

Yeah, but those are older stories, from an era where that was the default. So it can't be held against them. What I'm saying is that, given how the storytelling has evolved since then, both in the comics and in screen adaptations, it seems regressive to go back to basics rather than taking advantage of modern developments like the marriage, Jon Kent, etc.

Plus, I feel secret identities are a discredited trope in this age when we've seen how toxic the secrets of the powerful can be, or the dishonesty of people in relationships. A lot of the classic "hide the secret identity from friends, family, and love interests" stories feel like gaslighting in retrospect. Superman's supposed to be a paragon of truth, so having him constantly lie and trick his loved ones is a pretty bad look (not to mention the gross professional conflict of interest of reporting on himself and lying about it to gain career success).

Agree with most of this (and you'll find few stronger advocates for the Clark/Lois marriage than I), but I'm still willing to be optimistic and choosing to keep an open mind.

Anyway, just because it's early days in the Superman narrative doesn't mean they can't tweak the old-school Clark/Lois dynamic. MoS did it, after all. Or something like what Nightowl1701 suggested a few posts above would actually be a pretty clever spin.

 

[YLu]

So, these movies are worthless? That's all I'm asking. I'm not denying audience expectations. I'm questioning the foundational idea that films with no sequel potential are now deemed worthless.

Right, no one here's arguing people don't want or enjoy sequels. The pushback's against the idea a sequel's *necessary*, that superhero film are pointless when there won't be one. That's bonkers.

I find that disappointing. Superman's early years at the Planet have been done to death. That essentially is part of Superman's origin story, a usual part of his debut story in any given medium, from the comics to the radio series to the serial and the Reeves TV series, not to mention the Reeve movie, Lois & Clark, S:TAS, Smallville, etc. (not an exhaustive list).

I like how the Superman narrative in the comics and a number of the adaptations has moved past that early phase to the part where he and Lois are a couple with no secrets between them -- or even skipped right to that part from the get-go, in Man of Steel (which was one of the things I liked about that movie). Going back to the early years seems regressive, as much as the way most modern Spider-Man adaptations have this bizarre need to keep resetting him to high school even though that was only his status quo for the first few years and he's spent the vast majority of his comics history as a college student or graduate.

This is why I generally don't like reboots. They end up being about re-doing what's already been done instead of forging ahead into the new.

 

[Nombrecomun]

Do you know why people don’t have those expectations for “Joker”? Because DC had to make it clear that it wasn’t part of a connected universe. That they had to do that shows how much the expectation of connectivity is there. Because of that people just viewed it as it’s own thing with no expectation of a sequel much less connectivity to other DC films.

To be fair, it's not like The Joker couldn't be part of a larger connected DC Universe. It's just that this was not the focus for this particular film and they didn't pepper the film with Easter eggs type of nods to other events, characters, etc...None of these things make a movie but there is a type of fan that loves those things. They could have easily made this version of the Joker and events of this movie part of any other movie and it would have fallen in place. Not that I'm advocating they should or should not have.

 

[The Lensman]

So, these movies are worthless? That's all I'm asking. I'm not denying audience expectations. I'm questioning the foundational idea that films with no sequel potential are now deemed worthless.

It’s beyond simple “sequel potential” as these are looked at as not just sequels for a specific character, but part of a larger story building to some inevitable big cross over. See everything Marvel has done. The vast majority of their films, sequels and all, are all in service to the larger narrative. Dr. Strange 2 bled more out of Vision and Scarlet Witch, and seemed to be settling up the multiverse for future movies. Stranges’s story was crammed somewhere in between those other two pieces of the larger narrative. That is the norm. Few people were going to see this just for Strange’s story alone. If they wanted to get where Scarlet Witches story went from the show, they had to see it. If they wanted to see the introduction of new characters and concepts that will come into play later, they saw it. If they wanted some kind of follow up on Stranges story, they saw it. And if they wanted to be completionists, so that they knew they saw the next chapter in the larger story, they saw it. These aren’t just individual films anymore, it’s like watching a tv show with each movie being a chapter with a different pov character. I’ve heard that comment from both fans and non-fans alike. Would you read a book that was released chapter by chapter only to find out there’s not going to be an end? Maybe, but most are going to think twice.

That’s going to put most people off, the degree of that will vary. If DC is smart, they’ll remove all post credit scenes that are setting up any larger story in the remaining films and use The Flash film to give closure to this era by having the universe get reset. Just to be clear, I plan on seeing all the remaining films because I enjoy all of those characters.

Technically speaking, at the 10 year mark after the release of the first MCU film, there had only been 19 films released. If you give it a few more months you get to 20.

Don’t be that guy

 

[Nombrecomun]

He thought he could save the DC universe with a potential and exciting Black Adam VS Superman and hype things up like one of his old wrestling matches.

I don't know why Johnson thought he could save the DC Universe with a follow up. I'm struggling to watch Black Adam now. Perfunctory. Uninspired. By the numbers. No soul. I could go on. And I'm only halfway through it.

 

[fireproof78]

Would you read a book that was released chapter by chapter only to find out there’s not going to be an end? Ma

Yes.

Few people were going to see this just for Strange’s story alone. If t

Count me among the few.

See everything Marvel has done

I have and am quite over it.

A film, to my mind, should stand alone. If not, it's a poor film, and no amount of interconnectedness will save it.

 

[Set Harth]

To be fair, it's not like The Joker couldn't be part of a larger connected DC Universe.

An interesting point of overlap between Joker ( no "The" ) and the Snyderverse is that the Waynes are killed in the same year in both.

 

[DigificWriter]

The pushback's against the idea a sequel's *necessary*, that superhero film are pointless when there won't be one.

That's not even remotely close to the argument I put forth.

Nice try, though.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

It really does seem that the decision to go with a younger Superman doesn't really have a lot of fans. Needless to say all the Snyder stans are going to hate it but no one else seems very enthusiastic about it either.

As to the news about Gadot, I had suspected that might be the case that once they pulled Cavill that everything connected could go the same. That end credit scene might actually have done more harm than good for The Rock, though that will hardly slow the tequila, energy drinks, XFL, Young Rock, his Xmas movie and whatever else he's pumping at the moment...

 

[fireproof78]

That's not even remotely close to the argument I put forth.

Nice try, though.

That's how it came across. That it was discount bin, removing any motivation to go see it. Which is not the reason for a film to exist.

 

[Prometheus59650]

The absolute BEST THING about Superman & Lois is that it's *NOT* a Superman origin story. Don't need that shit. People know it, people have seen it.

I don't really have interest in seeing a new DCU revisit again.

This.

Who doesn't know the origin stories of Batman and Superman at this point, even just by accident.

 

[Set Harth]

That's why they skipped the origin story for Spider-Man in the MCU.

 

[Awesome Possum]

All they need to do is copy All-Star Superman.

Doomed planet. Desperate scientists. Last hope. Kindly couple. Superman.

 

[YLu]

That's not even remotely close to the argument I put forth.

Nice try, though.

Tell it to folks saying things like:

These movies will now tank at the box office because the people in charge have said, this universe is Dead, so why go see it and invest any money or emotions into the movie if we now know for certain that there won't be any more Shazam, etc. even if it makes a Billion.

These upcoming movies would usually if successful lead to more movies. Shazam 3, Bluebeetle 2, Aquaman 3 etc. Now that we know that that isn't really a possiblity, why go see it in the theatres?

Those who were among the growing fanbase of the MoS continuity were likely set to see the 2023 films, but now that the MoS continuity is apparently an arbitrarily closed chapter, they have little reason to see the rest of films from a film universe that no longer matters.

By effectively confirming a from-scratch reset, though, Warner Bros. Discovery has removed any actual Impetus for anyone, general audiences or hardcore fans of the MoS SCU, to go see the vast majority of their upcoming slate and contribute to the box office numbers thereof...

 

[DigificWriter]

@YLu Would you support the MCU's next slate of releases if you knew going in that Marvel Studios had already effectively declared that they were going to start their film franchise from scratch?

Because that's the equivalent to the argument that myself and others were actually making.