Yes. I like what he's saying. I've felt for a long time that the powerlessness of writers in feature films has led to countless films that were superbly made in every way except for having incoherent writing, and so they fell apart, like magnificent mansions built on rotten foundations. The script is the blueprint for the movie (pardon the mixed metaphor). You need to know what you're going to build before you start to build it.
For those who find it interesting, Gunn tweeted some of the comics that served as inspiriation for the new DCU. Not in terms of stories/plots, but more tone and feel. https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/statu...-on-the-comics-inspiring-the-new-dc-universe/
I’m a big fan of most of those. (I run hot and cold on Morrison’s Batman, depending on the arc, but I really dig all the others.) So that’s very promising, to my mind.
While I do feel it’s silly that we need two different Batman movies out there, at least one of them will have a Robin.
I'm a big fan of all those and have heard great things about The Authority--so that is really inspiring. I've got my fingers crossed that the Superman movie is going to be an adaptation of the first arc of Morrison's run-- with Mxyzptlk in the background as they were the mastermind behind the longer story.
I saw those. As I've noted before, I'm not as big a fan of All-Star Superman or Morrison in general as I'm supposed to be. But they and Tom King -- whom I, conversely, like a good deal more than many fans do -- seem to be Gunn's comics brain trust, so we shall see what we shall see.
I'm ambivalent about Morrison. I loved All-Star Superman, but I didn't enjoy Morrison's take on Batman. I'm not familiar with The Authority. The only Moore Swamp Thing issues I've read are the ones that crossed over with Crisis on Infinite Earths, but I know Moore's take is considered the definitive one, and it was an influence on the DC Universe Swamp Thing TV series.
Morrison's Superman? Eh. Never a favorite, but if Gunn's story ends the way Morrison's did, then the next step would be Supergirl becoming the one and only "super" character in his universe.
"That doesn't mean we're adapting all these comics, but that the feel, the look, or the tone of them are touchstones for our team". He literally said these aren't adaptations, the story and way it ends will most likely will be different.
Read again. Nowhere did I say he was adapting Morrison's story (but it is a point of discussion on this page) but theorized in the event it ended the way Morrison's book did, what I see as a possible outcome (i.e. Supergirl).
I really can't see them doing that, from they've been saying it sounds like they're really wanting to turn Superman into a central figure of the new DCU, and they can't do that if they kill him off in his first or even one of his first movies.
Despite the major outcry that hit the Internet when Warners and Gunn fired Cavill? Or the fact that Synderverse has its own hardcore fan base? Yeah, I find this hard to believe.
There's always a "major outcry that hits the internet" about practically anything in genre film and TV, and the outcriers continue to delude themselves into thinking that they constitute a statistically significant percentage of the actual moviegoing audience. Most moviegoers aren't hardcore fans who'd be following the news in advance and complaining about things not going the way they want, but are casual audiences looking for a way to spend an evening out or following an actor they like. Besides, I'm having a hard time seeing how your comment actually conflicts with the sentence you quoted, which is saying that if the new take on Superman doesn't resonate with audiences, it will be bad for the new slate of films. Surely that's true regardless of your feelings about the previous take on Superman.