• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond

WB didn't even decide to finish the Snyder Cut until after Aquaman, Shazam!, Birds of Prey, and WW84 had been completed, so naturally those movies were consistent with the theatrical version instead

As has already been mentioned twice, James Wan explicitly stated that the released version of Aquaman was consistent with Snyder's version of JL, not the theatrical cut, and did so either shortly before or shortly after Aquaman's release.

The explicit references in The Flash to events that only occurred in Snyder's version of JL is further evidence/confirmation that, despite WB's public claims otherwise, the MoSSCU did not in fact become disconnected from Snyder and his influence vis a vis the theatrical cut of JL and Joss Whedon's script changes.
 
So then Aquaman isn't part of this timeline.

It can only be one or the other, right? If we're playing by the rules.

What rules? It's just telling stories. They can be reinvented in midstream, because they aren't real. I already mentioned how the DCEU contradicts its own "timeline" in several ways. Which is nothing compared to Marvel Comics, which pretends that everything since 1961 is a single continuous timeline that's all taken place within the past 10-15 years. It doesn't use alternate timelines to rationalize it like DC does, it just rewrites the continuity, pretends it still holds together, and expects the audience to play along with the conceit. Because that's all anything in fiction is -- a conceit that we choose to suspend disbelief about.
 
What rules? It's just telling stories. They can be reinvented in midstream, because they aren't real. I already mentioned how the DCEU contradicts its own "timeline" in several ways. Which is nothing compared to Marvel Comics, which pretends that everything since 1961 is a single continuous timeline that's all taken place within the past 10-15 years. It doesn't use alternate timelines to rationalize it like DC does, it just rewrites the continuity, pretends it still holds together, and expects the audience to play along with the conceit. Because that's all anything in fiction is -- a conceit that we choose to suspend disbelief about.

You're sort of helping me make the point in my question.
The arbitrary "rules" that some posters are making up to feel better about how things fit in their timeline only when it helps their point of view when it doesn't matter at all. Especially when watching the movies in mostly isolation from each other, which DC had the advantage with towards the end.
 
As has already been mentioned twice, James Wan explicitly stated that the released version of Aquaman was consistent with Snyder's version of JL, not the theatrical cut, and did so either shortly before or shortly after Aquaman's release.

By now, you should realize that fact will be ignored, all because of the need to pretend Snyder's successful, intended vision for the DC films did not exist / is not canon, when....

The explicit references in The Flash to events that only occurred in Snyder's version of JL is further evidence/confirmation that, despite WB's public claims otherwise, the MoSSCU did not in fact become disconnected from Snyder and his influence vis a vis the theatrical cut of JL and Joss Whedon's script changes.

Undeniable evidence.

Its so amusing how some argue against "made up" rules, yet constantly use their own false belief that there's next to no continuity between films when evidence to the contrary has been posted in this thread time and again. Denying evidence makes some feel better about dealing with their obsessive need to damn Snyder and his work.
 
By now, you should realize that fact will be ignored, all because of the need to pretend Snyder's successful, intended vision for the DC films did not exist / is not canon, when....



Undeniable evidence.

Its so amusing how some argue against "made up" rules, yet constantly use their own false belief that there's next to no continuity between films when evidence to the contrary has been posted in this thread time and again. Denying evidence makes some feel better about dealing with their obsessive need to damn Snyder and his work.

Explain the Aquaman and Wonder Woman inconsistencies then.
Which keep being ignored for "but the Flash!"
 
It really is the question deciding the quality and legitimacy of any movie.
j6TU3i8.gif
 
It really is the question deciding the quality and legitimacy of any movie.
j6TU3i8.gif

Canon can be used a crutch. If a STORY is good and compelling it doesn't matter if it is canon or not. I've read numerous comic book 'one-shots' that were infinitely better than REGULAR issues of comics that were actual parts of the 'canon' storyline.

For the last 20 or 30 years canon in movies and film is because of the 'franchise-itis'... Studios want to just plop out 'installments' of a franchise and have you show up for that franchise. People have fallen into this 'must consume everything' of a franchise's "shared universe" and as such it means canon 'has to matter' because otherwise why am I watching something I don't really 'want' to watch if its not part of canon and I think it's mediocre or average in quality.

Some of my favorite Trek stories are not canon and were written by authors for book format only and never expected to be canon. Such as Vendetta (which I still prefer as the origins of the Borg) and Metamorphosis (where Data becomes human for a time)
 
Last edited:
Explain the Aquaman and Wonder Woman inconsistencies then.

New information changing the audience's understanding of the lore of a universe, be it delivered through the characters inside said universe discovering that something they thought to be the case was not in fact the case or through direct and explicit retconning does not equal an inconsistency, but if you still want an explanation about perceived differences between BvS and Snyder's cut of JL and later movies, I'll lay one out:
1) Mera believed that her parents were dead, only to subsequently discover that her father was alive

2) It was never directly stated, merely implied, that Diana hadn't put on her Wonder Woman armor between World War 1 and the events of BvS, with WW84 demonstrating that said implication was untrue
 
Last edited:
It really is the question deciding the quality and legitimacy of any movie.


But who makes that decision? I don't see how any one person or group can make such a decision, since so many people have different opinions of any movie, play or TV series.
 
Personally, given that Superman and Supergirl films have already been announced, a live-action Legion of Super-Heroes movie would top my wishlist. Unless Gunn wants to give us a Lois Lane solo project?
 
Little brouhaha developing over an article critical of Zaslav in GQ.

GQ took the article down after a rep for Zaslav complained and the writer refused to make the changes making him look better.

GQ ownership is heavily invested in WBD, so there's the implication although no one has outright said it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2023/07/05/gq-pulled-david-zaslav-article/

The plot thickens: https://variety.com/2023/film/news/...story-producing-movie-warner-bros-1235662109/
 
Ah, but which Legionnaires and how many of them?
My first reaction was to say, "As many as the budget will stand." But it's true the script (assuming a feature film) would have to be carefully crafted so as not to overwhelm the audience with characters, and allow time for character development and world-building as well as plot.

You could always start with the standard "Legion origin" story, in which Imra, Garth, and Rokk save R. J. Brande's life, leading to the founding of the Legion, and build out from there. It's old news to Legion comics fans, but would be brand-new to a more general audience. But maybe a better approach would be something like Supervisor 194 suggests above, and use Clark as the audience's point-of-entry to a fully-formed Legion (which was, of course, how they were first introduced in the comics). And ideally, the film would earn sequels that could expand on the first.

As for which characters? Well, as long as Imra (my favorite Legionnaire) is there, I'm good. :)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top