Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by JoeZhang, Jul 20, 2013.
The Joker discussion may have become relevant retroactively...
Rumor: Joker to appear in MoS.
At least one aspect of that rumor doesn't jibe with...
Spoiler: a BvS spoiler from earlier in this thread:
Dick Grayson's gravestone.
The Hollywood Reporter says that Warner Bros' superhero universe needs a single guiding force.
Is this business as usual or is Warners' in trouble? Or, as some have said, studios inherently know what they are doing - otherwise they'd be out of business.
Is THR giving credence to a vocal minority of fans griping about nothing?
Warners cares about one of these two things. Guess which?
Looks like clickbait. Pubs like THR that have their roots in the old-line Hollywood trade press are struggling to stay relevant on the web. On the one hand, Deadline killed them for a long time by being subversive and less cozy with/more scary to the studios and their hand-fed publicity operations, and on the other hand by sites and blogs that rather than servicing the whole entertainment community hone in on a single genre or aspect of commercial movies (most obviously sf/fantasy/comics). Then there are sites that pretty exclusively aggregate and report box office stats, budgets etc. more rapidly and comprehensively than THR or Variety.
I don't know if they necessarily need a Kevin Feige type figure as long as the people in charge can come up with a clear plan for what they want to do with the movies. I think the problem is right now we don't really have any idea exactly what that plan is. Marvel has been pretty open with what they have in mind, but Warners seems to be playing things pretty close to the vest right now.
Sounds like the usual behind the scenes stuff...nothing to see here really.
I admit it is a bit concerning that they seem to be having so much trouble coming up with workable scripts for WW and Aquaman, but I suspect that has more to do with just how difficult these more godlike DC characters are to write for in general (as even Whedon discovered a while back). And not just because they don't have some "single guiding force" in charge of the whole thing.
Wonder Woman and Aquaman have had trouble coming up with interesting and sustained comic runs in their histories so having trouble coming up with an interesting movie script is no surprise.
Did you just call Aquaman a godlike character?
But don't they also have a goldmine of fantastic stories that they can use as a starting point?
Almost exactly like what they're doing with their next movie that we're in a thread discussing, perhaps?
Writers can come up with good stories. It's what they do. It's up to the people in charge to decide what they like or don't. This IS a surprise since they have dates set and don't know what they want. It's quite backwards, especially if they really don't have a plan or overall direction. Or trust in someone talented to just do their thing and let the talent speak for itself.
Just as a quick example Peter David can easily write at the very least an outline to an Aquaman story that would most likely be fantastic (it IS that easy). But why go to the talent when you have Snyder leading the way?
Heh, not literally. I was just referring to the basic feel the DC characters have, of being much more noble and perfect and hard to identify with, etc.
YMMV with that last one. That hasn't been the case for decades in the grand scheme of things between DC characters and the supposed "down to Earth" characters of the Marvel Universe.
In other news, check out Batfleck's mugshot.
Batman, Lex Luthor and Aquaman all look very cool. I like Joker too.
I wasn't too crazy about Cavill's Superman, but he was sort of passable as I recall.
But then Zack Snyder has never been lacking in the visual department. ALL his movies, even the bad ones, LOOK awesome and so do his characters.
When it comes to cool, vibrant visuals...Zack is your man.
When it comes to cohesive, entertaining storytelling, the results are mixed.
I really enjoyed 300 and Dawn of the Dead. I thought Watchman was average---some great moments offset by some bad ones, depending on the scene and the cohesiveness of the scene. Sucker Punch was a definite misfire from a storytelling perspective. And I was not happy with Man of Steel.
Superman is an important character to me, so I guess I'm sensitive when a movie of his drops the ball. I get that a lot of people liked MOS, but I also know that it's one of the most hotly divisive films to ever grace geekdom.
I'll wait and see what the word-of-mouth is.
I'm hoping Superman becomes great again, but I'm pessimistic because of Zack's inconsistent track record with storytelling and Hollywood relentless efforts to make Superman a darker character. (I happen to think making Superman his old-school, boy-scout self would be more challenging to make and potentially more rewarding.)
We know the movie will have cool visuals, but whether it tells a great story and honors these classic characters? We'll have to wait and see. Will this be a 300 (great Zack), Watchman. (mediocre Zack), or Sucker Punch (epic fail Zack).
"How did I get here? I won an Oscar for Argo"
Well we know one person who won't be seeing Batfleck's performace.
"Does this belt make me look fat?"
Bat's outfit looks like a plaster cast, might save time when he gets injured fighting crime.
Looks like he made the suit from Kitchen lino. A bit too snug in that mask. As in, can't move his head or open his mouth.
Yikes, definitely not one of the better shots we've seen of him in the costume. But thankfully in the actual movie footage he seems to look a helluva lot better, and much more convincing.
I gotta be honest. Batfleck, as pictured above, invokes a scary reminder from the past: Batclooney. <shudders>
I need to meditate. <ahmmm> It's going to be fine. <ahmmm> It's going to be fine. <ahmmm> It's going to be fine. <ahmmm>
Separate names with a comma.