Thank you, I wasn't thinking of cameos, appreciate this. Didn't he also shoot additional scenes for the Snyder cut of JL?
Amy Adams is a great actress, nailed it as Lois Lane in all 3 films.
DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
I don't recall that Cavill shot additional scenes for ZSJL -- think all his footage was material Snyder had filmed originally? Snyder did add a couple of newly-filmed bits, I believe, but Cavill wasn't in them.
Birds of Prey is absolutely fantastic, one of my absolute very movies of all time. Margot Robbie is absolutely amazing as Harley.
Yeah Cavill was a definite no-show on new material for the Snyder cut. Which is presumably why two or three shots of him are actually re-used bits from Man of Steel and BvS.
You read the news a couple of years ago about how the WB just stopped all production of the Snyder-verse, correct? Cavill's last Superman appearance was in Black Adam. Before you ask why, let me tell you--- the WB had an economic reckoning and the people that bank roll the movies ended all DC productions and killed that continuity. They hired James Gunn to be the Feige of the new DCU and that's what he's doing. Because The Suicide Squad was Gunn's movie, he gets to say it is still continuity--which is fine, because there is really little reference to other DC movies in TSS. Just pretend that end scene in the Peacekeeper didn't happen.
Creature Commandos first appeared in Weird War Tales in 1980 and have made sporadic appearances since; but, since they're monsters I'm assuming that if the show is set in the past at least a couple of them are immortal that they can appear in the present. WHY? you ask. Because James Gunn wants it and he is now in charge.
Then we have Superman, which looks set to introduce a version the late 80s/early 90s Justice League, everyone's favorite incarnation with Nathan Fillion playing Guy Gardner and I can't remember the rest of the cast--but they all have costumes that resemble the Terrifics (Oh yeah, Mr. Terrific is in it) team from a few years ago.
That is all I know, so if you want to know anything else you'll have to go online to find it.
I don't remember, I don't follow this kind of stuff in the news. I just check YouTube, Wikipedia, stuff like that for what and when the next movie will be. I'm not that into this DC and Marvel stuff. For me, it's just the next Superman movie.
Ouch.
Understood. I am indifferent to James Gunn, I've seen very few of his films, really just his Dawn of the Dead remake and his first two GOTG movies, that's it, really.
I've never heard of them prior to this conversation, at least I don't think I have. What's the appeal? Is it anything like Sanctuary or Sweet Home?
Nathan Fillion, that's awesome. Isn't Guy Gardner a TrekBBS guy?
Is Justice League going to be a prequel?
That's right. He's said he's more concerned with the world-building aspect. His main criticism of Marvel is that they didn't really have an overall plan for how everything connected. Just like a comics editor, his job will be to make sure everything fits even if the movies are not connected with an overall story arc. (That's my interpretation as I don't believe Gunn has commented on if there is a connecting story.) Then Gunn will be able to direct the stuff he wants to direct and leave it to other creators to leave their own mark on the DCU.
Originally it was a war book. Monsters fighting Nazis in WWII. A special ops team with vampires, werewolves, monsters and the like.
Guy is a comic book character and member of the Green Lantern Corps. Member Guy took his name from the character.Nathan Fillion, that's awesome. Isn't Guy Gardner a TrekBBS guy?
They fired Cavill, that's what broke it.If it helps, I'm not a Superman fan - I just like the movies and wanted to see Henry Cavill do a 2nd film that wasn't a team-up film.
Don't you have to have a job first to be fired from it?
Yes, he did, he was under contract to play Superman, and they fired him.
I think the point is pure $$$$. WB felt the Snyder movies were tainted and thought rebranding with Gunn, probably due to his MCU popularity because The Suicide Squad was not a big money maker IIRC, was the way to go. They want Superman to break 1B or something like that and if it doesn't then we probably won't see big DC movies for a while.
Can you give details, or is this a "trust me, bro" moment? I presume you're going to call them liars:
Henry Cavill’s ‘Deal’ To Return To DC As Superman Was Reportedly Just A Verbal Agreement
If you are wondering how exactly The Rock got Henry Cavill to return as Superman for a Black Adam cameo, only to have that idea immediately thrown out the window, look no further than how this all came together, according to new insider reporting.
www.forbes.com
You might be classified as a fairly serious fan of the character. "Average" superhero fans can take of leave most adaptations of a character, but you seem to have put in some dedicated time to Superman productions.OK, Superman fan, I have a question, please. I love the old Christopher Reeves Superman films, Returns, and the 3 DCEU films Cavill is in. I don't count the Snyder Cut of JL as a 4th film, just a director's cut of an existing film. On TV, I watched (randomly) Lois & Clark, often only half paying attention. Smallville was good, but I lost touch in S3 or S4, I can't remember. I was getting older, and it got too teeny bopper for my tastes. I've seen the opening episodes of Superman & Lois at a friend's house, thought it had a good opening.
This is my entire exposure to Superman. What kind of fan am I?
You did not mention Kirk Alyn's Superman serials, and I suggest you give them a try; Alyn created the best live action Superman until Cavill gave the world its greatest, definitive version in one of best superhero adaptation sets to date (MOS/BVS/WW1/AM/ZSJL).
I was going off memory. What's with the college kid talk? I just remember that after JL, it was in the news that the studio wanted to retain Cavill for cameos. He wanted to star as Superman front and center, not be locked in for easter egg cameos. So, it gave the impression that he was fired.Can you give details, or is this a "trust me, bro" moment? I presume you're going to call them liars:
Henry Cavill’s ‘Deal’ To Return To DC As Superman Was Reportedly Just A Verbal Agreement
If you are wondering how exactly The Rock got Henry Cavill to return as Superman for a Black Adam cameo, only to have that idea immediately thrown out the window, look no further than how this all came together, according to new insider reporting.
Thank you. If I were to articulate what I'm a fan of, I would say the Superman movies specifically, open to the TV shows if they're good. Out of the various shows, the only ones to grab my attention are Smallville which I haven't seen in 20 years and Superman & Lois which I've seen the opening episodes of a while ago.
Before Superman: The Movie, there's the 1950's movie and series, and before that, the 1940's serials?
Superman and Lois' greatest contribution to live action Superman productions was the casting of Elizabeth Tulloch as Lois. She--by far--is the saving grace of the series, and I rank her version in the top three best interpretations of the character.
Kirk Alyn's two Superman serials--Superman (1948) and Atom Man vs. Superman (1950) are remembered for Alyn's take on the character, capturing the best elements of the Golden Age comic book version, sans the idiotic, goofy tendencies of the Mort Weisinger period. Of note, is the second Alyn serial marking the live action debut of Lex Luthor, as portrayed by Lyle Talbot, who was a a strong version of the villain, with a mad scientist delivery common to serials and B-movies of the period. The serial using cel animation for Superman's flying sequences are the biggest distraction, but Alyn's overall performance as Superman and Kent are among the best put before cameras, just trailing Cavill's magnificent run as the character.
If it isn't already obvious, Admiral Jean-Luc Picard, opinions and preferences vary widely among Superman fans -- as is probably the case with most franchises with long runs and multiple productions. As TREK_GOD_1 says above, he is a huge fan of Kirk Alyn and Henry Cavill, whereas I would elevate Christopher Reeve and George Reeves and Tyler Hoechlin above either. Which is fine, or at least it should be, because tastes are individual, and different aspects of character and performance appeal to different people. (TG1 and I are in agreement, however, on Elizabeth Tulloch's excellence as Lois Lane -- a character who, to me, is at least as important as Clark/Superman himself.)
The only way to know which iterations will work best for you is to sample as many as possible. One of the joys of Superman fandom is just how many versions of the beloved characters and story there are to enjoy over the nearly nine decades since the debut of Action Comics #1. Personally, I have at least some affection and appreciation for all of them.
The only way to know which iterations will work best for you is to sample as many as possible. One of the joys of Superman fandom is just how many versions of the beloved characters and story there are to enjoy over the nearly nine decades since the debut of Action Comics #1. Personally, I have at least some affection and appreciation for all of them.
But that's exactly what doesn't make sense. There were 15 theatrically released DCEU movies; Zack Snyder only directed three of the first five. His direct involvement with the DCEU, aside from the JL "Snyder Cut," ended in 2017. (Presumably his producer credit on WW84 was just pro forma because he produced the first WW and thus got a cut of the profits on the sequels.) The latter 2/3 of the series was post-Snyder, so why should people's opinions of Snyder have had any bearing on its fate? It's an irrational decision, responding to hype and superficial impressions rather than actual facts.
It's probably more to do with the fact that new executives in a company often prefer to cancel their predecessors' projects and put their own stamp on the company going forward. Just corporate politics rather than anything creative.
Probably that was some of it, but I do think there was a sense that the DCEU overall was tainted -- starting with the reception of Snyder's films, but continuing through the underwhelming response to many of the productions that followed. Hell, from the studio's point of view, Batman should be their most reliable cash cow, yet all the DCEU entries featuring the character -- BvS, JL, The Flash -- performed well below expectations. Meanwhile, non-DCEU films like The Batman and Joker cleaned up at the box office.
Honestly, I don't know how much difference trading one "cinematic universe" for another is going to make at this point -- is the general audience really going to be that hyperconscious of a crucial difference between a "DCEU" versus a "DCU" film? Seems unlikely. As always, it will come down to the quality of the individual films, along with a hundred unpredictable elements of audience mood and the media marketplace. But I can understand how the studio might want to scrap what they perceive as a failed brand, and start over with new creative and commercial oversight that they (hope they can) trust.
Honestly, I don't know how much difference trading one "cinematic universe" for another is going to make at this point -- is the general audience really going to be that hyperconscious of a crucial difference between a "DCEU" versus a "DCU" film? Seems unlikely. As always, it will come down to the quality of the individual films, along with a hundred unpredictable elements of audience mood and the media marketplace. But I can understand how the studio might want to scrap what they perceive as a failed brand, and start over with new creative and commercial oversight that they (hope they can) trust.
Clarity: Justice League's theatrical cut failed not because of any nonexistent negative perception of that films series' Affleck/Batman, but WB's moronic decision to shove Whedon on the production, hoping to clone the cartoonish Avengers. Proving forevermore that the DCEU worked on its own legacy and terms, not as some other franchise's elements/tone no one wanted see in a DC movie.
BVS on the other hand, was a success.
The Flash was not a Batman/Affleck movie, and one would really need to stretch perception and truth to the point of snapping to even suggest such a thing. In fact, the Affleck version in The Flash was limited to a glorified cameo, so if any "Batman" caused a box office performance below expectations, that blame fell squarely on the Keaton Batman, who was one of the main characters in the film.
Audiences obviously loved the Affleck Batman, as he was one of the reasons fans wanted to see Snyder complete that arc with his Justice League film, which WB greenlit. No studio spends even an extra penny on an already existing, big budget production unless they believe it would be successful / had a significant audience, and undoubtedly, Affleck's Batman (and of course, Cavill's Superman) was one of the main draws of the film.
Now, we're back to WB wanting to ape the MCU all over again (when it failed in spectacular fashion with Whedon's JL), by pouring Gunn into the franchise, probably hoping to copy+paste GOTG on every DC film going forward, and if any approach was the polar opposite of what a DC film should be, its GOTG. Granted, we will wait and see how that turns out.
BVS on the other hand, was a success.
The Flash was not a Batman/Affleck movie, and one would really need to stretch perception and truth to the point of snapping to even suggest such a thing. In fact, the Affleck version in The Flash was limited to a glorified cameo, so if any "Batman" caused a box office performance below expectations, that blame fell squarely on the Keaton Batman, who was one of the main characters in the film.
Audiences obviously loved the Affleck Batman, as he was one of the reasons fans wanted to see Snyder complete that arc with his Justice League film, which WB greenlit. No studio spends even an extra penny on an already existing, big budget production unless they believe it would be successful / had a significant audience, and undoubtedly, Affleck's Batman (and of course, Cavill's Superman) was one of the main draws of the film.
Now, we're back to WB wanting to ape the MCU all over again (when it failed in spectacular fashion with Whedon's JL), by pouring Gunn into the franchise, probably hoping to copy+paste GOTG on every DC film going forward, and if any approach was the polar opposite of what a DC film should be, its GOTG. Granted, we will wait and see how that turns out.
Last edited:
Probably, yes, but that's exactly why it frustrates me. Decisions should be based on facts, not reputation and preconceptions. It's totally unfair that the people who made the ten post-Snyder movies were "tainted" by the residue of Snyder's work. And I hate it when people are judged or treated unfairly.
And the fact that the later DCEU embraced standalone films with minimal continuity ties makes it equally unfair to judge them as a homogeneous mass. Some of them were good, some were weak, but they were their own things, and they deserved to be judged independently of each other.
Besides, there have been a bunch of film series that had weak installments and poor reputations but kept on making new films rather than rebooting. Horror franchises like Halloween and Friday the 13th just keep going on no matter how often they flop. They kept making Trek: TOS and TNG films after some of them did poorly. X-Men had a soft reboot that altered the timeline while still keeping the same overall continuity and some of the cast, and they just kept going no matter how many bombs they had. Any "taint" can be erased simply by making a good film. Mistakes can be made up for by staying the course and striving to do better. So rebooting is hardly a necessary or inevitable response to a few poorly received films. If anything, it's the exception rather than the rule.
Exactly. They're already pretty much their own separate things anyway. Brief cameos and references aside, films like Shazam and Aquaman and Birds of Prey hardly feel like they inhabit the same reality. So rebooting just seems gratuitous.
But you just said it didn't, that the later individual films were "tainted" by Synder's reputation even though he had nothing to do with them. That's just what I'm saying -- it should come down to individual quality, but it apparently doesn't.
