DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)

[Mr. Adventure]

Yeah, Calle was ill-served, and I regret we will likely not see her again in the role. But it's the nature of these characters to keep changing thespian hands, and I very much look forward to seeing what Alcock brings to the legacy.

Well, yes and no, it seems the audiences get very attached to keeping performers locked in their roles. Matt Ryan as Constantine, Foggy and Karen in Daredevil, hell, anyone cast ever in the MCU, you will have people basically treating that role as sacrosanct when it comes to casting.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Well, yes and no, it seems the audiences get very attached to keeping performers locked in their roles. Matt Ryan as Constantine, Foggy and Karen in Daredevil, hell, anyone cast ever in the MCU, you will have people basically treating that role as sacrosanct when it comes to casting.

It's always hard for people to let go of someone they really loved in a part, especially if they were the first person to play the role. But all it really takes for them to get over it is a studio willing to just do it anyway and able to do a good job finding the new actor, so pretty much everyone will eventually be replaced. And the most popular ones will slowly join the ranks of characters like Bond, Batman, Joker, Sherlock, etc, where there are so many different versions that people don't even sweat it that much anymore because if the next one's bad, there's always the one after that.

 

[Christopher]

Well, yes and no, it seems the audiences get very attached to keeping performers locked in their roles. Matt Ryan as Constantine, Foggy and Karen in Daredevil, hell, anyone cast ever in the MCU, you will have people basically treating that role as sacrosanct when it comes to casting.

Well, within a single continuity, as with your examples, it makes sense to keep the same actor where feasible, though of course the MCU has a number of exceptions already and will add one more in Born Again with Sandrine Holt replacing Ayelet Zurer as Vanessa Fisk.

But when it's a new version of the character in a new continuity, which is the case with Supergirl here, it's more common to recast. A previous actor is generally only kept if they're popular and have a long association with the role, like Adam West and Kevin Conroy reprising Batman in later productions, Judi Dench's M surviving the James Bond reboot, and J.K. Simmons playing J. Jonah Jameson in two live-action and multiple animated universes.

 

[Noname Given]

I mean the Superman movie. Just feels like a mess with all these characters

WB always feels it's playing 'catchup' with the MCU. They don't want to have to start doing standalone films for each character; they want to hit the ground running and see what 'sticks' with any audience interested in this (I for example really am not) - and branch off from there.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Well, yes and no, it seems the audiences get very attached to keeping performers locked in their roles. Matt Ryan as Constantine, Foggy and Karen in Daredevil, hell, anyone cast ever in the MCU, you will have people basically treating that role as sacrosanct when it comes to casting.

The trick is to cast someone that doesn't click with the audience to ensure that the person after will be fully embraced with open arms!
See Clooney to Bale, Garfield to Holland, Bosworth to Adams, Norton to Ruffalo...
(Though nine times out of ten, it's the script more than the actors.)

 

[Christopher]

WB always feels it's playing 'catchup' with the MCU. They don't want to have to start doing standalone films for each character; they want to hit the ground running and see what 'sticks' with any audience interested in this (I for example really am not) - and branch off from there.

I wouldn't say "always." They tried doing that in their 2016-17 films, then got over it and just did a diverse set of standalones and the occasional sequel from 2018-2023, but now they're seemingly back to making their original mistake of trying to compete with Marvel and build a large continuity from the start.

The trick is to cast someone that doesn't click with the audience to ensure that the person after will be fully embraced with open arms!
See Clooney to Bale, Garfield to Holland, Bosworth to Adams, Norton to Ruffalo...
(Though nine times out of ten, it's the script more than the actors.)

Indeed, I'd say that parenthetical applies to your first two examples. Clooney and Garfield were both excellent casting choices undermined by their scripts. (Not to mention Emma Stone, who was even better.)

 

[The Realist]

More from Gunn on Alcock (from his Threads account):

Strangely, Milly was the FIRST person I brought up to Peter for this role, well over a year ago, when I had only read the comics. I was watching House of the Dragon & thought she might have the edge, grace & authenticity we needed for the DCU’s Supergirl. And now here we are. Life is wild sometimes.

 

[The Realist]

 

[Set Harth]

a certain song comes to mind.

 

[Commander Troi]

That's really super, Supergirl.

 

[DarrenTR1970]

That's really super, Supergirl.

A fellow XTC fan. I like it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Fingers crossed for Brainiac's Daughter.

 

[Ovation]

Fingers crossed for Brainiac's Daughter.

I’d settle for Brainiac at this point (you’d think he’d have shown up in at least one movie by now).

 

[theenglish]

I’d settle for Brainiac at this point (you’d think he’d have shown up in at least one movie by now).

I don't know where I saw it, but I thought that Brainiac was mentioned as being the antagonist of this film. I know Gunn hasn't mentioned it yet, but I'm hoping the script will be inspired by the Action Comics story from 2011.

 

[The Realist]

There's no confirmation that Brainiac is in Superman: Legacy, just a lot of fans speculating. There seems to be a strong desire in some quarters for the character to appear, but I don't much care myself. I mean, I'm fine if he does, but it's not something I'm clamoring for. The only Superman villain who matters to me is Luthor, and thankfully we do know he's in the mix.

If Brainiac should show up, Gunn would be well-advised to take some pointers from the Krypton TV series, where the character was put to excellent use.

 

[Christopher]

The only Superman villain who matters to me is Luthor

Which is a testament to the relative weakness of Superman's rogues' gallery. Luthor's been overused by this point; I welcome attempts to build up lesser-known rogues with strong theatrical showings. We've never had a feature-film version of Brainiac, the closest thing being the evil computer in the climax of Superman III, which was going to be Brainiac in early drafts. I'd say it's high time someone tried.

After all, as I've been saying in another thread, the appeal of movies can't be based solely on reusing characters and ideas the audience already likes; that's a crutch. The goal should ideally be to create audience fondness for your characters and concepts by making a good movie.

 

[Set Harth]

I’d settle for Brainiac at this point (you’d think he’d have shown up in at least one movie by now).

Images of Brainiac's ship do turn up in the background minutiae of The Flash but it's not like a viewer can actually see it.

 

[valkyrie013]

Which is a testament to the relative weakness of Superman's rogues' gallery. Luthor's been overused by this point; I welcome attempts to build up lesser-known rogues with strong theatrical showings. We've never had a feature-film version of Brainiac, the closest thing being the evil computer in the climax of Superman III, which was going to be Brainiac in early drafts. I'd say it's high time someone tried.

After all, as I've been saying in another thread, the appeal of movies can't be based solely on reusing characters and ideas the audience already likes; that's a crutch. The goal should ideally be to create audience fondness for your characters and concepts by making a good movie.

Well, for the movies, Luther had never really been used correctly, from Gene Hackman on, Have hope for Nicholas but I don't have Hi hopes that they do it like the Animated versions which are Emencely superior.

If they do braniac, hope they do the true comic version and not the ones connected to Krypton, only thing hes attached to Krypton is him shrinking kandor before it exploded, He's NOT a Krypton super computer.

 

[The Realist]

Which is a testament to the relative weakness of Superman's rogues' gallery.

Nah. It's a testament to how great Luthor is as a character. Superhero villains are mostly just interchangeable props, but he's the real deal. And it's impossible to "overuse" him; I believe he's exceeded in importance in the Superman mythos only by Lois and Clark himself. One would never complain that Lois is overused (unless one is some kind of dipshit). Lex is not on her level of essentialness, but he's only one step removed.

But this is a debate we've had before. I know you disagree, so no need to subject our fellow Trek BBSers to another lengthy back-and-forth on the topic.

 

[Christopher]

Nah. It's a testament to how great Luthor is as a character.

Even if that's so, that doesn't make it wrong to try to build up other villains from time to time. I mean, you could include Luthor as a secretly evil business magnate in the first movie while Superman battles Brainiac (say), and then save his direct confrontations with Superman for later movies. Or have Luthor be the eminence grise behind other villains' attacks, as was often done on Lois & Clark and Superman: TAS.