DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond

[Morpheus 02]

@Kai "the spy" how could you forget Earth 3's Ultraman... I believe the earliest of the anti-Superman characters that wasn't a 1 shot deal.

====

Also, saw this on my Google feed

https://www.joblo.com/james-gunn-superman-henry-cavill/

Which seems to bolster my thought that this Superman problem is Zaslav's fault/choice, not James Gunn. Gunn is only working with the parameters given.

It is perhaps his talks with Zaslav that made Zaslav think he would be a good Kevin Feige (if i read correctly, kinda like how Feige's knowledge on the set of pre MCu films was the reason he was given his current gig).

With Cavill being the literal face of the DCFU, Zaslav falsely blames him for the problems of the DCFU.

He wants a billion dollar Superman movie... which IS a logical expectation. A number of things Snyder did do right was most of the casting, especially transforming Aquaman out of a joke, and James Wan able to make the billion dollar international sensation Superman ought to be.

@TREK_GOD_1 you really need to stop blaming Gunn for getting rid of Cavill. It wasn't him. You (and maybe even most of us) might not like the new (and even I agree is unnecessary) recasting... but put blame on the greedy capitalist (who seems to be a lot like the DCFU Luthor )

 

[Kai "the spy"]

@Kai "the spy" how could you forget Earth 3's Ultraman... I believe the earliest of the anti-Superman characters that wasn't a 1 shot deal.

I didn't. I posted the trailer for Crisis On Two Earths.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

And I specifically kept it on TV and film, as @Dee1891 said they didn't read comics.

 

[Anwar]

The comics are amazing.

Superman vs the Elite, that was a great Superman take:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Henry Cavill's Superman had embodied that to me. But he had also embodied a complex individual with his or her own set of virtues and flaws..

That is how a relatable Superman is created. No one walking this planet is a grinning, winking Santa / Daddy, and does not aspire to be that, as its unrealistic to the nature of humanity and how most must navigate throughout the course of life--the very reason 21st century moviegoers were not looking for the Salkinds' Superman 2.0, rejecting it when it was attempted in 2006.

I see nothing wrong with a story about Superman failing in that struggle - even for a brief period. Why are people so afraid of the idea of heroes turning into villains?

Some have invested their feelings into the concept of a "perfect" hero who never exhibits realistic behavior in any difficult or potentially deadly situation, even when said situation calls for the oft-mislabeled "wrong" and/or "dark" behavior, which is not only an immature position to embrace, but its advocating the most creatively hollow, milquetoast method of "writing" of heroic characters. For example, Captain Kirk (the original Shatner Kirk, of course) has been one of the consummate heroes of filmed fiction, playing his role in saving countless lives, worlds, realities, etc., yet he was not dipped in red, white and blue paint with fireworks displays going off every time he so much as lifted a finger. Kirk was and remains a beautifully crafted hero because he could not approach all situations like some stodgy, professorial stick (nor dis he set his gaze on all beings in the Santa manner) but used his very human feeling and judgement to solve problems, and yes, that human feeling and judgement includes allegedly darker behavior. He is a successful character because of his realistic blend of his professional and earthy, human view / actions. Superheroes are no different, and when walking that path, comic book history (and film adaptations) witnessed superior stories and character development which resonated with readers. That cannot happen when someone is a walking Rockwell painting from 1950, or a caped Mickey Mouse.

But I don't see any need or reason to completely dismiss any possibility of such a story. I really don't.

There's no mature reason to avoid stories of that kind.

 

[JD]

What comic is that page from?

 

[Tosk]

Man of Tomorrow #2 (2020)

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

DCEU / Gunn rumors, etc.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Relevant points--

Cavill fired from the DCEU (based on this video) / Blaming Dwayne Johnson / Gunn’s role in the situation (1:20 – 3:38): If any of this has weight, it does not look good for Gunn.

Flash (4:05 – 4:56) : Sasha Calle removed from the end of the film (along with Keaton). Rumor has it that Calle will not reprise her Supergirl role in the DCU, so she’s a single appearance character as of this date.

Audiences walked out of the 2nd Aquaman 2 screening (5:51 – 8:21): Fischer suggests the walkout was caused by a strong political message about global warming.

Additional rumor: Affleck’s scenes for A2 have been cut. If true, my interest in the film just dropped by—at the very least—70 percent.

 

[DigificWriter]

@TREK_GOD_1 is right to point out that the Superman character as James Gunn sees him has already been brought to modern-day movie screens once before in 2006 and was rejected by general audiences at the time, and we as a society are in a far worse place now, almost 17 years later, than we were then, which only amplifies the potential likelihood of Superman: Legacy failing because it's already been shown that Gunn's ideal version of Superman doesn't have the modern appeal to audiences that he seems to think it does/might.

 

[Saul]

Affleck’s scenes for A2 have been cut.

Pretty sure those were after credit scenes that would have set up a crisis movie. If they are rebooting the universe it would make sense not to keep them, along with the after credits scenes with Supergirl and Keaton.

 

[DigificWriter]

DCEU / Gunn rumors, etc.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Relevant points--

Cavill fired from the DCEU (based on this video) / Blaming Dwayne Johnson / Gunn’s role in the situation (1:20 – 3:38): If any of this has weight, it does not look good for Gunn.

Flash (4:05 – 4:56) : Sasha Calle removed from the end of the film (along with Keaton). Rumor has it that Calle will not reprise her Supergirl role in the DCU, so she’s a single appearance character as of this date.

Audiences walked out of the 2nd Aquaman 2 screening (5:51 – 8:21): Fischer suggests the walkout was caused by a strong political message about global warming.

Additional rumor: Affleck’s scenes for A2 have been cut. If true, my interest in the film just dropped by—at the very least—70 percent.

I wouldn't trust rumors from some random voice actor with a YouTube channel any more than I would trust a certain 'news' network.

 

[ichab]

@TREK_GOD_1 is right to point out that the Superman character as James Gunn sees him has already been brought to modern-day movie screens once before in 2006 and was rejected by general audiences at the time...

Nope. First off, a movie from 2006 that does close to $400 million dollars in business is not a "rejection" by the audience. Second off, that movie underperformed because it was basically a retelling of the first movie only with worse actors.

and we as a society are in a far worse place now, almost 17 years later, than we were then, which only amplifies the potential likelihood of Superman: Legacy failing because it's already been shown that Gunn's ideal version of Superman doesn't have the modern appeal to audiences that he seems to think it does/might.

Zak Snyder already showed that a darker version of DCU doesn't work.

 

[DigificWriter]

^ Failed concepts don't generally spawn 15 movies (11 already released movies plus The Flash, Shazam 2, Blue Beetle, and Aquaman 2), so the MoS Shared Continuity Universe clearly did work, for the most part, even if you don't personally like it.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

DCEU / Gunn rumors, etc.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Relevant points--

Cavill fired from the DCEU (based on this video) / Blaming Dwayne Johnson / Gunn’s role in the situation (1:20 – 3:38): If any of this has weight, it does not look good for Gunn.

Flash (4:05 – 4:56) : Sasha Calle removed from the end of the film (along with Keaton). Rumor has it that Calle will not reprise her Supergirl role in the DCU, so she’s a single appearance character as of this date.

Audiences walked out of the 2nd Aquaman 2 screening (5:51 – 8:21): Fischer suggests the walkout was caused by a strong political message about global warming.

Additional rumor: Affleck’s scenes for A2 have been cut. If true, my interest in the film just dropped by—at the very least—70 percent.

^ Failed concepts don't generally spawn 15 movies (11 already released movies plus The Flash, Shazam 2, Blue Beetle, and Aquaman 2), so the MoS Shared Continuity Universe clearly did work, for the most part, even if you don't personally like it.

Wait, Snyder's Superman has been in 11 released movies and will be in four more? I've only seen him in four, five if you count each version of Justice League as seperate movies. How did I miss six movies?

 

[Dee1891]

Nope. First off, a movie from 2006 that does close to $400 million dollars in business is not a "rejection" by the audience. Second off, that movie underperformed because it was basically a retelling of the first movie only with worse actors.

Zak Snyder already showed that a darker version of DCU doesn't work.

You know, this accusation doesn't really work for me. The only movie with Superman that anyone can describe as "dark" is "Batman v. Superman". And contrary to what many claim, the movie does have its legion of fans. Including me. "Man of Steel" ended on an uplifting note. So did both versions of "Justice League". I've never seen "Black Adam" and Cavill's Superman only had a cameo appearance.

Audiences walked out of the 2nd Aquaman 2 screening (5:51 – 8:21): Fischer suggests the walkout was caused by a strong political message about global warming.

They had a problem with the film's message about global warming? I don't know if this is true or not. If it is, it's not a good reflection of this society.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Pretty sure those were after credit scenes that would have set up a crisis movie. If they are rebooting the universe it would make sense not to keep them, along with the after credits scenes with Supergirl and Keaton.

Only seconds of DCEU Supergirl footage have been released so far, yet this version seemed to earn so much interest of all characters known to be in the Flash film. I'm certain some fans will make their displeasure over her one & only film appearance known far and wide this summer.

^ Failed concepts don't generally spawn 15 movies (11 already released movies plus The Flash, Shazam 2, Blue Beetle, and Aquaman 2), so the MoS Shared Continuity Universe clearly did work, for the most part, even if you don't personally like it.

Agreed. For some reason, there's a belief that the DCEU, or more to the point, the MoS continuity only spanned two films, when that's far from the truth of the running connection through MoS/BvS/WW/SS/AM 1 & 2/ZSJL (and/or JL),Black Adam, The Flash, etc.

You know, this accusation doesn't really work for me. The only movie with Superman that anyone can describe as "dark" is "Batman v. Superman".

..with a main story "dark" out of necessity--serving the story of the film, rather than being serious for the sake of it.

And contrary to what many claim, the movie does have its legion of fans.

Indeed.

 

[Anwar]

@TREK_GOD_1 is right to point out that the Superman character as James Gunn sees him has already been brought to modern-day movie screens once before in 2006 and was rejected by general audiences at the time, and we as a society are in a far worse place now, almost 17 years later, than we were then, which only amplifies the potential likelihood of Superman: Legacy failing because it's already been shown that Gunn's ideal version of Superman doesn't have the modern appeal to audiences that he seems to think it does/might.

The problem with the 2006 movie wasn't that it tried too hard to be the old Reeves Superman, it was that it tried too hard to be a Richard Donner tribute/homage. Bryan Singer has made it clear he simply doesn't care about the comic characters he adapts, but the chance to make a movie like Richard Donner is what appealed to him.

That's why he cared little about the plot or characters.

 

[Commander Troi]

They had a problem with the film's message about global warming? I don't know if this is true or not. If it is, it's not a good reflection of this society.

Agreed. I really hope it isn't true.

 

[The Knappos]

I'd argue that if we're in a far worse place now than in 2006, it's all the more reason we need that Superman. Just, without the stalking this time.

 

[Supervisor 194]

The 2006 movie didn't have confidence in that its own premise---Superman has been missing long enough for the world to move on without him.

The casting of the movie undercut the very premise with Lois and Jimmy seeming just as young (or younger) as in every other iteration. I think it would have been much more effect to have, say, Dana Delany playing Lois. And have her as editor of the Planet as well.

The other unspoken premise of the movie is that it was featuring the same Superman that had been portrayed by Christopher Reeve, and that those films were in continuity with it. The movie itself tried to have it both ways though, with a murky implied connection to the Reeve films but also trying to be a brand new version kicking off a new cycle of films, and not fully committing to either goal.

I love the idea of the 2006 movie: the Superman we know and love has been missing for a long time and returns to a world that has changed and moved on. That's a great way to challenge the character on more than just a physical level. But without fully committing to the premise (the world instantly cheers as soon as he's back), and without fully committing to actually being the same Superman as Reeve OR establishing him as a different character in his own right, the movie never lived up to its potential.

 

[Christopher]

The other unspoken premise of the movie is that it was featuring the same Superman that had been portrayed by Christopher Reeve, and that those films were in continuity with it. The movie itself tried to have it both ways though, with a murky implied connection to the Reeve films but also trying to be a brand new version kicking off a new cycle of films, and not fully committing to either goal.

It's not uncommon for a new version of a story to be only loosely in continuity with the original, to continue from its broad strokes while altering the details to suit its own purposes. For instance, the 1986 Starman TV series came out only two years after the John Carpenter movie it was a sequel to, but was set 14 years after it, pushing the events of the movie back to 1972, even though the catalyst for the movie's plot was a Voyager probe launched in 1977. The 1989 Alien Nation series seemed at first glance like a sequel to the previous year's movie, with the pilot even incorporating flashback footage from the film, but it altered a wealth of details about the aliens' nature and the timing of their arrival, and was ultimately more a reboot from the movie than a sequel to it. Then you've got things like the James Bond series, which purported to be a loosely continuous narrative despite Bond occasionally changing into a different, younger person over the course of decades. Which is the same kind of perpetual-present continuity that comic books traditionally employ.

Still, I agree it was a conceptual mistake to do a pseudo-sequel to the Reeve films. I was hoping to see Bryan Singer reinvent Superman in the same game-changing way he'd done with the X-Men, but instead we just got a very expensive, self-indulgent, and rather dull fan film.