DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond

[JD]

But the foundation of a legal system is based on accepted moral values predating organized law, otherwise there would be little to standard of what a group, community or nation views as illegal / criminal.




True, Hell has no vacancies for illegal downloaders (well, not yet.. ), but on our earthly plane, stealing is viewed as a serious moral failing, especially when theft is born not out of necessity (e.g. a homeless person taking food he could not pay for), but out of fan-motivated entitlement, as if there's a need to possess / experience a product in defiance of the law (including the property owner's right to determine the accessibility of his property).

Not accepted moral values, the "moral" values of the people passing the laws. Just look at all the controversy over what happened with Roe v Wade, the majority of people wanted it to continue, but since the people in the Supreme Court didn't like it, they overturned it anyways. It's all about what the people in power want, not "accepted moral values".
And that's in the US, if you go to dictatorships, then the laws are all about keeping the dictator in power, and have nothing whatsoever to do with "accepted moral values".

Just what do you think was the foundation of law--particularly law involving the treatment and interaction of people? Do you believe it was created, authored & established entirely apart from any accepted moral beliefs in a culture or society? Moreover, when someone established laws against murder for one example--do you believe only those who passed the law held the moral belief that murder was wrong, or did it represent a broader consensus among the population?

Oh my god, how hard is this? Yes, some laws align with humanistic values, like the one against murder, but that does not mean all laws do. Laws are passed to structure the society, not because of morality. You can't have people killing each other, as that would break society apart, so that's why there's a law against murder.

Jesus, law and morality, a lot of snobbish communities use the law to criminalize feeding and/or sheltering the homeless, not to mention criminalizition of being homeless. That's just an example of how some laws can be immoral.

If you need a law to decide whether something is moral or not, then that throws a very dark shadow on your personal morality.

I was finding this conversation pretty interesting, but I understand it's not what this thread is about, so if I started a thread for it in the Misc. section, would you anybdoy be interested in continuing it there?

 

[Kai "the spy"]

I was finding this conversation pretty interesting, but I understand it's not what this thread is about, so if I started a thread for it in the Misc. section, would you anybdoy be interested in continuing it there?

God, no. I've got enough on my plate without having to explain the differences between morality and legality to a person totally unwilling to accept anything but their black-and-white objectivism (coupled with a good portion of hypocrisy).

 

[urbandefault]

To be perfectly frank, the final destination of this movie will not affect my life one way or the other, although the reactions of posters in this forum have provided me with a bit of amusement.

Quoting Bob Hope, "Thanks for the memories."

 

[JD]

Releasing a film so you (or any audience member) can judge for yourself--particularly on a film that appears to have been a disappointment in the making--is not part of any realistic business model. If the studio has no confidence in the project, there it will usually end.

I'm not saying they should release it just for that reason, I'm just saying it would have been nice if they did, so we didn't have to base all of thoughts about the movie on hearsay and rumors.
After seeing some of the shit that actually is released, it's ridiculous that this isn't being released. With the popularity of anything Bat related, I have a feeling this would have been pretty likely to at least make some profit, even if it wasn't a huge hit. There are plenty of bad movies, or at least movies that the critics and media hated, that were still huge hits, like Michael Bay's Transformers.
Honestly, quality has nothing to do with how popular a movie ends up being, all you really need is something that will get people's attention, either with spectacle, big names in front of or behind the camera, or a franchise. This had the advantage of being part of a hugely popular franchise, and was going to feature the next appearance by a fan favorite character with Michael Keaton's Batman.

 

[fireproof78]

To be perfectly frank, the final destination of this movie will not affect my life one way or the other, although the reactions of posters in this forum have provided me with a bit of amusement.

Quoting Bob Hope, "Thanks for the memories."

Indeed. I cannot match the emotionality of the thread. I tried and failed. So, yup, entertainment for me too. Thanks for the furor.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I'm not saying they should release it just for that reason, I'm just saying it would have been nice if they did, so we didn't have to base all of thoughts about the movie on hearsay and rumors.

Information is trickling out, week after week, which comes with the warning to take it with the oft-mentioned grain of salt.

At present, the public has accepted the idea that Batgirl will not be released, so for anyone still wanting a "why," they pretty much have to rely on the rumors and quotes, then ask themselves, who do they believe / disbelieve? Those who were at the screening(s) and have offered their (as yet unconfirmed) opinion? Individuals who championed the film sight unseen?

After seeing some of the shit that actually is released, it's ridiculous that this isn't being released. With the popularity of anything Bat related, I have a feeling this would have been pretty likely to at least make some profit, even if it wasn't a huge hit.

That's the issue: obviously, WB wanted the film to be a big hit because its Bat-related, and needed it to be a continued springboard for / integrated with this new alternate universe they're developing, hence using Keaton as one of the draws (or so they assumed) to this universe. However, if the Gonzales account has any weight whatsoever, it would appear being Bat-related is no longer a guarantee of quality and/or a pleasing outcome (for reference, remember what the Clooney and Kilmer Bat-films did to the 90s Bat-series).

Solo was part of one of the biggest film franchises in history,

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Not saying his account is wrong necessarily but I've seen a lot of stuff online questioning how reliable that Gonzalez guy is. Seemed he burned a lot of bridges in the past with some of his "scoops" that didn't pan out.

 

[DigificWriter]

Not saying his account is wrong necessarily but I've seen a lot of stuff online questioning how reliable that Gonzalez guy is. Seemed he burned a lot of bridges in the past with some of his "scoops" that didn't pan out.

Yep.

He used to be quite well-respected in the Entertainment News industry, but is now considered a hack, just like Grace Randolph.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Yep.

He used to be quite well-respected in the Entertainment News industry, but is now considered a hack, just like Grace Randolph.

Heh, I was wondering when Randolph's name would come up again.

In any case, if his story ends up being proven false / a lie, etc. its back to square one just waiting for someone else either close to or in the inside from WB to make their statement on Batgirl.

 

[JD]

Information is trickling out, week after week, which comes with the warning to take it with the oft-mentioned grain of salt.

At present, the public has accepted the idea that Batgirl will not be released, so for anyone still wanting a "why," they pretty much have to rely on the rumors and quotes, then ask themselves, who do they believe / disbelieve? Those who were at the screening(s) and have offered their (as yet unconfirmed) opinion? Individuals who championed the film sight unseen?

Oh, I understand their reasons they've given for not releasing it, I just don't think it's a good reason. I've seen movies that have gotten a much, much, much worse response than "it's like a CW pilot" get released and go on to make money, so not releasing it for that reason, just seems like a massive overaction, especially when consider you the entire history of every movie ever release. From what we've heard, it's not like this was a completely irredeemable dumpster fire of a shit show.


[QUTE]That's the issue: obviously, WB wanted the film to be a big hit because its Bat-related, and needed it to be a continued springboard for / integrated with this new alternate universe they're developing, hence using Keaton as one of the draws (or so they assumed) to this universe. However, if the Gonzales account has any weight whatsoever, it would appear being Bat-related is no longer a guarantee of quality and/or a pleasing outcome (for reference, remember what the Clooney and Kilmer Bat-films did to the 90s Bat-series).
[/QUOTE]
But even with what we've heard now, there was still a pretty chance it could have been a hit. There've been a lot of movies that have gotten a worse response than "like a CW pilot" that have gone on to be big hits. Just look at Michael Bay's Transformers movies for example, the last three movies got 30s on Metacritic, and yet they all made between $500,000,000 and $1,000,000,000. This was being made for $90, a fraction of what those were made for, so it wouldn't have needed to make anywhere near that kind of money to be profitable.

 

[Set Harth]

This was being made for $90

Yeesh. Talk about low budget! No wonder they shelved it.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Oh, I understand their reasons they've given for not releasing it, I just don't think it's a good reason. I've seen movies that have gotten a much, much, much worse response than "it's like a CW pilot" get released and go on to make money, so not releasing it for that reason, just seems like a massive overaction, especially when consider you the entire history of every movie ever release. From what we've heard, it's not like this was a completely irredeemable dumpster fire of a shit show.

You say that, but to many, the DC/CW shows are considered low-rent garbage (hence the reference in the Gonzales account), not at all the best representation of DC's properties. That--of course--is a subjective opinion, but I would bet next to no one wanted to hear their big budget film--one intended to be the linchpin for a new generation of adventures in that alternate world--was compared to the DC/CW's often derided brand of adaptations.

 

[fireproof78]

You say that, but to many, the DC/CW shows are considered low-rent garbage (hence the reference in the Gonzales account), not at all the best representation of DC's properties. That--of course--is a subjective opinion, but I would bet next to no one wanted to hear their big budget film--one intended to be the linchpin for a new generation of adventures in that alternate world--was compared to the DC/CW's often derided brand of adaptations.

Yeah, "like a CW show" is not exactly known has a high praise.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Brendan Gleeson has joined the cast of Joker: Folie à Deux in an unknown role https://deadline.com/2022/09/joker-folie-a-deux-brendan-gleeson-1235105442/

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, "like a CW show" is not exactly known has a high praise.

Speak for yourself. The Arrowverse has done some really impressive comic-book action and visuals over the years. The CW is the only broadcast network I watch anymore, since it's been such a great home for SF, fantasy, and superhero shows. Although that era seems to be ending now as part of the overall WB-pocalypse.

 

[fireproof78]

Speak for yourself. The Arrowverse has done some really impressive comic-book action and visuals over the years. The CW is the only broadcast network I watch anymore, since it's been such a great home for SF, fantasy, and superhero shows. Although that era seems to be ending now as part of the overall WB-pocalypse.

I have zero experience with the CW shows. I only know what I read here and other fan boards reading CW level shows and writing.

So, yeah. Take it up with them...

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Surprising absolutely nobody, fandome is cancelled. They basically say live conventions are good enough, in other words, let others do the marketing for them, they don't want to spend money on something fun for the 22 million fans that watched (not that they have to.)

https://www.thepopverse.com/dc-fandome-2022-dc-comics-warner-bros-brothers-discovery

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I've heard some disgruntled people on the forums say that Fandome was found to be substandard and deserved to be cancelled.


Well, OK, I don't know if that's true but I did enjoy the last event anyway, too bad with 2022. Speaking for myself at least DC seems a bit lacking in identity at the moment, whether everything is DCEU or not I think some branding and solidarity would be good.

 

[Christopher]

I have zero experience with the CW shows.

So maybe don't go around insulting them, okay?

 

[fireproof78]

So maybe don't go around insulting them, okay?

Edited: Forget it. No insult was intended but I'll take due notice of my comments in the future towards the CW.