Warner bros announce superhero films through 2020

[Christopher]

Michelle MacLaren was originally attached to direct before she dropped out due to "creative differences" which was one of the go to arguments on how WB is going to "ruin" WW by interfering during its production, and there were numerous "reports" that Wonder Woman is a shambolic mess, unwathcable and so forth, not to mention all the stupid "controversies" that filled the headlines like the armpits and candy bars...

People forget all the clickbait bullshit that surrounded it now, but Wonder Woman was absolutely not immune to it.

But that's different. That was just people panicking and overreacting to things that aren't that unusual in the filmmaking process. We know in retrospect that it actually went more smoothly than that, that the film we got is the film Jenkins shot with virtually nothing cut out. There were reshoots, yes, but no more than normal for a big-budget film, reportedly just "augmenting" what they'd already shot. It's different from a case where the film actually does have serious problems that need to be addressed in reshoots and editing.

 

[dahj]

But that's different.

Than what?

 

[Christopher]

Than what?

Read the last sentence of my post.

 

[dahj]

Different from a case like Suicide Squad or JL where the problems are real rather than the paranoid fantasies of nervous fans.

Who decides what's "real"?

David Ayer has repeatedly said that the movie was his, that there are no alternate cuts, yet people still claim that the "trailer company cut the movie". People don't like the movie, so he is lying and rumors are "real".

Everyone involved with the production of JL says that Zack brought on Joss by himself, and the length of reshoots is mainly due to scheduling problems with the stars, but people still claim they're all lying and they're actually redoing everything Snyder. The movie isn't even released yet but all the rumours are "real."

Wonder Woman suffered much the same rumours, but people like it so Patty isn't lying, and the rumours are false.

Seems rather arbitrary to me...

 

[Gaith]

DC is not in the business of making glorified Power Rangers movies.

Um...

 

[JD]

It seems, sometimes, that many are behaving as if movie productions are not allowed to have problems. These problems are common in Hollywood and other film industries. And yet, the media and many moviegoers continue to act like Chicken Little, predicting doom, every time a rumor or news story about a production problem comes up . . . especially with the DCEU lately. Actually, it's getting as boring as the constant rumors about Ben Affleck leaving the franchise.

Sure productions are allowed to have problems, but most of them have one or two issues in the beginning and get their shit together after that, but DC seems to be struggling with that second part.

 

[Christopher]

Seems rather arbitrary to me...

Not at all. It's not simply a matter of what you want to believe. Rational people can use their judgment to discern between plausible reports and implausible conjectures, by considering their context, source, timing, corroborating evidence or lack thereof, etc. Indeed, one of the most important rules of critical thinking is to be skeptical of the things you most want to believe, because that desire is an obvious source of bias.

 

[JD]

For me the biggest thing when trying to decide whether to trust a story or not is the source. If it just comes from some random person on Twitter or Facebook, I tend to be very skeptical, but if it's from something like Entertainment Weekly, Variety, or the Hollywood Reporter, I'll put a bit more trust in it.

 

[dahj]

It's not simply a matter of what you want to believe.

I honestly don't care what people choose to believe. I do have an issue when they use those beliefs as an absolute truth to shore up their argument on the "quality" of a movie. So the way these reports are usually used in arguments is the very definition of employing bias.

There's no correlation between the quality of a movie and the amount of complications during its production, there have been plenty of rubbish movies with completely straightforward productions, and also a bunch of brilliant ones with legendarily troubled productions.

 

[ichab]

I honestly don't care what people choose to believe. I do have an issue when they use those beliefs as an absolute truth to shore up their argument on the "quality" of a movie. So the way these reports are usually used in arguments is the very definition of employing bias.

There's no correlation between the quality of a movie and the amount of complications during its production, there have been plenty of rubbish movies with completely straightforward productions, and also a bunch of brilliant ones with legendarily troubled productions.

Agreed. The Godfather, Star Wars, Superman, Apocalypse Now......great movies with notoriously troubled productions.

 

[Christopher]

I honestly don't care what people choose to believe. I do have an issue when they use those beliefs as an absolute truth to shore up their argument on the "quality" of a movie. So the way these reports are usually used in arguments is the very definition of employing bias.

Not true. Rational people neither rely on belief nor assert anything as an "absolute truth." Absolute certainty only exists in mathematics. A rational mind assesses the relative likelihood of different models of the world based on evidence, and is always open to admitting error. You formulate the best understanding you can based on the available evidence. You change that understanding if contradictory evidence comes along, but it would be premature to change it before such evidence comes along. That's not blind belief in an "absolute truth," it is confidence in the deductive method.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

The MCU has never made anything resembling a "glorified Power Rangers" movie

The Avengers and Guardians movies say hello.

they certainly haven't had "several" lackluster films

Two of the three Iron Man films were awful, lifeless films doing nothing to advance the Stark character, other than have him in a constant state of either erratic behavior (not brought on by drinking), or asshole behavior, which moved into the cartoony Avengers movies.

Having a superhero movie with color and fun doesn't make it a cartoon or like Power Rangers

Captain America: The First Avenger had color and fun...but it happened when necessary; it was not littered with characters seemingly on tour at The Laugh Factory, or stuffed with so much overblown action (that barely served the story) that it played as an episode of Power Rangers (if not the entire franchise).

just like how being all muted colors, depression, and somehow pretentious in a really stupid way doesn't make DCEU

Serious themes are not the product of pretension, but a purpose. The DC films are not only a product of their era, but of the greater stories from the printed source, where heroes live up to that title due to personal challenges and the need to face issues greater than themselves. The reason why Captain America: The Winter Soldier is--far and away--the jewel in the MCU's crown (with the first film being a somewhat smaller stone) is all thanks to its serious plot, and larger challenges that have a more personal impact / investment for the heroes and their surroundings--like the best of the DC films. They are not out for a 'roided-up weekend warrior romp all to have an explosion of action and pseudo sci-fi hi-jinks.

 

[Dream]

MCU's films already feel like they come off an assembly line.

I'm honestly not sure how much more I can take from their quippy humor.

 

[LJones41]

Two of the three Iron Man films were awful, lifeless films doing nothing to advance the Stark character, other than have him in a constant state of either erratic behavior (not brought on by drinking), or asshole behavior, which moved into the cartoony Avengers movies.

Tony Stark had advanced as long as he could. I view "Iron Man 2" as proof that Tony is barely capable of improving as a character. And he hasn't really improved that much . . . not even in the non-Iron Man films. As for the first Iron Man film . . . I feel that the only thing that truly held up that film was the Tony Stark character. His characterization seemed new and unique to me at the time. Otherwise, it struck me like a pre-fabricated comic book hero movie.

The reason why Captain America: The Winter Soldier is--far and away--the jewel in the MCU's crown (with the first film being a somewhat smaller stone) is all thanks to its serious plot, and larger challenges that have a more personal impact / investment for the heroes and their surroundings--like the best of the DC films. They are not out for a 'roided-up weekend warrior romp all to have an explosion of action and pseudo sci-fi hi-jinks.

That is exactly how I feel. I can tolerate the assembly-line style movies to a certain extent. But the only way I will ever be excited over a movie is if it offers something truly unique. Which is why I love movies like "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" and "Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice". Neither are perfect to me. But I feel that both movies are not only first-rate, but also possess unique style and substance.

 

[Kor]

I think the big problem with DC may be that its characters are generally iconic and very idealized (only Batman is allowed to be more dark and bada** and even then only somewhat). Marvel comics fans prefer the characters and storylines to be a lot more edgy as in Marvel while DC comics fans are displeased that the film versions of the characters are made more edgy than in the comics.

But in the last couple decades the characters in DC comics have gotten grittier, haven't they?

Kor

 

[Christopher]

But in the last couple decades the characters in DC comics have gotten grittier, haven't they?

In the wake of Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns, yeah -- pretty much ever since, DC's been trying to copy their grittiness and extremeness. But I think that's starting to change in the past couple of years, the pendulum starting to swing back toward a lighter tone.

 

[JD]

Yeah, I think they have been starting to lighten things up since The New 52.
As for the Marvel style, it's one of my favorite styles so I love them. I won't deny that they do have a pretty regular style, but I think they're all different enough to feel unique and to keep them from being repetitive.
While there is some dark stuff I absolutlely love, like the Ron Moore Battlestar Galactica, and The 100 I still overall prefer something that's light and fun like the MCU movies.
I have enjoyed all of the DCEU movies, but overall the darkness has been the main factor that has kept them from reaching the levels of the MCU movies for me.

 

[LJones41]

I have enjoyed all of the DCEU movies, but overall the darkness has been the main factor that has kept them from reaching the levels of the MCU movies for me.

This doesn't make sense to me. Even the MCU was capable of being gritty or "dark". I can't even think of one Captain America film that ended happily. Come to think of it, I don't recall "The Incredible Hulk" ending on a happy note, either.

Nor do I regard the tone of a comic book hero movie as a reason to judge it. Some "dark" films are extremely good. Some are not. Some "shiny/bright" comic book films are very good. Some are not.

What is with this excessive demand that all comic book movies be true to its comic source and avoid being "dark" and gritty that has been around for the past year or two? It almost seems as if these fans who keep making this demand are suffering from some kind of hangup.

 

[dahj]

I'm officially convinced WB picked the right guy for Captain Marvel Shazam!

https://www.instagram.com/p/BYg_4UrHavc/

 

[Tosk]

I wonder who Lotta will play this time.