All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation - Part 4

[TheVileOne]

Snyder's superman is derided by most and I really don't think that having him in the marketing would've changed much (if anything at all) in the box office.

IMO what really killed JL were 2 things: First is the crapfest that was BvS, a movie so hated by the general audience that it holds the dubious record for the worst multiplier for any 100 million dollar opening movie in hollywood history!
The second ofcourse is the crap fest that is JL, which was essentially yet another crappy Snyder movie with crappy Whedon dialogue added in for good effect.

As for the WB restructuring, well Tsujihara and co are still there and if the wrap's report about the bonuses was true then reshuffling the execs is the equivalent of fixing a ferrari with a faulty engine by changing the paint job.

Pretty much. Once again, they had already done one of these "restructurings" for DC films in May 2016, and it was widely reported.

 

[Flint Marko]

It's still insane to me that they killed Superman in his second appearance after cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS and they honestly expected people to care.

 

[misslane38]

It's still insane to me that they killed Superman in his second appearance after cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS and they honestly expected people to care.

There's a young man who dies in Dunkirk. He's not a soldier, he doesn't have many lines, and he's barely a supporting character. I cared when he died. I cared when Yinsen died in Iron Man and Erskine died in Captain America. It's amazing what the human heart is capable of feeling when one opens up to a story. A good man died sacrificing his life for a world that had feared, betrayed, and rejected him. He left behind his widowed mother and the woman he loved. He never got to see humanity embrace him as its hero. He proved to Bruce and Lex that he wasn't the devil each had imagined him to be. Heartbreaking.

 

[Limonade]

There's a young man who dies in Dunkirk. He's not a soldier, he doesn't have many lines, and he's barely a supporting character. I cared when he died. I cared when Yinsen died in Iron Man and Erskine died in Captain America. It's amazing what the human heart is capable of feeling when one opens up to a story. A good man died sacrificing his life for a world that had feared, betrayed, and rejected him. He left behind his widowed mother and the woman he loved. He never got to see humanity embrace him as its hero. He proved to Bruce and Lex that he wasn't the devil each had imagined him to be. Heartbreaking.

Aren't we comparing apples and oranges... I mean I wouldn't say Superman's death to like Erskine's death is at all comparable in the scope of caring.

After all, what does it say when Superman has more screen time than Erskine and people have the same level of caring for both?

 

[Flint Marko]

There's a young man who dies in Dunkirk. He's not a soldier, he doesn't have many lines, and he's barely a supporting character. I cared when he died. I cared when Yinsen died in Iron Man and Erskine died in Captain America. It's amazing what the human heart is capable of feeling when one opens up to a story. A good man died sacrificing his life for a world that had feared, betrayed, and rejected him. He left behind his widowed mother and the woman he loved. He never got to see humanity embrace him as its hero. He proved to Bruce and Lex that he wasn't the devil each had imagined him to be. Heartbreaking.

Don't act like it's on the viewer to care for something based solely on assumed empathy. That's a sorry excuse for poor film-making. It's up to the story-tellers to put the work in and earn that emotion. I'm well aware that you don't share my viewpoint and that's great, but I'm not interested in debating why.

 

[misslane38]

Aren't we comparing apples and oranges... I mean I wouldn't say Superman's death to like Erskine's death is at all comparable in the scope of caring.

After all, what does it say when Superman has more screen time than Erskine and people have the same level of caring for both?

Don't act like it's on the viewer to care for something based solely on assumed empathy. That's a sorry excuse for poor film-making. It's up to the story-tellers to put the work in and earn that emotion. I'm well aware that you don't share my viewpoint and that's great, but I'm not interested in debating why.

You can't make an argument about screentime and then make a quality vs. quantity argument. Either Superman's screentime and dialogue in terms of minutes and lines matter or it doesn't. It sounds like both of you are saying it doesn't matter. What matters is storytelling. And, if that's true, then you have to ask why do you think audiences care about the deaths of those other characters but don't care about Superman's death. I have my theories, but that's not important. I simply wanted to point out that "cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS" is not a reasonable explanation for why people didn't care about Superman's death.

 

[Flint Marko]

You can't make an argument about screentime and then make a quality vs. quantity argument. Either Superman's screentime and dialogue in terms of minutes and lines matter or it doesn't. It sounds like both of you are saying it doesn't matter. What matters is storytelling. And, if that's true, then you have to ask why do you think audiences care about the deaths of those other characters but don't care about Superman's death. I have my theories, but that's not important. I simply wanted to point out that "cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS" is not a reasonable explanation for why people didn't care about Superman's death.

Yeah, I never said the lack of screen time was why people didn't care about Superman's death. I have my own theories (namely piss poor story-telling), but I brought up the screen time because it's an undeniable sign of ineptitude on the part of WB/Snynder/who ever was responsible for the theatrical cut.

You're going to end your movie by killing the most iconic superhero of all time.... and then you cut a good chunk of his scenes. That makes no sense, particularly when you look at how little he's actually given in the theatrical cut.

 

[misslane38]

Yeah, I never said the lack of screen time was why people didn't care about Superman's death. I have my own theories (namely piss poor story-telling), but I brought up the screen time because it's an undeniable sign of ineptitude on the part of WB/Snynder/who ever was responsible for the theatrical cut.

No, the lack of screentime was the only thesis you put forward to which I responded:

It's still insane to me that they killed Superman in his second appearance after cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS and they honestly expected people to care.

If you want to clarify now and add storytelling to the thesis, that's fine. But that's not the argument you made.

You're going to end your movie by killing the most iconic superhero of all time.... and then you cut a good chunk of his scenes. That makes no sense, particularly when you look at how little he's actually given in the theatrical cut.

Did the cut scenes make you care about his death more? I thought the cut scenes added some much needed context to Superman's arc in the film. But I'd never argue that more screentime and fewer cuts is the universal answer to generating emotion. It all comes down to story.

 

[Flint Marko]

No, the lack of screentime was the only thesis you put forward to which I responded:



If you want to clarify now and add storytelling to the thesis, that's fine. But that's not the argument you made.

Right, because I was specifically honing in on the undeniable ineptitude displayed by those at WB who seemingly tried to undercut their own ending by minimizing the amount of time we spend with one of our titular characters who they kill at the end.

I never posited this as the only, or even the main, reason why this ending didn't work for a lot of people. You seemed to have interpreted it that way.

Did the cut scenes make you care about his death more?

The phone call with his mother was a really warm, human scene in a movie that was sorely lacking that. So yes, if they had put that scene in there (along with him investigating Batman) it would have improved his role in the film if only by a little.

 

[Limonade]

You can't make an argument about screentime and then make a quality vs. quantity argument. Either Superman's screentime and dialogue in terms of minutes and lines matter or it doesn't. It sounds like both of you are saying it doesn't matter. What matters is storytelling. And, if that's true, then you have to ask why do you think audiences care about the deaths of those other characters but don't care about Superman's death. I have my theories, but that's not important. I simply wanted to point out that "cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS" is not a reasonable explanation for why people didn't care about Superman's death.

Why not? You're comparing a main character to a side-character.

I believe people care enough in what they invest in each character. There are degrees of caring for a character.

People cared for Superman dying--and what it means to world? And Lois Lane? I guess?

It's not a vs argument, either. The quality AND quantity fell below people's expectation when watching this movie.

If a character like Erskine, or even Star-Lord's Mom (Meredith), succeeds where Superman fails in less time, what does that say about the film that Superman's in?

 

[misslane38]

Right, because I was specifically honing in on the undeniable ineptitude displayed by those at WB who seemingly tried to undercut their own ending by minimizing the amount of time we spend with one of our titular characters who they kill at the end.

That's a different argument, though. It's not the amount of time we spend with Superman that matters. What matters is the quality of that time. It isn't the minutes of time those cut scenes comprise that makes a difference; it's what those scenes contain. WB wasn't inept because it reduced Superman's screentime. WB was inept because it chose to cut scenes that gave Superman more point of view, fleshed out his motivations, and showed him interacting with injured citizens, first responders, and the people he loved who would mourn him. It's not the "amount of time" that was cut that illustrated ineptitude. It was the story contained in that "amount of time."

I never posited this as the only, or even the main, reason why this ending didn't work for a lot of people. You seemed to have interpreted it that way.

Because you didn't elaborate with any context. You have expanded on your initial take, so I understand your point of view better now.

The phone call with his mother was a really warm, human scene in a movie that was sorely lacking that. So yes, if they had put that scene in there (along with him investigating Batman) it would have improved his role in the film if only by a little.

I agree. What mattered ultimately wasn't that Superman didn't have a lot of screentime. What mattered was how that screentime was used. What if the film had kept the phone call with Martha and left out the "You don't owe the world a thing" scene? What if the film kept the aftermath of the Capitol bombing instead of the Knightmare? What if we still had the scenes of Clark investigating Batman but cut out one of Clark's heated exchanges with Perry? I prefer keeping all of the scenes, but I also believe if cuts needed to be made, they could have worked had they been the right cuts. WB could have cut Superman scenes from the film and still helped people care more about his death.

 

[misslane38]

If a character like Erskine, or even Star-Lord's Mom (Meredith), succeeds where Superman fails in less time, what does that say about the film that Superman's in?

It says there's a storytelling or audience expectation issue somewhere, but it doesn't say that screentime and cut scenes are the source of those issues or that simply adding more scenes would have made a difference.

 

[Limonade]

It says there's a storytelling or audience expectation issue somewhere, but it doesn't say that screentime and cut scenes are the source of those issues or that simply adding more scenes would have made a difference.

Yeah, it would really have to depend on what scenes were left on the cutting room floor. And if we've seen everything Snyder wanted to add to the story.

 

[Jonwo]

Given how successful WB was last year, it's no surprise that we've seen rejigs to make sure there is more Wonder Woman, IT type hits rather than a Justice League or King Arthur.

DC is important but it's only one aspect of the slate.

 

[Superchan]

It's still insane to me that they killed Superman in his second appearance after cutting a good chunk of his scenes in BvS and they honestly expected people to care.

Remember, this is the studio that brought us recent comicbook classics such as MOS, BvS, SS and JL and the director who brought us the razzie robbed classic Suckerpunch . What did you expect honestly!

Regarding the UC of dawn of just-s**t, well I thought that all the additional CK/superman scenes they re-inserted improved the movie (and superman's stance) quite abit in sense that the movie went from being a dinosaur sized dump into a human sized dump.
Take an Emo, mopey dialogue challenged superman and a psychotic Batman then add a twitchy lex luthor that only Joel Schumacher could love, a waste of screen time lois lane and a silly, contrived, poorly thought out plot and you end up with a s**t souflé (looks substantial from the outside but is infact full of fart air).

 

[TheVileOne]

Remember, this is the studio that brought us recent comicbook classics such as MOS, BvS, SS and JL and the director who brought us the razzie robbed classic Suckerpunch . What did you expect honestly!

Regarding the UC of dawn of just-s**t, well I thought that all the additional CK/superman scenes they re-inserted improved the movie (and superman's stance) quite abit in sense that the movie went from being a dinosaur sized dump into a human sized dump.
Take an Emo, mopey dialogue challenged superman and a psychotic Batman then add a twitchy lex luthor that only Joel Schumacher could love, a waste of screen time lois lane and a silly, contrived, poorly thought out plot and you end up with a s**t souflé (looks substantial from the outside but is infact full of fart air).

LOL, you certainly have a way with words Superchan

 

[Superchan]

My dear vileone it's all for your convenience.t:

 

[fan4stic]

I don't think Carrey's Riddler was as twitchy as BvS Lex.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Given how successful WB was last year, it's no surprise that we've seen rejigs to make sure there is more Wonder Woman, IT type hits rather than a Justice League or King Arthur.

DC is important but it's only one aspect of the slate.

And therein lies the problem in contrast to other 'centrally focused' studios, shall we say.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Right, because I was specifically honing in on the undeniable ineptitude displayed by those at WB who seemingly tried to undercut their own ending by minimizing the amount of time we spend with one of our titular characters who they kill at the end.

I never posited this as the only, or even the main, reason why this ending didn't work for a lot of people. You seemed to have interpreted it that way.



The phone call with his mother was a really warm, human scene in a movie that was sorely lacking that. So yes, if they had put that scene in there (along with him investigating Batman) it would have improved his role in the film if only by a little.

For some reason Flint I thought you hadn't seen the UC of BvS. Have you watched it recently or am I getting you mixed up with someone else?

Just curious to hear your thoughts on it.

 

[The Guard]

Have we now mathematically proven that absolutely no one cares about the emotional beats in the DCEU? We just going to apply that blanket statement to all audiences now?

 

[Superchan]

Have we now mathematically proven that absolutely no one cares about the emotional beats in the DCEU? We just going to apply that blanket statement to all audiences now?

To 'all'?.... No to most absolutely and if BvS's shocking multiplier, shocking RT score and underwhelming B.O. final not to mention the mega boxoffice and critical flop that is JL don't convince you then.....well......it's all good man, what ever makes you comfortable.

 

[Flint Marko]

For some reason Flint I thought you hadn't seen the UC of BvS. Have you watched it recently or am I getting you mixed up with someone else?

Just curious to hear your thoughts on it.

I think you're mixing me up with someone else. I saw it around the time it came out and I basically remember coming away thinking that it was the same movie, just longer and slightly better than what I saw in theaters.

Truth be told I only watched it because there were a fair amount of users here whose opinion of the film dramatically improved once the extended cut was released. I didn't expect a drastic improvement but I was pretty disappointed to find that it was just as much of a slog. A more coherent slog, sure, but still a slog.

Like I said to misslane, the single best part of the UC is Clark calling his mom and waking her up in the middle of the night to ask why Pa never left Kansas. That right there is 100% what I need from this Superman: warmth. Real, genuine humanity and vulnerability. I don't need jokes, I don't need a smile, I just need something to grab on to other than him pouting while people talk at him.

Just say something interesting, please. In that moment he did, but it wound up on the cutting room floor.

 

[TheVileOne]

I have a lot of problems with Man of Steel, but Clark at least felt like a character in that movie there. In Batman v Superman he almost feels non-existent. Too many characters. Too many subplots, and none of them gel together well.

 

[Boy Scout]

I don’t think Clark’s character was explored much in MOS. I think the idea of him was considered more interesting to the people involved.