All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation - Part 5

[MbJ]

 

[STARMAN]

Peter Jackson is rumored to be one. We'll be interesting to see the other two rumored.

 

[Flint Marko]

Peter Jackson would be a huge get.

Smart move on WB's part to basically open up the DC treasure chest to top-level talent, but I think it could be a sign that the DCEU as we've known it is effectively done for. I really don't know if three big name directors want to play in a sandbox filled by other people and other projects.

 

[Flemm]

Well, they need to make some hit movies.

The extended universe aspect has become a burden and a hindrance for them at this point. They could come back to it later, but it can't be a priority for now.

 

[Flash525]

Peter Jackson would be a huge get.

He'd be great assuming WB weren't too strict and allowed him a little free reign and gave him that creative licence.

 

[misslane38]

Peter Jackson would be a huge get.

Smart move on WB's part to basically open up the DC treasure chest to top-level talent, but I think it could be a sign that the DCEU as we've known it is effectively done for. I really don't know if three big name directors want to play in a sandbox filled by other people and other projects.

Are you implying they were actively keeping that treasure chest closed before?

 

[Flint Marko]

He'd be great assuming WB weren't too strict and allowed him a little free reign and gave him that creative licence.

They've historically been a studio that has allowed for a lot of creative freedom amongst their film-makers, so I'd like to think they're making a return to form after JL.

Are you implying they were actively keeping that treasure chest closed before?

No.

 

[misslane38]

No.

Then why say, "Smart move on WB's part to basically open up the DC treasure chest to top-level talent"? To open something suggests that it was originally closed. Why are you praising WB for essentially lifting a restriction that was never there in the first place? Wouldn't it be easier just to say that feel good about top talent being interested in working for WB on DC properties? Also, not that I'm not excited for them, but is, say, Blackhawk really a DC treasure?

 

[misslane38]

I always hated TDKR because of how it depicted superman but atleast Miller was smart enough to know that he could write a Batman vs Superman story because he had a 4 decades long friendship that he could deconstruct whereas Snyder jumped straight into deconstructing a pair of characters who haven't been constructed (batman)/constructed fully (superman) thus giving the audience a moody, dark, over convoluted movie that portrayed it's lead (iconic) characters as a pair of nihilistic -and in batman's case- psychotic *****bags who were neither likable (superman) or heroic (batman).

Hi, Superchan. First, I'll reiterate that Snyder didn't adapt TDKR as is; he deconstructed it and subverted it in a way that even Grant Morrison appreciated, especially with regards to Superman. Second, I thought I'd remind you to be good to yourself and follow your own advice about BvS criticism. Remember when you said, "save your breath" and "take solace" in Snyder/BvS's failure?

 

[Flint Marko]

Then why say, "Smart move on WB's part to basically open up the DC treasure chest to top-level talent"? To open something suggests that it was originally closed.

No it doesn't.

 

[misslane38]

No it doesn't.

Whatever. You do you, I guess.

 

[Flemm]

There's a question of emphasis. Certain high profile directors seem to be reluctant to work within the extended universe concept because of the additional constraints. They are used to running the show and having a lot of creative control.

In the current context, bringing in high profile directors is probably more of a priority than building the universe.

Speaking hypothetically, if Peter Jackson were to say, "I'm interested in doing X, but I want to do it my way, without worrying about this other stuff," then I'm guessing that they would say "yes, do whatever you want."

Or at least that seems likely. That's already different from the way Marvel is doing it.

 

[misslane38]

There's a question of emphasis. Certain high profile directors seem to be reluctant to work within the extended universe concept because of the additional constraints. They are used to running the show and having a lot of creative control.

Where is this impression coming from? And, again, it's not as if WB was closed to the possibility of such directors. What you're saying is the limitation was set by the filmmakers and not the studio.

 

[Flemm]

What you're saying is the limitation was set by the filmmakers and not the studio.

Yes, at least in a sense. Directors in Hollywood generally have a lot of power and creative control (as opposed to television, where the director's role isn't really defining what happens creatively, it's more the writers and producers).

Marvel Studios has developed something that is closer to the tv model, in which the directors are signing on to work within a certain context and constraints defined by the studio. That has nothing to do with the talent level of the individual directors, of course. And the studio seems to be getting better and better at the collaborative process.

But the emphasis is different, and they have mostly relied on directors who are still looking to establish themselves. As to where that impression is coming from, there has been a lot of documentation of creative friction between Marvel Studios and their directors, or potential directors.

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/fe...em-why-a-list-filmmakers-are-fleeing-the-mcu/

Nolan's skepticism of the extended universe concept is another example. When asked about the DCEU's struggles recently, late last year I think, he basically said that there are a lot more constraints now than when he did The Dark Knight trilogy.

https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a14010704/christopher-nolan-dc-warner-bros-problems/

Granted, one has to read between the lines to an extent, but basically the point about emphasis seems solid enough.

 

[misslane38]

Yes, at least in a sense. Directors in Hollywood generally have a lot of power and creative control (as opposed to television, where the director's role isn't really defining what happens creatively, it's more the writers and producers).

Marvel Studios has developed something that is closer to the tv model, in which the directors are signing on to work within a certain context and constraints defined by the studio. That has nothing to do with the talent level of the individual directors, of course. And the studio seems to be getting better and better at the collaborative process.

But the emphasis is different, and they have mostly relied on directors who are still looking to establish themselves. As to where that impression is coming from, there has been a lot of documentation of creative friction between Marvel Studios and their directors, or potential directors.

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/fe...em-why-a-list-filmmakers-are-fleeing-the-mcu/

Nolan's skepticism of the extended universe concept is another example. When asked about the DCEU's struggles recently, late last year I think, he basically said that there are a lot more constraints now than when he did The Dark Knight trilogy.

https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a14010704/christopher-nolan-dc-warner-bros-problems/

Granted, one has to read between the lines to an extent, but basically the point about emphasis seems solid enough.

That doesn't seem like strong evidence that the DCEU had a strong restrictive ethos to begin with and that directors are interested now because that policy has shifted. What Nolan is saying may also only apply to him. I mean, look at Patty Jenkins who is doing WW2 pretty soon after the first. Perhaps it's more a reflection of the industry at the moment, where in order to do a certain type of blockbuster it either has to be a part of an existing franchise or related to a comic book company.

 

[Flemm]

That doesn't seem like strong evidence that the DCEU had a strong restrictive ethos to begin with and that directors are interested now because that policy has shifted.

The phrase "strong restrictive ethos" doesn't feel appropriate. I've been using the term "emphasis," implying only a shift in focus.

That fits with what DC entertainment itself has been saying.

"Our intention, certainly, moving forward is using the continuity to help make sure nothing is diverging in a way that doesn’t make sense, but there’s no insistence upon an overall story line or interconnectivity in that universe."

http://www.vulture.com/2017/09/dc-wonder-woman-movie-strategy-universe.html

That may feel a little abstract at the moment, but I'm guessing that, if Peter Jackson, for example, ends up directing a DC film, then the difference will be quite clear.

It seems like a good strategy to me. Marvel has done very well by emphasizing the connections and serializing their movies, but that isn't the only way.

DC could set itself apart by focusing more on the individual director's take.

 

[TheVileOne]

The DCEU is a failure.

 

[misslane38]

"Our intention, certainly, moving forward is using the continuity to help make sure nothing is diverging in a way that doesn’t make sense, but there’s no insistence upon an overall story line or interconnectivity in that universe."

This has nothing to do with whether or not this new direction is what is attracting directors or that, because they had a different approach before, that it was the same as having a policy that intentionally "closed" off certain directors from the so-called DC treasure chest.

DC could set itself apart by focusing more on the individual director's take.

Again, this doesn't make sense. Snyder did get to focus on his take. The issue was connectivity, not director's vision. And going back to Nolan's comment, the issue for Snyder seemed to be less that he didn't have time to craft his vision, but that once he had, WB got cold feet and messed with it in post-production.

 

[Pennywise]

Peter directing a DCEU movie would be amazing! Probably won't happen, though!

 

[Flemm]

This has nothing to do with whether or not this new direction is what is attracting directors or that, because they had a different approach before, that it was the same as having a policy that intentionally "closed" off certain directors from the so-called DC treasure chest.

We can infer or expect that downplaying the connections between movies might open up new possibilities for A-list directors to get involved. Due to more freedom and increased creative control, basically.

I didn't use the "treasure chest" metaphor, but it's just a metaphor.

Again, this doesn't make sense. Snyder did get to focus on his take. The issue was connectivity, not director's vision. And going back to Nolan's comment, the issue for Snyder seemed to be less that he didn't have time to craft his vision, but that once he had, WB got cold feet and messed with it in post-production.

Not everything is an implied criticism of Snyder.

For a while they focused heavily on the inter-connectivity, but now they are moving away from that.

 

[Tg11]

If Peter Jackson comes on board to DC then we can lure other great filmmakers to actually save the DCEU...filmmakers that actually know what they are doing and can actually make a great film

 

[Jekecy]

Eh, I'm not so sure PJ is the right guy for any property to be honest. He went the way of Lucas in record time. None of his post-LOTR films were particularly outstanding.

 

[Tg11]

For my Phase 2 slate of predicted films:

Aquaman (2018)
Shazam (2019)
Wonder Woman 2 (2019)
The Batman (2020) (I would go for a winter release date; either January, February or March)

The Flash (solo film not Flashpoint) (2020) (Summer release date; either July or August)

Suicide Squad 2 (2021) (push back Suicide Squad another year to 2021; February release)

Green Lantern Corps (2021) (push back GLC another year to 2021; Fall release date; either October or November of 2021)

Justice League 2 (2022) (I would either go for a Spring or Summer release date)

 

[Boom]

Eh, I'm not so sure PJ is the right guy for any property to be honest. He went the way of Lucas in record time. None of his post-LOTR films were particularly outstanding.

I could see him with Justice League Dark, maybe Justice League proper under the right circumstances, and New Gods if it weren't already taken. Otherwise I'm drawing a blank.

 

[misslane38]

I could see him with Justice League Dark, maybe Justice League proper under the right circumstances, and New Gods if it weren't already taken. Otherwise I'm drawing a blank.

Jackson seems like a director who can handle complex mythology, so the New Gods would have fit him, but I think perhaps a film about Hawkman and Hawkgirl with Vandal Savage could work, too. Maybe Black Adam? His other work is often dark comedy, horror, or adventure, and he's done also a few films about young women. I don't know. It's possible characters like Zatanna and Huntress would appeal to the director who did Heavenly Creatures and The Lovely Bones while the mythological teams like the JSA would appeal to the director of LOTR and King Kong. In any case, I don't think there's a clear perfect fit out there for Peter Jackson, but there are a few things that could be a solid match.