All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation

[StarWars]

Sigh. Really? A Black Adam movie! We haven't even got a Shazam movie and the WB is already announcing a Black Adam movie? Why?



I agree. There's no reason to produce a Black Adam movie. None.

The WB is really pushing for their "Extended Universe" are they?

Agreed. DC is only making films that have a 'star', the material is not important to them, they simply dont care. Forget solo movies - pump out the Justice League asap....Forget Man of Steel 2 - pump out a batman vs. superman movie asap.....Forget Shazaam - pump out a Black Adam movie bc we got the Rock attached......And most importantly - FORGET THE DC FANS, we dont care about them.

 

[MbJ]

Yes.

Nope. Black Adam is supposed to be the bad guy. Bad guys do bad things.

 

[Flint Marko]

Question...

After Superman makes that one brief attempt...does Batman try to talk, or does he watch, smiling, as his traps are sprung?

Does Batman make any attempt to respond to Superman's earlier appeal, or to hear him out after the traps are sprung?

In what way is it not made clear that Batman probably isn't going to respond to reason within the first few moments of the conflict?

Batman is armored for combat. He is raging. He has attacked twice. He will not stand down.

Superman is not pummelling Batman for no reason. He is trying to get Batman to stay down and stop attacking him, because it is wasting time. He says as much after he throws Batman onto the signal.



Except that he tried to communicate, and it failed.

There is nothing to reasonably suggest, when your attempt to resolve matters peacefully were met with violent reprisal, that the other person will suddenly be willing to listen to reason until they are no longer a threat.

Time is of the essence, and being a superstrong being, he thinks he can force Batman to stand down through sheer use of power. These two men also underestimate each other during the fight.



I have.

Superman makes an emotional appeal. Batman doesn't listen and attacks.

Superman tries to use force to get Batman to stand down, progressively using more and more power.



I'm sorry that the stressed out, angry Superman didnt try reasoning with the heavily armored man who just attacked him with sonic device and machine guns...

Most reasons for two parties fighting aren't terribly complex, I don't find this one any less so. Emotion is a powerful thing.



Yet in other cinematic showdowns, there is often not even the brief attempt to reason. Or there is a single attempt. This also occurs in real life scenarios.

But superheroes have to act like superheroes all the time, so one attempt here is not enough because...well, because.

I suspect what lies at the heart of most people's problems with this sequence is not some inherent "flaw" in how fights must be written within a screenplay, but in the fact that people feel "Superman doesn't act like this".



Yes, I recognize why it doesn't sit well, but it's also not supposed to sit well. It's meant to be a very intense, troubling sequence with both men in peril and not thinking clearly.

But pretending that this fight is somehow less "justified" within the screenplay than many other screen conflicts and scuffles? Eh, not buying it. Is it the best development to a fight ever? No. It's also not the worst.

Within the context of the film, these men are obviously wrong to fight. Batman recognizes the massive error in judgement after the fight is over. You are not supposed to like the decisions they made that led to them fighting or the fact that they fought. They are, after all, supposed to be heroes, which is the end result of the film. Their realization that they should work together, and Batman's recognition that he has gone way, way too far.

We're not going to do the thing where we split the quotes up and debate them bit by bit, as you aren't going to be able to talk around my point any further. I'm going to go ahead and put it in bold just so there's no missing it:

As far as Superman knows, Batman is not a threat. He is not in any danger. There's no need to punch Batman through buildings. Antagonizing someone that you're going to need help from is a huge waste of time, particularly when his mother's life is on the line. Superman makes one brief attempt to explain the situation before he spends the rest of his time silently pummeling the one person he needs to explain things to. It's easy to see why people think this fight is stupid.

And just to be clear, it's not stupid in an intentional way where the point is about a "breakdown of communication". There's no reason that Superman cannot communicate in this scenario, other then the film-makers knew it would not make for a cool action sequence. They did not put enough thought into the titular conflict as both characters come across looking stupid.

And make no mistake, this isn't "stupid compared to their comic book counterparts", this is stupid compared to what anyone in this situation would do. This conflict is the textbook definition of contrived, and they have both characters act like morons to execute it. You can bend over backwards to try and explain this away all you'd like, but the rest of us aren't going to blindly accept something this poorly executed.

 

[Luke234]

I'm looking forward to a Black Adam flick. I don't think the Rock is Marlon Brando or anything but the dude has charisma and I think he makes entertaining flicks. I don't know much about Black Adam then he's Shazam's arch rival and is sometimes an anti- hero.
I love the idea of a possible fight with Superman. Sounds cool. I think the Shazam character sounds a little cheesy with the little boy stuff. I wish they'd just skip that character but we'll see.

 

[Erzengel]

Flint made me think of this from Kingdom Come.

 

[The Joker]

Question...

After Superman makes that one brief attempt...does Batman try to talk, or does he watch, smiling, as his traps are sprung?

Does Batman make any attempt to respond to Superman's earlier appeal, or to hear him out after the traps are sprung?

In what way is it not made clear that Batman probably isn't going to respond to reason within the first few moments of the conflict?

Exactly, Superman makes one brief attempt. How is that a justification for the lethal force he used against Batman, or because Batman didn't respond to, as you say one BRIEF attempt, that he cannot be reasoned with at all.

In DKR, when Batman and Superman came to blows, they knew it was coming, they knew why it was coming, they even spoke to each other before, during and at the end of the fight. There was reason, logic and communication there. Can't say the same for the 1-D conflict in BvS.

Except that he tried to communicate, and it failed.

It was a pathetic attempt. I can't buy a justification based on one weak brief attempt to resolve it.

These two men also underestimate each other during the fight.

How pray tell did Batman under estimate Superman in this battle? He's seen what level of powers he has strong enough to level a city. He can burn things with his eyes.

If Batman under estimated his power then he's a bigger moron than I thought.

I have.

Superman makes an emotional appeal. Batman doesn't listen and attacks.

Superman tries to use force to get Batman to stand down, progressively using more and more power.

An emotional appeal? Saying I was wrong, you have to listen to me is an emotional appeal? This is what is supposed to convince Batman? And afterward when he destroys Batman's guns he goes over picks him up and flings him across 50 feet away. Then goes after him and attacks him again knocking him through a building. Then tells him to stay down. This is trying to appeal to Batman's sensible side? Why didn't he just pin Batman down when he had him and force him to listen instead of throwing him around like a rag doll and adding to the tension.

I'm sorry that the stressed out, angry Superman didnt try reasoning with the heavily armored man who just attacked him with sonic device and machine guns...

Most reasons for two parties fighting aren't terribly complex, I don't find this one any less so. Emotion is a powerful thing.

If Superman was so stressed about his Mom's well being, he would have done everything he could to get Batman to listen, rather than aggravating the situation by attacking him. He didn't even know how strong Batman's metal suit was. For all he knew plunging Batman at high speed through a building could have killed him. But then why should he care, when he already did the same to a terrorist at the beginning of the movie.

Yet in other cinematic showdowns, there is often not even the brief attempt to reason. Or there is a single attempt. This also occurs in real life scenarios.

Most great cinematic showdowns know why they are having a showdown in the first place and don't need to try to reason. In this case Batman didn't know he was being played by Lenny Luthor.

Yes, I recognize why it doesn't sit well, but it's also not supposed to sit well. It's meant to be a very intense, troubling sequence with both men in peril and not thinking clearly.

But pretending that this fight is somehow less "justified" within the screenplay than many other screen conflicts and scuffles? Eh, not buying it. Is it the best development to a fight ever? No. It's also not the worst.

That's the problem though. Neither of them "not thinking clearly" is just sugar coating for saying they both were total idiots. Mr 1% chance Batman and hot head Superman trying to reason with someone by throwing them through a building, and flinging them around like a rag doll.

It sums up BvS in a nut shell. We get what they were trying to do, but the execution is so far off that it's shockingly laughable and bad. The Martha scene is another classic example of this.

 

[idiot09]

Nope. Black Adam is supposed to be the bad guy. Bad guys do bad things.

Black Adam's origin story is very anti-hero type. He is not a straight out villain.

 

[The Guard]

There are plenty of interesting stories that can be told with Black Adam, and many have been.

 

[Flint Marko]

That's the problem though. Neither of them "not thinking clearly" is just sugar coating for saying they both were total idiots. Mr 1% chance Batman and hot head Superman trying to reason with someone by throwing them through a building, and flinging them around like a rag doll.

It sums up BvS in a nut shell. We get what they were trying to do, but the execution is so far off that it's shockingly laughable and bad. The Martha scene is another classic example of this.

Well said, particularly this concluding statement.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Why is Ant Man getting his own movie, he's Ant Man.

Why is Dr. Strange getting his own movie, he's Dr. Strange.

Why is Thor getting his own movie, he's Thor.

Etc.

The fact that Black Adam is Black Adam doesn't mean that a movie about him cannot be good.

Ant-Man is a founding Avenger. Dr. Strange has been an important Marvel hero for decades. Thor is one of the Avengers Big Three.

Black Adam is a villain. You are comparing apples and oranges here.

 

[MbJ]

Ant-Man is a founding Avenger. Dr. Strange has been an important Marvel hero for decades.

Black Adam is a villain. You are comparing apples and oranges here.

That's far less of a stumbling block than people on here seem to be thinking. Movies about bad guys or antiheroes get made all the time. The entire genre of slasher movies exists basically because there's an audience for guys like Freddy Krueger or Jason. The comparison about Ant-Man and Strange works because if someone is making an argument about Black Adam being too obscure, then so were those guys just a few years ago.

Heck, DC already made a movie about villains, and despite being absolutely terrible, it was a huge hit.

 

[Erzengel]

I have no issue with Black Adam per se.

I just have a problem with already 2 picture deal.

Same thing with Sirens, Harley Quinn, Deadshot movies.

It's all over the place with no direction. Not that everything has to lead into an Infinity War type destination but I wish they'd provide a new slate of dates.

 

[Timebomb]

I like Black Adam. My only issue is that the DCEU already have too many movies in limbo. They need to focus on a few and worry about getting those right. Just releasing news on new upcoming movies doesn't build my confidence, good movies do.

 

[Zarex]

I think the the "Martha" scene could have worked if Bruce was under some sort of hypnotic trance and the mention of his mother's name shocked him back into reality. Maybe bring in Tala, Lex's gal from JLU, to do the dirty work. The instantaneous turn from wanting to murder someone with a radioactive spear to becoming BFFs would have made a lot more sense if there was some sort of outside involvement.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

That's far less of a stumbling block than people on here seem to be thinking. Movies about bad guys or antiheroes get made all the time. The entire genre of slasher movies exists basically because there's an audience for guys like Freddy Krueger or Jason. The comparison about Ant-Man and Strange works because if someone is making an argument about Black Adam being too obscure, then so were those guys just a few years ago.

Heck, DC already made a movie about villains, and despite being absolutely terrible, it was a huge hit.

Obscurity doesn't matter. Every original character ever made was a complete unknown because they didn't exist.

It is about whether they would work as the lead in a feature film.

And those slasher movies have limited audiences. The highest grossing Friday the 13th film grossed $114.9 million worldwide. The highest grossing Nightmare on Elm Street did $115.7 million. For comparison, the highest grossing films in both franchises grossed less than Fant4stic, which was a massive failure on all levels.

 

[JtheDreamer]

We're not going to do the thing where we split the quotes up and debate them bit by bit, as you aren't going to be able to talk around my point any further. I'm going to go ahead and put it in bold just so there's no missing it:

LOL, but that's The Guard for you.

 

[MbJ]

Obscurity doesn't matter. Every original character ever made was a complete unknown because they didn't exist.

That's what I just said.

It is about whether they would work as the lead in a feature film.

And I see absolutely nothing about Black Adam that would preclude him working as a lead in a feature film. Aside from the DCEU's usual shoddy track record.

Modern comics already play him up as an anti-hero and tragic figure so it's not like it'd be two hours of him gleefully punching pregnant women to death.

And those slasher movies have limited audiences.

If you discount slasher films, movies about anti-heroes or morally ambiguous types have been standards of American cinema for decades. The entire genres of heist and gangster movies almost exclusively consist of characters who would, at best, be considered antiheroes.

 

[2kt09]

Agreed. DC is only making films that have a 'star', the material is not important to them, they simply don't care.

If by them you mean Snyder/Goyer/Terrio, the material matters so much they have to overthink it and complicate what you guys fundamentally like about these heroes. That's called caring too much.
Suicide Squad is when WB heard your complaints and just made the most vapid product imaginable.

Forget Man of Steel 2 - pump out a batman vs. superman movie asap

BvS:UE is as much a MoS2 as much as it is BvS.

 

[idiot09]

Guys I thought this was the DCEU news and speculation thread and not the "lets discuss BvS" one?

 

[Flint Marko]

Guys I thought this was the DCEU news and speculation thread and not the "lets discuss BvS" one?

You deliberately omitted the word discussion. "All things DCEU discussion". Seems appropriate.

LOL, but that's The Guard for you.

And with that, he exited the debate

 

[idiot09]

You deliberately omitted the word discussion. "All things DCEU discussion". Seems appropriate.

Yeah I think the discussion part is about the news stuff, not about BvS.


Look even I have been guilty of this at times, but lets just all of us,stick to the topic shall we?

 

[Flint Marko]

Yeah I think the discussion part is about the news stuff, not about BvS.


Look even I have been guilty of this at times, but lets just all of us,stick to the topic shall we?

A mod can correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to be pretty clear:

Where Anything relating to the DCEU is on topic, it's all fair game!

-fan casts
-director picks
- news of any DCEU movie
- etc

While all things are allowed for discussion my primary motivation for creating this thread was to make a place to discuss things that don't exactly fit in any one forum.

What's not on topic is debating about what is or is on topic, so this is the last I'll say on the matter.

 

[idiot09]

A mod can correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to be pretty clear:



What's not on topic is debating about what is or is on topic, so this is the last I'll say on the matter.

Fair enough. Continue your BvS debate

 

[StarWars]

Yeah I think the discussion part is about the news stuff, not about BvS.


Look even I have been guilty of this at times, but lets just all of us,stick to the topic shall we?

The thread is now about Black Adam as a solo film. Not sure what you're talking about. BvS was discussed before the Black Adam news.

 

[Flint Marko]

BvS:UE is as much a MoS2 as much as it is BvS.