DC What was the Rush???

[Hmarrs]

My Thing with DC is that they Rushed everything.
The Death of Superman should have been it's own Motion picture...

One of the biggest events in Comic book history squeezed into 10 minutes of film time BVS?

You make that a feature like the Comics and use that as a huge motion picture to introduce all your Characters out against Doomsday(Thanos)...Superman doesnt Die in BVS but in Superman 3.

Sort of like "Avengers Endgame"...If their goal is to catch up to Marvel...Just Backwards Superman

But before that or after that you push out

Teen Titans with Cybor in that..NOT JL
The Sequel Titans
Doom Patrol
Booster Gold
Shazam
All Your B hitters

You give the public a Tease With your Justice League playing in the Background observing like in the "Young Justice Series"

Heck make a Young Justice after Teen Titans
Then they become the Younger Squad under Titans..

Then you bring out your heavy Hitters for the Clean Sweep.
Sorry to me it was and still is all a mess...

And whether you liked Affleck or not(To me the Warehouse scene felt like the first time I actually saw THE TRUE BATMAN on Screen I could easily do 2 plus hours of that with Affleck)losing him hurts the Boat stay afloat bcse the one DC is hurting from...Besides Continuity..is

Stability.

Am I right about it????...Geez!!!

 

[Rorschach2012]

Superman should have had a prestige, TDK-level trilogy of his own.

They ****ed up the DCEU from the get-go. Lex should have been established in the first film, and the villain should have been Brainiac. Nobody needed Zod again.

We probably should have gotten two Superman films before BvS too.

 

[metaphysician]

Why rush? We all know the answer why: The Avengers. Or more precisely, the 1.5 billion dollars it made at the box office.

 

[-Arya-]

Because The Avengers happened and WB shareholders wanted an answer to it.

 

[Boy Scout]

Superman should have had a prestige, TDK-level trilogy of his own.

I’d like to believe that he has in some alternate universe

They ****ed up the DCEU from the get-go. Lex should have been established in the first film, and the villain should have been Brainiac. Nobody needed Zod again.

Zod could’ve been cool. There’s so much potential with him beyond boring, bland, military guy who hates Superman’s father, but it seems like a lot of writers are either unable or unwilling to capitalize on it.

I’m in no hurry to see him again, but when we do, he should be Superman’s own Ra’s al Ghul.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Yeah I feel like they should have built up to Zod. I know using him early on probably felt like a no-brainer since it allows you to explore some of the Kryptonian mythology but maybe it would have been better to keep that a little more mysterious and have audiences gradually learn about it as Superman discovers it himself. But I think their rationale was, “Everyone knows Zod because of Superman 2. Let’s just use him again!”

 

[Rorschach2012]

If you’re going to do an alien invasion with ties to Superman’s past, you just do ****ing Brainiac, yknow, the villain everyone actually wants to see.

 

[2kt09]

Brainiac like Starro is and should be JL-tier.

 

[Boy Scout]

Nah. Superman needs rouges of his own.

 

[metaphysician]

Part of the problem is, Superman's rogues gallery just isn't *that* strong. He's got basically two truly iconic villains, in Lex Luther and General Zod, a couple lesser but still memorable villains in Brainiac, Metallo, and Bizarro, and. . . that's about it. Its not a terrible gallery, but its not anywhere near as strong as Batman or Spider-man, or even Flash.

That a lot of his villains are basically unusable in big "Threat to the World" stories, while the movie makers are averse to using Superman in anything smaller scale, is another issue. Metallo and Bizarro are both memorable villains, but they can only really work as muscle for someone else, and you sure as hell aren't threatening the world with Toyman.

( Yes, I left out a number of people. Mongul and Doomsday both suffer for that they each basically have *one* iconic story, and are otherwise rather indifferentiable Alien Conqueror/Rampaging Monster. Mxyzptlk is only usable in a very distinct style almost antithetical to anything a movie is likely to use. Darkseid and the New Gods. . . are not Superman villains, they are their own thing, and its awful that they keep getting forced into the role of Superman Villain. )

 

[Rorschach2012]

Huh? Superman has one of the best rogues galleries in comics. Lex Luthor, Brainiac, Doomsday, General Zod, Metallo, Bizarro, Parasite, Toyman, Mongul, Mr. Mxyzptlk, and I consider Darkseid and Lobo to both be Superman villains.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Yeah, I’ve never bought into the “Superman has a terrible rogues Gallery” theory. Any villain can suck if you don’t know what to do with them. Look at the Joker in Suicide Squad. But if you take the time to make the villain work in the setting you’re placing him/her in, then there are plenty of options for Superman. Parasite, Metallo and especially Brainiac could be amazing in the right hands.

 

[metaphysician]

I didn't say "terrible", I said "not the greatest". And then I elaborated upon some of the specific ways that its properties make it hard to use in movies. Not everything can be split into "best thing ever" and "complete garbage".

 

[MadVillainy]

Part of the problem is, Superman's rogues gallery just isn't *that* strong. He's got basically two truly iconic villains, in Lex Luther and General Zod, a couple lesser but still memorable villains in Brainiac, Metallo, and Bizarro, and. . . that's about it. Its not a terrible gallery, but its not anywhere near as strong as Batman or Spider-man, or even Flash.

That a lot of his villains are basically unusable in big "Threat to the World" stories, while the movie makers are averse to using Superman in anything smaller scale, is another issue. Metallo and Bizarro are both memorable villains, but they can only really work as muscle for someone else, and you sure as hell aren't threatening the world with Toyman.

( Yes, I left out a number of people. Mongul and Doomsday both suffer for that they each basically have *one* iconic story, and are otherwise rather indifferentiable Alien Conqueror/Rampaging Monster. Mxyzptlk is only usable in a very distinct style almost antithetical to anything a movie is likely to use. Darkseid and the New Gods. . . are not Superman villains, they are their own thing, and its awful that they keep getting forced into the role of Superman Villain. )

I didn't say "terrible", I said "not the greatest". And then I elaborated upon some of the specific ways that its properties make it hard to use in movies. Not everything can be split into "best thing ever" and "complete garbage".

His rogue gallery is fine.
Brainiac, Darkseid (I don't get your take on them, DCAU did a well received take of them being Superman villains), Zod, Metallo, Mongul, even Bizzaro could work as a main film villain.

Killimonger was not iconic before Black Panther. I mean Spider-Man Homecoming made Vulture work. Vulture. If they can make ****ing Vulture work as a main villain; they can make Metallo or Bizarro work. I personally have a take on Metallo (where Luthor is the secondary villain) where he can be a main villain in a Superman movie. And if a non pro like me can come up with that, then an actual talented screenwriter can do it better.

It's a silly argument.

Yeah, I’ve never bought into the “Superman has a terrible rogues Gallery” theory. Any villain can suck if you don’t know what to do with them. Look at the Joker in Suicide Squad. But if you take the time to make the villain work in the setting you’re placing him/her in, then there are plenty of options for Superman. Parasite, Metallo and especially Brainiac could be amazing in the right hands.

I didn't even know this was a theory

Because The Avengers happened and WB shareholders wanted an answer to it.

Yeah this is the answer. Businesses are very reactionary.
Oh Apple has their own music streaming service? We gotta make one too
Ford made a car that can go 300 mph? We need one too.
Disney has a billion dollar grossing shared universe we need one too.

If only all these studios actually took the right lessons from Disney/Marvel we could actually have a couple of cool cinematic universes.

 

[unholyrevenger]

nah, death of Superman came at the right time. And technically BvS and the first half of JL concern the death of Superman.

 

[MadVillainy]

Eh I disagree you don't kill off Superman or any main franchise character in their 2nd movie when that movies happens to be a team up movie.

If we didn't get BvS and we got MoS2 and they did Death of Superman then that'd be better

But different strokes...

 

[unholyrevenger]

Eh I disagree you don't kill off Superman or any main franchise character in their 2nd movie when that movies happens to be a team up movie.

If we didn't get BvS and we got MoS2 and they did Death of Superman then that'd be better

But different strokes...

it's not a team up movie. and i do agree it should have been in movie 3 but that's only because bvs should have been chopped into 2 volumes, kill bill style

 

[Flint Marko]

Team-up, crossover, whatever word you want to use, it was DC’s biggest properties thrown into one movie as an answer to the Avengers. As Blackman said, WB needs to answer with their own billion dollar superhero crossover and they need it as soon as they can manage.

Part of the reason it was so poorly received is due to it being so poorly conceived.

 

[Flash525]

Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman (at least) should have had two films each pre Justice League. Aquaman, Flash, and either someone like Shazam, or Hawkgirl should have had at least one solo film before Justice League.

Then being them together for the ensemble, of which you can potentially kill one of them off (Superman, and temporarily). A sequel to the Justice League would revive him, and you'd have had chance to tell a sequel to all of the above characters during that time; how they deal with the loss of Superman and how the world (from different angles) deals with his loss too.

A Justice League would bring him back, and give him his third film afterwards, alongside any character that didn't get a follow up between JL1 & JL2.

The Lantern Corps is the only bunch of characters that could have simply been introduced, but they're not specifically tied to the Justice League (in the sense that they're cosmic, and not reliant on being available specifically to Earth).

That's how I'd of done it anyway.

• Superman 1
• Wonder Woman 1
• Aquaman 1

• Batman 1
• Flash 1
• Shazam 1

• Wonder Woman 2
• Superman 2
• Hawkgirl 1

• Justice League 1
• Flash 2
• Batman 2

• Aquaman 2
• Hawkgirl 2
• Shazam 2

• Justice League 2
• Batman 3
• Flash 3

• Superman 3
• Aquaman 3
• Shazam 3

• Wonder Woman 3
• Flash 3
• Hawkgirl 3

• Justie League 3
• Lantern Corps
• Flashpoint

 

[Zarex]

The problem came about due to a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Justice League is. The folks at Warner Brothers treated JL like it was the Guardians, X-Men or Suicide Squad, ie a standard superhero team up. The Justice League, even more than the Avengers, is an All Star team. The team needs stars to work, and the studio's lazy set up didn't allow for it.

 

[Iceman]

The problem came about due to a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Justice League is. The folks at Warner Brothers treated JL like it was the Guardians, X-Men or Suicide Squad, ie a standard superhero team up. The Justice League, even more than the Avengers, is an All Star team. The team needs stars to work, and the studio's lazy set up didn't allow for it.

Exactly.

 

[writer0327]

The problem came about due to a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Justice League is. The folks at Warner Brothers treated JL like it was the Guardians, X-Men or Suicide Squad, ie a standard superhero team up. The Justice League, even more than the Avengers, is an All Star team. The team needs stars to work, and the studio's lazy set up didn't allow for it.

Couldn't agree more. WB saw Avengers and Guardians as lesser entities that JL (which they are) and said..."Well if people loved those films, they will love seeing Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, etc team up! Lets get that going immediately!"

So what was the rush? Seeing all these lesser Marvel properties killing the box office. Hard to argue with WB for wanting to seize the moment, hell, Universal tried to launch the Dark Universe at the same time. But for WB their biggest misstep was no true MoS sequel. They could have spent the amount of money on BvS on two films and scaled back the budget, making one of those a Batman noir detective film with a younger actor and the other either the MoS sequel or Flash. Having no solo films for Batman, Flash, Cyborg before launching JL was as bad a move as killing Supes in the second film of the cinematic universe.

 

[MadVillainy]

Couldn't agree more. WB saw Avengers and Guardians as lesser entities that JL (which they are) and said..."Well if people loved those films, they will love seeing Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, etc team up! Lets get that going immediately!"

So what was the rush? Seeing all these lesser Marvel properties killing the box office. Hard to argue with WB for wanting to seize the moment, hell, Universal tried to launch the Dark Universe at the same time. But for WB their biggest misstep was no true MoS sequel. They could have spent the amount of money on BvS on two films and scaled back the budget, making one of those a Batman noir detective film with a younger actor and the other either the MoS sequel or Flash. Having no solo films for Batman, Flash, Cyborg before launching JL was as bad a move as killing Supes in the second film of the cinematic universe.

I think their biggest misstep was MoS in the first place. Personally I don't like MoS at all. But even taking my personal feelings about it away, you can't really argue that MoS got a mixed reception. It's extremely hard to build something on shaky foundation. MCU had Iron Man which was a runaway success financially and with critics, DCTV had Arrow which was a success, etc.
If they would've gotten MoS or whatever their first outing was to be a undeniable success, then it would've been much easier to keep the DCEU going

 

[writer0327]

I think their biggest misstep was MoS in the first place. Personally I don't like MoS at all. But even taking my personal feelings about it away, you can't really argue that MoS got a mixed reception. It's extremely hard to build something on shaky foundation. MCU had Iron Man which was a runaway success financially and with critics, DCTV had Arrow which was a success, etc.
If they would've gotten MoS or whatever their first outing was to be a undeniable success, then it would've been much easier to keep the DCEU going

I think they could have gotten away with a shaky beginning if they followed it up with a strong second act. The film was successful enough to warrant a sequel, the problems the film had were certainly fixable by simply giving audiences a more cheerful rendition of Supes. I happen to like MoS, but I see the problems it had and I know it could have been a lot better. Just don't let Snyder direct the sequel.

 

[MadVillainy]

Eh Im not so sure. Making a sequel to a very a movie with a mixed reception is already a risky endeavour. Diminishing returns and all that. I mean even sequels to well liked movies can gross less than the original.
And I don't really see that much evidence that the large movie going public was craving MoS 2.
I'm not saying they couldn't recover from MoS, but I think it's better to put your best foot forward rather than trying to recover from a stumble.