Do you agree it's time to reboot and why?

[Iceman]

Just doing new films and ignoring what came before will be fine. They'll have to start from the beginning again but at least they lose most of the baggage.

 

[Frodo]

Lets look at history here...

- After Batman Returns we got Batman Forever & Batman & Robin- After Tim Story's Fantastic 4 films we got the 2015 Version

- After Rami's SM Trilogy we got ASM 1 & 2 then SMHC

- After Reeves' Superman films we got Superman Returns

- The rebooted Friday The 13th & Nightmare On Elm Street films

- After Cameron's Terminator we got Terminator Salvation then Genisys

- After Punisher 89 we got Punisher & War Zone

Pretty sure i can go on and on but history shows that Hollywood sucks at reboots and doesn't get them right until the 3rd or 4th time. If WB rebooted odds aren't in it's favor quality wise.

I wouldn't call those reboots. They're sequels in the same way the Bond films up to Die Another Day were all sequels to each other, just with different actors playing the lead and different tones of the films.

Superman returns is supposed to be loose sequel to Donner's Superman 1 and 2.

Other than the Batman and Superman series of the 90s , yeah Hollywood tends to struggle on reboots, though it worked for Bond with Casino Royale, Batman with the Nolan trilogy, and Star Trek which was a reboot of sorts.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I wouldn't call those reboots. They're sequels in the same way the Bond films up to Die Another Day were all sequels to each other, just with different actors playing the lead and different tones of the films.

Superman returns is supposed to be loose sequel to Donner's Superman 1 and 2.

Other than the Batman and Superman series of the 90s , yeah Hollywood tends to struggle on reboots, though it worked for Bond with Casino Royale, Batman with the Nolan trilogy, and Star Trek which was a reboot of sorts.

Yeah, nearly all of the films he listed weren't reboots.

 

[metaphysician]

Rebooting everything is just another form of sloppy rushed craven narrative at this point. Skip the hard work of building and just get to the good stuff. The DCEU needs to earn goodwill, a reboot does not do that, a reboot and a great film doesn't do that as much as just making a great film in the current continuity does.

Also, soft rebooting is a legitimate option, and probably the best choice as long as they don't have a Kevin Feige and have to play it by ear film to film anyway.

Pretty much this. They can just go forward, make new movies, and only keep the stuff they want to keep as canon. So, sure, the Snyder movies happened. . . in the broad strokes. You just don't keep to their thematics, or fell bound to strictly follow their events, or directly reference any of the particularly bad parts.

That way, you avoid the risk/temptation of doing a reboot that largely repeats the same mistakes over again. Use the DCEU as a tool to benefit the movies, and only when it benefits them. Don't use the movies as a way to build to some theoretical future DCEU Killer App.

 

[Frodo]

A hard reboot of Batman and Superman imo, is the best way to go given they've been written into a creative corner and have turned off the GA, especially if Affleck and Cavill are still involved.

I haven't heard a convincing argument for keeping those versions going, and the idea of keeping for the sake of continuity and consistency isn't a good enough reason to keep trying to sell something the GA don't want. It just isn't.

The argument for not throwing the entire DCEU is much stronger than the argument against not rebooting Batman and Superman for the sake of fanboys who want continuity.

That said, as long as the leadership of WB , who made a lot of the bad decisions up to this point, remains the same, the the likelihood of a hard reboot of Batman or Superman is nil.

As mentioned before, the likely solution will be soft reboots which don't emphasize the interconnectivity of the film universe and don't mention or dwell on the divisive films like MOS, BvS, and JL. And that's assuming they don't bring Affleck and Cavill back.

 

[The Guard]

How have they been written into a creative corner, exactly?

 

[Timebomb]

I know this has been gone over a gazillion times but the DCEU Batman is a murdering idiot with no moral leg to stand on so....

And Superman aint much better.

 

[brandeezy89]

How have they been written into a creative corner, exactly?

This, people just lack imagination and creativity. Anytime something fails they automatically yell "reboot" from the rooftops instead of trying to figure out a creative way to fix it. Reminds me of fans of sports team who yell "kick him off the team" after a star player has a couple bad seasons.

New Head Coaches when they're hired don't get rid of all the starters and replace them. They fit them in their system that they brought over with them and figure out how to use their strengths.

Just look at this year's NFL playoffs, the two QBs playing in the NFC championship have been in the league for 5-6 years and have never been to the playoffs before. The Jags are playing against the Patriots with a QB who was labeled a bust and a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in 11 years.

Same thing applies

 

[CLARKY]

When they recast Superman they really need to put acting ability before appearance. Cavill looks dead on but objectively he's a pretty bad actor and has turned in (3) weak performances that didn't resonate whatsoever with the general audience.

It really should've been Armie Hammer as Superman all along.

I disagree. I always thought he was an excellent Superman. Having a reboot without him is really a loss, I think.
I mean... if they get rid of the moustache...

 

[CLARKY]

Pretty much this. They can just go forward, make new movies, and only keep the stuff they want to keep as canon. So, sure, the Snyder movies happened. . . in the broad strokes. You just don't keep to their thematics, or fell bound to strictly follow their events, or directly reference any of the particularly bad parts.

That way, you avoid the risk/temptation of doing a reboot that largely repeats the same mistakes over again. Use the DCEU as a tool to benefit the movies, and only when it benefits them. Don't use the movies as a way to build to some theoretical future DCEU Killer App.

Exactly. This is what I think too. Be bold, just go forward and keep what you did while correcting some stuff.
This was my idea for the GL movie. I thought they had enough to build on it without rebooting evrything and keeping only what they want to keep.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I know this has been gone over a gazillion times but the DCEU Batman is a murdering idiot with no moral leg to stand on so....

And Superman aint much better.

I don't think the "no kill" rule means nearly as much to the GA as it does to veteran comic readers. If you count how many soldiers she killed in her solo, Wonder Woman is the most murderous of the 3 headlining heroes, yet audiences have clearly responded to her.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Just doing new films and ignoring what came before will be fine. They'll have to start from the beginning again but at least they lose most of the baggage.

I say make solo films of high quality, win the audience back. Minimal to no easter eggs of other properties. Then maybe some time down the line if BO receipts improve and the stigma is gone, then you can try a JL2. But, the brand as a whole needs repaired first before another crossover attempt can even be considered.

I would try and get buzz back by doing something, like a Matthew Vaughn or George Miller Superman film (pay them whatever they want and let them make the movie they want). Reeves Batman also will be key in fixing the Batman brand. Wonder Woman will be fine. We'll see how Aquaman turns out. I would dump Flashpoint and make a different movie: The Flash.

 

[STARMAN]

I don't want George Miller on Superman. He was asked about it in 2015 and I wasn't crazy about his answer. I'm paraphrasing but he talked about Superman potentially being a boring character and you need to find his demons and get the internal conflict going. He mentioned needing to have that conflicted character and Greek gods and why Batman is so interesting.

Even if executed well, it's going further down a road I don't want with the character.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I don't think the "no kill" rule means nearly as much to the GA as it does to veteran comic readers.

Agreed. GAs may have noticed that some incarnations of Batman have been more willing to kill than others but I doubt they're aware what a 'big thing' (for people like us) that is.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I don't want George Miller on Superman. He was asked about it in 2015 and I wasn't crazy about his answer. I'm paraphrasing but he talked about Superman potentially being a boring character and you need to find his demons and get the internal conflict going. He mentioned needing to have that conflicted character and Greek gods and why Batman is so interesting.

Even if executed well, it's going further down a road I don't want with the character.

Sounds like the complete opposite of what most Supes fans seem to want right now, tbh.

 

[Boy Scout]

I don’t want him on Superman for that very reason. Vaughn is my current favorite, but I’m not optimistic he’ll get it.

Maybe they’ll do some shuffling around and get Zemeckis (who was apparently the front runner for the Flash movie) to helm it.

 

[STARMAN]

I was a supporter of Vaughn last year but I cooled on him a little. He talks a big game about Superman especially with how critical he is about other films yet also seems like he needs convincing to do it. It could be a negotiation tactic but I sometimes get the feeling he likes talking about it rather than actually doing it. I can also see him signing on and dropping out as he's done before.