Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Justice League' started by Thread Manager, Apr 24, 2013.
Superman Returns was horrible imo. But I agree with the rest.
What do you mean?
I'd love to see a different take on Dark Knight Returns or a Batman Beyond years from now with Bale as old man Bruce. Terry McGinnis, years after Blake's run.
Without prior films of WW and Flash, I'm wondering what they'll put the focus into in the movie.
If the gloss over and make Bruce become Batman again in under 5 minutes, because of the characters needing attention, I'll be annoyed.
That's why I wanted a WF film first.
Oh ok, I see what u mean. Depends really. If he's in a MOS cameo along the way, that's step 1..they might not need too much time to tell the story of why he gets back in the game and why Blake has to stay in Gotham. That doesn't have to take too long. But they definitely need at least 1 scene beforehand in a crossover, even just a cameo.
I think we should recap here. You said Marvel (specifically Avengers) has been ruining/has ruined WB's DC films. I said, WB have been doing that just fine themselves, evidence is Green Lantern and the fact that they had no wider plan outside of Batman, and that series is now one that works against them.
Here's my quote -
To which, you replied with -
What I meant that had Avengers not happened, WB would have focused on making some good solo DC movies first instead of rushing to make a Justice league movie.
Nolan has not stopped them from making solo DC movies, and they did try, like Jonah Hex and Green Lantern, but those movies were not good as WB's approach of making comic book movies was not right.
Nolan's movies have nothing to do with those under-performing movies. Now, let's us assume that they are able to create a good team of producers, writers and directors. Like for MOS they hired Nolan as a Producer, Goyer as a script writer and Snyder as a director and decide on making solo DC movies first for example - a Flash movie, a Wonder Woman movie.
Just because Avengers made boatloads of cash, WB are getting greedy and rushing to Justice League movie.
What makes you assume all that though? What makes you think that we won't be getting Bruce Wayne centric movies?
Not having Nolan does not automatically mean going back to Burton/Shumacher. ("There's no goin back. He's changed things...forever")
Is there any reason why the Bat reboot can't be like Man of Steel?
Avengers definitely did mess up DC movies because now the Justice League push has made the studio go into overdrive. While I really, really, really want JL, making it the whole purpose for movies going forward has the glaring danger of making said solo movies turn into stepping stones. Kind of like Captain America which was my least favorite of the Phase 1 Marvel movies. It felt like a stepping stone as did Thor to a slightly lesser degree. And I think the weakest part about Iron Man 2 was the fact that they tried to muscle in Fury and Widow's role into the plot just to make the story relevant to the building Avengers story. If DC ends up doing the same things and introducing WW and Flash ONLY to get to the end which is Justice League, they could meet the same criticisms that the final three movies of Phase 1.
Man of Steel will probably get a pass due to going into production before the Avengers set the box office on fire and seems to be made in order to make a GREAT Superman movie. But if they put MoS 2 on the fast track to get it out by 2015 and then smush whoever else they want to get introduced in order to get to their perceived money maker, they could end up losing more of their audience than they gain. DC movie reputation is sort of straddling thin ice right now. The Nolan Batman movies did well but pretty much everything else DC has put out in the last decade has been frowned upon by the GA. MoS will do some good if the reviews stay positive, but they don't want to ruin that directly after.
And that is how the Avengers has thrown WB for a loop.
Most fans want a video-game like (inspired by Arkham games) stylized, Batman movies with lots of gadgets and fantastical elements thrown in.
That would surely not match with tone of MOS.
^ Good points.
......THIS MOVIE HAS AN ALIEN FROM ANOTHER PLANET IN IT.
Seriously people, this movie is dealing with tons of fantastical elements. An AA inspired Batman could work fine with this.
Well first, what fanboys want does not dictate what's going to happen, or else we'd have no Ledger Joker, or Hathaway Catwoman.
But even if they did make it more Arkham-like, the Arkham games were thin, and was 99% Batman / 1% Bruce Wayne because it was a video game.
I'm sure a movie could do more, and 'say something about Bruce Wayne'; it doesn't have to be 99% beating up baddies and solving riddles just because that's what the game is.
Obviously, when people talk about an AA inspired Batman movie, they're talking about the tone of the overall film, not about the actual content.
A Batman film that still takes itself very seriously, has good character development, yet incorporates some of the more outlandish Batman foes. Like Mr. Freeze for example.
That would fit perfectly with this new Superman film, because that's exactly what this film is doing. Taking an outlandish, completely unrealistic character, and handling it in a serious way. The tones would mesh perfectly.
Arkham Asylum inspired Batman movie sounds like a worst idea to me, make Batman dependent on tech and gadgets, like Pierce Brosnan's Bond.
What happened to those Bond movies ? Yeah, they were rebooted to include a more grounded approach to Bond, that earned a billion dollars.
If Earth in MOS is 98% like ours, in terms of law and physics, how can that be?
Why couldn't a Batman Reboot have that as well.
98% like our world, except for a new discovery?
It's a world where a man from another planet, looks and talks just like us, yet can fly, has super strength, can shoot lazers out of his eyes, and has a myriad of other completely unrealistic powers.
The rules of the universe that MOS is in have accepted the completely unrealistic notion that Superman is possible. What the film is doing is taking a completely unrealistic and outlandish idea (Superman) and trying to examine how the real world would react to an outlandish thing. Thus, it's an unrealistic film that presents some realistic reactions.
It's taking the unrealistic elements seriously. That's what people are asking for in a AA inspired, or TAS inspired Batman movie. A film that takes itself very seriously, has solid character development, and has some of the more outlandish characters.
And you know why it could work? Because once an audience sees that this a world where an alien being THAT COULDN'T EXIST, is a main character, they're going to accept a character like Mr. Freeze much easier. Especially if he's given a serious treatment.
All it means, since MOS starts with a 'realistic' world, is that MOS has to take place first.
After Supes and Zod (and WW, Flash, GL) all crop up, will 'fantasy' villains that eventually came into Gotham really feel out of place?
If the Batman Reboot is supposed to have an established 'fantasy' rogues gallery, just have it set several years after MoS (in this time, all the villains cropped up).
Exactly. Once the audience accepts the initial fantasy villains, the others won't be hard to accept either.
Provided they're handled with the same maturity and seriousness that MOS is handling it's universe. People will accept almost any amount of ridiculousness if the material is presented in a well done manner. LOTR is a perfect example of that.
And it's important to note that many of Batman's more fantastic villains are still grounded in a bit of the "realistic possibility." They're all very sci-fi. Mr. Freeze could be presented in a way where he could seem possible. It's all in the presentation. It's all in the presentation. Jurassic Park made us believe it might be possible to clone dinosaurs because they presented it in a very compelling manner.
But just because an Alien arrives and an Island like Themyscira exists, does that mean the society in the DCU be any different from ours?
But we have to see.
...By definition, since the DCU society has to deal with these completely outlandish creatures/beings, it will be incredibly different then ours. Because our society doesn't have to deal with super-powered aliens.
Superman may be a fantastic character but he still has to exist in a real world and he still has to obey laws of physics.
For example - Superman cannot talk in space, Superman cannot resurrect the dead.
He also has to interact with normal people around him, this is not a fantasy world like - Land of Oz or Narnia.
why would you have to set up their origins...Did we get Hawkeye's or Black Widow's origin??? Did we get one for the Chitauri or the guy talking to Thanos???
Save the origins for the solo films. The Marvel way isn't the only way.
But does it mean Earth should by any different, before they arrive?
If Lexcorp is already in the process of building cyborgs and what not during MOS, then that notion of trying to be realistic will be dispelled.
well we are dealing with an earth that has a few more cities than we do