Justice League Status Updates Thread - Part 2

While I don't share your opinion, I understand why you feel like that. I hope they'll prove you wrong though ;-)
 
It was.I howver dont want to see that villain in a first JL movie-
I think its a bad idea to have Solo villains make their appearance in a JL movie before they make a solo movie apperance,it kinda spoils them.Braniac should not show up in a Jl movie before he shows up in a Mos sequel.Thats like Loki showing up in the avenger before Thor .
The JL movie doesnt have to use solo villains-There are JL villains as well.For example,Darkseid is primarily a League villain even if he sometimes appears as a Superman villan.So he can be used without any solo movie apperances.
Nope. Darkseid needs to be the villain in an MoS movie before the JL. Establish him as Superman's enemy first and foremost before you move him onto the entire JL.
 
Léo Ho Tep;24270901 said:
While I don't share your opinion, I understand why you feel like that. I hope they'll prove you wrong though ;-)

At least is should be fun (something which i think avengers failed miserably) Even stories of JLA that people usually love , i've read them and...meh. The characters are nothing but gimmicks and extreme archetypes of their own legacies.
 
Nope. Darkseid needs to be the villain in an MoS movie before the JL. Establish him as Superman's enemy first and foremost before you move him onto the entire JL.
Darkseid is firstly a League villain secondly a Superman villain.So he can show up in the league before MOS.Whereas Braniac is firstly a Superman villain,secondly a legaue villain so he should appear in MOS series first
 
Darkseid is firstly a League villain secondly a Superman villain.So he can show up in the league before MOS.Whereas Braniac is firstly a Superman villain,secondly a legaue villain so he should appear in MOS series first

In truth, Darkseid is firstly a New Gods villain, however, imo he's a Superman villain before he moves onto the entire JL. Done right, he'd appear in an MoS movie before the JL with his entire legion to invade Earth.

Darkseid takes a special interest in Superman because of his virtuous nature.
 
Get a 2-part animated DTV New Gods movie to tie-in, yo.
 
Darkseid should be a one-off. He's ultimate evil. He shows up to royally **** **** up, and when he's defeated, he's defeated for good.
 
After reading some of these comments, I just realized that the new Superman movies will probably all include something about "Man of Steel" in the title, like how Batman became "the Dark Knight trilogy." Why is WB afraid to say the hero's name in the title of his movie?
 
General audience associate "Superman" movies with the old franchise, It will help to establish a new identity for this franchise.

Besides, many find Superman a cheesy and outdated hero, so they find it difficult to even admit the fact that they want to go to a new Superman movie (my many friends simply refused to go to SR, not because of the story, actor or the reviews but because it was a Superman movie.)

MOS will help lure them into one. :cwink:
 
Well, why does it have to be in the title? I always found that annoying. Batman this, Batman that. Superman 1, 2 and 3! Superman Returns! Batman Returns/Forever! Heck the next name after B&R was gonna be "Batman Triumphant" for crying out loud. It's like we get it.....it's Batman...now can u come up with another name please.

They're just trying something new so it's not the same thing over and over. We know it's Batman, just call it Dark Knight, or Caped Crusader or some other name. Same with Man Of Steel. If they have other nicknames, use em.
 
I don't hate that they do it sometimes. I just don't want it to become the new norm. What's really funny to me is that the one time the comic had a really cool title that wasn't the actual character's name, they changed the title of the movie to his name (Constantine).
 
Yeah but it's different when you're debuting a character on the big screen. It made sense for the first couple of Superman, Batman films. But then the titles got ridiculous.

I wouldnt mind "Batman" in the title of the reboot, but not every one from now on. And i think it's a good time to sell a few Superman movies without that name in the title. There's no need for it.
 
Yeah Donnie Darko, i dont know much about Constantine but "Hellblazer"? And that's better than "Constantine"?? oh boy...
 
Rumors are Lobo might be in the Justice League film. I'm down with that. :D
 
I'm not. He'd be a terrible pick for a name villain, and an even worse team member. Seriously, "Earth's greatest heroes fight an alien biker dude?"
 
After reading some of these comments, I just realized that the new Superman movies will probably all include something about "Man of Steel" in the title, like how Batman became "the Dark Knight trilogy." Why is WB afraid to say the hero's name in the title of his movie?
well man of steel is a better name than just superman imo

man of steel gives off the aura of strength and power

and it is just a bad ass name
 
the dark knight trilogy started with batman begins.

besides, the dark Knight "anything" sounds better then batman "whatever."
 
I'm not. He'd be a terrible pick for a name villain, and an even worse team member. Seriously, "Earth's greatest heroes fight an alien biker dude?"

I doubt he'd be either. He's a bounty hunter. The blanks would be easy to fill in.
 
I don't think he'd be a team member. If he was there'd be another reason behind it.

I don't think he'd be a great main villain, but he could be. I think they're most likely thinking of giving him a cameo or small role, which would be awesome.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top