Justice League Lounge of Justice - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 77

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]544187[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]544037[/split]

 

[Mandon Knight]

Considering you just labeled a bunch of people you don't know "****witted morons" for doing a job you have no real details on, I have no problem calling this one like I see it.

Are you telling me WB execs have behaved and demonstrated 1) sound business sense & acumen in many of their decisions and 2) have shown they care enough about the character to date across many issues within the DCEU framework and in particular with Superman.

 

[BH/HHH]

Wow, really? I didn't have a problem with her. I'm sorry that you did. In fact, I recall her being a fan favorite and sensation when her season was released.

I just found her really unlikeable so maybe it's more my hang up than her performance actually. I'll still give her a chance, she's certainly in great shape for the role.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Are you telling me WB execs have behaved and demonstrated 1) sound business sense & acumen in many of their decisions and 2) have shown they care enough about the character to date across many issues within the DCEU framework and in particular with Superman.

I'm talking strictly about the issues of Cavill's and Affleck's contracts. The issues that you decided to rage out over in the post I originally quoted. I'm not having and have no desire to at any point have some long-winded discussion about the ins and outs of WB's business dealings with respect to the entirety of the DC stable. Nor do I care in the slightest about rehashing the years old conversation over whether or not anyone at WB likes Superman.

 

[The Shape]

It's not like any of the CW leads are particularly amazing actors. I'm sure Ruby Rose will be fine.

 

[Black Narcissus]

Considering the Patty Jenkins new deal took almost 6 months to work out, and this was after she was successful, yeah, I'd say WB is doing fine with the bits and pieces the we do know on this possible new Cavill deal. There is this weird notion now online about WB as a studio in general, folks often forget how successful that studio is every year when the receipts come in.

 

[MbJ]

I simply don't get WB's reluctance over Cavill or the character, from any angle, business or otherwise. Come to a conclusion, one way or another over Cavill and Affleck, one way or another, make some ground, grow some balls and sort it out you bunch of ****witted morons.

I do. The unfortunate reality now is that his tenure has been marred by mixed to negative reactions, and it’s now been like 40 years since we’ve had a Superman film that was a complete success. I don’t like it but I get why the studio is so hesitant. Particularly since the three movies featuring Superman were incredibly expensive, and one of the things Hamada was hired to do was cut down costs.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Considering the Patty Jenkins new deal took almost 6 months to work out, and this was after she was successful, yeah, I'd say WB is doing fine with the bits and pieces the we do know on this possible new Cavill deal. There is this weird notion now online about WB as a studio in general, folks often forget how successful that studio is every year when the receipts come in.

And here I was thinking the only thing they made were DC movies. You mean to tell me they make other stuff too?!

 

[KalvinEllis]

It's not like any of the CW leads are particularly amazing actors. I'm sure Ruby Rose will be fine.

It's not just that, people say the same thing about almost every casting choice. When they cast Gal Gadot as WW, you heard two things: 1)She can't act; 2)She is not "chesty" enough. People really need to give it time, whether the actor ends up proving them wrong or not.

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

Someone said on twitter Ruby Rose shouldn't play the role because she's not Jewish. As if Reynolds was Jewish when he played Hal Jordan. People are so obsessed with group identity these days, it's embarrassing.

To be fair, Batwoman's Jewish identity is arguably more essential to Hal's, as it originated with this particular iteration of the character and is frequently referenced in the comics. Hal is a much older character who didn't become half-Jewish (a characteristic that isn't even universally acknowledged by DC) until the late 90s or early 2000s.

Having said that, as long as Kane is depicted as Jewish within the confines of the actual story, the actress portraying her need not be of the same background. That's just silly. I always thought of Kane's family as converts to the faith anyway, as her aunt (Martha Kane-Wayne) derives from Protestant (possibly Catholic) WASP aristocracy.

 

[chintai80]

I do. The unfortunate reality now is that his tenure has been marred by mixed to negative reactions, and it’s now been like 40 years since we’ve had a Superman film that was a complete success. I don’t like it but I get why the studio is so hesitant. Particularly since the three movies featuring Superman were incredibly expensive, and one of the things Hamada was hired to do was cut down costs.

yup.
this is something that's out of cavill's control, but business is still business.

and unfortunately he's part of what has not been producing the results that WB wanted.

and some has mentioned here - he's in a similar boat as andrew garfield was with his spider-man tenure.

 

[BH/HHH]

Considering the Patty Jenkins new deal took almost 6 months to work out, and this was after she was successful, yeah, I'd say WB is doing fine with the bits and pieces the we do know on this possible new Cavill deal. There is this weird notion now online about WB as a studio in general, folks often forget how successful that studio is every year when the receipts come in.

Yup, but that's fans thinking with their hearts rather than their heads.

I do. The unfortunate reality now is that his tenure has been marred by mixed to negative reactions, and it’s now been like 40 years since we’ve had a Superman film that was a complete success. I don’t like it but I get why the studio is so hesitant. Particularly since the three movies featuring Superman were incredibly expensive, and one of the things Hamada was hired to do was cut down costs.

Exactly and as frustrating as it is as a Superman fan it's the sad truth.

I do think though WB have been stupid with the budgets on some of these films. You could do a Superman film for a lot less and still have it be great and spectacular.

 

[Mandon Knight]

I'm talking strictly about the issues of Cavill's and Affleck's contracts. The issues that you decided to rage out over in the post I originally quoted. I'm not having and have no desire to at any point have some long-winded discussion about the ins and outs of WB's business dealings with respect to the entirety of the DC stable. Nor do I care in the slightest about rehashing the years old conversation over whether or not anyone at WB likes Superman.

If they had anything about them, they would/could have sorted these/this out a long time ago, (Affleck), amateur hour frankly. With Cavill, how they've allowed an actor (the best since Reeve to portray the role) into a situation where he and they are scrabbling over 'cameo's' or any desire to put him in a solo film again is comical.

I mention the two points to back up my claim of the ****wittery, that is all.

 

[BH/HHH]

If they had anything about them, they would/could have sorted these/this out a long time ago, (Affleck), amateur hour frankly. With Cavill, how they've allowed an actor (the best since Reeve to portray the role) into a situation where he and they are scrabbling over 'cameo's' or any desire to put him in a solo film again is comical.

I mention the two points to back up my claim of the ****wittery, that is all.

I don't get how Affleck was amateur hour it's pretty clear he doesn't wanna come back.

But should Cavill be getting what he's asking when reality is he's been in 3 movies that haven't been majorly succesful? I think he needs to back down a bit tbh.

 

[moviefreak]

Considering the Patty Jenkins new deal took almost 6 months to work out, and this was after she was successful, yeah, I'd say WB is doing fine with the bits and pieces the we do know on this possible new Cavill deal. There is this weird notion now online about WB as a studio in general, folks often forget how successful that studio is every year when the receipts come in.

Yup --people forget that Time Warner is a biggrass company. This is from 2 years ago:

 

[Da-Scribe]

If they had anything about them, they would/could have sorted these/this out a long time ago, (Affleck), amateur hour frankly. With Cavill, how they've allowed an actor (the best since Reeve to portray the role) into a situation where he and they are scrabbling over 'cameo's' or any desire to put him in a solo film again is comical.

I mention the two points to back up my claim of the ****wittery, that is all.

So, because you feel it should easy and because you like Cavill, then all that coupled with random speculation means that WB has no clue how to run their business?

 

[KalvinEllis]

To be fair, Batwoman's Jewish identity is arguably more essential to Hal's, as it originated with this particular iteration of the character and is frequently referenced in the comics. Hal is a much older character who didn't become half-Jewish (a characteristic that isn't even universally acknowledged by DC) until the late 90s or early 2000s.

Having said that, as long as Kane is depicted as Jewish within the confines of the actual story, the actress portraying her need not be of the same background. That's just silly. I always thought of Kane's family as converts to the faith anyway, as her aunt (Martha Kane-Wayne) derives from Protestant (possibly Catholic) WASP aristocracy.

I think Hal's Jewish heritage has been around for much longer than that, just rarely acknowledged and never given much emphasis. He was modeled after Paul Newman who was Jewish as well. But I can agree it's not the same since Hal is neither a practicing Jew, nor much of a religious individual in general, as opposed to Kate, Kitty Pride or Magneto. And as I said in my previous comment, Rose's full name is Ruby Langenheim, which sounds a lot like a Jewish name to me.

 

[Mandon Knight]

So, because you feel it should easy and because you like Cavill, then all that coupled with random speculation means that WB has no clue how to run their business?

So the moustache scenario was 'random speculation' about how to manage a business was it ?

 

[Black Narcissus]

It's not just that, people say the same thing about almost every casting choice. When they cast Gal Gadot as WW, you heard two things: 1)She can't act; 2)She is not "chesty" enough. People really need to give it time, whether the actor ends up proving them wrong or not.

Agreed.

Still, Rose gives me no hnnngh vibes. But that is ok. I don't see any of these lame CW shows.

 

[Kevin_28]

Langenheim sounds more German.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

To be fair, Batwoman's Jewish identity is arguably more essential to Hal's, as it originated with this particular iteration of the character and is frequently referenced in the comics. Hal is a much older character who didn't become half-Jewish (a characteristic that isn't even universally acknowledged by DC) until the late 90s or early 2000s.

Having said that, as long as Kane is depicted as Jewish within the confines of the actual story, the actress portraying her need not be of the same background. That's just silly. I always thought of Kane's family as converts to the faith anyway, as her aunt (Martha Kane-Wayne) derives from Protestant (possibly Catholic) WASP aristocracy.

I did not know she was Batman's cousin.
How ideal, a Bruce with a cousin using the same theme he does to fight crime. I wonder how many other similarities are there between Wayne and Banner.

 

[Mandon Knight]

I don't get how Affleck was amateur hour it's pretty clear he doesn't wanna come back.

But should Cavill be getting what he's asking when reality is he's been in 3 movies that haven't been majorly succesful? I think he needs to back down a bit tbh.

1) Affleck - WB, announce it then, stop dallying around, make a statement, take control. If he doesn't want to stay, and if he's behaved causally with his position, sort it out.

2) Cavill - WB, make an offer, incorporate what you want and how you want it, Cavill, make your pitch. Shake hands or don't shake hands, just 'king get on with it.

 

[MbJ]

They both have a thing for Wonder Woman.

 

[Mandon Knight]

I do. The unfortunate reality now is that his tenure has been marred by mixed to negative reactions, and it’s now been like 40 years since we’ve had a Superman film that was a complete success. I don’t like it but I get why the studio is so hesitant. Particularly since the three movies featuring Superman were incredibly expensive, and one of the things Hamada was hired to do was cut down costs.

Those mixed reviews or points are studio decisions, not 'Superman's fault, error or issue', nor the actor's. Yes, whilst others have mentioned, my wording of anger towards WB is extreme, because I am angry at how my favourite character is being treated, that's my love of the character, but every problem that stands with Superman is of the studio's making not of the character or Cavill's, he deserves another chance.