Justice League Lounge of Justice - Part 88

[Greenlite]

Well there's still the DCU for that. Plus, I'm at least morbidly curious on how they handle Bruce apparently just outright giving up on Gotham in Batwoman.

A billionaire cooperate playboy who show no respect to women, dressing up as a bat in the nights and beating up Catwoman, Harley Quinn and Poison Ivy, in a #timesup & post-metoo era?

The public probably rooted for the hard working, minority everyman's representative Bane to break his back, at least on the CW universe anyway

=P

 

[Greenlite]

For all the ''genius'' that is always thrown at Nolan, I always found it odd that he never even embraced the detective side of Batman. I mean, one would think that would be his angle aka his bread and butter, but we got mouth wide Batman shocked to have the hot chick stab him and him spending time painting a giant bat signal on a building. Eh. lol

"Talia...why.....but...but...we had sex!"

and no this is not from Collegehumor, it's from Matt Reeves screen test with RP in the old batsuit.

PS - I'm pretty sure Bruce paid Bane's thugs to paint the bat signal, I mean, he's still rich

 

[Black Narcissus]

The Lord God said: It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.

Man: Oh, that's cool.

The Lord God carved her body from the trees as thy stump were nice and thick, her eyes from the ocean cool breeze, and her awesome boobs from the bouncy clouds.

Lord God: Now go my son, motorboat till thee dinosaurs are ridden by Mormon men!

Man: If I were dead and you were still fighting for life, I'd come back from the darkness. Back from the pit of hell to fight at your side.

 

[heatvision38]

Batwoman looks like its DOA man, the buzz for it is BAD. And honestly it looks bad.

These shows and movies have to be careful how they present their property. If you are trying to come off as "agenda," you are going to put off a lot of your potential audience. I was keen to watch Batwoman as long as it didn't take the same approach as Supergirl, which is to hit me over the head with female power or gun control or whatever social issue they want to throw in our faces. I understand that stories have messages, but that message should serve the story and characters, not the other way around.

So I was hoping Batwoman, with a difference creative team, wouldn't fall into that trap. Then the trailer comes. Aside from being a weirdly edited trailer (which I put on the trailer team, not the showrunners), having 2 "I'm a badass female" moments in its first trailer is not a good sign. I'm not looking to watch Batwoman because she is a FEMALE character but rather because she is an interested female CHARACTER. This seems to be where Hollywood is getting it wrong. I was just re-watching Edge of Tomorrow the other day and Emily Blunt's character is awesome and badass, but at no point did I ever feel like I was forced to be impressed with how badass she was. That was just her character and I was along for the journey.

But no, Batman's costume won't be perfect until it fits a woman (though it weirdly looked like the costume already had breasts on it) and she won't let a man take credit for a woman's work despite the fact that she is using Bruce's batcave, bat gadgets, etc, etc, etc. Some self awareness would help.

Of course someone can say, "You're a dude, you aren't the target audience," to which I would reply, "Why not? Why can't I be a part of the target audience?" Are they actively trying to push people like me away? And why would they think that's smart?

/rant

 

[Spider-Aziz]

"Talia...why.....but...but...we had sex!"

and no this is not from Collegehumor, it's from Matt Reeves screen test with RP in the old batsuit.

PS - I'm pretty sure Bruce paid Bane's thugs to paint the bat signal, I mean, he's still rich

I saw that College Humor video too.

 

[Greenlite]

These shows and movies have to be careful how they present their property. If you are trying to come off as "agenda," you are going to put off a lot of your potential audience. I was keen to watch Batwoman as long as it didn't take the same approach as Supergirl, which is to hit me over the head with female power or gun control or whatever social issue they want to throw in our faces. I understand that stories have messages, but that message should serve the story and characters, not the other way around.

So I was hoping Batwoman, with a difference creative team, wouldn't fall into that trap. Then the trailer comes. Aside from being a weirdly edited trailer (which I put on the trailer team, not the showrunners), having 2 "I'm a badass female" moments in its first trailer is not a good sign. I'm not looking to watch Batwoman because she is a FEMALE character but rather because she is an interested female CHARACTER. This seems to be where Hollywood is getting it wrong. I was just re-watching Edge of Tomorrow the other day and Emily Blunt's character is awesome and badass, but at no point did I ever feel like I was forced to be impressed with how badass she was. That was just her character and I was along for the journey.

But no, Batman's costume won't be perfect until it fits a woman (though it weirdly looked like the costume already had breasts on it) and she won't let a man take credit for a woman's work despite the fact that she is using Bruce's batcave, bat gadgets, etc, etc, etc. Some self awareness would help.

Of course someone can say, "You're a dude, you aren't the target audience," to which I would reply, "Why not? Why can't I be a part of the target audience?" Are they actively trying to push people like me away? And why would they think that's smart?

/rant

The question is though, which suit did this version of the Batwoman design?

Keaton, Batffleck, or Clooney's?

 

[Black Narcissus]

 

[Spider-Aziz]

*Clooney gif*"That's not very PC, is it? How about Batwoman or Bat person?"*Clooney gif*

 

[Black Narcissus]

The think pieces about foot fetish when Once Upon A Time in Hollywood comes out:

 

[Greenlite]

Well, according to Mark Hughes, his multiple sources told him that WB is looking to phase out Gal so they can cast a new Diana and team her up with Pattinson and the new Supergirl/Batgirl etc

If true, that's like in 2014 Fox teams up James McVoy and Michael Fassbender with the old Prof x and Magneto, except they cast new senior actors instead of Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, and a Wolverine actor not called Hugh Jackman.

That'd be lesson learnt from the "not muh Superman" fans, not.

 

[Black Narcissus]

*Clooney gif*"That's not very PC, is it? How about Batwoman or Bat person?"*Clooney gif*

 

[Greenlite]

*Clooney gif*"That's not very PC, is it? How about Batwoman or Bat person?"*Clooney gif*

Bat-homo....

....sapien

Bat-homosapien

 

[Iceman]

Well, according to Mark Hughes, his multiple sources told him that WB is looking to phase out Gal so they can cast a new Diana and team her up with Pattinson and the new Supergirl/Batgirl etc

If true, that's like in 2014 Fox teams up James McVoy and Michael Fassbender with the old Prof x and Magneto, except they cast new senior actors instead of Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, and a Wolverine actor not called Hugh Jackman.

That'd be lesson learnt from the "not muh Superman" fans, not.

Phase out Gal..wha...

 

[Greenlite]

Phase out Gal..wha...

ya, phase out Gal, Margot, Jason and Zach once they've completed their sequels in 3-5 years and cast new actors in their roles to team up in a rebooted universe starting by Reeves' Batman.

Total genius idea, more work and hostility and comparison, and risk of one to all of the recast not matching up to their beloved originals. We ain't talking about recasting people with divisive receptions

 

[flickchick85]

That's not how I interpreted Hughes' comments at all. I took it to mean Gal and Jason would be allowed to let their runs play out unfettered while the "new generation" of characters would be in a different universe with no DCEU baggage to worry about. Gal and Jason won't be "phased out," they just won't be playing in the same sandbox as the others.

 

[-Arya-]

That's not how I interpreted Hughes' comments at all. I took it to mean Gal and Jason would be allowed to let their runs play out unfettered while the "new generation" of characters would be in a different universe with no DCEU baggage to worry about. Gal and Jason won't be "phased out," they just won't be playing in the same sandbox as the others.

Sounds like a cluster****. Then again, we have no Flash, Green Lantern or Superman anywhere so....whatever

 

[flickchick85]

As someone who doesn't care about the interconnected universe anymore, it sounds perfectly fine to me, as I'd rather the new properties didn't find themselves beholden to the Snyderverse in any way whatsoever. Just focus on the solo franchises for now, and all will be well, imo.

 

[kguillou]

That's not how I interpreted Hughes' comments at all. I took it to mean Gal and Jason would be allowed to let their runs play out unfettered while the "new generation" of characters would be in a different universe with no DCEU baggage to worry about. Gal and Jason won't be "phased out," they just won't be playing in the same sandbox as the others.

Except theres no way that would happen without serious blowback. Its one thing to have a movie version and a tv version of the same character (Flash, Superman) its another when your trying to have two actors/actresses in big budget hollywood movies playing and competing in the same role. Hollywood immortalizes actors in the roles that they play until they're completely done. Robert Downey Jr is Ironman, Chris Evans is Captain America, Gal Gadot is Wonder Woman and Jason Mamoa is Aquaman.

Having a separate big budget high profile film with Jaime Alexander as Wonder Woman and Ryan Gosling as Aquaman is only begging for comparison, competition and awkward AF interviews for said actors. “So, Gal, what do you think of Alexander taking your role and how does your portrayal differ from hers?” Why do you think Nolan was so vehemently against JL Mortal having a totally different Batman while he was doing his thing? It dilutes the characters and frankly is disrespectful to the actors already doing a good job embodying the roles.

 

[MbJ]

I don't think anyone was suggesting there will be competing versions of Wonder Woman and Aquaman. In this scenario the newly cast Batman and Superman likely wouldn't be interacting with any Wonder Woman or Aquaman, just like we're probably not gonna see a separate middle-aged Batman showing up in Suicide Squad 2 or the Birds of Prey movie at the same time Battinson is a thing.

I'm also not ruling out the possibility that WB just says canon be damned and maybe has some of these characters cross over without acknowledging things.

 

[flickchick85]

Except theres no way that would happen without serious blowback. Its one thing to have a movie version and a tv version of the same character (Flash, Superman) its another when your trying to have two actors/actresses in big budget hollywood movies playing and competing in the same role. Hollywood immortalizes actors in the roles that they play until they're completely done. Robert Downey Jr is Ironman, Chris Evans is Captain America, Gal Gadot is Wonder Woman and Jason Mamoa is Aquaman.

Having a separate big budget high profile film with Jaime Alexander as Wonder Woman and Ryan Gosling as Aquaman is only begging for comparison, competition and awkward AF interviews for said actors. “So, Gal, what do you think of Alexander taking your role?” Its disrespectful to the actors. Why do you think Nolan was so vehemently against JL Mortal having a totally different Batman while he’s doing his thing? It dilutes the characters and frankly is disrespectful to the actors already doing a good job embodying the roles.

No one's talking about recasting Wonder Woman or Aquaman though. There are no separate Wonder Woman or Aquaman projects in development. And I'm sure there won't be, until Gal and Jason are done in like 7 years or something. "New Universe" doesn't mean "new Justice League." It means "no ties to previous universe," and that's it.

And make no mistake, there WILL be a new Iron Man and a new Captain America some day. Few things in life are certain, but that's one of them.

 

[flickchick85]

I don't think anyone was suggesting there will be competing versions of Wonder Woman and Aquaman. In this scenario the newly cast Batman and Superman likely wouldn't be interacting with any Wonder Woman or Aquaman, just like we're probably not gonna see a separate middle-aged Batman showing up in Suicide Squad 2 or the Birds of Prey movie at the same time Battinson is a thing.

I'm also not ruling out the possibility that WB just says canon be damned and maybe has some of these characters cross over without acknowledging things.

Bingo.

Gotta stop thinking about it in "how does that makes sense for continuity?" terms. It doesn't, and it won't. But in the long run, all the new properties will be better for it, imo. And the old properties that will continue on will also continue to be just fine on their own.

 

[MbJ]

One thing I found interesting today was that after that Hollywood Reporter piece confirmed that WB and Ben basically knew they were done back in 2017, I went back and read the initial reports from THR. This stood out to me:

But a source with knowledge of the situation says that the studio is working on plans to usher out Affleck’s Batman — gracefully, addressing the change in some shape or form in one of the upcoming DC films.

Then this came from Variety a few months later.

While Ben Affleck is expected to appear as Batman in a standalone Flash movie, it is highly unlikely he will don the cape and cowl in Matt Reeves’ planned standalone Batman movie. The director is said to want to cast the role with fresh talent, according to sources.

So if WB was seriously working on somehow addressing the actor change in-universe and Ben was expected to return one last time for Flashpoint (before that idea got scrapped), I guess they were planning to use that to somehow give an explanation for why Reeves' Batman would be different.

They were at least playing with the idea of potentially offering an in-universe explanation for the actor switch and while this was just Ben, perhaps it's something they'd be more interested in pursuing with the additional departures that are looking more and more likely (Henry and Ezra in particular).

 

[Greenlite]

As someone who doesn't care about the interconnected universe anymore, it sounds perfectly fine to me, as I'd rather the new properties didn't find themselves beholden to the Snyderverse in any way whatsoever. Just focus on the solo franchises for now, and all will be well, imo.

Hughes was on Geek Vibe podcast last night, the host made a very good point - instead of fill the holes - Sup, Bat, Flash, and introduce new characters and retain popular ones in a singular universe, now we could be looking at having 3 continuity at the same time -

- Pattinson's rebooted universe introducing Supergirl soon (Hughes' persisting scoop)
- Gal/Jason/Margot's DCEU
- Elseworld starting with Joaquin

Try explaining this s*** to family and friends, after 2 sentences they'd just shake heads and say f*** DC they suck, let's watch Marvel.

 

[kguillou]

No one's talking about recasting Wonder Woman or Aquaman though. There are no separate Wonder Woman or Aquaman projects in development. And I'm sure there won't be, until Gal and Jason are done in like 7 years or something. "New Universe" doesn't mean "new Justice League." It means "no ties to previous universe," and that's it.

And make no mistake, there WILL be a new Iron Man and a new Captain America some day. Few things in life are certain, but that's one of them.

Well, okay, my mistake, i thought the implication would be having competing universes run concurrent with each other which two actors embodying different versions of the same character, because, that would be bug nuts. Lol

Also, hot take, no disrespect to RDJ, i love the guy but im actually ready for a new Tony Stark. One thats less quippy and ad-libby and more James Bond-y. Lol

 

[flickchick85]

Try explaining this s*** to family and friends, after 2 sentences they'd just shake heads and say f*** DC they suck, let's watch Marvel.

Or don't explain it and just let them watch the movies and judge them on their own merits.

I saw lots of people expecting Wonder Woman to show up in Endgame. The only people who follow/care about these continuities are us.

 

[Greenlite]

I don't think anyone was suggesting there will be competing versions of Wonder Woman and Aquaman. In this scenario the newly cast Batman and Superman likely wouldn't be interacting with any Wonder Woman or Aquaman, just like we're probably not gonna see a separate middle-aged Batman showing up in Suicide Squad 2 or the Birds of Prey movie at the same time Battinson is a thing.

I'm also not ruling out the possibility that WB just says canon be damned and maybe has some of these characters cross over without acknowledging things.

I think he meant instead of hooking Gal/Jason/Margot up with RP/new Sup/new Flash etc in 5-7 years time (which you stated in your second paragraph), they're going to use RP/new Sup/Flash as the new foundation and in 5-7 years when Gal/Jas/Margot did their franchises they're gonna reboot these 3 and cast new actors in their roles and hook them up with RP and co.

Which would bring comparisons for the new actors against Gal/Jas/Margot and if 1-2 of them are not as well received, they're f***ed because people like me (=P) will be screaming at them for not just going the simple root of continuing with Gal/Jas/Margot and use the hype to cross them over with RP and co

Hughes does say that there is a possibility but from the evidence he gathered, WB is going to let gal and co run their course and reboot them.