Matt Reeves Directing The Batman

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's not about laying off the philosophical stuff. It's about making it clearer, more focused and more coherent.

Agreed.

A similar complaint I see a lot of lately (especially in comics where the short production times allow them to be more topical in the short term) is fans telling creators to "keep their politics out of comics."

Might as well ask them to keep the content out of comics.
 
Agreed.

A similar complaint I see a lot of lately (especially in comics where the short production times allow them to be more topical in the short term) is fans telling creators to "keep their politics out of comics."

Might as well ask them to keep the content out of comics.

It could be more subtle than a blunt axe though.
 
I think that the DCEU is being held up to an impossible standard. It's being treated like it's at it's 25th film.

Nonsense. Making a fundimental good film is hardly asking for a miracle. Film studios make good films all the time. The last 3 batman films are proof of that.

Comparing to Marvel is the problem.

No it isn't. The DCEU making garbage movies and being shrouded in negative PR is the problem. Their entire business acumen is a joke. None of what you're saying was an issue when Ironman came out the same year TDK did, why? Because both were good films that were recieved well critically.

At this point Marvel had just made Iron Man 2. Let's put that in perspective. They had Iron man, Hulk, and then Iron Man 2. Regardless of how you felt about the films. That's not a huge universe.

So what? WB have owned all the DC characters for decades, they have their pick of which heroes to use. They have experience with making successful superhero movies. Marvel OTOH built their universe using B and C list characters and turned them into A-list icons by employing a modicum of good sense, a decent plan and the conviction to do right by their characters and audiences instead of making a quick buck and releasing their movies no matter what (which is admittedly the mindset of WB).

Trying to compare what Marvel were doing in 2008 to 2012 to the state of the DCEU right now doesn't offer empathy to the latter; in fact it does the opposite. The DCEU have the benefit of hindsight and they're still failing.

Now getting each hero a solo film before JL?

Superman and Batman have had plenty of films. The GA knows these guys. The JL cartoons never needed to introduce solo series for most of the roster.

Plenty of ensemble movies don't have prefilms.

Avengers essentially reintroduces the bulk of the cast.

What Marvel did with their world building was build their studio. They had to build the foundation so they could expand.

The WB's infrastructure is already built.

Now again I think the DCEU on the internet has been held up to an impossible standard.

Nope. The DCEU put themselves in a position where they didn't think things through properly. They planned poorly and are perpetually in a reactionary state. There's no conviction in what they're doing and there's no clear objective for them to work towards.
Whether it's solo films or a shared universe, the only thing audiences want more than anything are good films that entertain and showcase the characters correctly. Forget Marvel Studios for a second, look at Deadpool and now Logan! These 2 films havn't done anything special other than do what they set out to do, which was to make great movies and surprise-surprise they succeeded. What's WB/DCEU's excuse??

The Batman production is being treated like it's in development hell. Um plenty of films vet directors. Marvel has certainly done it. Thor has had three different directors. Captain America got new directors. Hulk hasn't seen a new film. Iron man got a new one for the 3rd.

The difference is Marvel don't turn the hiring of their directors into some sort of dog and pony show and then have it blow up spectacularly in their face.

With the Batman, too many sites kept using misleading titles. They took rumor as fact. They took interest as confirmation.

It's just so frustrating to see unfair reactions.

Which sites took rumour as fact? Obscure blog sites? Reputable trades? In any case, I've only seen commentary on the rumours and actual facts on the aforementioned. The only place where people are confusing conjecture with fact are amongst overzealous fanboys on forums.
In any case, the unfair reactions you speak of are largely justified reactions. The DCEU is a mess and WB are mismanaging the entire operation in a spectacularly epic fashion. They should all feel embarrassed.
 
Reeves and many others did too. They had issues with the third act.

What about it didn't they like? Do you know? I thought Snyder was responsible for the idiotic neck snap. Was it the levels of wanton destruction?
 
What about it didn't they like? Do you know? I thought Snyder was responsible for the idiotic neck snap. Was it the levels of wanton destruction?
I don't remember the details but i'm going to take a guess and say it was the destruction and lack of character development in the final act. Perhaps they all felt that the script needed another draft at least to smooth things out.

I thought Goyer wrote the neck snap and Nolan disagreed, but Snyder wanted to do it. I don't know, maybe it was the other way around. But even without the neck snap, the third act must have looked really bare on paper. I would love to read the actual screenplay for MOS.

I wouldn't doubt it if The Batman has the same problem right now. This might be the second time Reeves says no to a solo DCEU film...with the two most iconic characters in comic book history.
 
I don't remember the details but i'm going to take a guess...
The entire premise is a guess. I don't know where you thought you got that info from, but it was most definitely not from the would-be directors' mouths or any trusted source.

Take Reeves, I recall only a single instance of him referencing Man of Steel:

"I really have no idea if any of that is true. It's certainly an amazing project, but I would be surprised..."

Not to mention it would be completely unprofessional to trash one of your peers' work, even if you weren't directly involved in the project. I believe the only director other than Snyder who was close to snatching Superman was Darren. From his interviews it really seemed like scheduling and location was the issue of him not joining. He went into a lot of details of what he would've done and was keen on taking it on. The others seemed more like dinner conversations with Nolan that never manifested into anything solid.
 
I thought Goyer wrote the neck snap and Nolan disagreed, but Snyder wanted to do it. I don't know, maybe it was the other way around. But even without the neck snap, the third act must have looked really bare on paper. I would love to read the actual screenplay for MOS.

Just done a quick Google search, and apparently it was all Snyder's idea. Wasn't in the original script. He got Goyer to add it.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Zack-Snyder-Explains-Man-Steel-Controversial-Ending-38118.html
 
Agreed.

A similar complaint I see a lot of lately (especially in comics where the short production times allow them to be more topical in the short term) is fans telling creators to "keep their politics out of comics."

Might as well ask them to keep the content out of comics.

A couple of creators went too far with politics in comics. A guy named Chuck Dixon for one. I do think most fans want intelligent stories though.
 
Frank Miller is definitely a guy who went too far.
 
Miller's earlier Batman work is better than his newer stuff.
 
Yeah Superman should not be compared to Jesus. it's too problematic.

Not necessarily. I just found the way Zack did it several times to be obnoxious. Like people are too stupid to make the connection without the nudging shots or lines.
 
He's jumping on that wagon.

He's not the only trade reporter jumping on that. Variety's Justin Kroll rightly pointed out that just because talks broke down, doesn't mean that Matt Reeves no longer wants to direct.

He pointed out that a similar falling out happened between Paramount and Tom Cruise when negotiating his deal for Mission Impossible 6. Then after things cooled down, negotiations resumed and his deal was finalized.

I wouldn't say "the DCEU is cursed!!" yet.
 
He's not the only trade reporter jumping on that. Variety's Justin Kroll rightly pointed out that just because talks broke down, doesn't mean that Matt Reeves no longer wants to direct.

He pointed out that a similar falling out happened between Paramount and Tom Cruise when negotiating his deal for Mission Impossible 6. Then after things cooled down, negotiations resumed and his deal was finalized.

I wouldn't say "the DCEU is cursed!!" yet.
I know Kroll pointed it out.
I'm not so sure Mayimbe isn't just parroting the same source.
 
Not necessarily. I just found the way Zack did it several times to be obnoxious. Like people are too stupid to make the connection without the nudging shots or lines.

There were several eye rolling moments in both films.

Yes Zack, that's a nice stained glass window depicting Jesus. Well done.

No, no, the reaching hands towards the messiah routine isn't overwrought in the slightest, Zack.

Yes, he does look like Jesus when he holds his arms out like that, doesn't he Zack? Well done you. Have a protein bar.
 
I always wanted interconnected universes, but not so routinely and certainly not to the detriment of every individual IPs own solo films.
100% times this

It's the biggest problem of the superhero genre, that solo movies are gone and all needs to have 2 or 3 heroes in it.

Superhero team-ups should be the exception and not the norm.
Unless it's, well, a team-up movie.
 
It's a phase that will be over when the 4th Avengers movie comes out in 2,3 years.
 
A couple of creators went too far with politics in comics. A guy named Chuck Dixon for one. I do think most fans want intelligent stories though.

Frank Miller is definitely a guy who went too far.

I may disagree with a creator's politics, but I wouldn't ask them to extricate those views from their art. That's not what art is. I just won't buy that art if I find it's message to be objectionable.
 
Isildur´s Heir;34828795 said:
100% times this

It's the biggest problem of the superhero genre, that solo movies are gone and all needs to have 2 or 3 heroes in it.

Superhero team-ups should be the exception and not the norm.
Unless it's, well, a team-up movie.

I think they still are an exception. There haven't been that many team-up films. I think it adds excitement when you have other heroes or characters make cameo appearances in another's solo film, or act as minor supporting characters. The shared universe gives us that.

However, with that being said, I do miss the days of a simple trilogy sometimes.
 
I think they still are an exception. There haven't been that many team-up films. I think it adds excitement when you have other heroes or characters make cameo appearances in another's solo film, or act as minor supporting characters. The shared universe gives us that.

However, with that being said, I do miss the days of a simple trilogy sometimes.

Team movies aside, we've had even less non-ensemble features.
Like the love interest or the buddy will somehow also be a hero or play such a crucial role to the narrative.

Simple trilogies aren't going anywhere as much as a couple franchises end up in a team-up territory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"