Justice League Real Talk - Where does the DCEU go from here? - Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Snyder’s Superman. Not the character in general.

Among the forum I have read at least 50 comments about "Superman is done. We'll not see any new superman movie for years, maybe decades".
It's simply insane.
I can agree that the situation is extremely difficult and since 90s at WB they haven't showed to be too brilliant in finding solutions. Regarding Supes before MOS I remember at least 3 aborted projects, and a totally wrong relaunch. Not a great curriculum. But for sure it shows that when WB want to invest on their properties, Superman, and Batman of course, are always there.
 
We had a younger Bruce in BB, an older one in BvS.

If WB were to reboot, which would you guys prefer?

Somewhere between the two. Post-year one, but not several years into his career. I'd like to see a Batman sort of where he is in The Long Halloween/Dark Victory. Doing it long enough that he is established, capable and in his prime, but not so long that he is jaded, grizzled, old Batman.

In fact, though 20 years ago I would've said it was an impossibility, I would love to see an adaptation of The Long Halloween. It would be unlike any comic movie ever made.

Patty Jenkins for mos2!!! She would be perfect, and she loves superman.

Oh lord, here we go with reactionary nonsense. Just because Jenkins made a good WW movie doesn't mean she can make a good Superman movie. Warners tried that route before. It brought us Superman Returns and Man of Steel. Rather than making the same mistakes Warners has in the past (seeing someone succeed elsewhere and then giving limitless reign to replicate it), Warners needs to get a big picture strategy in place, then find a story teller who has a story worth telling in that big picture and then put the best people in place to execute it. Cutting corners is what got Warners into this mess. Doing so again isn't smart.
 
Among the forum I have read at least 50 comments about "Superman is done. We'll not see any new superman movie for years, maybe decades".
It's simply insane.
I can agree that the situation is extremely difficult and since 90s at WB they haven't showed to be too brilliant in finding solutions. Regarding Supes before MOS I remember at least 3 aborted projects, and a totally wrong relaunch. Not a great curriculum. But for sure it shows that when WB want to invest on their properties, Superman, and Batman of course, are always there.

I don't think its that improbable to say that it could be years before we see another Superman movie. Really, its a factual statement. We know that to be the case as Warners has no Superman project in development and even assuming Warners sticks to the DCEU schedule (which it won't) best case scenario is 2020-2021. That's 3 to 4 years. That seems...unlikely. I wouldn't say its outside of the realm of possibility that we don't see a Superman film for another 6 or 7 years, maybe longer.
 
Chris Nolan, Patty Jenkins, Joss Whedon, Guillermo Del Toro, Darren Aronofosky for Superman! :o
 
Tarantino for Superman. No, scratch that... Lars von Trier
 
I hope he does. He's seemed bored and uninterested with this role from the get-go. His latest performance felt so phoned in.
I agree. His performance in JL was uncomfortable to watch simply because he appears so uninterested in it all. It genuinely looks like he showed up on set, spoke his lines and executed the blocking to the director's satisfaction. His discomfort in the role, even in his stiff movements, are very evident in the scene with Alfred, as they talk about how "the team needs Clark." It really looks like an uncomfortably calculated, "Pick up device. Move to statue 1. Then move to statue 2. Stare. Speak line. Attempt to emote." It is all very robotic. It also doesn't help that his Bruce Wayne performance carries a lot of Affleck-isms -- like an abundance of blinking during scenes/lines that are supposed to carry great weight -- which results in tension dissipating instantly.

Affleck was a huge step back in terms of acting ability and commitment to the role.
 
not gonna happen and don't want him tbh but interesting nonetheless.

quentin-tarantino-347810.jpg
 
That's not a Tarantino quote. That's a bill quote. Of course Bill would interpret Clark as mocking humanity. Bill is a villain. Superman is Clark because it keeps him grounded.
 
I agree. His performance in JL was uncomfortable to watch simply because he appears so uninterested in it all. It genuinely looks like he showed up on set, spoke his lines and executed the blocking to the director's satisfaction. His discomfort in the role, even in his stiff movements, are very evident in the scene with Alfred, as they talk about how "the team needs Clark." It really looks like an uncomfortably calculated, "Pick up device. Move to statue 1. Then move to statue 2. Stare. Speak line. Attempt to emote." It is all very robotic. It also doesn't help that his Bruce Wayne performance carries a lot of Affleck-isms -- like an abundance of blinking during scenes/lines that are supposed to carry great weight -- which results in tension dissipating instantly.

Affleck was a huge step back in terms of acting ability and commitment to the role.

It was made even more obvious by the fact that the other members of the League did seem like they were legitimately going for it with their performances.
 
oh, i know it's from Kill Bill. but i always see Tarantino in almost every charactors he writes.
 
He may not necessarily hold the same view on Superman as Bill does.

I mean, Hans Landa compared Jews to rats. Do you see a bit of Tarantino in that?
 
The problem with Kill Bill is that it influenced a ton of people into thinking that this IS the correct interpretation of Superman...and it likely didnt help in how that next generation viewed the character (not to give that movie enough power to shape a generation...but it played a part in a larger movement that has degraded the character)
 
That's not a Tarantino quote. That's a bill quote. Of course Bill would interpret Clark as mocking humanity. Bill is a villain. Superman is Clark because it keeps him grounded.

Yeah, I much prefer the "Clark is who I am, Superman is what I can do" approach to the Messianic figure who uses Clark as a mask from the world.
 
He may not necessarily hold the same view on Superman as Bill does.

I mean, Hans Landa compared Jews to rats. Do you see a bit of Tarantino in that?

that's why i said almost lol
that's more like that's how he sees Nazis.
 
The problem with Kill Bill is that it influenced a ton of people into thinking that this IS the correct interpretation of Superman...and it likely didnt help in how that next generation viewed the character (not to give that movie enough power to shape a generation...but it played a part in a larger movement that has degraded the character)

Really? I've never seen actual superman fans influenced by that quote. Only movie fans who never gave a toss about Superman anyways.
 
That's not a Tarantino quote. That's a bill quote. Of course Bill would interpret Clark as mocking humanity. Bill is a villain. Superman is Clark because it keeps him grounded.

The problem with Kill Bill is that it influenced a ton of people into thinking that this IS the correct interpretation of Superman...and it likely didnt help in how that next generation viewed the character (not to give that movie enough power to shape a generation...but it played a part in a larger movement that has degraded the character)

Yeah, I much prefer the "Clark is who I am, Superman is what I can do" approach to the Messianic figure who uses Clark as a mask from the world.

Yeah that quote is bs. In almost every interpretation, Clark grows up thinking he's human until he learns otherwise. It is therefore impossible for him to not be Clark. Clark the reporter is a façade, but Clark the son of Jonathan answers martha Kent? That is the essential Superman (with, of course, the knowledge of his alien heritage).
 
Really? I've never seen actual superman fans influenced by that quote. Only movie fans who never gave a toss about Superman anyways.

Correct. ACTUAL Superman fans. What I'm talking about is everyone else...the people who dont really like Superman but maybe have a t-shirt or something and couldn't wait for the "cooler, edgier" version that we have now.
 
Really? I've never seen actual superman fans influenced by that quote. Only movie fans who never gave a toss about Superman anyways.

You know, that quote has sort of been the epitome of how WB has used the character. Superman Returns, MOS, BvS, JL...none of these movies pay even a bit of attention to Clark. He ranges from punchline to afterthought, depending on the movie.

Maybe that is a part of the reason Superman movies keep failing. Look at Spider-Man Homecoming. That is more about Peter Parker than Spider-Man. And that is what makes the character relatable and endearing to the audience. I wonder if the to solving the Superman film riddle is to make a movie that focuses at least as much on the Man as it does the Super.
 
Yeah that quote is bs. In almost every interpretation, Clark grows up thinking he's human until he learns otherwise. It is therefore impossible for him to not be Clark. Clark the reporter is a façade, but Clark the son of Jonathan answers martha Kent? That is the essential Superman (with, of course, the knowledge of his alien heritage).

I'm not even sure that the reporter needs to be viewed as a complete farce. After all, everyone wears a little bit of a different face at work than they do in their private life.

I think one of the most perfect Clark moments is from the 90s animated series, the episode where Clark is "killed" by a dirty cop and CK/Superman has to deal with the reality that he cannot be Clark anymore (because the world has to believe Clark Kent is dead). There is a moment near the beginning where Clark monologues that the reason he was driving to begin with was to take evidence personally as Clark, because he wanted Clark to get a win, not Superman. I love that distinction right there. All things considered, that episode is actually one of the better studies of the duality of Clark and Superman.
 
I'm not even sure that the reporter needs to be viewed as a complete farce. After all, everyone wears a little bit of a different face at work than they do in their private life.

I think one of the most perfect Clark moments is from the 90s animated series, the episode where Clark is "killed" by a dirty cop and CK/Superman has to deal with the reality that he cannot be Clark anymore (because the world has to believe Clark Kent is dead). There is a moment near the beginning where Clark monologues that the reason he was driving to begin with was to take evidence personally as Clark, because he wanted Clark to get a win, not Superman. I love that distinction right there. All things considered, that episode is actually one of the better studies of the duality of Clark and Superman.

Well I was thinking of Donner's version, which I think is the Clark in view in that quote - clumsy, weak and timid. You're right, in the comics that really isn't the Clark that's portrayed. Boring maybe, but not really a mask. In fact, I very much liked what Henry Cavill said about his own approach - that Clark stays under the radar rather than drawing attention to how not like Superman he is.
 
Well I was thinking of Donner's version, which I think is the Clark in view in that quote - clumsy, weak and timid. You're right, in the comics that really isn't the Clark that's portrayed. Boring maybe, but not really a mask. In fact, I very much liked what Henry Cavill said about his own approach - that Clark stays under the radar rather than drawing attention to how not like Superman he is.

I appreciate Cavill's stance on it, but what we have seen from him doesn't really give us much indication of that, simply because Snyder has not really let him play Clark in any meaningful way.
 
His Clark basically the same mopey superman but with glasses on. Routh played a really good Clark.
 
WB had no plans for MOS 2 to begin with. The idea that the film was secretly in-development and far along while waiting for JL to debut was never true.

MFR who reported "JL was shot twice" and added on the Jake Gyllenhaal news, said WB's mood is actually calm, and they did want to trigger a MOS2 once the new Sup is received well by the audience.

I might agree, except for two points: 1) both BvS and JL were heavily marketed as Batman films, and 2) the consistent criticism of this Superman in both MOS and BvS has been that he isn't like Donner's version. Affleck' Batman is the one who couldn't draw an audience, and JL didn't even feature Superman in the marketing. It'd be one thing if audiences showed up to JL and hated Cavill. But they didn't even show up, which places the fault on the marketing, not on Cavill's Superman. Cavill may very well go down with the ship, but it won't be because he's steering it. WB, despite their obvious faults, won't necessarily blame Cavill. Affleck, however? He's definitely done. Despite what we all may think, his Batman just isn't as popular as previous versions.



If WB reboots, it'll be a hard reboot for everyone but Wonder Woman and Harley Quinn. With JL's performance, I just don't see any reason for them to keep anyone if they indeed decide to reboot. Hell, I expect they're also retooling WW 2 to disconnect it from BvS and JL (it's not that hard tbh).


If Warner Brothers decides to make another Superman movie in the near future (whether it be MoS2 or a reboot), they'd be wise to keep an eye on how Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom performs.

J.A. Bayona is a talented filmmaker, and is on record as wanting to make a Superman film. Given the current state of the property, finding a filmmaker with genuine passion for the source material holds immense value. If Fallen Kingdom comes out and is a smash success like its predecessor, I'd give him a call.

Love your discussions guys.

Boom, I love the suggestion of Bayona, he's talented and passionate about the character.

Dereklake, you took the words out of my mouth.

People are saying Cavill's gone because of JL's OW b.o. and he's the face of DCEU. But really, he's only the face of MOS - underperformed (thanks to sandwitching between WWZ and Monster Inc, and Minions worldwide), but has a solid cinemascore, RT audience score, and strong DVD sales and profit (100M+ overall profit compared to BvS' 40M).

He wasn't the face of BvS, Ben was, and he got the top billing, and Henry's arc was chopped out in favor of Batman for the 2.5 hr cut that the suits wanted.

Then Gal become the golden girl, face of DCEU along with Ben, and Henry was basically non-existence in the trailers/teasers.

And yes, if JL opened to say, 120M+ and gets a horrendus drop of 70% second weekend, or 65%+ for Thanksgiving holidays, then you could argue audience showed up and hated Cavill and the team. But the reality is, people didn't show up! However, the Monday drop was 67%, 4% more than Mockingjay 2, the closet Thanksgiving comparison for JL, and Tuesday JL achieved a 41% increase (MJ2 was 33%, Fantastic Beast with great legs had 38%! Gitesh called it the best pre thanksgiving Tues increase in 10 years!).

So audiences are hearing enough to show up later on, after hearing stuff from the OW crowd, and the stats and from what I've heard are positive for Henry. Scott Mendelson referred to JL as a season premeire, where if the audiences who showed up enjoyed the characters, there's potential for the future installment of these characters.

Similar to Batman Begins, it had a poor b.o. take overall (370M WW), but people liked it and TDK had hot buzz, made a billion. I didn't want to watch the movie in 2005, friends dragged me to it, I thought it was Batman and Robin, then I enjoyed it a lot, so did the audience who didn't show up OW who caught the movie later on, or at home, and they showed up in droves for TDK. IF audiences enjoy the new Sup portrayal in the coming weeks, and months at home, there's still potential for Henry.

So far, JL looks like it might get to 250M+ in US, and 700M+ WW is looking more likely by the day, China will improve on BvS and WW and crack 100M and close in on Thor 3, Asia is doing well, so if it has some legs, it could be a case of people don't want to turn up because of the previous movie, but caught it later on and liking it, then if they make good/great movies, audiences will come back.

As far as the fall out - they could just pin it on Ben really, and he deserves it, quiting Batman, divorce drama/affair rumors?, alcohol, sexual harrasment, will he/won't he, boy, how is that good for PR of the movie, if that's all mainstreams hear all year, and if you have Gal, Jake and Henry making the interviews and be the face of the future, it has a chance.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,359
Messages
22,091,120
Members
45,886
Latest member
Elchido
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"