BvS The Barry Allen/Flash Casting Thread

[InJustice]

Grant Morrison made a good point about how adults feel the need to bring their fantasy characters into the real world whereas children can accept the fantasy of it it. A less armored Flash is the same thing as a less armored Batman. What if they get shot? Well, simple. Write them so they don't because they're superheroes and know what they're doing.

It's easier to write it for the Flash, than Batman. Because the Flash could easily and swiftly evade gunfire. Hence, the "what if he got shot" question is pointless.

 

[MaceB]

regwec.. saying you covered my points isn't the same as actually doing it. And dismissing my argument by simply saying that I "don't know the character" is about as weak of a rebuttal as you can get. maybe I dont know the ins and outs of the character... do you expect the movie audience to know as much as you? Besides, these characters SHOULD be up for reinterpretation as long as the spirit of the character is left intact. Armor would do nothing to hurt the spirit of the character, so it's open for debate.

Your analogy about aquaman is obviously absurd; how these two relate is beyond me. Aquaman is not a human... I'm taking these characters on a case by case basis. Martian Manhunter has been known to go through things... a smiley face is condescending, not a retort.

And I'm sorry, but my stance is that using speed force to explain away his vulnerability is sloppy writing and a get out of jail free card. You could use it to make him impervious to anything, which saps the drama. It'd make for a more effective movie to highlight his weaknesses, thereby making him more human, more prone to danger, and more relatable. Maybe the armor wouldn't help entirely... but again... it's practical, and I'd love to see Flash get hurt due to an extreme crash with pieces of his suit breaking apart along with broken bones.

Even if armor wouldn't work in the real world, it would go a long way in completing the illusion for the audience to accept the fantastical elements of the character.

I don't mind if you disagree with me, but stop pretending like we're all so dumb who propose this idea... and actually talk about the points at hand. I actually want to communicate with people on this thing... not to be treated like a child by someone who has plenty of time to say that my opinions are defective but not to explain why. At least answer me this, since you do seem to know more about the character than I do. How far does the speed force explanation go? If he were to run as fast as he could and rammed straight into Superman.. would the speed force protect him? Or is it just for minor falls and stuff? if that's the case, then where exactly is the line?

 

[Nathan]

Your analogy about aquaman is obviously absurd; how these two relate is beyond me. Aquaman is not a human... I'm taking these characters on a case by case basis. Martian Manhunter has been known to go through things... a smiley face is condescending, not a retort.

Flash can go through things too. I guess the armor debate is over then.

And I'm sorry, but my stance is that using speed force to explain away his vulnerability is sloppy writing and a get out of jail free card. You could use it to make him impervious to anything, which saps the drama. It'd make for a more effective movie to highlight his weaknesses, thereby making him more human, more prone to danger, and more relatable. Maybe the armor wouldn't help entirely... but again... it's practical, and I'd love to see Flash get hurt due to an extreme crash with pieces of his suit breaking apart along with broken bones.

Or you simply create drama by showing that no matter how fast he is, even he can't be everywhere at once. Show people die and him unable to stop it, and you still have your drama.

Even if armor wouldn't work in the real world, it would go a long way in completing the illusion for the audience to accept the fantastical elements of the character.

So we make the audience accept the fantastical elements of the character, by actually making him less fantastical.

 

[MaceB]

Or you simply create drama by showing that no matter how fast he is, even he can't be everywhere at once. Show people die and him unable to stop it, and you still have your drama.

Eh, but he would still be basically invulnerable. I guess we never have to worry whenever he's in a fight. Why would you want to limit the character this way.

So we make the audience accept the fantastical elements of the character, by actually making him less fantastical.

Well...yeah. Did it with Superman as well as others. There needs to be limits on their abilities, or it's no longer interesting. A cage match between gods might sound exciting, but it'll get old real fast when you take away the chance that they could get hurt. There's nothing wrong with limiting their powers. Actually, nothing but good can come from it.

 

[regwec]

Well, interpret it from the other angle: The Flash is a character who can run sufficiently fast to enter a parallel dimension. Could that work without the possibility he might stub his toe or slip on a dog turd being set aside? No, it could not. In the same way, we accept that light speed travel, or "warp drives", can be utilized by star ships in Sci Fi movies, without worrying what will happen when they encounter pesky meteors. The alternative is that no one ever strays much beyond their own little solar system. Likewise, the suggestion that The Flash should be vulnerable to bumps and grazes would make his speed entirely useless. Any impact that occurred at that speed would separate his atoms into the finest vapour. What possible difference would a bicycle helmet make?

 

[MaceB]

It's simply for the movie. It may not make a real difference, and yet it would be enough for casual audience members to go... okay... he's protected, I get it.

 

[Nathan]

Or the audience can just go and watch another Movie, if Flash without a helmet is too much for them to handle.

 

[MaceB]

I'm sure glad the Producers don't think like that. ... we do want more DC movies... yeah? You don't get there by ignoring the audience.

 

[roach]

Why...is the audience clamoring for a helmeted Flash?

 

[InJustice]

I'm sure glad the Producers don't think like that. ... we do want more DC movies... yeah? You don't get there by ignoring the audience.

You also don't get there by giving too much credit to the audience.

 

[regwec]

I'm sure glad the Producers don't think like that. ... we do want more DC movies... yeah? You don't get there by ignoring the audience.

I doubt the audience is that stupid. They are more likely to be questioning of a character wearing a costume that is superfluous or counter productive.

 

[Jekecy]

Even if armor wouldn't work in the real world, it would go a long way in completing the illusion for the audience to accept the fantastical elements of the character.

I'm not following this logic. At this point in our understanding of the sciences, there is very little that could be done to rationalize or explain Flash's powers, and by extension, the speed force. It is a concept that you can either accept for 2 hours, or not. At best it can obey certain physical laws which have been established, but no more than that.

As someone pointed out earlier, at the speeds he's going armor is futile. It's akin to recommending a helmet and seatbelt to prepare for a head-on crash with a stone wall going at 200 mph. For the less harmful instances, his speed abilities practically take care of everything. The reflexes alone would prevent most everyday dangers and mistakes from ever occurring.

The retort of "he's too powerful and therefore the stakes are lowered" are the voices of non-writers and the unimaginative. If any given person can't figure out how to make it work, then the simple fact is you shouldn't be allowed creative reign over the material. This is a basic principle of any job. It is fiction, a realm of unlimited possibilities. There is zero excuse not being able to write anything.

 

[MaceB]

Because it'd be odd for a man who can go that fast not to be wearing some kind of protection. Even if it couldn't save his life in all circumstances, certainly it would come in handy when only running at 10% speed or fighting a super strong villain, no? It's a logical common sense thing...and without it, audiences will default to the position that the flash just can't be hurt.

 

[Nathan]

I'm sure glad the Producers don't think like that. ... we do want more DC movies... yeah? You don't get there by ignoring the audience.

Because when the audience goes to watch a Movie of people dressed up in colorful costumes, Flash without a helmet is where they draw the line. "No thank you, it was a good movie, but I don't think I want to watch a Movie where the guy with super speed doesn't have a helmet, for a 2nd time."

We already had a Flash TV show without him wearing heavy protection. It's pretty much safe to guess that he won't wear a helmet in the Arrow related TV show. By then more than enough people are used to him not wearing heavy protection. He won't need a helmet in the Movie.

 

[Jekecy]

It's simply for the movie. It may not make a real difference, and yet it would be enough for casual audience members to go... okay... he's protected, I get it.

It's addressing a problem which doesn't even exist. By now it's an accepted trope of the genre. Need I remind people James Bond continues to be as popular as ever, and he literally fends off multiple armed baddies wearing a tuxedo.

Why you think they would harp on someone who can outrun bullets and move through objects, is wildly beyond my understanding.

 

[MaceB]

The retort of "he's too powerful and therefore the stakes are lowered" are the voices of non-writers and the unimaginative. If any given person can't figure out how to make it work, then the simple fact is you shouldn't be allowed creative reign over the material. This is a basic principle of any job. It is fiction, a realm of unlimited possibilities. There is zero excuse not being able to write anything.

I appreciate that point of view, I do. I get it. Look... hollywood is built around melodrama, and melodrama has always been strengthened by a sense of realism, not stilted. Now, yes... you could make a fantastic, fun movie that doesn't address these issues. I'm just telling you that there's a trade off. The further you get from what is reasonable, the more detached you are with the characters. That can be okay, if you're just going for a fun rollercoaster ride, but I think WB is shooting for more here, and I want them to succeed.
Besides... what is the problem with a helmet and little extra plating to fill out the empty spaces where people might go, wow... that should have hurt him more. I just don't get the intense resistance to it... besides just fan boy loyalty really.

 

[MaceB]

By then more than enough people are used to him not wearing heavy protection. He won't need a helmet in the Movie.

I'm not saying he needs one. I'm saying I think it would yield beneficial results. What exactly is the resistance to using plating along with fabric and a skulpted helmet? Why is it such a bad idea?

 

[roach]

I'm not saying he needs one. I'm saying I think it would yield beneficial results. What exactly is the resistance to using plating along with fabric and a skulpted helmet? Why is it such a bad idea?

if you have to ask then it can't be explained.

 

[MaceB]

You also don't get there by giving too much credit to the audience.

What? Audience watchers are smart. I wouldn't discount them. And isn't this kind of thinking just an excuse to make a fun, wild, but stupid movie? I can watch the animated movies from home. Demands are a lot higher for live action stuff.

 

[MaceB]

Roach... I live by a simple life philosophy. Put up or shut up. I'm a big boy... if you can't explain it to me, then you can't explain it.

 

[Jekecy]

I appreciate that point of view, I do. I get it. Look... hollywood is built around melodrama, and melodrama has always been strengthened by a sense of realism, not stilted.

Emotional tangibility, really. The ability to evoke a dynamic range of human emotions is the core strength of any truly great movie. But actual physical realism has been proven to be fairly dismissible. Pull up a list of the top 100 most popular and highest grossing movies of the last century, and there is a very good chance it is heavily populated with fantasy.

Besides... what is the problem with a helmet and little extra plating to fill out the empty spaces where people might go, wow... that should have hurt him more. I just don't get the intense resistance to it... besides just fan boy loyalty really.

It's an aversion to this recent trend in obsessing over the "why" of everything. For the most part, over details which have little to no effect on the presentation of the story or its characters.

In the late 90s, early 00s, the "in" thing was black. That was the solution for everything. Just make it black. X-Men I'm looking at you. Now thanks to Nolan's films, it's "why". Or perhaps more specifically; armor. Wrap it in armor and that will take care of things.

To me that is lazy, and more often than not I've seen it disturb the visual aesthetic. It's a haphazard solution to an inconsequential problem. Unless it's some novel approach which dramatically alters perception of the world/characters in a good way, I don't think it's worth addressing at all. If he has a little protection here and there which doesn't make him look like his Injustice design, fine. If it helps people sleep at night, by all means. But the moment he starts looking like Robocop, that's when I'll voice an outcry.

 

[regwec]

The Flash is unrealistic whether he is wearing armour or not. The difference armour makes is shattering the verisimilitude and making the unrealistic seem absurd.

 

[MaceB]

Pull up a list of the top 100 most popular and highest grossing movies of the last century, and there is a very good chance it is heavily populated with fantasy.

Realism is not the same as naturalism. Realism is a trope that you can use for effect. Naturalism is a style throughout the story. Realism can be used to reinforce the bond between the character and the viewer, and it allows the viewers to be more engrossed in the movie. We all go to movies for escape right? Well...actually, it's easier to escape in a world that is like your own. If it's super fantastical, that can be fun, but you're further detached from it.

To me that is lazy, and more often than not I've seen it disturb the visual aesthetic. If he has a little protection here and there which doesn't make him look like his Injustice design, fine. If it helps people sleep at night, by all means. But the moment he starts looking like Robocop, that's when I'll voice an outcry.

Hey, I agree. It's a fine line between renovating the character to be more current and changing him into something he's not. We need to be careful about this. I know it can be done though, and sometimes the change can be for the better and open up new opportunities. We need to be very careful about not keeping these characters constantly the same.... too much change, and they're no longer the same. Too little change, and they become unimportant and die out.

Thanks though.. I'm not even a super big supporter of armor per say. I do think we could find a mid ground in there though to serve both our wants.

 

[Airwings]

This armor discussion is tiring me out. Just let him have his usual suit. Deal with it, people!

 

[roach]

Roach... I live by a simple life philosophy. Put up or shut up. I'm a big boy... if you can't explain it to me, then you can't explain it.

if you haven't gotten it after 20 pages I don't what to say.