shauner111
Avenger
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 23,134
- Reaction score
- 9,236
- Points
- 103
I think Ivy would love what’s happened.
I think Ivy would love what’s happened.
On point mah man.Yeah she'd enjoy it but I meant more like the people trying to "fix" things is what she'd take issue with, it's what would bring her into the fold
NVM. I initially missed your next few posts.I don't know If the flood will ever really be dealt with, it'll definitely focus heavily in Penguin, and then the sort of fallout will be in the sequel, with Batman reeling from whatever Penguins up to, and then that films villains will probably be a direct result of the flooding.
(Deacon Blackfire preaching to the homeless, Freeze's wife being sidelined because of the flood, Ivy being angered over the city dying ect.)
I don't think it'll really matter in the Arkham show because it'll mostly just take place inside the Asylum.
I'd almost prefer for the flood to sort of be a constant reminder, an exact moment that we can pinpoint where "the freaks" moved in.
Yeah I love the direction so much. This movie feels like a graphic novel sometimes. Without some splash graphic tossed onto the image or a thought bubble. It doesn’t go there with it but it still feels like a live-action graphic novel. Snyder’s movies tend to look like a video game adaptation (which is why I think Zack should be making Mortal Kombat movies or something). Nolan’s didn’t feel like a graphic novel, it felt more like an actual film where Batman was a made up cinematic character if that makes any sense. More reminiscent of seeing Indiana Jones for the first time.I think my new favorite aspect, this many viewing in, is the small little overhead shots… during the funeral, post-crash and especially right before Batman tears up the carpet.
That’s the “comic panel brought to life” that I love/appreciate. Not the version that is Batman running away from Doomsday but we have lightning and it looks like TDKReturns cover nonsense.
Do you think Reeves included the flood with a clear idea of where he wanted to go with it in the sequel/spin-offs? I think he wanted the Riddler’s endgame to include a cataclysmic event and he’s spoken in the past about focusing on one movie at a time but it seems too major of a choice to think ‘I’ll figure that out later’.
Is there any chance the flood is dealt with by the end of the Penguin series or is resolved off-screen and plays no part in the sequel?
Not to sound alarmist, but some of the recent moves by WBD have me very curious just how safe Reeves' Batman films and spinoffs are.
It was all feeling good for a while but it seems WBD are capable of going past regular executive idiocy levels and who knows how they are viewing anything that isn't delivering mega-blockbuster results.Not to sound alarmist, but some of the recent moves by WBD have me very curious just how safe Reeves' Batman films and spinoffs are.
Thought The Batman made alot of money.
770million is alot.
Thats stupid, most dont reach 1billion and still get sequels.It did and it is. Only people who claim it didn't are people who think it has to make a billion to be a profit for some weird reason
(it doesn't)
Thats stupid, most dont reach 1billion and still get sequels.
I dont care about that. But the fact they cancel a 90million movie is such a strange thing, what a weird world they live in (hollywood), just throwing money away.Would it surprise you to learn most of the people I've seen claiming this are Snyder fans