The Brave and the Bold News and Discussion Thread

[Invader Joker]

It’s not so much micromanaging, as just managing in general. If it’s a shared universe there’s going to have to be an overall structure, consistency, etc… he wouldn’t have made such a big deal about all the characters remaining consistent throughout different forms of media if not.

He's equally made a big deal about the fact that the DCU won't even have a specific tone or aesthetic whatsoever and that it'll be all over the place depending on the project and the creatives involved. Which again, if you see the creative team behind Lanterns and then compare it to Gunn himself and his own work you can actually see he's committing to his word. (Not to mention in general I do not think that Miller's tone is even that different from Gunn's. On a technical level they're on whole different levels but the tones aren't that far off to imagine them co-existing in a same connected universe)

Even if you put aside the fact that Justice league Moral was a decade and a half ago when Miller was much younger, that was something built from the ground up by him, in term of casting, designs, even the script was heavily rewritten and changed by him before the writers strike killed it. Every other project he’s done is something that he’s originated, even Babe 2 or Happy Feet.

The thing here is this film is the one that's introducing Batman and the Bat-Family etc in the DCU, so for all intents and purposes for Miller or any creative that does this film it'd be basically making it from scratch anyway. It's not like it's a case where these characters were already introduced and he's making a sequel or something. Even Gunn signalled in an interview that this film would likely not even feature any other DCU characters except just the ones Batman has, so those issues become way less of a big deal through those lens. He's not exactly having to remain consistent with anything if none of these characters have even been introduced before.


Tho granted, given his casting choices in JL Mortal, I'd kinda prefer if they did strip away his creative freedom when it comes to casting because jesus christ 19 year old Armie Hammer as Bruce (which becomes more nonsensical reading the script) and Teresa Palmer as Talia were god-awful decisions lmao.

 

[Eddie Dean]

Let me ask you this: would you want the man to kickstart another Batman franchise to be 85 years old when the first movie comes out?

 

[Invader Joker]

Let me ask you this: would you want the man to kickstart another Batman franchise to be 85 years old when the first movie comes out?

I think the main priority should be to make this movie as great as possible. If that means getting a director like Miller who could nail this specific movie but then probably couldn't do the sequels, so be it. But I think first and foremost they need to focus on this movie and this theatrical introduction to the DCU Batman to absolutely nail it in every way, they can deal with the "But who will be in charge of the sequels?" question later.

 

[Eddie Dean]

There’s as great as possible and there’s practical concerns

 

[Boom]

If Miller wants to stay in the world of Mad Max then that's where his time and energy should be spent. Simple as that.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Miller is so antithetical to the kind of filmmaker Gunn has hired thus far on top of Eddie's entirely accurate list of reasons why it would never happen. The most visionary director he's hired is Mangold who I'm a big fan of but is a total old school studio hired gun.

I would kill all of your right now in a ritual sacrifice for a George Miller Batman movie though.

 

[Invader Joker]

If Miller wants to stay in the world of Mad Max then that's where his time and energy should be spent. Simple as that.

I don't think he's getting another Mad Max film anytime soon lol (As it's always the case) That's the issue here.

 

[Invader Joker]

Miller is so antithetical to the kind of filmmaker Gunn has hired thus far on top of Eddie's entirely accurate list of reasons why it would never happen. The most visionary director he's hired is Mangold who I'm a big fan of but is a total old school studio hired gun.

Eh. If WB in the 2000s was willing to hire him (and the studio system in the 2000s was very rigid and ****ed up in many ways) I don't see why Gunn wouldn't. Gunn is a fanboy at heart, a film fanboy and a comic fanboy. You look at the type of **** he posted and how he talked about this stuff 12 years ago and he seems like anyone that could've been in these forums. And I do believe that a film fanboy and a comic fanboy would absolutely die to see a Batman movie directed by the guy that did Fury Road. That's the main reason I think Gunn himself would be game for it. And I do see an extremely clear path for Miller to be interested on it as well being he's already said he's a fan of superheroes, was already willing to direct a DC movie that got created by someone else, and even recently entertained the idea of directing ****ing Thor 5 lol

 

[Eddie Dean]

Again, George Miller owns the rights to Mad Max so he can literally make a Mad Max movie for any budget he wants and release it, AND the films are funded by the Australian goverment in order to create jobs and boost their film industry, so it's not a simple Furosa had a bad opening weekend we will never see another Mad Max film again.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Eh. If WB in the 2000s was willing to hire him (and the studio system in the 2000s was very rigid and ****ed up in many ways) I don't see why Gunn wouldn't. Gunn is a fanboy at heart, a film fanboy and a comic fanboy. You look at the type of **** he posted and how he talked about this stuff 12 years ago and he seems like anyone that could've been in these forums. And I do believe that a film fanboy and a comic fanboy would absolutely die to see a Batman movie directed by the guy that did Fury Road. That's the main reason I think Gunn himself would be game for it.

You yourself think that Gunn personally has a strong vision for what he wants his Batman to be. I agree with that and won't be shocked if Gunn writes it. This 100% eliminates the possibility of a George Miller type director making it.

 

[Invader Joker]

Again, George Miller owns the rights to Mad Max so he can literally make a Mad Max movie for any budget he wants and release it, AND the films are funded by the Australian goverment in order to create jobs and boost their film industry, so it's not a simple Furosa had a bad opening weekend we will never see another Mad Max film again.

And even then they STILL take a long time to get made because of typical studio shaeningans, which are just bound to become worse because of how Furiosa bombed. Fury Road took a long, long while to get made, and Furiosa took a decade. The next Mad Max film, if it comes, isn't coming in the next 3-4 years. There's a gap there that completely makes sense for him to work in something else. Also I'm not convinced Miller will want to make a Mad Max movie at any lower budget than he's already done after going so big with Fury Road and Furiosa. I'm not even convinced it's even possible to continue the trajectory of those films and do it for a lower budget, quite frankly, which will probably complicate the process at getting it made /again/.

 

[Invader Joker]

You yourself think that Gunn personally has a strong vision for what he wants his Batman to be. I agree with that and won't be shocked if Gunn writes it. This 100% eliminates the possibility of a George Miller type director making it.

I mean yeah I still think the likeliest scenario, unless for whatever reason they need the film to be done quick or something, is Gunn writes and directs it himself (if he writes it there's no way in hell he doesn't direct it). But my thinking is also that he'd be willing to make an exception for certain special creatives he'd want to see their take on Batman, and Miller would probably be at the top of that list.

 

[Eddie Dean]

And even then they STILL take a long time to get made because of typical studio shaeningans, which are just bound to become worse because of how Furiosa bombed. Fury Road took a long, long while to get made, and Furiosa took a decade. The next Mad Max film, if it comes, isn't coming in the next 3-4 years. There's a gap there that completely makes sense for him to work in something else. Also I'm not convinced Miller will want to make a Mad Max movie at any lower budget than he's already done after going so big with Fury Road and Furiosa. I'm not even convinced it's even possible to continue the trajectory of those films and do it for a lower budget, quite frankly, which will probably complicate the process at getting it made /again/.

I would imagine he would want to take that time making sure his movie is getting made instead of making a different movie for someone else then. He is old! He is very old!

 

[flickchick85]

George Miller ain’t making this. That’s just not remotely in the cards.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

It will be someone of similar stature to Andy Muschietti if he hadn’t recently made a giant flop in the genre or Craig Gillespie. There have been enough hires that it’s clear what Type they’re shooting for.

 

[Babillygunn]

George Miller ain’t making this. That’s just not remotely in the cards.

I am completely sure that you are right, but…

 

[Invader Joker]

It's just Bill rambling again but my god I hope that announcement comes soon. No one expects or wants this dude to direct. No one, just get it over with.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

It's just Bill rambling again but my god I hope that announcement comes soon. No one expects or wants this dude to direct. No one, just get it over with.

Hey, there are about a dozen lunatics on Twitter with a bizarrely deep devotion to Muschietti who would beg to differ! He has a weirdly devoted little cult following that boggles my mind.

There's a small part of me that is... intrigued simply because I do not care about this movie at all in the first place to see what sort of disaster it would be with Muschietti. The Flash is awful but its a very unique, special flavour of awful that is also deeply bizarre and funny.

 

[Invader Joker]

Hey, there are about a dozen lunatics on Twitter with a bizarrely deep devotion to Muschietti who would beg to differ! He has a weirdly devoted little cult following that boggles my mind.

There's a small part of me that is... intrigued simply because I do not care about this movie at all in the first place to see what sort of disaster it would be with Muschietti. The Flash is awful but its a very unique, special flavour of awful that is also deeply bizarre and funny.

I think a lot of those are the same people that defended Ezra Miller with the same conviction and are now equally devoted to Andy by proxy tbh But I will say I do find them very funny because a lot of them seem to have genuinely no idea what a director is even supposed to do. You bring up the bad CGI and they go "No, that's not his fault!" (Nevermind that most VFX people will say that a director does have /a lot/ to do with how the CGI comes out. Hell, even Gunn himself has said that!), you bring up bad costume design and they say that's not his fault either, bad cinematography. They genuinely seem to think that a movie director just exists to point fingers at actors or something. But on the other hand, they'll also tell you he should direct the film because he did so well with the Batman action scenes... which are at least 80% CGI.


I do have to say: What do people even see in the Batman action scenes in that film? It does baffle me a lot how some people seem to be into them because they all looked horrible and they have genuinely nothing special in their filmmaking at all. Even the most middle of the road choice they could get as replacement for Muschietti could still come up with stuff on par to the Batfleck chase sequence and the Keaton vs Russian goons thing (a scene which only lasted for less than a minute, there was barely anything to see there) There was nothing about either sequence that was particularly smart or interesting that'd indicate that this guy would be undeniable as director or he has something irreplaceable.

And the other one that drives me nuts is how people constantly act as if he was a victim of WB or something when he really, really wasn't. It speaks to the film and how badly constructed it is that it seems like it's a Josstice League situation where it got dissected to hell in post, but unlike that and Suicide Squad 2016 which had numerous trade articles talking about how both films got chopped up and changed by the studio, not to mention crew members and cast talking about it, there's no such thing here. The only thing that came out was an article talking about changing the last minute of the movie to introduce the Clooney cameo, which in my opinion, was by far the best part of the film and the most fitting conclusion they could've given it. Every single flaw in that movie was 100% Muschietti, which is not even surprising since this film pretty much just doubled down on every terrible instinct he had as a filmmaker in his past films and put them on steroids. You can tell it's directed by the same dude that did IT Part 2 on every frame.

 

[Eddie Dean]

I’m no fan of his and I agree a lot of the bad stuff you can make a straight line to the bad stuff in It 2, but to say it wasn’t a disaster of a production when the main star was literally wanted by the police during filming and they where in constant reshoots doesn’t seem right…

 

[emielaen]

Muschietti set him up.

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Boom]

Mmmmmk. Kinda cooling on this project a bit. Guess I need to see more from it before I can get back on the hype train.

Watch this script get finished before The Batman Part II's.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Makes me concerned that if Muschietti drops out we’ll get an even worse scenario with Fede Alvarez.

 

[WatchProtect]

Gunn debunked.