- Joined
- Jun 16, 2007
- Messages
- 55,896
- Reaction score
- 60,173
- Points
- 218
I was already surprised by the look of the film just in the first look pic alone.
Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates.
Starting January 9th, site maintenance is ongoing until further notice, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
Due to recent news involving X, formerly Twitter and its owner, the staff of SuperHeroHype have decided it would be best to no longer allow links on the board. Starting January 31st, users will no longer be able to post direct links to X on this site, however screenshots will still be allowed as long as they follow Hype rules and guidelines. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Not much, but there's something there
Not much, but there's something there
I love it. That imagery is a part of the Superman lore and mythology. Hope anger doesn't ensue. I know those metaphors were an issue with people from previous versions.So any thoughts regarding thatquick tease of Superman being crucified in the future from "Creature Commandos"?
I love it. That imagery is a part of the Superman lore and mythology. Hope anger doesn't ensue. I know those metaphors were an issue with people from previous versions.
No.In your opinion, do you find it weird thatGunn would introduce Superman like that for the new DCU?
Super weird, but im gonna wait and see the contextIn your opinion, do you find it weird thatGunn would introduce Superman like that for the new DCU?
No, not at all. If it ties into the storyline from a certain perspective of what the vision of the creators want to say, then more power to them. It also shows that moans and grumbles from certain fanbases won't detour them from creating the necessary imagery the story needs. Those metaphors have been used, will be used, and will be used again in future iterations with the Superman character. They go hand in hand.In your opinion, do you find it weird thatGunn would introduce Superman like that for the new DCU?
I’d have to see the context but if it’s just some flash forward to a hypothetical future, not even a little bit?In your opinion, do you find it weird thatGunn would introduce Superman like that for the new DCU?
So any thoughts regarding thatquick tease of Superman being crucified in the future from "Creature Commandos"?
Given Gunn's recent comments about the Sucide Squad being considered canon to the DCU, does that now mean it was David's Superman that Bloodsport shot and put in the ICU?
Gunn should go that route. When you name-drop Superman in the series of your own creation and then end up being the one to direct and write the next iteration of the character on the big screen, you should acknowledge and follow through with something. Even if it's like a small aspect in an earlier portion of Kal's Earthly life, like an American Alien angle of some sort.Given Gunn's recent comments about the Sucide Squad being considered canon to the DCU, does that now mean it was David's Superman that Bloodsport shot and put in the ICU?
Not much, but there's something there
My takeaways:
I am happy he talked about how scary and imposing Hoult's Lex is (and how we've never seen it on film). That indicates to me that this Lex is going to be much closer to a John Bryne, or STAS style Lex than the various live action goofballs we gotten since Gene Hackman.
The first thing I thought of when Gunn was announced as the Superman director and everyone was debating whether he was a fitting choice or not, was how he built a lot of the cosmic world of the MCU with the Guardians movies and that Superman has a TON of that type of stuff, so I felt validated when he mentioned the "Silver Age Weirdness". There is actually a lot of quirky weird stuff in the Superman mythos that Gunn could have a ball with, if you think about it.
Not exactly. Here's the simplest way to put it. Anything from TSS or Peacemaker S1 could have happened (with exception of the JL cameo in the Peacemaker S1 finale), but it is not officially DCU canon unless explicitly stated somewhere in the new filmverse. That is to say, unless the Bloodshot incident is mentioned in an upcoming DCU film or show, it never even occurred.Given Gunn's recent comments about the Sucide Squad being considered canon to the DCU, does that now mean it was David's Superman that Bloodsport shot and put in the ICU?
I think it’ll also come down to how long David’s Superman has been at it. Flag Sr. put the events of TSS at about two years ago. If this Superman has been on the job 2+ years, it’s possible. Any more recent arrival on the scene, then probably not.Not exactly. Here's the simplest way to put it. Anything from TSS or Peacemaker S1 could have happened (with exception of the JL cameo in the Peacemaker S1 finale), but it is not officially DCU canon unless explicitly stated somewhere in the new filmverse. That is to say, unless the Bloodshot incident is mentioned in an upcoming DCU film or show, it never even occurred.