BvS Zach Snyder plans to speak with Frank Miller for MoS Sequel

[BH/HHH]

The attempts at the DCU have been Green Lantern and Man of Steel. 1 out of 2 aint' bad.

They've been trying to make a DCU for years and by that I don't just mean a cohesive universe but films starring the big hitters. They've tried and failed with Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Arrow etc mostly because they've been too afraid to take a risk and we've seen what happens when they get scared they make Green Lantern.

 

[The Question]

They've been trying to make a DCU for years and by that I don't just mean a cohesive universe but films starring the big hitters. They've tried and failed with Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Arrow etc mostly because they've been too afraid to take a risk and we've seen what happens when they get scared they make Green Lantern.

They haven't tried and failed with any of those characters.

 

[STARMAN]

It's amazing to think Green Lantern actually got a movie considering how few DC characters get one.

 

[kalhawj]

ZACK: "It's too early for me to discuss the film. However, regardless of how I feel about Superman, ultimately I have to go along with the direction that Warner Bros. thinks is best".



http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=13726

This is the part that scares me. Run while you can Zack... Don't be WB's Puppet... Be like Nolan and do it your way... if you do what WB wants you'll ruin Superman and Batman for ever... You'll be run out of town by the fans...

Here's what happen when WB think they know what they are doing: Green Lantern, Johan Hex in '09, Catwoman in'04, Batman and Robin, and who cannot forget Steel in'97.

They better not ruin this for all of us... I hope they proof us all wrong for the sake of DCCU.

 

[BH/HHH]

They haven't tried and failed with any of those characters.

So they haven't ever commissioned scripts for any of these characters? That's them trying right there but as usual they got cold feet.

 

[BH/HHH]

It's amazing to think Green Lantern actually got a movie considering how few DC characters get one.

It's cause in the comics he's been hot in recent years.

 

[STARMAN]

Really? I didn't know Green Lantern was hot in the comics.

 

[BH/HHH]

Really? I didn't know Green Lantern was hot in the comics.

Is that sarcasm? t:

 

[STARMAN]

Ha. You got me.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

This is the part that scares me. Run while you can Zack... Don't be WB's Puppet... Be like Nolan and do it your way... if you do what WB wants you'll ruin Superman and Batman for ever... You'll be run out of town by the fans...

Here's what happen when WB think they know what they are doing: Green Lantern, Johan Hex in '09, Catwoman in'04, Batman and Robin, and who cannot forget Steel in'97.

They better not ruin this for all of us... I hope they proof us all wrong for the sake of DCCU.

And yet the films that WB lets the director do his thing, like TDK trilogy and Watchmen tend to get positive reception. Who knew?

But yes. If WB has its way, Superman would be a joke so that they can have a solo Batman movie to make more money. And then randomly dive into the Justice League movie.

If WB bullies Zack, he should straight-up BAIL. That would win him the respect of fans and not tying down his legacy to a film that will most likely be terrible. Also, handing it off to a director more in tune to the subtle aspects of storytelling doesn't seem like a bad idea. But I do think few directors have the sincerity and passion of Zack with the source material.

By going a comics creator, he's trying to remain faithful to someone who crafted one of the most popular Batman stories ever.

It's just too bad that Miller drank some tainted water, or whatever.

 

[BH/HHH]

Ha. You got me.

 

[kalhawj]

And yet the films that WB lets the director do his thing, like TDK trilogy and Watchmen tend to get positive reception. Who knew?

But yes. If WB has its way, Superman would be a joke so that they can have a solo Batman movie to make more money. And then randomly dive into the Justice League movie.

If WB bullies Zack, he should straight-up BAIL. That would win him the respect of fans and not tying down his legacy to a film that will most likely be terrible. Also, handing it off to a director more in tune to the subtle aspects of storytelling doesn't seem like a bad idea. But I do think few directors have the sincerity and passion of Zack with the source material.

By going a comics creator, he's trying to remain faithful to someone who crafted one of the most popular Batman stories ever.

It's just too bad that Miller drank some tainted water, or whatever.

I would respect Zack even more if WB is forcing him to do what he know isn't going to work and decides to bail... That at least shows us he care and wants to make Superman and Batman the right way... We'll see how this movie will be once more detail is available.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I would respect Zack even more if WB is forcing him to do what he know isn't going to work and decides to bail... That at least shows us he care and wants to make Superman and Batman the right way... We'll see how this movie will be once more detail is available.

That's what I meant. Go Del Toro on WB. Fans will see what he's sacrificed and start to care. Nonfans won't be looking up his name to find out who ruined a Superman/Batman film.

If WB isn't playing fair, they need to be SuckerPunched into reality

 

[BH/HHH]

I would respect Zack even more if WB is forcing him to do what he know isn't going to work and decides to bail... That at least shows us he care and wants to make Superman and Batman the right way... We'll see how this movie will be once more detail is available.

Definitely

 

[kalhawj]

For now... I'm going to try and not let this news bother me until I know what this movie plot will be about... if it turns out to be a vs movie with TDKR adaptation to live action, that will be the last straw for me and WB/DC.

 

[JDklip]

And yet the films that WB lets the director do his thing, like TDK trilogy and Watchmen tend to get positive reception. Who knew?

But yes. If WB has its way, Superman would be a joke so that they can have a solo Batman movie to make more money. And then randomly dive into the Justice League movie.

If WB bullies Zack, he should straight-up BAIL. That would win him the respect of fans and not tying down his legacy to a film that will most likely be terrible. Also, handing it off to a director more in tune to the subtle aspects of storytelling doesn't seem like a bad idea. But I do think few directors have the sincerity and passion of Zack with the source material.

By going a comics creator, he's trying to remain faithful to someone who crafted one of the most popular Batman stories ever.

It's just too bad that Miller drank some tainted water, or whatever.

It's not as simple as that. There are talented directors who seem to understand story & structure and stick to their guns and make better films for it. But there are also smart executives who understand what their place is in the creative process and can be the saving grace of a film that's in trouble.

I've followed Snyder's career incredibly closely since he was announced to direct MOS, as I'm sure most of us have. And the the conclusion I have easily come to is that he has always been a puppet. Plain and simple. It just depends on who's pulling the strings at the time. First Superman was going to be a standalone movie, then all of a sudden it had to accommodate a larger DCU. Then there was going to be a straight-up MOS sequel, and now we're not getting that. The back-pedaling and contradictions are everywhere.

Just because Snyder is a comics fan doesn't automatically mean he has integrity. Which is fine. It's hard to have integrity in Hollywood. You have to earn it and keep earning it, and Snyder hasn't done that. So he'll do what WB tells him to do because he wants to keep a job. It's just that this generation's cinematic Superman suffers for it.

But this announcement also sheds light that Snyder was never really been a Superman fan. I don't understand how people can think he is. Just because he knows what to say in interviews? Well, I was incredibly hopeful for MOS. It looked like Snyder was going to make something with depth, like Nolan's Batman films. We didn't get that. Now, I like the film. And like all of Snyder's work, I'll grow to like it more as I watch it more. But the depth and heart that I was hoping for was nowhere to be found. It's just "ok."

 

[Bathead]

Because WBs have contiously made stupid decisions with the DCU?

Yeah, like the extremely stupid decision they made hiring Nolan, right?
My point being, yes they've made some dumb decisions, but they've also made some brilliant ones. Don't conveniently forget those just because you're nervous about this movie.

 

[Audrey]

A few things:

I totally agree that MoS should have just got a regular sequel. You'll get no argument out of me there. I've been saying for months and months that Batman should just sit on the shelf while Superman gets the spotlight for a change.

And you're right, in the more modern depictions of their relationship Batman has been given the edge more often than not. But the fact remains that he's a guy who throws Batarangs next to a guy who can toss things out of the atmosphere. The two of them together can very quickly become ridiculous if it's not handled carefully, and doing it in live action is completely uncharted territory. A lot of the GA is not used to seeing them together.

It's not my intention to come off greedy here. I was perfectly content with the trilogy and ready to take a break from Batman films. But this is happening whether I like it or not, and I still care about the character and want what's in his best interest if WB is going after my dollar here. This could potentially dictate the direction of Batman in cinema for the next decade or so...obviously myself and every hardcore Batman fan here has our eye on this.

Again, I'm not saying I want Batman to PWN Superman in this film and just dominate everything. IF Batman is to be Superman's major opponent in this film (like they are heavily implying), then he needs to be a worthy opponent. It's that simple. With kryptonite added to the mix, I don't see why this is such an inherently bad thing. If you're going to introduce a plot device like kryptonite, obviously it will need to be paid off at some point and we'll see Supes more vulnerable. One of the best scenes in Superman Returns is Lex's beatdown of Supes on the kryptonite-infused island. Him stabbing Supes in the back? So badass! If we can have a scene like that in a film, where that version of Lex wasn't even a physically imposing threat...would it really such a crime to have a kryptonite-wielding Batman trade some blows with Supes?

Quite frankly, after the very video-gamey sequence CG Kal and Zod fighting each other while destroying Metropolis...I'd LOVE to see some on the ground, hand to hand stuff between Cavill and ________. It's be visceral and a nice change of pace.

I'm not saying this has to get turned into another Bat-glory hour. I think this should ultimately be a Superman movie where Superman learns something and becomes the better for it (and Batman too...they should learn from each other). As "greedy" as you think it might be for a Bat-fan to have specific wants for this film, I think some Supes fans are coming off a little insecure about the whole "vs" aspect of the movie. If Batman has to cheat to level the playing field I don't see how it reflects badly on Superman if he manages to inflict some damage, especially when he doesn't have Batman's training as a fighter.

Lastly, I think Lex could still be a MAJOR player in this film. I think there could be an interesting hate-triangle of sorts between Bruce, Lex and Superman. Similar to the Batman/Dent/Joker triangle of TDK.

Except you missed a HUGE component of the problem here: LOIS.

The moral triangle in a Superman movie should NOT be between Superman/Lex/Batman. It should be BETWEEN SUPERMAN/LOIS/LEX.

Do you understand how totally male-centered this movie just became? Do you understand how insulting it is for me to see the Superman mythos---a mythos that has a HUGE FEMALE LEADING PLAYER---be treated as this totally male-centric sausage fest now?

Lois Lane is not just Superman's lover/wife/partner. The Superman mythos has an ACTUAL FEMALE LEAD. It's one of the few male superhero properties that actually HAS one. The Superman mythos is female driven in a way the Batman mythos is NOT. Which is not to say that there are not AMAZING women in the Bat mythos because there are. But, in general, Batman's journey does not revolve around a WOMAN. Superman's journey DOES. Lois Lane is not just there to be the lover. She HAS A ROLE To play here and should never be shunted aside for another DUDE.

Lex Luthor is not just the enemy of Superman. He's also the enemy of LOIS LANE and she has her own hatred, history and battles to fight with him. Their history has been portrayed multiple ways over the years (I am not a fan of them having a romantic history) but no matter which way you go their relationship is significant because Lois Lane is ON TO HIM.

Fighting Lex Luthor is not a battle that Superman does alone. Lois is a huge part of that. She's helping fight the corruption from within. She's the one who gets in Lex's face publicly when CLARK KENT has to stand back. She's the one fighting the war while Superman hides in plain sight.

It's not ok to say, "Well LEx can still be a huge part of the movie because now we get a Joker/Dent/Batman triangle for Superman." NO. Because Lois Lane is not Rachel Dawes. Lois Lane is part of that moral struggle and part of that fight. She's part of that triangle. She is NOT the woman standing on the sidelines and it's wrong to MAKE her that way.

The moral battleground 'TRIANGLe" here was supposed to be Clark/Lois/Lex. There is a WOMAN who is supposed to be in the middle of this who probably is now only going to be a supporting player because BATMAN just came in and stole her role. WB has literally taken a movie where a WOMAN should have been a huge, huge part of the moral conflict and they have GUARANTEED that she will be pushed to the sidelines. They made the project more male-centric. They did.

Do you get this? I'm asking honestly. Do you understand why this is a problem? In a genre where we CANNOT seem to get a female led superhero movie to save our life, the one woman who SHOULD have been a co-lead in this movie and the heart of the conflict with Superman has now been shunted to the supporting sidelines because of Batman. There is no way it's not going to happen. And as a woman, that just depresses the bad place out of me. Lois deserved more than she got in Man of Steel and Clark/Lois absolutely deserved MORE. But some of us defended the film because we figured...ok....we have a sequel. Lois will get her due in a sequel. Lois/Clark will come center stage in the sequel as it should. And now...we get THIS. So I'm sorry but I just can't be charitable to Batfans right now. Not as a female fan. Because it's bad enough I can't get a Black Widow movie or a Wonder Woman movie but now, I have to sit back and watch the female lead of the Superman mythos get pushed aside for another man.

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah, like the extremely stupid decision they made hiring Nolan, right?
My point being, yes they've made some dumb decisions, but they've also made some brilliant ones. Don't conveniently forget those just because you're nervous about this movie.

What about Catwoman, Green Lantern, Jonah Hex, Superman Returns?

Hw did conveniently forget those? I was simply pointing out they make terrible decisions when it comes to DC on film. Nolan is the exception yes but the bad clearly outweighs the good.

 

[Elevator Man]

If WB bullies Zack, he should straight-up BAIL.

Agreed. But I have a feeling that the temptation of putting Superman and Batman together on the big screen for the first time will be tough for him to walk away from. Snyder likes to take on projects that are considered risky like remaking Dawn Of The Dead and making Watchmen, which (many of us know) was believed to be "unfilmable" by Moore and the purists.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ "But this announcement also sheds light that Snyder was never really been a Superman fan. I don't understand how people can think he is. Just because he knows what to say in interviews?"

That's the ironic thing, for me. I feel like Zack has tried to give MOS heart. And in my opinion, he succeeded. The scene in which Clark realizes that he's emotionally helpless against the bullies and the scene of him comforting Lois come to mind.

I actually feel like he's a bigger fan of the genre and characters than Nolan is. Heck, the costume redesign is more comic-bookish than Bale's Batsuits ever were.

But Chris Nolan makes up for it with his sheer storytelling ability.

That's why his films feel "right" even when I can tell you how ridiculously out of character it is for Batman to leave someone in a doomed train. It's because he's earned the confidence of the GA, and the gratitude of fanboys who are just happy to see a good movie that SOMEWHAT resembles the source material.

Again, if MOS were better, we probably wouldn't be discussing about how the climax was handled or the beacon leading Zod to Earth.

The Nolans are writers. They can "fix" something at a script level. I don't think Zack can.

I feel like a lot of the warmth for the TDK trilogy comes from Jonah Nolan, who cares more about Batman than Chris does. Heck, POI feels more in the spirit of Batman (at times) than the trilogy.

If all this sounds like a giant bashing of the TDK trilogy, it's not. If the movies weren't as well made as they are, fans would rage more.

We might eventually get Batman adaptations in live action that are as well made as they are faithful.

But until then, the TDK trilogy is a landmark in the genre, and one that would be difficult to top in terms of writing, scope, supporting characters, uncompromising vision, and practical effects.

 

[Mysteryman]

Except you missed a HUGE component of the problem here: LOIS.

The moral triangle in a Superman movie should NOT be between Superman/Lex/Batman. It should be BETWEEN SUPERMAN/LOIS/LEX.

Do you understand how totally male-centered this movie just became? Do you understand how insulting it is for me to see the Superman mythos---a mythos that has a HUGE FEMALE LEADING PLAYER---be treated as this totally male-centric sausage fest now?

Lois Lane is not just Superman's lover/wife/partner. The Superman mythos has an ACTUAL FEMALE LEAD. It's one of the few male superhero properties that actually HAS one. The Superman mythos is female driven in a way the Batman mythos is NOT. Which is not to say that there are not AMAZING women in the Bat mythos because there are. But, in general, Batman's journey does not revolve around a WOMAN. Superman's journey DOES. Lois Lane is not just there to be the lover. She HAS A ROLE To play here and should never be shunted aside for another DUDE.

Lex Luthor is not just the enemy of Superman. He's also the enemy of LOIS LANE and she has her own hatred, history and battles to fight with him. Their history has been portrayed multiple ways over the years (I am not a fan of them having a romantic history) but no matter which way you go their relationship is significant because Lois Lane is ON TO HIM.

Fighting Lex Luthor is not a battle that Superman does alone. Lois is a huge part of that. She's helping fight the corruption from within. She's the one who gets in Lex's face publicly when CLARK KENT has to stand back. She's the one fighting the war while Superman hides in plain sight.

It's not ok to say, "Well LEx can still be a huge part of the movie because now we get a Joker/Dent/Batman triangle for Superman." NO. Because Lois Lane is not Rachel Dawes. Lois Lane is part of that moral struggle and part of that fight. She's part of that triangle. She is NOT the woman standing on the sidelines and it's wrong to MAKE her that way.

The moral battleground 'TRIANGLe" here was supposed to be Clark/Lois/Lex. There is a WOMAN who is supposed to be in the middle of this who probably is now only going to be a supporting player because BATMAN just came in and stole her role. WB has literally taken a movie where a WOMAN should have been a huge, huge part of the moral conflict and they have GUARANTEED that she will be pushed to the sidelines. They made the project more male-centric. They did.

Do you get this? I'm asking honestly. Do you understand why this is a problem? In a genre where we CANNOT seem to get a female led superhero movie to save our life, the one woman who SHOULD have been a co-lead in this movie and the heart of the conflict with Superman has now been shunted to the supporting sidelines because of Batman. There is no way it's not going to happen. And as a woman, that just depresses the bad place out of me. Lois deserved more than she got in Man of Steel and Clark/Lois absolutely deserved MORE. But some of us defended the film because we figured...ok....we have a sequel. Lois will get her due in a sequel. Lois/Clark will come center stage in the sequel as it should. And now...we get THIS. So I'm sorry but I just can't be charitable to Batfans right now. Not as a female fan. Because it's bad enough I can't get a Black Widow movie or a Wonder Woman movie but now, I have to sit back and watch the female lead of the Superman mythos get pushed aside for another man.

Lex isnt 100% percent confirmed .

 

[BatLobster]

Except you missed a HUGE component of the problem here: LOIS.

The moral triangle in a Superman movie should NOT be between Superman/Lex/Batman. It should be BETWEEN SUPERMAN/LOIS/LEX.

Do you understand how totally male-centered this movie just became? Do you understand how insulting it is for me to see the Superman mythos---a mythos that has a HUGE FEMALE LEADING PLAYER---be treated as this totally male-centric sausage fest now?

Lois Lane is not just Superman's lover/wife/partner. The Superman mythos has an ACTUAL FEMALE LEAD. It's one of the few male superhero properties that actually HAS one. The Superman mythos is female driven in a way the Batman mythos is NOT. Which is not to say that there are not AMAZING women in the Bat mythos because there are. But, in general, Batman's journey does not revolve around a WOMAN. Superman's journey DOES. Lois Lane is not just there to be the lover. She HAS A ROLE To play here and should never be shunted aside for another DUDE.

Lex Luthor is not just the enemy of Superman. He's also the enemy of LOIS LANE and she has her own hatred, history and battles to fight with him. Their history has been portrayed multiple ways over the years (I am not a fan of them having a romantic history) but no matter which way you go their relationship is significant because Lois Lane is ON TO HIM.

Fighting Lex Luthor is not a battle that Superman does alone. Lois is a huge part of that. She's helping fight the corruption from within. She's the one who gets in Lex's face publicly when CLARK KENT has to stand back. She's the one fighting the war while Superman hides in plain sight.

It's not ok to say, "Well LEx can still be a huge part of the movie because now we get a Joker/Dent/Batman triangle for Superman." NO. Because Lois Lane is not Rachel Dawes. Lois Lane is part of that moral struggle and part of that fight. She's part of that triangle. She is NOT the woman standing on the sidelines and it's wrong to MAKE her that way.

The moral battleground 'TRIANGLe" here was supposed to be Clark/Lois/Lex. There is a WOMAN who is supposed to be in the middle of this who probably is now only going to be a supporting player because BATMAN just came in and stole her role. WB has literally taken a movie where a WOMAN should have been a huge, huge part of the moral conflict and they have GUARANTEED that she will be pushed to the sidelines. They made the project more male-centric. They did.

Do you get this? I'm asking honestly. Do you understand why this is a problem? In a genre where we CANNOT seem to get a female led superhero movie to save our life, the one woman who SHOULD have been a co-lead in this movie and the heart of the conflict with Superman has now been shunted to the supporting sidelines because of Batman. There is no way it's not going to happen. And as a woman, that just depresses the bad place out of me.

I get it.

Then again, Amy Adams has already been reported to be returning. There's still a chance this could be an ensemble movie where everyone gets a chance to shine. I loved Amy as Lois in MoS.

Honestly, all of your concerns are valid but I feel like you're just using my posts as a launching pad to vent your frustration here.

Again, I was ALL FOR a movie that had Clark/Lois/Lex at the center of it. I was not clamoring for Batman to be in this movie. But he is now whether we all like it or not, and all I can do is roll with the punches at this point.

And at the same time, if JL and/or Trinity is where we're headed, Diana might end up becoming the central heroine of the DCU.

I see Lois having a role similar in size to what Pepper Pots had in the Iron Man films. And Pepper was an awesome part of those movies IMO and was given plenty to do. Especially in Iron Man 3.

 

[John Lambert]

They have not. Was Nolan's trilogy, Man of Steel, Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and even Superman Returns stupid decisions?

People always want to bring up the Jonah Hex's and Green Lantern's they've done but never the **** they got absolutely right.

Don't get it.

Superman Returns was a stupid decision. Especially if they wanted to start another Superman series, it was the worst possible choice. It was took stuck as being a continuation of Christopher Reeve's Superman, while readjusting the time line in unworkable ways.

 

[John Lambert]

I don't think the whole destroying a spy drone thing came off as overly pro-military.

Which is exactly why I am not worried that Superman will be portrayed as a government lap-dog in the sequel.

On the other hand the whole scene of Superman consulting a priest, who is portrayed in a very positive light, makes me suspect that Snyder will not go for an overly political attack on the US government in the sequel, especially not one that will tend to come out as taking specific political leanings.