Future of DC Films (DCEU)

[matticus]

It's easy for a 'scooper' to come up with LOGICAL plans based on what the fans would want. It's much harder for them to predict the out-of-left-field crap the ignoramuses at WB will actually come up with, like a Wonder Twins movie. I definitely do not believe that WB has a 4-year plan in place, nor that it would make as much logical sense as that.

We've seen how hard it is to adapt superheroes to the screen accurately. Feige and Snyder are basically the only ones who've been able to do a consistently good job of it this century, with great casting, good-looking costumes and reasonably faithful plots. Raimi also did fine with the Spider-Man movies, except when he tried to move out of 1960s Spider-Man, the only material he read growing up, and into the Venom story line.

DC immediately went off the rails as soon as Snyder left, with almost every new character cast extremely poorly. They appear to have only one consistent plan for DC, and that is to race-swap as many white characters as possible. They have a politically correct corporate edict based on a social agenda, not an agenda based on a love for the comic books and a desire to give the fans what they want. Some other directors can make good movies like the Nolan trilogy and Joker, but they're not comic-book accurate. X-Men was sometimes good, but rarely very accurate. Deadpool was their most accurate movie, and naturally was their most successful.

Bottom line, I don't think there's anyone else out there in Hollywood who will be able to adapt DC comics into movies well and accurately besides Snyder. There's nothing to look forward to unless he's running their universe.

It's also simply not true that he didn't have plans to run a complete DCEU shared universe. That sounds like a grifter, I mean a 'scooper,' trying to falsely represent reality in order to make his 'scoop' sound more plausible. He had many plans to produce films beyond just his 5 films, such as Affleck's Batman movie, a Batman & Robin TV series, introduction of Carrie Kelley, another Superman movie, a Ryan Choi Atom movie, likely something with John Stewart and the Green Lanterns. And he would have been able to fit in these other ideas that came up like the Amazons movie. The Snyders were producing all the spinoffs while they were there, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Aquaman. That would have continued. It doesn't rule out that Affleck's Batman might have been 'retired,' but that's no different than MCU retiring Iron Man, Widow or Cap. Flashback movies could still be done, and a new generation could step in to fill those characters' shoes. Bruce Wayne is the least relatable aspect of Batman, so having someone else inherit the mantle could be quite marketable.



I couldn't disagree with you more strongly and wholeheartedly. Superman's goal is to save lives, and the way you save lives sometimes is by killing murderers. Superman killed General Zod in Superman II. He killed him in John Byrne's 1980s comics. Snyder's portrayal of Superman killing Zod was 100% accurate, traditional and faithful to the character. And, in fact, much softer than those past two examples, because it was purely defensive. These two examples are pre-meditated executions of a Zod who has already had his powers taken away. But if the scene is brightly lit and there's joyful music playing, then I guess the killing is okay?

Why kill anyone when you can just spin the world backwards in time? Those old Superman movies have just as dumb material as good material.

 

[matticus]

Did you mean a more serious take on the superheroes and their mythology? I hope so! And I’m sincerely asking since what you said can be interpreted that way. Like if you have a relatively serious take at the baseline then too bright, light-hearted, and comedic isn’t always going to mesh well?

Or did you mean this is too serious a take for the GA?

I meant they don't have the right take for the GA.

There is a middle ground. Why was BvS so negative? Why was Man of Steel not rated higher? Mark Waid, a Superman writer, put it best in that nothing triumphant came from those movies. There is no stand up and cheer moments. It all comes off as sad, depressing and cold.

The MCU is not perfect. But their failure goes over better as humor gives people enjoyment. Marvel gives their characters heroic moments. It reminds me of SW OT compared to SW ST. You started with heroics (Luke becoming a Jedi) and then lost the triumph (go away while I suck on some milk). Sadly, ZSJL captured triumph at the end, but it was too late. Too much sadness to lead it off with MoS and BvS. Too much, too soon.

 

[jye4ever]

At least Snyder wasn’t making it up as he went along he was working off his long term plan.

Shame he also didn’t possess a spider sense to feel out the backstabbing executives he was working with.

God forbid the movie only making 872 million at the box office.

 

[matticus]

At least Snyder wasn’t making it up as he went along he was working off his long term plan.

Shame he also didn’t possess a spider sense to feel out the backstabbing executives he was working with.

God forbid the movie only making 872 million at the box office.

Snyder put a lot of thought into the movies. It just didn't land like he thought it would. But he laid it all out there for those WB execs, they gave the O.K., then backstabbed him when the reviews went South. Both BvS extended and ZSJL got better reviews than the theatrical versions. Was there no communication on the runtime?

Problem is, you need that Feige producer where you tell a Snyder no on a Eisenberg Lex Luthor. No on Batman murdering/branding. No neck snap.

The money was there though and they should have kept ZSJL intact. I don't see how a movie turns out with two very different directors putting a movie together like that. Those execs ruined their careers and ended Whedon's. Didn't realize Geoff Johns was a POS that he is.

 

[The Buffinator]

At least Snyder wasn’t making it up as he went along he was working off his long term plan.

Shame he also didn’t possess a spider sense to feel out the backstabbing executives he was working with.

God forbid the movie only making 872 million at the box office.

Too bad he wasn't. I might have cut him some slack if "Martha" was a spur of the moment brain fart, but given it was part of his long term plan...

As for only making $873M, the first two Avengers movies* each made more than that WITHOUT counting their domestic takes, so I think even God would say BvS underperformed to expectations. The WB bean counters sure felt that way lol.

* - Who wrote and directed those again? The name escapes me right now.....

 

[ironwez20]

Wonder if it was snyders idea to put doomsday in bvs or was it an executive decision. That was such a dumb idea.

 

[ironwez20]

Snyder put a lot of thought into the movies. It just didn't land like he thought it would. But he laid it all out there for those WB execs, they gave the O.K., then backstabbed him when the reviews went South. Both BvS extended and ZSJL got better reviews than the theatrical versions. Was there no communication on the runtime?

Problem is, you need that Feige producer where you tell a Snyder no on a Eisenberg Lex Luthor. No on Batman murdering/branding. No neck snap.

The money was there though and they should have kept ZSJL intact. I don't see how a movie turns out with two very different directors putting a movie together like that. Those execs ruined their careers and ended Whedon's. Didn't realize Geoff Johns was a POS that he is.

Lol I remember some here said Geoff johns was a mole for marvel. Ridiculous. WB destroyed themselves on there own. I agree Snyder had good ideas just not good execution. He did a great job making Superman actually fight but I hated the characterization. Warehouse batmen scene was great but it was surrounded by a bad movie. I think he can make a good dc film but I don’t believe he can carry a universe by himself. Sorry I just don’t. Maybe with better direction. Maybe.

 

[Alatar]

I meant they don't have the right take for the GA.

There is a middle ground. Why was BvS so negative? Why was Man of Steel not rated higher? Mark Waid, a Superman writer, put it best in that nothing triumphant came from those movies. There is no stand up and cheer moments. It all comes off as sad, depressing and cold.

The MCU is not perfect. But their failure goes over better as humor gives people enjoyment. Marvel gives their characters heroic moments. It reminds me of SW OT compared to SW ST. You started with heroics (Luke becoming a Jedi) and then lost the triumph (go away while I suck on some milk). Sadly, ZSJL captured triumph at the end, but it was too late. Too much sadness to lead it off with MoS and BvS. Too much, too soon.

I agree completely about the GA (include critics) and BvS. BvS is a deconstruction that Chris Terrio described as intended to be sort of the dark night of the soul, the nadir of the hero’s journey in the MoS/BvS/JL leg of the saga, and tonally akin to ESB in SW or The Two Towers in LotR.

I will never forget leaving the theater on BvS’s opening day with a family having sat in front of me with young father and mother and two young boys about 4 and 5 y/o one wearing a Superman costume and one wearing a Batman costume. They walked out of that theater looking almost ashen, lol.

In terms of its entire artistic project BvS is a film for adults. And thoughtful, reflective, sophisticated adults at that, to be totally honest. Snyder basically applied what Alan Moore did in Watchmen to Batman and Superman. It is utterly amazing to me that Snyder was allowed to make it to begin with. I guess it was because Nolan had gotten the ball rolling with the deconstructionist vibe… or at least grounded realism… so successfully with the TDK.

It’s not entirely without cheer moments. There is the stirring entrance of Wonder Woman. The DC trinity assembled moment. There is Batman’s warehouse scene.

But yeah, overall it ends with the death of Superman!

 

[Alatar]

Too bad he wasn't. I might have cut him some slack if "Martha" was a spur of the moment brain fart, but given it was part of his long term plan...

As for only making $873M, the first two Avengers movies* each made more than that WITHOUT counting their domestic takes, so I think even God would say BvS underperformed to expectations. The WB bean counters sure felt that way lol.

* - Who wrote and directed those again? The name escapes me right now.....

I suspect that in Snyder’s mind Clark Kent had researched Bruce Wayne after their meeting at Lex’s charity ball, read about the Wayne murders aware that Bruce witnessed it as a helpless child, and that Clark intentionally says “Martha“ in order to shock Bruce out of his temporary state of rage/madness. Superman pulls his punches the entire fight and it’s clear as day that he could win at any moment but he elects to have Bruce tantrum himself out, essentially. He underestimates Bruce with the Kryptonite gas and spear. But he’s willing to risk getting killed by Bruce in order to try to talk sense to him. Yes, there are other ways he could have done it, but then we’d never have the epic fight which was billed as the marquee event for the film! And it’s a battle that we are in fact treated to in Frank miller’s acclaimed The Dark Knight Returns which is a huge inspiration for BvS. The same plothole arguments that Superman could have chosen to do x, y, or z in order to avoid the fight in the first place can also be applied to Miller’s TDK which is regarded as a masterpiece in the comics world.

Now if this is the case then why in the world are we not shown that research into Bruce by Clark? I believe the scene was shot:

I have my own theory as to why which I’ll share if others are interested. But anyway if this scene was shot, and it included an over-the-shoulder shot of Clark reading the story from 1981 in which the headline would would name Thomas and Martha (!) Wayne, it is a very puzzling choice indeed to omit it from the movie.

And let me add that when making the decision about how to use the “Martha“ moment Zack Snyder had two academy award winning writers involved: Chris Terrio and Ben Afffleck! Terrio who won best screenplay for Argo (Argo also won best picture that year) and Ben also had won a best screenplay Oscar for Good Willing Hunting! Can you imagine the discussions that they must have had about this scene?

 

[jye4ever]

Too bad he wasn't. I might have cut him some slack if "Martha" was a spur of the moment brain fart, but given it was part of his long term plan...

As for only making $873M, the first two Avengers movies* each made more than that WITHOUT counting their domestic takes, so I think even God would say BvS underperformed to expectations. The WB bean counters sure felt that way lol.

* - Who wrote and directed those again? The name escapes me right now.....

But you know what I mean.

Sure Martha is a part of it but he still put together a long term plot plan and for that I give him credit.

 

[Alatar]

Wonder if it was snyders idea to put doomsday in bvs or was it an executive decision. That was such a dumb idea.

Look, this is one of those things that like many others in BvS some love and some hate. Right down to the physical appearance of the creature, lol. E.g., many criticize that he looks like a Peter Jackson cave troll, etc.

Use of Doomsday in BvS is polarizing af—but so is the entire movie in the first place. The whole deconstructionist concept behind BvS is controversial and polarizing. I.e., what would these two characters look like if we apply a Watchmen style approach of putting them in our real world and reimagining them that way? I.e., Superman would have to wrestle with how to use his powers on the world stage given the concerns of governments. He would have existential issues about that for sure. Batman might very well go down the psychological (late) midlife crisis road that Frank Miller explores in TDKR. He might become cynical, jaded, burnt out, and no longer care anymore if in self-defense he kills people that are trying to kill him. He could end up “fallen” in terms of his original crime fighting ideals, Etc.

If anyone hates Doomsday or the Martha moment or what have you from BvS nothing I say is going to change their mind. It’s fine to have that reaction, even. Snyder knew full well that his choices in BvS would be polarizing and controversial.

Some things to bear in mind regarding Doomsday, though:

1) Lex uses the DNA profile in the scout ship database for the proper Doomsday creature but modifies it by adding his own DNA. I think that is in order to give the creature a specific imperative to hate and want to kill Superman specifically. It’s kind of silly but the whole movie is after all based on comics. For the sake of argument Lex Luthor being a super genius with an advanced alien library at his disposal could probably figure out how to code the DNA to do that (i.e., hate Superman specifically, or have many of Lex’s personality traits, etc.) “if it was real.”

2) The creature begins as an “infant” and evolves very fast. It absorbs energy; and with each absorption it grow stronger, as we see it progressively “leveling up” throughout the fight. It even absorbed a frickin’ nuke which made it tremendously powerful. The newly formed trinity managed to kill it just in time, actually. Had they not it would have evolved into the Doomsday creature we know from the comics, at least in terms of appearance, as we see the bony spikes emerging from it. It might have become unstoppable. Doomsday represents the sort of high level threat that the newly formed Justice League will be facing.

3) I believe Snyder wanted to incorporate the Death of Superman comic into this saga, at this stage when the superhero film genre is being deconstructed so savagely, as a commentary on the evolution of comics. See Darren Mooney’s excellent analysis of this in Escapist Magazine: Zack Snyder's DCEU Is a Nine-Hour Joyride Through Decades of Comic Book History

 

[jye4ever]

Old grizzled Batman was under developed.

 

[Alatar]

Old grizzled Batman was under developed.

Honestly, most all of the core ideas in BvS are approached with a kind of shorthand approach. I think what Snyder had in mind was telling a story to a nerd fanbase, i.e., with that fanbase in mind first and foremost… or at least a fandom would be become intrigued enough to be willing to nerd out with comics and sleuth things out with literally hundreds of Easter eggs embedded (no exaggeration, he ran a contest for fans to identify them on VERO), etc… that is told very similar to reading comic book panels.

Jeremy Irons made a fair point that (perhaps unintentionally expressing the GA perspective) BvS was “muddled and overstuffed.” I would like to think what he is commenting on is actually that BvS is so jam packed with meta-content and commentary.

For me personally, I’m able to go on the kind of journey that BvS takes me on as it exists for itself, in its own right, and I’m completely satisfied. But that’s because I believe that I “get it.” Which may just be my own delusion, lol!

I can totally see, though, how people that value more conventional storytelling feel that it suffers in all kinds of ways. That sounds condescending probably, and if so, I apologize.

 

[The Buffinator]

But you know what I mean.

Sure Martha is a part of it but he still put together a long term plot plan and for that I give him credit.

I was just stirring the pot but IMO even more egregiously idiotic than Martha was the whole BvS setup in the first place. The givens:

- Gotham and Metropolis are twin cities separated by a bay;​

- Batman is a much older, established crime fighter in Gotham;​

- Clark works for a major metropolitan newspaper;​

- Clark dates/LIVES WITH a seasoned, award winning investigative reporter.​

Considering all of the above, we're to then believe that no one at The Daily Planet would give Clark the heads up about Batman's heroic past or that he wouldn't oh, I don't know, check their archives for info on him? Maybe google him? That he'd just get upset about him branding some thugs and ignorantly treat him as some run-of-the-mill vigilante, fly in as Superman and tell him to retire? I'm sorry, but that was beyond lame.

Having a plan is just the first step. Making sure it's a coherent plan is next, then comes the execution.

 

[ironwez20]

I actually liked that metropolis and gotham are next to each other. Kinda like the city you just don’t want to recognize. I always viewed metropolis peoole as stuck up successful types who look down on gotham and boast about having Superman .

 

[ironwez20]

I was just stirring the pot but IMO even more egregiously idiotic than Martha was the whole BvS setup in the first place. The givens:

- Gotham and Metropolis are twin cities separated by a bay;​

- Batman is a much older, established crime fighter in Gotham;​

- Clark works for a major metropolitan newspaper;​

- Clark dates/LIVES WITH a seasoned, award winning investigative reporter.​

Considering all of the above, we're to then believe that no one at The Daily Planet would give Clark the heads up about Batman's heroic past or that he wouldn't oh, I don't know, check their archives for info on him? Maybe google him? That he'd just get upset about him branding some thugs and ignorantly treat him as some run-of-the-mill vigilante, fly in as Superman and tell him to retire? I'm sorry, but that was beyond lame.

Having a plan is just the first step. Making sure it's a coherent plan is next, then comes the execution.

Pretty much.

 

[jye4ever]

I was just stirring the pot but IMO even more egregiously idiotic than Martha was the whole BvS setup in the first place. The givens:

- Gotham and Metropolis are twin cities separated by a bay;​

- Batman is a much older, established crime fighter in Gotham;​

- Clark works for a major metropolitan newspaper;​

- Clark dates/LIVES WITH a seasoned, award winning investigative reporter.​

Considering all of the above, we're to then believe that no one at The Daily Planet would give Clark the heads up about Batman's heroic past or that he wouldn't oh, I don't know, check their archives for info on him? Maybe google him? That he'd just get upset about him branding some thugs and ignorantly treat him as some run-of-the-mill vigilante, fly in as Superman and tell him to retire? I'm sorry, but that was beyond lame.

Having a plan is just the first step. Making sure it's a coherent plan is next, then comes the execution.

Hey we thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction lol

 

[matticus]

Let's face it - it wasn't a good story to begin with. Nolan helped write Man of Steel and I thought it was a good movie. But Snyder chose to snap Zod's neck, a choice Nolan didn't care for. BvS might have been served better focused on Clark investigating as SM/Clark with minimal Batman, keeping him mysterious.

 

[Alatar]

I was just stirring the pot but IMO even more egregiously idiotic than Martha was the whole BvS setup in the first place. The givens:

- Gotham and Metropolis are twin cities separated by a bay;​

- Batman is a much older, established crime fighter in Gotham;​

- Clark works for a major metropolitan newspaper;​

- Clark dates/LIVES WITH a seasoned, award winning investigative reporter.​

Considering all of the above, we're to then believe that no one at The Daily Planet would give Clark the heads up about Batman's heroic past or that he wouldn't oh, I don't know, check their archives for info on him? Maybe google him? That he'd just get upset about him branding some thugs and ignorantly treat him as some run-of-the-mill vigilante, fly in as Superman and tell him to retire? I'm sorry, but that was beyond lame.

Having a plan is just the first step. Making sure it's a coherent plan is next, then comes the execution.

To be fair, a lot of movies that are considered great can be picked apart in this way as well. You can find plotholes all over the place if you start actively looking for them, etc.

I think we can assume that Clark may be broadly aware of who Bruce Wayne is. It isn’t necessarily that Clark doesn’t know of Bruce Wayne. He just didn’t recognize him by sight, i.e., wasn‘t familiar enough with his appearance. As a parallel to this irl, I’m a pretty knowledgeable, well informed member of society and I had no idea who Robert Bigelow was until after the “tic tac” ufo videos got released. I had never heard of him.

But if my theory is right about the scene below that never made it into the film, Clark lacking detailed detailed information about Bruce Wayne also serves to set up a scene where Clark decides to do a bit of investigation. Again, why this doesn’t appear in the film is baffling, though! (If I’m right that that’s what this scene is about.)

 

[The Buffinator]

To be fair, a lot of movies that are considered great can be picked apart in this way as well. You find plotholes all over the place when you start going on an expedition for them, etc.

I think we can assume that Clark may be broadly aware of who Bruce Wayne is. It isn’t necessarily that Clark doesn’t know of Bruce Wayne. He just didn’t recognize him by sight, i.e., wasn‘t familiar enough with his appearance. As a parallel to this irl, I’m a pretty knowledgeable, well informed member of society and I had no idea who Robert Bigelow was until after the “tic tac” ufo videos got released. I had never heard of him.

But if my theory is right about the scene below that never made it into the film, Clark lacking detailed detailed information about Bruce Wayne also serves to set up a scene where Clark decides to do a bit of investigation. Again, why this doesn’t appear in the film is baffling, though! (If I’m right that that’s what this scene is about.)

View attachment 572569

I agree that most films can be picked apart like that but in this case the illogical nature of the story immediately took me out of the movie. I like MoS and thought the Clark/Superman character was developed well but the Clark in BvS did not feel like the same character.

I agree he knew about Bruce Wayne, but his actions did not reflect that he did his homework on Batman's heroic past, which given Bruce's age would have been lengthy by this time and surely well documented at The DP given Gotham was located in Metropolis's backyard.