Future of DC Films (DCEU)

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyway, maybe I have this wrong as well, but wasn't the Knights of Ren order that Luke (?) established originally supposed to be philosophically "gray" versus "white" or "black?" But then that somehow led to Ben Solo turning completely to the dark side. So maybe I misunderstood that part.

There was a comic book that explained the Knights of Ren, they weren't part of Luke's Jedi academy but kept trying to lure Ben away (and obviously succeeded with a little help from Palps).

I actually wouldn't mind an animated or recast live-action series about the adventures of Luke, Ben and Lor San Tekka as shown in the comics, to fill in the gaps between ROTJ and TFA.
 
Last edited:
Now with rumors circulating that a former Batman is going to continue as the Brave and the Bold Batman, combined with rumors that Ben Affleck has agreed to direct that film… honestly, it would be a PR master stroke if WBD allies Affleck to continue in the universe. That would salve the wound for a lot of (imo rightly) disgruntled Snyderverse fans.

Also, didn't Gunn say that Ben was interested in directing a DC film?
It was already debunked by Gunn! Batman will be a new actor.
 
Mmm, ZSJL is reconstruction, though. Its tropes are all fantastical like the comics mythos. So I would not say what Snyder does is not 100% deconstruction. The pendulum swings back to fantastical escapism in ZSJL. Something related to the subject that I posted today for any that are interested:


I have several issues with this. First being with Watchmen and with Zack Snyder’s adaptation. Moore’s Watchmen is unequivocally a deconstruction. That can’t be denied, but it is also scathing satire. Not only of comic books but of the inextricable link between the “might makes right” ideology of comic book superheroes and the jingoistic social and political identity of Reagan’s America. It’s dark and gritty and favors itself intellectual, but it’s also…funny.

And that’s something Snyder didn’t get. He took the meat of Moore’s story; the part that lampooned our culture at the time and used these characters as a mirror for that deconstruction, and he reduced it to empty set dressing. That’s part of why I believe the book has always been seen as unadaptable…because the time to adapt it was 35+ years ago. Snyder tried to make all of those characters into larger-than-life archetypes trafficking in epic melodrama when that’s antithetical to Moore’s point: to strip bare the archetypes and expose them for what they are.

And that’s why Damon Lindelof’s adaptation/remixing/sequel worked where the film didn’t: he understood the point. Where Watchmen the comic satirized the Cold War paranoia that permeated American Culture in the 1980s, Watchmen the show satirized the racial tension that has been bubbling throughout the 2020s. It wasn’t about exactly matching the dialogue or creating slow motion action scenes that could really give a “wow” factor to the comics’ proceedings, it was about capturing the spirit of the book and creating something new with it. Not only did it succeed in that, but it forced audiences and critics alike to re-examine what could be achieved in a comic book show, much as it’s predecessor had 35 years prior.

Snyder lacked that vision. He lacked it with Watchmen and he lacked it in his DCEU. He didn’t have the sense of nuance to execute his vision and the result is a gaud over-complication; a self-indulgent, vainglorious exercise in trying to reinvent the wheel despite nobody asking him to. Nobody’s disputing his plan. He liked to name drop Joseph Campbell like his life depended on it, the problem is he couldn’t read the room and, to paraphrase Dr. Ian Malcolm, “he was so preoccupied with whether or not he could do something, he never stopped to think if he should.”

Marvel revitalized the landscape of contemporary superhero films and they showed what was possible, but, more than that, they showed what could be achieved by trusting in the source material and capturing the spirit of the characters. Snyder’s always lacked that. He’s the antithesis of the Paul Dinis, Bruce Timms, Dwayne McDuffies and all of the architects of the DCAU who perfectly distilled 80+ years worth of history into concentrated, definitive versions of those characters: he mines the books for iconography and imagery without understanding why it worked in the first place.

When you factor in the general moviegoing public and a great many comic book fans, very few people want a Dark Knight Returns Batman as their main universe version of the character, it’d be the equivalent of Kevin Feige introducing his own version of the “Reign” Spider-Man in Captain America: Civil War (the 70-year old, depressed Peter Parker who spends that entire story lamenting the death of Mary Jane from Cancer after she was exposed to his radioactive spider-cum [it’s a real story. Google it.]). It’s weird.

Same deal with Superman. To reduce the character to something he’s not, only so you can then “reconstruct” him in your own image, tells me that not only do you not understand why the character’s enduring, it shows you’re not a skilled enough artist to create a compelling story utilizing the character as he’s existed for (at that time) 75 years. If you’re hired to make a Superman movie, you shouldn’t need to reinvent Superman to make it work. Period.
 
Same deal with Superman. To reduce the character to something he’s not, only so you can then “reconstruct” him in your own image, tells me that not only do you not understand why the character’s enduring, it shows you’re not a skilled enough artist to create a compelling story utilizing the character as he’s existed for (at that time) 75 years. If you’re hired to make a Superman movie, you shouldn’t need to reinvent Superman to make it work. Period.

Gotta disagree with you there. The classic "overgrown boy scout" version of Supes wouldn't "fly" with cynical modern audiences, Snyder had little choice but to ground him in today's paranoid, distrustful, tribal world.

Even Singer felt the need to give him a dark twist, and he was continuing the Donnerverse.
 
Gotta disagree with you there. The classic "overgrown boy scout" version of Supes wouldn't "fly" with cynical modern audiences, Snyder had little choice but to ground him in today's paranoid, distrustful, tribal world.

Even Singer felt the need to give him a dark twist, and he was continuing the Donnerverse.
Both versions missed the mark.

... And the version Gunn said they're taking inspiration for is widely regarded as one of the biggest "overgrown boy scout" comics of the modern era, and widely beloved for that very reason.

Marvel made it work head-on with Captain America, and it's one of the reasons the character was so well-liked.
a97e673d-70ae-441e-bc56-5793ecd37e20_text.gif
 
Gotta disagree with you there. The classic "overgrown boy scout" version of Supes wouldn't "fly" with cynical modern audiences, Snyder had little choice but to ground him in today's paranoid, distrustful, tribal world.

Even Singer felt the need to give him a dark twist, and he was continuing the Donnerverse.
Idk captain America worked well with audiences and that concept is more silly than Superman . It’s all about how you write and develop a character.
 
Both versions missed the mark.

... And the version Gunn said they're taking inspiration for is widely regarded as one of the biggest "overgrown boy scout" comics of the modern era, and widely beloved for that very reason.

Marvel made it work head-on with Captain America, and it's one of the reasons the character was so well-liked.
a97e673d-70ae-441e-bc56-5793ecd37e20_text.gif
Yup! Just said this. If audiences can get with a captain America Boy Scout then they can with Superman .
 
Both versions missed the mark.

... And the version Gunn said they're taking inspiration for is widely regarded as one of the biggest "overgrown boy scout" comics of the modern era, and widely beloved for that very reason.

Marvel made it work head-on with Captain America, and it's one of the reasons the character was so well-liked.
a97e673d-70ae-441e-bc56-5793ecd37e20_text.gif
I think the general audience is going to baulk at it.

I thought Captain America was good but I didn't get much from him. Felt a bit too one note.
 
Flash Superbowl trailer:

WB hates Snyder so much that they made a 100% 325 million dollar Snyder aesthetics Snyder influenced Superhero movie :yess:

WB/Gunn you should be ashamed of yourselves for the theft! :yess:
That's exactly what I thought. But then Musscetti did always say/indicate that the directors (he, Jenkins etc) chose to take Zack's aesthetic as canon, and not Joss Wheadon's.

For me I could totally see Zack's aesthetic in the trailer. Looked frigging great !!!

Now, what will be really interesting is when The Flash does gangbusters at the theaters ($1 billion ??) and everything else thereafter from Gunn crashes and burns.

Call me a hater, but I really hope that happens at this point !!
 
That's exactly what I thought. But then Musscetti did always say/indicate that the directors (he, Jenkins etc) chose to take Zack's aesthetic as canon, and not Joss Wheadon's.

For me I could totally see Zack's aesthetic in the trailer. Looked frigging great !!!

Now, what will be really interesting is when The Flash does gangbusters at the theaters ($1 billion ??) and everything else thereafter from Gunn crashes and burns.

Call me a hater, but I really hope that happens at this point !!
I promise you if the flash does that kinda money it will not be because of zacks influence lol. Part of the draw for this movie is Keaton. Nobody cares about anything else but that.
 
You make it so difficult to actually discuss things.
Cause that’s a silly question. One character is an America propaganda type hero and the other is supposed to be the perfect superhero . But cap is more silly with his star spangled suit and Justice shield and eagles ears.
 
Cause that’s a silly question. One character is an America propaganda type hero and the other is supposed to be the perfect superhero . But cap is more silly with his star spangled suit and Justice shield and eagles ears.
Not if I don't know what you mean or the context you are referring to.
The other is an alien that can fly, has super everything and hides behind a pair of glasses.

Just think of you had said this the first time you wouldn't have to answer the silly question twice.
 
The "too silly for audiences" horse bolted from the barn when the general audience was able to get onboard with a movie where one of the main characters was a talking CGI raccoon with a machine gun. If audiences were allergic to a lighthearted tone, the MCU wouldn't have spent a decade running circles around the DCEU. A light tone and a dark tone are just different ways of telling a story; there's no hard and fast rule about what audiences will or won't accept.
 
Not if I don't know what you mean or the context you are referring to.
The other is an alien that can fly, has super everything and hides behind a pair of glasses.

Just think of you had said this the first time you wouldn't have to answer the silly question twice.
You should definitely know what I mean. And you think captain America a guy with a super soldier serum who dresses up as the American flag and has a big a on his head isn’t sillier than Superman? The only thing silly about Superman really is the alter ego part. Everything else you named is pretty standard superhero stuff. Most of them all fly
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top