DC Extended Universe THREAD

[YoungJRNYfan]

Reeves is doing his own thing with Batman. He is not interested in helping to prop up a creatively-stillborn universe.

So Kettle is doing okay..or? You don't know that. I think the whole stance on Affleck is going to effect Reeve's decision on the story he's working on. The good thing about the situation, creatively, is that if 'The Batman' ends up in DCEU continuity, Affleck's Batman was such an older take on the character that they can wiggle the prequel format into play. Rumors are that Reeves turned in his first draft of his story and it was said to feature a younger Batman so they can easily set this trilogy up in the days way before BvS (where Bruce was at the end of his rope.) It wasn't until the 'Black Zero' event in Man of Steel and the coming of 'The Superman" that lit a fire under Bruce's cowl for a comeback. It could all work if they wanted to go that direction.

I just said that Reeves' Bat film will make Batman the center of the DC universe. Your rejoinder? Is there an echo in here? Helloooo?

It's a no brainer that the Bat-Universe was going to come into play. Batman has the longest list of rogues and family in the DCU and Gotham plays a big part in the universe regardless but that wasn't what I was getting at. You said they would sideline other characters..mainly Cyborg but you failed to realize that if anything, other characters will come into the frey. You singled out Cyborg but didn't realize Cyborg is a huge part of a team called the Teen Titans, led by Dick Grayson (Nightwing.) Chris McKay is working on Nightwing so we'll see if anything is destined to spin-off from that if it comes to fruition.

One bad entry in a franchise is not the end of the world. WB mishandled that. B&R under-performed compared to Batman Forever. I actually think Forever is WORSE than B&R. At least B&R is confidant in its kitsch take. Both Schumacher films suck. WB should have just made a better Batman 5.

Man you are are all over the place here. There's hedges everywhere. In that case, WB seems to be taking your proposal in this current DCEU. They seem to be taking the approach by moving forward with their present franchise's headlined by the current actors/creators involved and are adament on keeping the past the past and make better Superman movies, Batman movies, Suicide Squad movies, Joker movies, etc. Just flat out make BETTER films. That looks to be their memo.

Huh? Zack was fired by WB. Keaton walked because he was loyal to Tim (he also hated the suit). No comparison.

There certainly are comparisons. Zack got roasted for making the DCEU, most notably BvS, too dark, his second film in the series that led to his departure. Burton? Ousted because his second film in the series was deemed too dark. The third entries after both directors left were course corrected by a more lighter tone that ultimately fucked everything up because it wasn't the idea that sprung the idea of what these films were meant to be in the first place. Keaton had every chance to return as Batman. He wasn't loyal to Burton. He was loyal to the material and direction. He knew what Batman Forever was mandated into and he bailed. Zack wasn't going to compromise either. I believe eventually, he told WB "fuck you" (kindly) and the two mutual sides departed.

You're contradicting yourself. You say the universe starts and stops with Nolan/Bale but is now continuing with Affleck/Reeves. Which is it?

Huh? Pay attention. I was just noting that by the time they brought Affleck in, they were expanding the universe. Anybody with a brain knows I'm talking about the MoS-verse; not the Nolan-verse. Obviously obvious.

Obviously.

Everything in BvsS feels like a retcon.

LMAO! Bah gawd the density. Like what?! Specific examples, please.

Standalone films are not a cinematic universe. DC is effectively flying the white flag of defeat. You just don't realize it's over.

Man of Steel is a standalone film. Wonder Woman is a standalone film. Aquaman is going to be a standalone film. Standalone's can exist in current continuity of which the universe connects to but the rules of those universe's can be specific to that respected character inside of their own worlds. And you got to realize that this entire "connective" thing doesn't matter to me. I can give two shits less about what is and what isn't connected or what films will crossover with each other as long as the movies are good. You realize that right? I think DC is going to create a deep, narrow and wider label for all of these things to occur simultaneously. We'll see if they reveal a rebrand in a few weeks.

[verslibre]

The Batverse is going to be a thing like the Starkverse is a thing and the Guardiansverse is a thing.

Everything Marvel puts out is a "standalone" film minus the Avengers movies (that includes the unofficial Avengers movie, Civil War). The only things that thread them together are the mid-credits scenes that aren't a part of the main narrative you pay $15 to watch. Sometimes those scenes are completely unnecessary, like "Blue" Thanos going "Fine...I'll just do it myself!"

"Everything in BvS feels like a retcon"? Better call the health dept. His place might be loaded with fumes.

[The_Noble_Cause]

So Kettle is doing okay..or? You don't know that. I think the whole stance on Affleck is going to effect Reeve's decision on the story he's working on. The good thing about the situation, creatively, is that if 'The Batman' ends up in DCEU continuity, Affleck's Batman was such an older take on the character that they can wiggle the prequel format into play. Rumors are that Reeves turned in his first draft of his story and it was said to feature a younger Batman so they can easily set this trilogy up in the days way before BvS (where Bruce was at the end of his rope.) It wasn't until the 'Black Zero' event in Man of Steel and the coming of 'The Superman" that lit a fire under Bruce's cowl for a comeback. It could all work if they wanted to go that direction.

Reeves' career is pretty hot right now. DC needs him. Not the other way around. It's that simple. He will not be hitching his career to an imploding turd.

It's a no brainer that the Bat-Universe was going to come into play. Batman has the longest list of rogues and family in the DCU and Gotham plays a big part in the universe regardless but that wasn't what I was getting at. You said they would sideline other characters..mainly Cyborg but you failed to realize that if anything, other characters will come into the frey. You singled out Cyborg but didn't realize Cyborg is a huge part of a team called the Teen Titans, led by Dick Grayson (Nightwing.) Chris McKay is working on Nightwing so we'll see if anything is destined to spin-off from that if it comes to fruition.

I said don't hold your breath for a Cyborg solo movie once the Batman gravy train is running. Mentioning a potential Nightwing spin-off series really just proves my point.

Man you are are all over the place here. There's hedges everywhere. In that case, WB seems to be taking your proposal in this current DCEU. They seem to be taking the approach by moving forward with their present franchise's headlined by the current actors/creators involved and are adament on keeping the past the past and make better Superman movies, Batman movies, Suicide Squad movies, Joker movies, etc. Just flat out make BETTER films. That looks to be their memo.

The difference is, the 1989 Burton Batman was a game changer. It was also a rock-solid bedrock to continue to build on. MOS, on the other hand, was divisive from the start. They tried to launch a universe on a house of cards. With Justice League, the whole enterprise finally collapsed. Should DC continue to build on past mistakes? Imo no. They should cut their losses. Which they are already doing to a large degree.

Keaton had every chance to return as Batman. He wasn't loyal to Burton.

So where's the betrayal?
After a few meetings with Schumacher etc, Keaton walked.
Even regarding the long-gestating Beetlejuice 2, Keaton said he will only return if Tim returns.

Zack wasn't going to compromise either. I believe eventually, he told WB "fuck you" (kindly) and the two mutual sides departed.

Any proof of this "fuck you" moment?

Huh? Pay attention. I was just noting that by the time they brought Affleck in, they were expanding the universe. Anybody with a brain knows I'm talking about the MoS-verse; not the Nolan-verse. Obviously obvious.

General audiences don't discriminate between Burton-verse, Schumacher-verse, Nolan-verse, Snyder-verse etc.
Even DC finally *gets this* now by having both a Leto-Joker project and a Joaquin Phoenix joker project underway.

And if DC truly wanted a clean break between the "Nolan-verse" they shouldn't have festooned Nolan's name all over the credits of MOS etc.

LMAO! Bah gawd the density. Like what?! Specific examples, please.

I don't recall much in the way of metahumans in MOS or Gotham being a stone's throw away from Metropolis. All the references in MOS (like the Wayne satellite or Star Labs) are blink-and-miss-it Easter eggs that go right over the heads of general audiences. That's not how you set up a connected universe.

Man of Steel is a standalone film. Wonder Woman is a standalone film. Aquaman is going to be a standalone film. Standalone's can exist in current continuity of which the universe connects to but the rules of those universe's can be specific to that respected character inside of their own worlds. And you got to realize that this entire "connective" thing doesn't matter to me. I can give two shits less about what is and what isn't connected or what films will crossover with each other as long as the movies are good. You realize that right? I think DC is going to create a deep, narrow and wider label for all of these things to occur simultaneously. We'll see if they reveal a rebrand in a few weeks.

The point of doing standalone movies is to cut ties with Snyderverse continuity that audiences have rejected.

[The_Noble_Cause]

"Everything in BvS feels like a retcon"? Better call the health dept. His place might be loaded with fumes.

Here's Snyder discussing the Batman references in MOS. The quote speaks for itself.

"It does say Wayne Enterprises on the satellite, but you can only see half of it,” explains Snyder. “I really just wanted to say, ‘This is the DC Universe.’ And whether or not it’s the Wayne Enterprises of Chris Nolan’s movies or whether it’s the Wayne Enterprises of DC in general, that’s yet to be seen."

The early scene of Wayne witnessing the destruction of one of his properties by Superman vs Zod is pure revisionist writing at its hackiest.
Wayne went from being an easter egg to the main character in the franchise without any set-up or exposition whatsoever.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Stop pressing the spin-cycle button repeatedly. You're wearing it out and the warranty's toast.

You're the one who said that DC is doing well on streaming and home video formats. Not me.

Which franchise isn't? Heard a lot about Star Wars lately, haven't you? Guess which movie made more money, Justice League or Solo?

I really don't care. If you do, go start a Star Wars thread about it. Last Jedi was bad. Solo, while predictable, kept me moderately entertained.

Aw, hell. Let me save you the trouble. Justice League CLOBBERED Solo! A freakin' Star Wars movie!

Worldwide: $657,924,295
Worldwide: $371,904,265

And since Ron Howard reshot 80% of the movie, you can bet Disney's red column for Solo is way higher than JL's.

I don't care. Want to discuss the comparative grosses of the "Weekend at Bernie's" franchise next?

F-meister says what he thinks people want to hear. You wanted to hear that, so he said it. You bought it. Yet no Iron Man 4 is in development. They're focusing on other characters in preparation for Downey's and Evans' inevitable exit.

He said it because he understands these characters are larger than any one actor.

Overly dark" had fuck-all to do with it. Returns was made for 2.5X more and it made a lot less domestically and worldwide.

Test audiences had reports of kids hysterically crying. You are simply uninformed.

WB was in no short supply of ideas and pitches. Batman and Robin's stain had to wear off. It was akin a bacterial weapon with a long-lasting stench.

You're giving audiences too much credit. If a good Batman movie is in theaters, it will draw audiences.

I like Moonraker. It made more than both The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only, too, both domestically and overseas. Check the numbers. I like all of Moore's movies.

Are you denying that Broccoli course-corrected the franchise after Moonraker veered too far on the side of campiness/jokes?
This is pretty much accepted fact.

Are you saying that *IF* Batman & Robin had been financially successful the series should have continued as is?
What are you saying exactly?

Seem you are just a Snyder fanboy cultist incapable of discussing anything objectively.

I still don't see why you have some kind of problem with Nolan's involvement in Man of Steel. And before you wiggle your fingers over your keyboard, Nolan's exec title on that film wasn't "marquee space filler." He's the one who brought Goyer's treatment to the studio.

Nolan's silence on the state of this franchise speaks volumes. He's pretty much disowned it actually.

Had they released one in 1999, it might have performed far below expectations short of bringing back Nicholson as the Joker. And that would have been very, very expensive. The "rumor" back then was that Jeff Goldblum was going to be Scarecrow and his chemically-derived arsenal was going to make Batman hallucinate the return of Joker-Jack. But I never bought into that because I didn't believe they could get Jack back. Jack made it painfully apparent he did that role for the moola. And he was paid a lot for it.

I think if you make a good product, audiences will come.
In addition to Goldblum, I remember there was even dumb talks of Howard Stern being scarecrow.
I would have reboot Batman Triumphant with Robin/Batgirl having been killed off-screen with Batman out for vengeance.

Says the guy who doesn't know Reeves' plans. "Yea? So?" Are we two degrees away from "Your momma's so fat" jokes?

I'm not here acting as the official PR flunky / Baghdad Bob of DC. That's you and YoungJrny. I'm just giving my opinion.

That diminishes continuity how? It doesn't. So they aren't making a team film in the next several years. "Yea? So?"

Wha? Standalone films don't diminish continuity? Do you also think Steve Perry solo albums count as Journey records?

Guess you didn't get the memo about Birds of Prey filming this coming January. What's that? Yet another DC movie headed into production? With Margot Robbie reprising her role as Harley Quinn? People are already forking over their cash.

What does this prove besides Harley being a great character and Margot being hot? DC is wise to salvage the wreckage of Suicide Squad and keep her.

This quote from the film Gladiator is totally about you!

"He enters Rome like a conquering hero. But what has he conquered?"

Ok, and here's a quote from The Waterboy that is totally about you!

"You don't have what they call 'the social skills.' That's why you never have any friends, 'cept fo' yo' mama."

[verslibre]

"Everything in BvS feels like a retcon"? Better call the health dept. His place might be loaded with fumes.

Here's Snyder discussing the Batman references in MOS. The quote speaks for itself.

"It does say Wayne Enterprises on the satellite, but you can only see half of it,” explains Snyder. “I really just wanted to say, ‘This is the DC Universe.’ And whether or not it’s the Wayne Enterprises of Chris Nolan’s movies or whether it’s the Wayne Enterprises of DC in general, that’s yet to be seen."

The early scene of Wayne witnessing the destruction of one of his properties by Superman vs Zod is pure revisionist writing at its hackiest.
Wayne went from being an easter egg to the main character in the franchise without any set-up or exposition whatsoever.

That's your concept of revisionist writing? I sense deeper-seated issues here. This smells personal more than anything.

Snyder's quote hinges on nothing but ambiguity. That's IT. Ambiguity is a great thing. He's essentially saying "Yo! Is this the Wayne Ent. you remember from the Nolan trilogy? (Hint: probably not.) Or is this the new Wayne Ent. you're going to be seeing from now on in this rebooted DC cinematic universe? Come to the next movie and find out."

That's it. BvS' first major scene is the Black Zero event from the street-level perspective of Bruce Wayne. How the hell is that a retcon? Nothing changes. The destruction is still there. The destruction is the catalyst. You're simply seeing it from Earthman-cam instead of Krypto-cam.

That IS the setup. It's all the setup we needed following the opening title sequence. We all know Batman's origin. A 40-minute recap wasn't necessary. Even Monker will agree.

Revisionist writing because you saw an Easter egg in the previous movie? Dude, go get your coffee.

[The_Noble_Cause]

That's your concept of revisionist writing? I sense deeper-seated issues here. This smells personal more than anything.

Just one of a few. The idea of Superman being one of many metahumans is also another half-assed retcon rush job.

Snyder's quote hinges on nothing but ambiguity. That's IT. Ambiguity is a great thing. He's essentially saying "Yo! Is this the Wayne Ent. you remember from the Nolan trilogy? (Hint: probably not.) Or is this the new Wayne Ent. you're going to be seeing from now on in this rebooted DC cinematic universe? Come to the next movie and find out."

Of course.
Snyder is an infallible puppet master manipulating us all behind the scenes.
I bet he even masterminded his own humiliating termination just to fuck with us.
We are merely pawns in his master plan.

That IS the setup. It's all the setup we needed following the opening title sequence. We all know Batman's origin. A 40-minute recap wasn't necessary. Even Monker will agree.

Revisionist writing because you saw an Easter egg in the previous movie? Dude, go get your coffee.

Batman's motivation in BvS is driven by an event from MOS in which he's not even present. That's a retcon.

[The_Noble_Cause]

If this JL Snyder cut news is true, I support it 100%. They should even give it a limited theatrical release. I'll be there opening night.

“It seems like, over the course of the last seven months or so, Snyder has been working on it himself,” says Robles. “Word on the street is that he’s not only been quietly tinkering and pushing it closer to completion, but that he’s actually close to announcing it (with a trailer and all!). The big hang-up, though, are the discussions he’s having with Warner Bros.”

[verslibre]

Stop pressing the spin-cycle button repeatedly. You're wearing it out and the warranty's toast.

You're the one who said that DC is doing well on streaming and home video formats. Not me.

Truth. The Numbers Dot Com. Wonder Woman did a cool hundred million on domestic home video. Check the stats for the other movies. MoS did more, Suicide Squad slightly less at 95 million. The only one that didn't do so hot was Justice League.

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Wonder-Woman-(2017)#tab=summary

Which franchise isn't? Heard a lot about Star Wars lately, haven't you? Guess which movie made more money, Justice League or Solo?

I really don't care. If you do, go start a Star Wars thread about it. Last Jedi was bad. Solo, while predictable, kept me moderately entertained.

Doesn't matter if you "care" or not. If somebody told you years ago a lesser-rated CBM would outgross a movie with Star Wars in the title, you'd have laughed them out of the room.

Aw, hell. Let me save you the trouble. Justice League CLOBBERED Solo! A freakin' Star Wars movie!

Worldwide: $657,924,295
Worldwide: $371,904,265

And since Ron Howard reshot 80% of the movie, you can bet Disney's red column for Solo is way higher than JL's.

I don't care. Want to discuss the comparative grosses of the "Weekend at Bernie's" franchise next?

Puppet Master.

F-meister says what he thinks people want to hear. You wanted to hear that, so he said it. You bought it. Yet no Iron Man 4 is in development. They're focusing on other characters in preparation for Downey's and Evans' inevitable exit.

He said it because he understands these characters are larger than any one actor.

Which franchise character so far isn't? Seems like the only one that didn't work out is Jason Bourne. But audiences really like Downey as Stark. That's going to be a tough nut to recast. They may have to go with Arno, not Tony. And if they COULD make Iron Man 4 with Tony, they'd all do backflips before you could slather a slice of bologna with mayo and stuff it between your cheeks. The thing is, Civil War is like an Iron Man movie in all but name. And that he gets so much screen time in Infinity War may have to do with his reaching for his coat from the rack in Feige's office.

It's unlikely. Downey's going to do Sherlock Holmes 3. F-meister's going to have to pour himself a stiff drink, because those Sherlock movies make a lot of money, too. $525-545 million. And those are Warner Bros. flicks.

https://www.inquisitr.com/4819617/iron-man-4-possibly-not-happening-due-to-robert-downey-jr-s-busy-schedule-after-avengers-infinity-war/

Overly dark" had fuck-all to do with it. Returns was made for 2.5X more and it made a lot less domestically and worldwide.

Test audiences had reports of kids hysterically crying. You are simply uninformed.

That movie wasn't made for 5-year-olds. While Batman and Robin was. Do the math.

WB was in no short supply of ideas and pitches. Batman and Robin's stain had to wear off. It was akin a bacterial weapon with a long-lasting stench.

You're giving audiences too much credit. If a good Batman movie is in theaters, it will draw audiences.

Again, if another Batman movie dropped a mere two years after the B&R fiasco, it would have suffered. Don't think so?

Exhibit A: Batman Begins. The best fuckin' origin CBM, in my humble opinion. Made for $150 million, plus marketing, it did not earn a profit. It came out eight years after B&R, with plenty of time for people to yearn for another Batman film. Its final worldwide gross was $374 million, with $207 million of that being domestic. For such a great movie, it didn't set the box office on fire. But its appreciation grew after 4.5-month run as more and more people got wind of it. By the time marketing commenced for The Dark Knight, people knew the shadow of B&R was no longer something to be feared, but flushed down like the crusty, campy turd it is.

I like Moonraker. It made more than both The Spy Who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only, too, both domestically and overseas. Check the numbers. I like all of Moore's movies.

Are you denying that Broccoli course-corrected the franchise after Moonraker veered too far on the side of campiness/jokes?
This is pretty much accepted fact.

It's still Moore being Bond. And Octopussy was more course correction? An island full of chicks? That screams "1969-71."

Are you saying that *IF* Batman & Robin had been financially successful the series should have continued as is?

Don't know where you got that. Had that movie made money, WB would have commissioned more of that dross. Then Batman would have required decades to hose off that guano.

Seem you are just a Snyder fanboy cultist incapable of discussing anything objectively.

Seems like you're a guy on the warpath with a vendetta against Snyder and the DCEU, one who backpedals, moves goalposts, and distorts meanings in order to buttress his non-argument.

I still don't see why you have some kind of problem with Nolan's involvement in Man of Steel. And before you wiggle your fingers over your keyboard, Nolan's exec title on that film wasn't "marquee space filler." He's the one who brought Goyer's treatment to the studio.

Nolan's silence on the state of this franchise speaks volumes. He's pretty much disowned it actually.

^Case in point! Nolan completed his trilogy. He participated in Man of Steel. He devoted nearly a decade of his life to DC, and he even managed to make two other films in-between, Inception being the textbook definition of a blockbuster. He has since made Interstellar (a hit) and Dunkirk (a hit). He's not making more CBMs. Your saying his "silence" speaks volumes is like saying Jon Favreau probably has something against Disney for leaving Iron Man 3 to Shane Black after Iron Man 2's rush job. These directors do other things. They get paid shit-tons of money. They don't care if you think their silence spells out fortune cookie fortunes.

Another good one: James Wan completed editing on The Conjuring 2, then tweeted "you guys are killing me" after he saw all of the ridiculous unfounded blogger bait that he was no longer making Aquaman. Thr rumor mill had become the equivalent of a brown bag-of-shit-on-fire that people kept stepping on.

In addition to Goldblum, I remember there was even dumb talks of Howard Stern being scarecrow.

WTF. That would have never happened. Sounds like something Gary heard at the hot dog stand that he passed on to Howard.

I would have reboot Batman Triumphant with Robin/Batgirl having been killed off-screen with Batman out for vengeance.

Then everyone would have cried "But where's our movie WITH Robin and Batgirl!" They couldn't handle Robin's memorial in BvS.

Says the guy who doesn't know Reeves' plans. "Yea? So?" Are we two degrees away from "Your momma's so fat" jokes?

I'm not here acting as the official PR flunky / Baghdad Bob of DC. That's you and YoungJrny. I'm just giving my opinion.

At least you spelled Baghdad correctly. Or did spellcheck handle it for you?

That diminishes continuity how? It doesn't. So they aren't making a team film in the next several years. "Yea? So?"

Wha? Standalone films don't diminish continuity?

They do? Isn't The Winter Soldier a standalone movie?

Do you also think Steve Perry solo albums count as Journey records?

Will you start listening to other bands/singers already?!

Btw, isn't it funny how Journey can't mount a proper comeback while Judas Priest records new albums their fans love? Priest just booked their South American tour.

Guess you didn't get the memo about Birds of Prey filming this coming January. What's that? Yet another DC movie headed into production? With Margot Robbie reprising her role as Harley Quinn? People are already forking over their cash.

What does this prove besides Harley being a great character and Margot being hot?

I dunno. Why the hell does max hotness always have to factor into casting? Why ScarJo for Natasha and not Judy Greer? Why Evangeline for Hope and not Mayim Bialik? And why the hell is Harley Quinn so popular? Well, she never has not been, so I guess we'll never know.

DC is wise to salvage the wreckage of Suicide Squad and keep her.

The 746.8 million dollar wreckage that pummeled the last X-Men movie and matched the one before it? Yeah, that's some heap.

Ok, and here's a quote from The Waterboy that is totally about you!

"You don't have what they call 'the social skills.' That's why you never have any friends, 'cept fo' yo' mama."

So I quote Ridley Scott's Gladiator, while he quotes a shitty Adam Sandler movie...hmm, telling.

[verslibre]

That's your concept of revisionist writing? I sense deeper-seated issues here. This smells personal more than anything.

Just one of a few. The idea of Superman being one of many metahumans is also another half-assed retcon rush job.

I see. If it wasn't mentioned in one movie — an origin film devoted to (rebooting) one particular character — and it's mentioned in the very next movie, that's a retcon.

Batman's motivation in BvS is driven by an event from MOS in which he's not even present. That's a retcon.

So because we don't see Bruce Wayne running down the street in Superman's origin movie, that's a retcon. That's wholesale nonsense.

Ask yourself this: What if Bruce Wayne had been showing running down the street in a post-credits scene at the very end of MoS, following the WB logo? Would that have made all the difference in the world to you? Because to normal people, that would make NO difference.

[RedWingFan]

Zack wasn't going to compromise either. I believe eventually, he told WB "fuck you" (kindly) and the two mutual sides departed.

Any proof of this "fuck you" moment?

I'm guessing it came shortly after WB security shoved a cardboard box of his belongings into his chest and escorted him out the door. Lol.

[RedWingFan]

Of course.
Snyder is an infallible puppet master manipulating us all behind the scenes.
I bet he even masterminded his own humiliating termination just to fuck with us.
We are merely pawns in his master plan.

LMAO!!!!

[The_Noble_Cause]

I see. If it wasn't mentioned in one movie — an origin film devoted to (rebooting) one particular character — and it's mentioned in the very next movie, that's a retcon.

Highlander 1 didn't mention that MacLeod was an alien.
The sequel did.

Spiderman 1 didn't mention that Sandman killed Uncle Ben.
The third one did.

Aliens 1-4 didn't mention that the Xenomorphs were the work of a flute-playing cyborg.
Covenant did.

All are examples of really shitty retcons and the Snyderverse is full of them.

Ask yourself this: What if Bruce Wayne had been showing running down the street in a post-credits scene at the very end of MoS, following the WB logo? Would that have made all the difference in the world to you? Because to normal people, that would make NO difference.

Oh, I don't particularly care one way or the other. I am just pointing out that it's shit story-telling.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Truth. The Numbers Dot Com. Wonder Woman did a cool hundred million on domestic home video. Check the stats for the other movies. MoS did more, Suicide Squad slightly less at 95 million. The only one that didn't do so hot was Justice League.

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Wonder-Woman-(2017)#tab=summary

Saying that DC fares well on home video is like bragging that Hasselhoff's music career is big in Germany. You truly have no shame.

Doesn't matter if you "care" or not. If somebody told you years ago a lesser-rated CBM would outgross a movie with Star Wars in the title, you'd have laughed them out of the room.

Not necessarily.
I've always felt that Disney would go to the well one too many time with Star Wars and fatigue would set in.
As we haven't been discussing Star Wars that is neither here nor there.

Puppet Master.

Off topic - but there's actually some decent buzz on the new Puppet Master reboot coming out.

Which franchise character so far isn't? Seems like the only one that didn't work out is Jason Bourne.

Well, in fairness, they tried to make the Bourne franchise about someone besides Bourne. That's just dumb. It's like Halloween 3 w/out Michael Meyers.

But audiences really like Downey as Stark. That's going to be a tough nut to recast. They may have to go with Arno, not Tony. And if they COULD make Iron Man 4 with Tony, they'd all do backflips before you could slather a slice of bologna with mayo and stuff it between your cheeks. The thing is, Civil War is like an Iron Man movie in all but name. And that he gets so much screen time in Infinity War may have to do with his reaching for his coat from the rack in Feige's office.

I think its entirely possible that an Iron Man without Downey may gross less than others. But it will still be successful. Similarly, Lazenby's Bond was moderately successful.

It's unlikely. Downey's going to do Sherlock Holmes 3. F-meister's going to have to pour himself a stiff drink, because those Sherlock movies make a lot of money, too. $525-545 million. And those are Warner Bros. flicks.

I thought the first Sherlock was great. Second was somewhat of a mess. They rushed into the Moriarty showdown too soon. Hopefully the third one is good.

That movie wasn't made for 5-year-olds. While Batman and Robin was. Do the math.

I admire Returns alot. I'm just saying that the film's tone and content factored into Warner's decision to give Burton the boot.

Again, if another Batman movie dropped a mere two years after the B&R fiasco, it would have suffered. Don't think so?

Hard to say.
Batman Forever was a huge hit and suffers from many of the same flaws as B&R.
I think WB could have salvaged the franchise rather than put it in hibernation.
As a Batman fan, I also selfishly feel like alot of time was lost.

It's still Moore being Bond. And Octopussy was more course correction? An island full of chicks? That screams "1969-71."

Octopussy didn't come after Moonraker. That was For Your Eyes Only. While some camp elements (example - Tarzan yell) made their return in Octopussy, its still toned down compared to MR. I love Moore. No dispute there.

^Case in point! Nolan completed his trilogy. He participated in Man of Steel. He devoted nearly a decade of his life to DC, and he even managed to make two other films in-between, Inception being the textbook definition of a blockbuster. He has since made Interstellar (a hit) and Dunkirk (a hit). He's not making more CBMs. Your saying his "silence" speaks volumes is like saying Jon Favreau probably has something against Disney for leaving Iron Man 3 to Shane Black after Iron Man 2's rush job. These directors do other things. They get paid shit-tons of money. They don't care if you think their silence spells out fortune cookie fortunes.

It's not unusual for producers to do the publicity rounds. Haven't seen Nolan promoting the DCEU much at all.

WTF. That would have never happened. Sounds like something Gary heard at the hot dog stand that he passed on to Howard.

Before B&R was made, I also remember rumors of Stallone being cast as Freeze before Arnold.

Btw, isn't it funny how Journey can't mount a proper comeback while Judas Priest records new albums their fans love? Priest just booked their South American tour.

Still having your original lead singer def. helps.

The 746.8 million dollar wreckage that pummeled the last X-Men movie and matched the one before it? Yeah, that's some heap.

Irrelevant. After the Suicide trailer was well-received, the studio had a company that specializes in trailers re-edit the movie. Total shitshow!

So I quote Ridley Scott's Gladiator, while he quotes a shitty Adam Sandler movie...hmm, telling.

Sure is. One of us obviously thinks defending DC is worthy of an arena-style death-match. The other thinks DC is a infantile dick/fart joke.

[verslibre]

[verslibre]

Truth. The Numbers Dot Com. Wonder Woman did a cool hundred million on domestic home video. Check the stats for the other movies. MoS did more, Suicide Squad slightly less at 95 million. The only one that didn't do so hot was Justice League.

https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Wonder-Woman-(2017)#tab=summary

Saying that DC fares well on home video is like bragging that Hasselhoff's music career is big in Germany. You truly have no shame.

That was an aside that you're reading way too much into. They do well at the box office, too. 3 billion across four films says hi.

Well, in fairness, they tried to make the Bourne franchise about someone besides Bourne. That's just dumb. It's like Halloween 3 w/out Michael Meyers.

It wasn't dumb. The plan was to have every Halloween film concern a different concept. John didn't want to do films exclusively about an indestructible slasher. Season of the Witch is an underrated movie, too. But the studio, and audiences, forced John's hand and back to Myers it went.

I think its entirely possible that an Iron Man without Downey may gross less than others. But it will still be successful. Similarly, Lazenby's Bond was moderately successful.

That's the thing. Disney doesn't want any movies to "gross less." They're always on the prowl for their next Downey/Evans/Pratt (Rudd doesn't count).

I thought the first Sherlock was great. Second was somewhat of a mess. They rushed into the Moriarty showdown too soon. Hopefully the third one is good.

Moriarty is his arch-nemesis. How was the second movie too soon?

Hard to say.
Batman Forever was a huge hit and suffers from many of the same flaws as B&R.
I think WB could have salvaged the franchise rather than put it in hibernation.
As a Batman fan, I also selfishly feel like alot of time was lost.

Perhaps. Eight years was quite an interval. But look what we got after it: the best Batman films ever. Reeves has a serious shadow to contend with. But I think he's going for something different, too.

It's still Moore being Bond. And Octopussy was more course correction? An island full of chicks? That screams "1969-71."

Octopussy didn't come after Moonraker.

I did not say that. (Clue: "more.")

That was For Your Eyes Only.

Right. Yes.

While some camp elements (example - Tarzan yell) made their return in Octopussy, its still toned down compared to MR. I love Moore. No dispute there.

A "Tarzan yell" any time after 1968 or in any film after that year that is not a spoof = full-on camp.

^Case in point! Nolan completed his trilogy. He participated in Man of Steel. He devoted nearly a decade of his life to DC, and he even managed to make two other films in-between, Inception being the textbook definition of a blockbuster. He has since made Interstellar (a hit) and Dunkirk (a hit). He's not making more CBMs. Your saying his "silence" speaks volumes is like saying Jon Favreau probably has something against Disney for leaving Iron Man 3 to Shane Black after Iron Man 2's rush job. These directors do other things. They get paid shit-tons of money. They don't care if you think their silence spells out fortune cookie fortunes.

It's not unusual for producers to do the publicity rounds. Haven't seen Nolan promoting the DCEU much at all.

For what? He's supposed to be tweeting DCEU stuff while on the set of Dunkirk? He spent a decade with DC. No surprise he's back to focusing on his own projects. He's done movies about an insomniac detective, magicians, space exploration and WWII. Who knows what's next for Nolan. But I'll be there.

Btw, isn't it funny how Journey can't mount a proper comeback while Judas Priest records new albums their fans love? Priest just booked their South American tour.

Still having your original lead singer def. helps.

Helps, but it's never a certainty: Blue Oyster Cult and Y&T have their original lead singers, too. But they're not playing arenas.

The 746.8 million dollar wreckage that pummeled the last X-Men movie and matched the one before it? Yeah, that's some heap.

Irrelevant. After the Suicide trailer was well-received, the studio had a company that specializes in trailers re-edit the movie. Total shitshow!

It wasn't the movie Ayer intended, no, but it didn't stop it from being a hit. The sequel will probably be a hit, too. Any movie with Harley Quinn will likely be.

Sure is. One of us obviously thinks defending DC is worthy of an arena-style death-match. The other thinks DC is a infantile dick/fart joke.

But one of them keeps replying.

[Monker]

That IS the setup. It's all the setup we needed following the opening title sequence. We all know Batman's origin. A 40-minute recap wasn't necessary. Even Monker will agree.

Funny how I get brought up in these conversations.

Correct, I don't believe they had to redo the entire origin story. Why would they when they wanted to make him and old and cranky middle-aged batman?

So, that also means that TNC is correct. Trying to explain why Batman is not the same as we have come to know, and do it in a movie where we also have to understand his feelings towards Superman, and the public's feelings towards Superman, and Superman's feelings towards everything, and why Lex Jr. is a spaz, and....blob monster, oh, and BTW, here's Wonder Woman...that is FAR, FAR, FAR too much to make any of these characters relatable AND have the story be engaging and make sense.

Not too long ago, I rewatched TDK:Rises. Even though it is probably my least favorite of that series, it STILL makes Batman into a relatable character. You feel his struggle, you feel his pain, you know his sacrifice at the end. NONE OF THAT HAPPENED with BvS and the introduction of Batfleck.

So, no, you didn't need an origin story for Batman. You needed an origin story for Batfleck...and BvS didn't do that.
Revisionist writing because you saw an Easter egg in the previous movie? Dude, go get your coffee. [/quote]

[verslibre]

Shazam!'s cinematographer says the first trailer is ready to go for Comic Con.

https://twitter.com/BatmanNewsCom/status/1017185941352566786

[RedWingFan]

Looking at the Shazam pics, it's good to see the guy from The Electric Company that made Spiderman's suit is still getting work.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Cavill and Fishburn don't sound very confident about a MOS 2 happening.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/cavill-fish ... f-steel-2/

[The_Noble_Cause]

That IS the setup. It's all the setup we needed following the opening title sequence. We all know Batman's origin. A 40-minute recap wasn't necessary. Even Monker will agree.

Funny how I get brought up in these conversations.

Correct, I don't believe they had to redo the entire origin story. Why would they when they wanted to make him and old and cranky middle-aged batman?

So, that also means that TNC is correct. Trying to explain why Batman is not the same as we have come to know, and do it in a movie where we also have to understand his feelings towards Superman, and the public's feelings towards Superman, and Superman's feelings towards everything, and why Lex Jr. is a spaz, and....blob monster, oh, and BTW, here's Wonder Woman...that is FAR, FAR, FAR too much to make any of these characters relatable AND have the story be engaging and make sense.

Not too long ago, I rewatched TDK:Rises. Even though it is probably my least favorite of that series, it STILL makes Batman into a relatable character. You feel his struggle, you feel his pain, you know his sacrifice at the end. NONE OF THAT HAPPENED with BvS and the introduction of Batfleck.

So, no, you didn't need an origin story for Batman. You needed an origin story for Batfleck...and BvS didn't do that.
Revisionist writing because you saw an Easter egg in the previous movie? Dude, go get your coffee.

When Monker is right, he is right.

[verslibre]

So nice to see you guys be pals again after all that weirdness in the other thread.

[verslibre]

Looking at the Shazam pics, it's good to see the guy from The Electric Company that made Spiderman's suit is still getting work.

Stop looking at his package. You can never be him.

P.S. Still looks better than Cap's 2012 Avengers suit.

[The_Noble_Cause]

That was an aside that you're reading way too much into. They do well at the box office, too. 3 billion across four films says hi.

If MOS did well enough to warrant a sequel, it would have been here already. Shoehorning Batman into the series was a hail mary pass that failed. With the exception of Wonder Woman, the DC franchise is a case profile in diminishing returns. They will have to move heaven and earth for The Flash movie to make money.

It wasn't dumb. The plan was to have every Halloween film concern a different concept. John didn't want to do films exclusively about an indestructible slasher. Season of the Witch is an underrated movie, too. But the studio, and audiences, forced John's hand and back to Myers it went.

You have this patronizing tendency to lecture people. I'm well aware of the thinking behind keeping Michael out of Halloween 3. An actual scary movie w/out Meyers may have been a hit. Instead audiences were given a film involving rubber masks with Stonehenge particles in it, a mad scientist, and androids. The entire thing was just dumb and laughable. Like an rejected first draft of a RL Stine novel retold by a retard.

Moriarty is his arch-nemesis. How was the second movie too soon?

Did Bond face-off against Blofeld by the second movie? Did Harry Potter fight Voldemort in the second movie?
Conan Doyle wrote over 50 Sherlock stories. Moriarty appears in less than a handful.
Your storytelling instincts are bad. This is why you like shitty DC movies.

Perhaps. Eight years was quite an interval. But look what we got after it: the best Batman films ever. Reeves has a serious shadow to contend with. But I think he's going for something different, too.

I disliked Begins. I think TDK and TDKR are both classics. I largely credit Jonathan Nolan for his work on the scripts. Goyer is a hack.

A "Tarzan yell" any time after 1968 or in any film after that year that is not a spoof = full-on camp.

I already said that Octopuusy had a few moments of humor. It was still decidedly more grounded than Moonraker. So was A View To A Kill.

For what? He's supposed to be tweeting DCEU stuff while on the set of Dunkirk? He spent a decade with DC. No surprise he's back to focusing on his own projects. He's done movies about an insomniac detective, magicians, space exploration and WWII. Who knows what's next for Nolan. But I'll be there.

Whatever he does, one thing is for sure - Nolan won't be reduced to making movies on his cell phone like Snyder.

Helps, but it's never a certainty: Blue Oyster Cult and Y&T have their original lead singers, too. But they're not playing arenas.

Maybe they should convince HBO to use their songs in the final episode of Game of Thrones or something. Neither of these groups were ever as big as Journey.

It wasn't the movie Ayer intended, no, but it didn't stop it from being a hit. The sequel will probably be a hit, too. Any movie with Harley Quinn will likely be.

Yes, it made bank. It was a super-villain team up with a snappy trailer. I was there opening night also. Did anybody like it? No, not really.

But one of them keeps replying.

Actually, you're replying to ME - because every non-glowing comment about DC offends your sensitive feels.
I am just rubbernecking at the flaming twenty mile pile-up known as DCEU. So keep dancing bitch.

[verslibre]

Cavill and Fishburn don't sound very confident about a MOS 2 happening.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/cavill-fish ... f-steel-2/

Well, if it isn't Dark Horizons, aka Garth Franklin, the Sultan of Spin! There's no guy better at mining other sites for his news info!

Let's translate Larry's remarks, taken out of context as usual:

"Not sure if/when they'll call me, but I'm glad I got the Ant-Man gig, so can we just talk about that?

{Honestly, if they can recast War Machine, they can recast Perry White. I'd rather they not, but he's not going to prevent any moves from being made.)

As for Cavill, Garthy Boy writes "Cavill meanwhile seems sick of people asking about the film..."

What a load. The guy should shut down his blog. Everyone knows Cavill loves to take the piss. Cavill and Affleck joked around plenty on set. It's "highly likely we will see another Superman movie somewhere between 2019 and 2045.”

DH has been operating for years and that guy still sucks as a writer.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Well, if it isn't Dark Horizons, aka Garth Franklin, the Sultan of Spin! There's no guy better at mining other sites for his news info!

If you're criticizing Dark Horizons for being a news aggregate site then you are pretty much criticizing every news site out there.

Let's translate Larry's remarks, taken out of context as usual:

"Not sure if/when they'll call me, but I'm glad I got the Ant-Man gig, so can we just talk about that?

{Honestly, if they can recast War Machine, they can recast Perry White. I'd rather they not, but he's not going to prevent any moves from being made.)

Sounds to me like Fishburne's multi-picture deal with DC is done.

As for Cavill, Garthy Boy writes "Cavill meanwhile seems sick of people asking about the film..."

What a load. The guy should shut down his blog. Everyone knows Cavill loves to take the piss. Cavill and Affleck joked around plenty on set. It's "highly likely we will see another Superman movie somewhere between 2019 and 2045.”

The only people being pissed on is clueless fans like you. Cavill should give them a straight answer and lose the smugness.

DH has been operating for years and that guy still sucks as a writer.

DH has been around for decades, even when the web was in its infancy. The site is obviously doing something right. Seems like you are just attacking the messenger rather than deal with Cavill's evasive answer.

[verslibre]

That was an aside that you're reading way too much into. They do well at the box office, too. 3 billion across four films says hi.

If MOS did well enough to warrant a sequel, it would have been here already. Shoehorning Batman into the series was a hail mary pass that failed. With the exception of Wonder Woman, the DC franchise is a case profile in diminishing returns. They will have to move heaven and earth for The Flash movie to make money.

You have this tendency to pontificate. And when I say you pontificate, I mean you express your opinions in a manner that reeks of pomp and intolerance.

It wasn't dumb. The plan was to have every Halloween film concern a different concept. John didn't want to do films exclusively about an indestructible slasher. Season of the Witch is an underrated movie, too. But the studio, and audiences, forced John's hand and back to Myers it went.

You have this patronizing tendency to lecture people. I'm well aware of the thinking behind keeping Michael out of Halloween 3.

So what? Because you assume I'm a telepath and I should know that already, you expect me to skip it? You're a hit with your snare drum and your slicked-back hair under the lamppost. My point was that John wanted to make a different movie EVERY time after Halloween II. Maybe you blinked and missed it.

An actual scary movie w/out Meyers may have been a hit. Instead audiences were given a film involving rubber masks with Stonehenge particles in it, a mad scientist, and androids. The entire thing was just dumb and laughable. Like an rejected first draft of a RL Stine novel retold by a retard.

You sound like you're 75. Season of the Witch has a wicked cool unconventional climax where EVIL WINS. Scores of hapless trick-or-treaters perish. Many a parent despised that movie for its fucked-up ending. It's another win for Carpenter in my book. A plausible premise? Not really. Kind of wacky. But there's this creepy vibe to the whole shebang, and it's got one of his best soundtracks. So there.

Moriarty is his arch-nemesis. How was the second movie too soon?

Did Bond face-off against Blofeld by the second movie?

Who cares? You and nobody else.

Did Harry Potter fight Voldemort in the second movie?

LOL! I have not watched ONE of those fucking movies. And I never will. Next!

Conan Doyle wrote over 50 Sherlock stories. Moriarty appears in less than a handful.

Yay! And who guess which movie in Nolan's trilogy the Joker appears in? The second! Woo-hoo!

Your storytelling instincts are bad. This is why you like shitty DC movies.

Sure. Let's see your fiction, bud. I'll give you my honest feedback. Put up-or-shut up time, storyteller.

Perhaps. Eight years was quite an interval. But look what we got after it: the best Batman films ever. Reeves has a serious shadow to contend with. But I think he's going for something different, too.

I disliked Begins.

You DISlike Batman Begins? Your cred just bottomed out. Don't ever read Frank Miller's acclaimed Batman: Year One, because that's where big chunks of Begins came from.

I think TDK and TDKR are both classics. I largely credit Jonathan Nolan for his work on the scripts. Goyer is a hack.

You can say that as many times as you want, but Begins is regarded as one of the best — if not the best — superhero origin films, and it's all Goyer, with some screeplay tweaks by Chris.

I don't disagree that Jon's revise of TDK was excellent. Even he said "I can't believe my name is on something this good," lol.

Still, Rises is the most flawed of the three films. It's the most ambitious, and the most flawed. Setting it eight years after TDK was too long. Nolan did that on purpose. He didn't want WB bridging off his trilogy. Showing Ra's vanish off-camera would've been more effective. Batman's fighting ability was reined in a bit. Tight choreography outside the main confrontation with Bane was not up to par. The crowd fight looks bad when you watch it now.

I already said that Octopuusy had a few moments of humor. It was still decidedly more grounded than Moonraker. So was A View To A Kill.

Roger Moore is also the biggest joke-target of all the Bonds, but that's never bothered me.

Whatever he does, one thing is for sure - Nolan won't be reduced to making movies on his cell phone like Snyder.

Spiteful remarks only make you look like a shill. Snyder did that for fun, on his own time, on his own dime. (Trust me, he can afford it.) Looks sweet, too. If you're trying to beef over that, you're gonna end up chowing on Hamburger Helper sans the meat.

Helps, but it's never a certainty: Blue Oyster Cult and Y&T have their original lead singers, too. But they're not playing arenas.

Maybe they should convince HBO to use their songs in the final episode of Game of Thrones or something. Neither of these groups were ever as big as Journey.

They've never relied on taped lead vocals, either. Btw, Journey's mega-success only lasted a few years. Want to compare their career to Van Halen's? They can put whoever they want out front and fill an arena. Hagar, Roth, Cherone. They could probably do it with "Weird" Al Yankovic.

It wasn't the movie Ayer intended, no, but it didn't stop it from being a hit. The sequel will probably be a hit, too. Any movie with Harley Quinn will likely be.

Yes, it made bank. It was a super-villain team up with a snappy trailer. I was there opening night also. Did anybody like it? No, not really.

If "nobody liked it," how did it score 748 million? Don't tell me the studio bought all those tickets.

W

But one of them keeps replying.

Actually, you're replying to ME - because every non-glowing comment about DC offends your sensitive feels.
I am just rubbernecking at the flaming twenty mile pile-up known as DCEU. So keep dancing bitch.

Haha! You can't not reply. You look forward to my posts.

[verslibre]

DH has been operating for years and that guy still sucks as a writer.

DH has been around for decades, even when the web was in its infancy. The site is obviously doing something right. Seems like you are just attacking the messenger rather than deal with Cavill's evasive answer.

I read DH back in the late '90s/early '00s, too. Cavill's answer isn't evasive, it's sarky (not snarky). He can't tell you what he's doing next because that's likely going to be announced in two Saturdays at a certain event. But nowadays, a less-than-direct answer routinely earns a negative spin. I'm glad you enjoy Garth's rhetoric, but he's working for clicks just like Screen Rant, Bleeding Cool, ComicBookMovie, CBR, Den of Geek and Heroic Hollywood. And those places are where he goes to source his regurgitations.

[The_Noble_Cause]

I read DH back in the late '90s/early '00s, too. Cavill's answer isn't evasive, it's sarky (not snarky).

Cavill didn't answer the question. He evaded it.

He can't tell you what he's doing next because that's likely going to be announced in two Saturdays at a certain event.

Like all blind faith cultists, you think there is a master plan underway. There isn't.

I'm glad you enjoy Garth's rhetoric, but he's working for clicks just like Screen Rant, Bleeding Cool, ComicBookMovie, CBR, Den of Geek and Heroic Hollywood. And those places are where he goes to source his regurgitations.

As mentioned, most reporting on the internet is comprised of aggregate websites that piggyback off the work of others. This isn't about Garth or the website.

[verslibre]

Right. He's not "writing," he's "reporting."