DC Extended Universe THREAD

[The_Noble_Cause]

When critics dislike a movie without having seen it (even if they watch the movie and [re]write/revise their "review" in post), that pretty much erases any shred of credibility they'd otherwise have.

How does this apply to Dev or Drew? Their BvsS reviews went up maybe a day or two after the BvsS screening. Like I said, if a critic gives a DC movie a bad review, you guys engage in wholesale character assassination. I've never seen anything like it. People have different opinions (and in the case of Drew and Dev, very well-written and well-argued opinions). Grow up.

[The_Noble_Cause]

I never had a problem with what McWeeny said. But Feraci goes way beyond comic book movies and way beyond Batman V Superman (he disliked BvS WAAY before it came out) when it comes to putting himself out there as a scumbag of epic proportions. He even admitted as such by how big of a troll he is. Like I said, Heroic Hollywood is way more respected as a scooper than Devin and that's saying something. Regardless of a movie critic or a scooper, I don't care for his antics as a human being.

If Dev thought BvS was good, he probably would've said as much. From it's inception, BvS appeared as a cynical hail Mary pass to many (including me). And watching the finished film did not persuade me otherwise. When Snyder announced the project, the creative team had no clue what they were doing. And they still don't. If Dev and other critics were cynical going into the film, they had every right to be. But that doesn't make them "haters." If Snyder and DC 've delivered a better movie, this discussion wouldn't be happening. When you double-down on a loser like Man of Steel, guess what you end up with?

[YoungJRNYfan]

Feraci ' s biggest supporters sense how big of a pretentious man child he is. He picks fights and is mostly out of line. He's an obvious troll when it comes to Kevin Smith, JJ Abrams, Star Wars and everything DC. If there's anybody to nail to the cross of scoopers it's Feraci. He's tough to defend and it starts with how big of a despicable human being he is. Whatever the critics say about DC films or BVS is whatever and respected for what it is. DF, though, I can care less what he thinks regardless of his track record.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Feraci ' s biggest supporters sense how big of a pretentious man child he is. He picks fights and is mostly out of line. He's an obvious troll when it comes to Kevin Smith, JJ Abrams, Star Wars and everything DC. If there's anybody to nail to the cross of scoopers it's Feraci. He's tough to defend and it starts with how big of a despicable human being he is. Whatever the critics say about DC films or BVS is whatever and respected for what it is. DF, though, I can care less what he thinks regardless of his track record.

Again, your talking about his character and other distractions. I'm talking about his film criticism. When it comes to BvS, his opinion is as valid as any.

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/03/22/ ... s-doomsday

[YoungJRNYfan]

I've followed Feraci. What he wrote is what he wrote. My point is, you can find any other horrid review of BvS (they're not hard to find so go ahead and pile on) and I'd respect it over his piece (taking one look at his review, he starts by saying how Snyder hates Superman as a character. NOT CREDIBLE.) I'm not particularly interested in it because his character as a human being reflects his attempts at trolling and he's been trolling everything DC WAY before BvS and he giggles and gleefully makes it known (again, as a critic, that's not credible.) He's been a thorn in the side of a specific set of topics and goes after everything when it comes to Star Wars, Kevin Smith, J.J Abrams, DC, etc. He's just as terrible of singling out his much hated properties (admittingly) as he is as a person. It's cool to like him. I don't regardless of his views. I tend to brush off whatever he has to say since I don't respect the dude as writer and the intentions he brings.

That said, it's pretty well known how we all feel about BvS and like you said TNC, it all comes down to individual opinions. Everybody has a right to their own opinion. What we were initially talking about was his "scoops" (which are mostly terrible and wrong regardless of being a good writer) and he was the one who broke the Wann thing about Aquaman, which led to Wann posting "You're killing me guys" as he posted a picture of him standing up against a wall of a Aquaman mural. which pretty much debunked DF's scoop. So that's that.

[verslibre]

A rumor without validity. A rumor that was valid was JGL and the Sandman film.

Multiple sites reported on JGL playing Batman. It was also reported that Josh Brolin was asked to play Batman before Affleck. Both sound fairly credible. The John Blake story felt shoe-horned into TDKR, as if WB was forcing Nolan to spin-off the franchise. And the JGL Sandman project was confirmed by JGL himself and he offered updates on it. So it was hardly ever a rumor. JGL probably leaked the story to the press initially. You are just picking and choosing what stories to believe based upon your own preexisting close-minded DC bias.

IMO, Blake wasn't shoe-horned at all. He was a supporting character whose birth name was only revealed to be Robin at the very end. It was a nod to the character. Blake and Wayne/Batman barely interacted on a couple occasions, but Blake had his own stuff going on. He was never going to be the Batman "after" The Dark Knight Rises, at least not formally on film. He could have been Nightwing. He could have been Eelman. (LOL) Audiences walked away with their own ideas. The game of "what if" is never not fun.

Now, what I guessed (incorrectly) during TDKR is that Blake would actually somehow don the cowl and they'd pull off a variation of Knightfall. But that did not happen. I think that would've been cooler than what we got, especially if it would've meant the absence of that subpar crowd fight scene in the climax.

And, yeah, Sandman was a thing. I didn't say it wasn't. But did they ever even actually move into the paperwork for it? A lot of people talk and say "Yeah, we're gonna do it." Then it just doesn't happen. It doesn't leave the table. It wasn't another Justice League: Mortal where they had the project cast and they were ready to go and the rug got pulled out from under their feet.

The SS reshoots added some action-expo, not Spidey-styled quips. Those aren't integral to the story it tells. It already has one-liners.

Were you on-set? Are you the script supervisor? You have ZERO proof backing this up. You just can't handle the possibility that a DC/WB film would require (GASP!) tinkering. But based on their awful track record, I would be more surprised if Suicide Squad did not have re-shoots.

Geez. Chill out, man. ALL these movies get tinkered with. BvS got reshoots, too. Late in the game. In fact, they filmed footage for different scenes with a single crane shot and cut it up and edited it in. I bet you didn't even know that.

Now, if you want to think the reshoots were for humor, that's your prerogative, Bobby Brown.

[verslibre]

When critics dislike a movie without having seen it (even if they watch the movie and [re]write/revise their "review" in post), that pretty much erases any shred of credibility they'd otherwise have.

How does this apply to Dev or Drew? Their BvsS reviews went up maybe a day or two after the BvsS screening. Like I said, if a critic gives a DC movie a bad review, you guys engage in wholesale character assassination. I've never seen anything like it. People have different opinions (and in the case of Drew and Dev, very well-written and well-argued opinions). Grow up.

Those guys were peddling negative vibes for weeks/months before the movie came out. It's all online. Look it up, Googleman! To the keyboard!

[The_Noble_Cause]

I've followed Feraci. What he wrote is what he wrote. My point is, you can find any other horrid review of BvS (they're not hard to find so go ahead and pile on) and I'd respect it over his piece (taking one look at his review, he starts by saying how Snyder hates Superman as a character. NOT CREDIBLE.)

Why is that not credible? Has Snyder not played on the established conventions of the Superman character as previously seen? Snyder's version is a morally ambiguous Supes who openly questions his obligation to defend the people of Metropolis. Snyder's Superman snaps necks. Snyder's Jimmy Olsen also get his brains blown out. I think there is a legitimate question as to whether Snyder cares for earlier depictions of the Superman character.

What we were initially talking about was his "scoops" (which are mostly terrible and wrong regardless of being a good writer) and he was the one who broke the Wann thing about Aquaman, which led to Wann posting "You're killing me guys" as he posted a picture of him standing up against a wall of a Aquaman mural. which pretty much debunked DF's scoop. So that's that.

How does Wan posting a photo debunk ANYTHING Dev reported? Since when has a filmmaker EVER commented publicly about a troubled and difficult production. It proves nothing. Drew at HitFix made similar comments about their being behind the scenes issues. I'd put my money on their reports over a stupid Instagram picture.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Those guys were peddling negative vibes for weeks/months before the movie came out. It's all online. Look it up, Googleman! To the keyboard!

"Peddling negative vibes" eh? Whatever that means. In other words, they reported something less than positive about BvS and you can't handle it. You also can't handle the possibility that the movie sucked.

[The_Noble_Cause]

IMO, Blake wasn't shoe-horned at all. He was a supporting character whose birth name was only revealed to be Robin at the very end. It was a nod to the character.

Very hokey and clumsily done. Reminds of the ending of Skyfall where the audience learns Moneypenny's name.

He was never going to be the Batman "after" The Dark Knight Rises, at least not formally on film. He could have been Nightwing.

Numerous movie sites reported differently. Were they all misinformed? WB/DC wanted to keep the Batman cinematic gravy train going and I'm sure they contemplated all sorts of bad ideas.

And, yeah, Sandman was a thing. I didn't say it wasn't. But did they ever even actually move into the paperwork for it? A lot of people talk and say "Yeah, we're gonna do it." Then it just doesn't happen. It doesn't leave the table. It wasn't another Justice League: Mortal where they had the project cast and they were ready to go and the rug got pulled out from under their feet.

Read it for yourself. I would imagine they at least had a script.

https://www.facebook.com/JoeGordonLevit ... 6645089664

Geez. Chill out, man. ALL these movies get tinkered with. BvS got reshoots, too.

Yea, and most films do so to make a film better. So when word leaks that Suicide Squad is doing re-shoots, odds are it's not because the movie is flawless.

[YoungJRNYfan]

Why is that not credible?

Because it's a ridiculous statement and untrue. Ridiculousness doesn't coincide with credibility.

Snyder's version is a morally ambiguous Supes who openly questions his obligation to defend the people of Metropolis.

Nothing is out of spite like you make it sound. Supe's mentality is more politically driven and manipulated through public opinion. He is beginning to believe the negativity being said about him about intervening, something half the world is split on, let alone being manipulated into thinking he's bringing more harm than good (that's the use of a good villain.) And it's clear this Superman just doesn't defend Metropolis. He's being billed as Earth's savior and his acts reflect that.

Snyder's Superman snaps necks

.

Superman has killed plenty of times.

Snyder's Jimmy Olsen also get his brains blown out.

So that means Snyder hates Superman? Rubbish. Superman also saved Lois Lane a thousand times between MoS and BvS and sacrificed himself in death. He even inspired Batman. Those things don't happen by accident if a director hates a character.

I think there is a legitimate question as to whether Snyder cares for earlier depictions of the Superman character.

How early are we talking here? Because Snyder's Superman has plenty of Golden Age influence on the character, which was his earliest depiction.

How does Wan posting a photo debunk ANYTHING Dev reported?

Go look on Feraci's Twitter. He has begun to backtrack and claims he never said the things he reported about Wann. I wonder why.

Drew at HitFix made similar comments about their being behind the scenes issues. I'd put my money on their reports over a stupid Instagram picture.

Now who sounds bias? Drew at HitFix could have the same lousy "scoops" as anybody else. Not smart to put your money on any of these internet scoops or reports. You're better than that to make those dumb quotes. Scoops of this nature are mostly always wrong. If a little luck will have it, maybe a portion of a scoop could end up being lukewarm at best. It proves nothing.

[verslibre]

How does Wan posting a photo debunk ANYTHING Dev reported?

So because DF reported it, it must somehow be true? Flimsy journalism does not credibility earn nor maintain. Because Wan tweets "You guys are killing me!" — he must be somehow full of shit? He's only the director. DF is a guy who just talks about movies (like we're doing here, maybe we should start making money like him).

Since when has a filmmaker EVER commented publicly about a troubled and difficult production.

First name that comes to mind is Joss Whedon. When he grits his teeth and enunciates a word to make the interviewer understand what he had to deal with, that says it all.

It proves nothing. Drew at HitFix made similar comments about their being behind the scenes issues. I'd put my money on their reports over a stupid Instagram picture.

"Unnamed, reliable sources."

Dude.

[verslibre]

"Peddling negative vibes" eh? Whatever that means. In other words, they reported something less than positive about BvS and you can't handle it. You also can't handle the possibility that the movie sucked.

I don't have to handle it, because it didn't. Next topic!

[verslibre]

IMO, Blake wasn't shoe-horned at all. He was a supporting character whose birth name was only revealed to be Robin at the very end. It was a nod to the character.

Very hokey and clumsily done. Reminds of the ending of Skyfall where the audience learns Moneypenny's name.

Subjective. It happens and then you're "Oh, interesting." Talked with some peeps in the theater. They thought that was a trip (in a cool way).

He was never going to be the Batman "after" The Dark Knight Rises, at least not formally on film. He could have been Nightwing.

Numerous movie sites reported differently. Were they all misinformed? WB/DC wanted to keep the Batman cinematic gravy train going and I'm sure they contemplated all sorts of bad ideas.

There are sites speculating (in some cases, praying to Buddha) that Snyder gets replaced right now. Are they misinformed? More than likely they're just posting click-bait. The entire production is in London. The cast has tweeted numerous workout and hangout pix. Snyder and Terrio wrote the script last year. It's been done.

Where the cinematic gravy train is concerned, every studio wants one, or a whole choo choo set. The Batman train is getting ready to roar again. Ben Affleck has "full creative control" of the film and the newest rumor is that it will feature a host of great villains. Makes me wonder if Ben's constructed a better version of No Man's Land than Nolan did in TDKR.

In actuality, there are only two gravy trains out there that may run forever: Star Wars and Disney's animated classics. Expect a lot more stuff like The Jungle Book to get redone. Disney plans to roll out a Star Wars film every single December from now on, too.

Read it for yourself. I would imagine they at least had a script.

Sounds like they were definitely working on it. I wonder what New Line objected to that made JGL split.

Geez. Chill out, man. ALL these movies get tinkered with. BvS got reshoots, too.

Yea, and most films do so to make a film better. So when word leaks that Suicide Squad is doing re-shoots, odds are it's not because the movie is flawless.

Or it means zip. It means they added a neck snap. Maybe another Batarang flew yonder. Maybe the Squad did a tap dance number. I don't give a shit till I see the movie.

I've mentioned this before, but that cinematic Holy Grail of 2015, The Force Awakens, had reshoots three whole months before it was due out. JJ and the cast went on Kimmel in early, early December (or maybe the very last week of November), and JJ said he had just finished the movie "Yesterday!" I can't tell what they did. That flick has sweet VFX, but that's about it. It has the flimsiest, safest, most linear story, a veritable remake of the '77 movie, and THE most hokey "Whoop! There it is" moment at the end of the movie that (well, you've already spoiled the movie for yourself, so you told us) conveniently allowed us to see Old Man Luke hanging out on an atoll. Carrie didn't do jack (if she did Jack, the movie would've been more interesting), Harrison was there to pick up his check, Finn was wallpaper, and a lot of the new X-Wing pilots sucked (but the spotlight was on Oscar Isaac's Poe Dameron, anyway).

My cuz was down from the Bay a few weeks back and I remembered we hadn't talked about that movie at all. He was a big Star Trek/Star Wars nut growing up. He said he still planned to buy TFA on DVD (I forget exactly why), but he railed on the movie. He hates JJ and his two Trek movies, too.

[YoungJRNYfan]

First off, no movie is flawless. EVERY single movie EVER created...is flawed. Gimmie a break.

All big film productions and blockbusters go through the re-shoot process. Take Marvel for instance:

Kevin Feige Explains MARVEL's Reshoots And Additional Photography Process
Hit the jump to hear what Kevin Feige has to say about reshoots, or additional photography, and how the process has become a standard function of Marvel Studios' production schedules.

[RedWingFan]

Again, your talking about his character and other distractions. I'm talking about his film criticism. When it comes to BvS, his opinion is as valid as any.

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/03/22/ ... s-doomsday

Hadn't seen this review before. Thanks, pretty much captures all the things I thought about the movie.

[verslibre]

First off, no movie is flawless. EVERY single movie EVER created...is flawed. Gimmie a break.

All big film productions and blockbusters go through the re-shoot process. Take Marvel for instance:

Kevin Feige Explains MARVEL's Reshoots And Additional Photography Process
Hit the jump to hear what Kevin Feige has to say about reshoots, or additional photography, and how the process has become a standard function of Marvel Studios' production schedules.

"A standard function." There you go. They should've reshot the entire third act of Ant-Man.

[verslibre]

Again, your talking about his character and other distractions. I'm talking about his film criticism. When it comes to BvS, his opinion is as valid as any.

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/03/22/ ... s-doomsday

Glad you pointed out that it's his opinion. In the review, he says the Knightmare sequence has no bearing on the film, and he's wrong. It's just not completely apparent yet. That's an example of kinetic foreshadowing. It's a snapshot of an event in an alternate future timeline that is or may not be. The Flash is trying to prevent it. The two "dreams" Bruce has during his download aren't dreams, and the papers flying around proved that, but people thought a bat flew by and did that. Yeah, right.

He also bitches that the film doesn't cut to Superman right after Perry White's Kansas quip. Big whoop. So the movie did not do what HE expected. He purposely (or ignorantly?) downplays Lex's big F.U. moment (Granny's peach tea) and chalks it up to a gag.

Dev Faraci reminds me of these millennials who "watch" movies and "read" books and "have" conversations while barely moving their gazes from the screens of their iPhones. When he says the CGI in the third act looks 15 years behind the standard of today, I can tell he's just being an asshole.

[YoungJRNYfan]

Cavill training for JL:

When Superman training, use your mind, you must. #Yoda #UseTheForce #SupermanTraining #JusticeLeague #Superman

[verslibre]

https://twitter.com/BretEastonEllis/status/727399215098269697

Best 2016 films so far: TALE OF TALES Garrone; GREEN ROOM Saulnier; THE INVITATION Kusama; BATMAN V SUPERMAN Snyder.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Go look on Feraci's Twitter. He has begun to backtrack and claims he never said the things he reported about Wann. I wonder why.

Actually, on Twitter Dev chided other movie sites for blowing what he said out of proportion. He tweeted "Again, this isn't what I reported. Other sites took it and ran" and "Anyway, if you see where I said Wan was leaving, let me know. Because I never wrote that." He still stands by the story. Batman vs. Superman was such a disaster, I can't blame Wan for having second thoughts.

[Monker]

Glad you pointed out that it's his opinion. In the review, he says the Knightmare sequence has no bearing on the film, and he's wrong. It's just not completely apparent yet.

LOL...that's hilarious.

That's an example of kinetic foreshadowing.

In BvS, they didn't have enough time to mess with that shit. TELL THE STORY....Snyder did not do that.

He also bitches that the film doesn't cut to Superman right after Perry White's Kansas quip. Big whoop.

That is NOT what he bitched about. He bitched about the fact that the first half of the movie was a bunch of cut scenes that had no relationship to one another...and the were BORING on top of that....and this was ONE example.

So the movie did not do what HE expected.

Correct. He expected it to entertain, and the movie sucked instead.

Dev Faraci reminds me of these millennials who "watch" movies and "read" books and "have" conversations while barely moving their gazes from the screens of their iPhones. When he says the CGI in the third act looks 15 years behind the standard of today, I can tell he's just being an asshole.

The problem is that 90% of the reviews agree with him....and you are the one in denial that BvS sucks.

[The_Noble_Cause]

That's an example of kinetic foreshadowing.

First we had "peddling negative vibes" and now we have "kinetic foreshadowing." You and Verse are pretty much speaking your own language.

He purposely (or ignorantly?) downplays Lex's big F.U. moment (Granny's peach tea) and chalks it up to a gag.

In my theater, people laughed at the mason jar of piss. Compare Eisenberg's spastic Luthor portrayal to Heath Ledger's turn as the Joker. Heath boldly made the part his own and silenced any comparisons to Nicholson. Eisenberg went big and just made a fool of himself.

When he says the CGI in the third act looks 15 years behind the standard of today, I can tell he's just being an asshole.

He's right. Doomsday was a sub-par CGI blur for the most part. Maybe I should have seen it in IMAX.

[verslibre]

That is NOT what he bitched about. He bitched about the fact that the first half of the movie was a bunch of cut scenes that had no relationship to one another...and the were BORING on top of that....and this was ONE example.

Yeah, he DOES bitch about that. Put your spectacles on and go look, Poindexter!

He expected it to entertain, and the movie sucked instead.

It sucked to the tune of 870 million* big ones? SURE. Why isn't it another John Carter or The Lone Ranger?

*Since everyone's so keen nowadays on using ticket sales to rank how good a film is...

[The_Noble_Cause]

There are sites speculating (in some cases, praying to Buddha) that Snyder gets replaced right now. Are they misinformed?

Dev and Drew, the critics being discussed, never said that. And their websites never reported that.

[The_Noble_Cause]

It sucked to the tune of 870 million* big ones? SURE. Why isn't it another John Carter or The Lone Ranger?

*Since everyone's so keen nowadays on using ticket sales to rank how good a film is...

Lone Ranger was waaaay better than BvsS. Just saying.

[verslibre]

There are sites speculating (in some cases, praying to Buddha) that Snyder gets replaced right now. Are they misinformed?

Dev and Drew, the critics being discussed, never said that. And their websites never reported that.

Did I mention those two guys' names? Nope. But if you do a general search with keywords like "Snyder replaced for JL" (etc.), you'll see dozens of click-bait headlines.

[verslibre]

It sucked to the tune of 870 million* big ones? SURE. Why isn't it another John Carter or The Lone Ranger?

*Since everyone's so keen nowadays on using ticket sales to rank how good a film is...

Lone Ranger was waaaay better than BvsS. Just saying.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Did I mention those two guys' names? Nope. But if you do a general search with keywords like "Snyder replaced for JL" (etc.), you'll see dozens of click-bait headlines.

But what does that prove? Zergnet-type websites are a dime-a-dozen? That doesn't mean every rumor about DC's cinematic slate is false.

[verslibre]

Did I mention those two guys' names? Nope. But if you do a general search with keywords like "Snyder replaced for JL" (etc.), you'll see dozens of click-bait headlines.

But what does that prove? Zergnet-type websites are a dime-a-dozen? That doesn't mean every rumor about DC's cinematic slate is false.

Pretty much. They're cannibalizing each for any shred of "news" they can spin and perpetuating the whim that Snyder just MIGHT (some pray) be replaced by another director at any given moment.