OFFICIAL DC Studios; "DCU" THREAD

[verslibre]

I already said WBD trashed their own house. Did you miss it?

It appears I'm capable of saying what you say with many fewer words, because you love to listen to yourself talk (type), and you repeat yourself.

I repeat: The Marvels will still be the bigger bomb.

[Monker]

I already said WBD trashed their own house. Did you miss it?

It appears I'm capable of saying what you say with many fewer words, because you love to listen to yourself talk (type), and you repeat yourself.

I repeat: The Marvels will still be the bigger bomb.

You are not seeing the big picture here.

So what if "The Marvels" bombed. I have NEVER argued that point. I don't care how "big" it bombed. Marvel, along with it's problems, is not on the verge of bankruptcy and DESPERATGELY NEEDING major hits. "The Marvels" has been the first true "bomb" in the entirety of the MCU. WB *NEEDS* big hits. It NEEDS Aquaman 2 to be a billion dollar film. The FACT that there has not been a major DC hit in YEARS matters a LOT.

Now it has even seeped into Rock Steady and the Arkham series of games. A series of games that is classic to the heights of your beloved Dark Knight movies. The leaks for the "Suicide Squad Kills the Justice League" are horrendous. The plot makes absolutely NO sense, involving a multiverse, alternate versions of characters, a Groot like resurrection of a plant girl who is supposed to be Poison Ivy but not really, a flippant death of Kevin Controy's Batman - his final performance of the character. This game should have been the equivalent of a billion dollar film...instead, they are probably going to lose money, too...and it was "in development" for NINE YEARS, well before Gunn took over.

WB is a money pit...it seems destined to go bankrupt. That means that you won't see ANY DC content for what may be decades. So, people like you who whine about Snyder characters and Gunn not doing what you want and condemning Gunn without even seeing what his Superman movie is, YOU are voting for NO DC content for decades.

Gunn said there are no plans to end the Arkham universe. There is supposed to be an Arkham Max series. If Gunn is smart he would involve Rock Steady to help write the story arc of the series, tell everyone the "Suicide Squad Kills the Justice League" is NOT canon and pretend it does not exist...and connect the new series and a new series of games in a close and fundamental way. THAT would be a smart idea. WB *CAN''T* keep releasing this shit any longer, in any medium.

[verslibre]

You are not seeing the big picture here.

No, you just like pontificating.

WB *NEEDS* big hits. It NEEDS Aquaman 2 to be a billion dollar film. The FACT that there has not been a major DC hit in YEARS matters a LOT.

Wow, you sure are moving the goalposts. Don't throw your back out.

You, yourself, said the movie doesn't matter...remember? Since the DCEU is done and Gunn is doing his thing, it doesn't matter (according to you). I've already said it's pathetic that the sequel to a billion dollar hit movie is projected to tank. But that's what you get with the constant meddling by WB/D. But, for some strange reason, you think the studio's too-many-cooks approach that multiple directors have complained of is not the culprit.

You are not seeing the big picture.

Had the DCEU proper been allowed to organically cement its mythology, this wouldn't be happening.

WB is a money pit...it seems destined to go bankrupt.

Already covered this. They need to be sold to Universal and Gunn needs to get the boot. There's nothing new to this "conversation."

There will always be "DC content," but the way things are going, it looks like we're going to see mainly Batman and Superman films, like before 2010.

[Monker]

Wow, you sure are moving the goalposts. Don't throw your back out.

There are no goalposts, especially if you think I am "pontificating".

You, yourself, said the movie doesn't matter...remember?

Correct, in the context of whether to decide to see any of these DCEU movies since Gunn took over and ended it. They do not matter because the DCEU does not exist so they are tied to no future.

Since the DCEU is done and Gunn is doing his thing, it doesn't matter (according to you).

Correct, why would a potential movie ticket buyer see a movie featuring Aquaman (or Shazam, or Flash) when it can no longer connect to the future of the DCEU?

I've already said it's pathetic that the sequel to a billion dollar hit movie is projected to tank. But that's what you get with the constant meddling by WB/D.

And, the constant meddling by Marvel created some of the biggest movies of all time and most successful franchise EVER. ALL of Marvel's movies have Feige tinkering, asking for rewrites and reshoots. And, it has happened from the Hulk movie up to The Marvels. In fact, it can be argued that if Feige had been MORE hands on that Marvel would have been better off.

It's a hindsight is 20/20 excuse you are making...for BAD writing, bad production, bad directing, bad story telling in general.

But, for some strange reason, you think the studio's too-many-cooks approach that multiple directors have complained of is not the culprit.

It's an excuse for imcompetent directors making mediocre crap. WW84 is crap because Patty Jenkins is way over rated as a story teller. Birds of Prey is crap because Margot Robbie's concept sucked and it was so poorly written. Neither of those projects could have been saved by the studio not getting involved. In fact, SOMEBODY should have put a hammer down and told them to write and create a better movie or the project is canceled.

Flash should have never been released because the direction of the DCEU kept changing - for nearly a decade. NOTHING could have saved this movie.

Aquaman, IMO, the entire concept sucks...boring shit...NOTHING about this story makes me want to see it. Again, SOMEBODY should have put the hammer down and told them to write a better story or it is canned...and THAT should have happened BEFORE Gunn took over.

The same with Black Adam. The story itself SUCKS. Write a better fucking story and don't rely on Dwayne's name and action sequences.

The studio should have been involved MORE, not less...and cut the shit out of these movies that made them so bad. That is what Feige did at Marvel through End Game, and slacked off on ever since and why recent movies and series have had issues.

Screaming goats, a live action SpongeBob, stupid shit like naked Thor meeting Zeus. Why does Thor need a lightning bolt when he has his hammer and super axe? Stupid shit like that Feige should have recognized and had it cut out and put more emphasis on Gor and Kang and compelling story telling.

You are not seeing the big picture.

Had the DCEU proper been allowed to organically cement its mythology, this wouldn't be happening.

If the DCEU had better writing and stories there would not have had to be so many changes. The DCEU will be remembered for having only a few decent movies and the rest are forgettable - BECAUSE THE STORIES SUCK.

WB is a money pit...it seems destined to go bankrupt.

Already covered this. They need to be sold to Universal and Gunn needs to get the boot.

NEITHER "needs" to happen. There is no reason for Universal to buy a company that is about to go bankrupt. What Universal should do is let WB fall into such financial trouble that they can buy it for $.01, or as little as possible. If WB is crashing, let it crash and then pay pennies for the wreckage, or not buy it at all. Even if Universal does buy WB, there is no reason to put any money into a absolute failure of a franchise that LOSES money. You are assuming way too much. If I were Universal, I would buy WB based on hard assets and NOT their IP...because their IP LOSES money.

There will always be "DC content," but the way things are going, it looks like we're going to see mainly Batman and Superman films, like before 2010.

You won't even get that if there is no studio to release it.

[verslibre]

Monker's gonna have fun till his daddy takes the T-bird away!

I'll only take the time to reply to the "important stuff."

Correct, why would a potential movie ticket buyer see a movie featuring Aquaman (or Shazam, or Flash) when it can no longer connect to the future of the DCEU?

So why does it need to make a billion dollars if it's already considered less than relevant? ASK GUNN & SAFRAN & ZASLAV!

And, the constant meddling by Marvel

STOP. We're not talking about Marvel. Moving right long...

It's an excuse for imcompetent directors making mediocre crap.

STOP. So now James Wan is incompetent!? Per your guidelines, the guy's dick should be bronzed for having directed three billion dollar earners.

Andy Muschietti's IT movies were great, better than I expected. He's not fully culpable for the train wreck that The Flash became. Two words: studio meddling.

Having a great time over there, cubicle warrior?

Patty Jenkins is way over rated as a story teller.

So is Joss Whedon, but you have a veiny boner for the guy because of his Star Wars knockoff.

Patty's done some very good work; she can't be faulted entirely for WW84 when Geoff Johns co-conceived it.

Birds of Prey is crap because Margot Robbie's concept sucked and it was so poorly written.

It sucks for many of the same reasons The Marvels sucks. I agree.

Neither of those projects could have been saved by the studio not getting involved.

You're assuming you're familiar with the original pitches and scriptments when I know, for a fact, you aren't.

NEITHER "needs" to happen. There is no reason for Universal to buy a company that is about to go bankrupt. What Universal should do is let WB fall into such financial trouble that they can buy it for $.01, or as little as possible. If WB is crashing, let it crash and then pay pennies for the wreckage, or not buy it at all. Even if Universal does buy WB, there is no reason to put any money into a absolute failure of a franchise that LOSES money. You are assuming way too much. If I were Universal, I would buy WB based on hard assets and NOT their IP...because their IP LOSES money.

Yeah, nothing "needs" to happen. This is all tied to the entertainment sector. We need to breathe, eat, drink, stay warm (or cool), and get the bills paid.

But what you should know is that they're meeting with Paramount. It's either going to be Paramount or Universal, baby. WB isn't lost — yet. But they do need a proper showrunner that isn't going to operate like DC is simply Marvel II. They need to get people interested again.

You won't even get that if there is no studio to release it.

And whose fault is that? Speaking for myself, I still have the comics and graphic novels, i.e., where it all began. There's plenty of content out there.

Btw, I read a rumor that Gunny is cutting all sorts of corners so that he still walks away with a major payday even if Superman: Legacy doesn't hit. The guy cites "cameo porn" but has around thirty characters lined up for this movie. Buzz is zilch.

[Monker]

Monker's gonna have fun till his daddy takes the T-bird away!

Don't need nor want a T-Bird. I own a Mustang.

Correct, why would a potential movie ticket buyer see a movie featuring Aquaman (or Shazam, or Flash) when it can no longer connect to the future of the DCEU?

So why does it need to make a billion dollars if it's already considered less than relevant? ASK GUNN & SAFRAN & ZASLAV!

Because this forum GUARANTEED it would, years ago....and the fact that WB is in huge debt. They can't afford to be releasing movies that LOSE MONEY.

And, the constant meddling by Marvel

STOP. We're not talking about Marvel. Moving right long...

Correct. We are talking about studios meddling in movies and you claiming that it causes them to fail. Marvel is an example where that is COMPLETELY untrue and the opposite is the case. WB should have had MORE meddling.

It's an excuse for imcompetent directors making mediocre crap.

STOP. So now James Wan is incompetent!?

Correct...if he can't write a story around DC's requirements, and blames them for HIS story sucking, YES, he is incompetent.

Per your guidelines, the guy's dick should be bronzed for having directed three billion dollar earners.

And, Michael Bay has four...that doesn't mean he can write a good story.

Also, "Rebel Moon" has a pathetic critics score. I watched a couple YT fan reviews and they said almost EXACTLY the same things, an entire middle section that is repetitive and boring, introducing new characters that have NO ROLE in the film and just stand around in the background, these other characters had special skills introduced that are NEVER USED in the film, a third act that comes out of nowhere and is EXTREMELY short. But, hey, the main character is good, the special affects are good and he does his slow motion thing...so Snyder fans may like it....or, you can wait until the REAL "Snyder cut" is released. Such repetitive BULLSHIT from an over rated director and storyteller.

Andy Muschietti's IT movies were great, better than I expected. He's not fully culpable for the train wreck that The Flash became. Two words: studio meddling.

One word: bullshit.

It was never going to be any good and should have never been released...it should have been canceled YEARS ago.

Having a great time over there, cubicle warrior?

Don't work in a cube...haven't in years.

Patty Jenkins is way over rated as a story teller.

So is Joss Whedon, but you have a veiny boner for the guy because of his Star Wars knockoff.[/quote]

I really don't care if he is or not. But, Joss has had MAJOR success with Avengers, Agents of SHIELD, Firefly, Buffy, Angel, and probably others that I can't think of. If he's over rated, that's fine.

As for "Star Wars knockoff", see above regarding "Rebel Moon" - a true Star Wars knockoff.

Patty's done some very good work; she can't be faulted entirely for WW84 when Geoff Johns co-conceived it.

Oh, please, if she could not see the issues with WW84, and work with Geoff Johns to fix them, than she sucks as a story teller.

Birds of Prey is crap because Margot Robbie's concept sucked and it was so poorly written.

It sucks for many of the same reasons The Marvels sucks. I agree.[/quote]

I do not know if "The Marvels" sucks...I haven't seen it. I have tried a few times to watch "Birds of Prey"...I eventually saw it all...but it is horrible.

Neither of those projects could have been saved by the studio not getting involved.

[You're assuming you're familiar with the original pitches and scriptments when I know, for a fact, you aren't.

Not the response I was trolling for. But, the bottom line is that WW84 had very little, if any, studio interference and "Birds of Prey" did not have much until post production. So, those films are actually examples of WB not interfering much after the filming started. So, giving them such freedom resulted in some of the worst movies in the DCEU.

Yeah, nothing "needs" to happen. This is all tied to the entertainment sector. We need to breathe, eat, drink, stay warm (or cool), and get the bills paid.

When you say Universal "needs" to do this and that, you are really just projecting your own wants and desires onto Universal and demanding things in a controlling way. Nobody "needs" to do what you say. I do not "need" to breathe, eat, or drink. I can just shoot myself in the head. But, why be so serious?

But what you should know is that they're meeting with Paramount. It's either going to be Paramount or Universal, baby. WB isn't lost — yet. But they do need a proper showrunner that isn't going to operate like DC is simply Marvel II. They need to get people interested again.

You just don't get it. Neither Paramount nor Universal has to release any DC content. Maybe they will license it off to Disney to release DC content. You are assuming way too much. The good thing about Paramount buying WB would be Paramount+ and Max merging content...I would consider buying into that.

You won't even get that if there is no studio to release it.

And whose fault is that?

If Gunn releases a good Superman movie and Snyder fans boycott it and protest it and review bomb it, etc...then it will be THEIR fault.

But, in general...it will be Universal's (or Paramount's) fault if they decide to not release DC content. It's THEIR decision.

[verslibre]

I have but one response to that word salad.

You are assuming way too much.

[Monker]

Saw "Rebel Moon". This is such a mess. It tries hard to be something great on a grand scales but fails horribly. So much time is taken up by long dialogue explaining back stories and general "stuff". This really should have been a mini series starting with Cora being a kid and SHOWING us all of this back story of her and other characters. It becomes so repetitive and boring. Same with recruiting their band of mercenaries, I guess that is what they are. There is so much time spent on dialogue and recruiting that there is zero time spent on any character growth. A farmer is in the group at the start, and there is no character growth and he is still a simple farmer at the end. There is nothing of substance here. The blurry affects make this movie look horrible and hard to watch at times. The slow motion thing is way over used at points. I watched the newish Matrix movie recently and they make fun of "bullet time" in a short sequence...and that is what this slow motion thing has become to me...a joke. Come up with something new already. The action sequences are OK...at times they seem to be lifted from "Alita: Battle Angel". This movie is also VERY predictable. I had guessed the twist at the end as soon as a certain character was introduced. The end does sort of come out of nowhere...I felt like I missed something and I didn't even know why we were at the place we were when the third act started...because of the repetitive "let's go recruit ______" took me so far out of the overall story.

There is one scene where a Huyang ripoff warrior robot kills someone to save the day...he turns and walks away and the rest of the cast goes about their business. Huyang is never seen again. I watched that scene and it made absolutely NO sense on why it was there. It is probably some stupid set up for the NEXT movie where Huyang joins this squad and is a kick ass battle robot again. This is another bad habit of Snyder's...setting up future shit instead of telling the story of the movie he is in. in a way, this entire movie does not tell a story...all it does is set up the next movie.

What I call "shock drama" is also used here, which I hate in general. A brutal beheading at the start, a potential gang rape, a giant bird thing clawing someone to death, etc. It's such a lazy way to attempt to introduce drama...it's the sign of a bad and lazy writer.

It's no wonder this was rejected as a Star Wars story. At least the way Snyder wrote it. He just does not seem to be a good writer, at all. How long did he spend coming up with this? Decades? This is the best he can come up with?

I give this a 5/10 at best. it's an interesting story idea, but told in a very bad way with mediocre special affects, a LOT of dialogue, and repetition that gets boring...and lazy shock drama.

It's FAR from a Star Wars killer. It's FAR from a Dune killer as well. Hell, the Dune rip off movie "Planet Dune" is better than this...at least it is somewhat "fun".

So, now we get to look forward to the Rated R "Snyder Cut", which he says is a completely different movie. Yay. I'm sure we will get a full rape scene, or two. We'll get to see a giant bird thing rip someone apart. We'll get to see more gore of the bad guy at the end. Oh, and General Zod will probably have a better introduction. "Renalla, Queen of the Full Moon" will probably do more to be a baby killer. But, I have serious doubts that it will be a better movie...because I don't think Snyder knows how to write a good story.

[verslibre]

Sorry, can't read it since I haven't seen the movie. I heard the third act is where it all comes together. Have a nice holiday.

[Monker]

Sorry, can't read it since I haven't seen the movie. I heard the third act is where it all comes together. Have a nice holiday.

Nothing gets "tied together" in the third act...it's just more stupid Star Wars rip offs, blended in with The Matrix and more Alita: Battle Angel. There was nothing to "tie together" because there was nothing built up to tie together.

I don't know how anybody can view this and give it more than a 5/10...and a 5 is even over rating it. IT IS THAT BAD. On RT, the critic score is at %22. The audience score started at over %80...and has crashed ever since the movie was released to Netflix...it is now at %65. Snyder fans review bombing can not even keep the score reasonably good.

And, it sounds like Netflix is contracted to release the R rated "Snyder Cut" version, and at least part 2. I have to wonder if Netflix is happy working with Snyder after this.

[RedWingFan]

I repeat: The Marvels will still be the bigger bomb.

Opening weekend boxoffice
The Marvels - $47M
Aquarian 2 - $40M

Wrong again. Like all the years of you and yngjrny saying how great and successful DCs Snyderverse was going to be even though they took cheap shortcuts and sloppy storytelling. I tried telling you guys.

[verslibre]

I repeat: The Marvels will still be the bigger bomb.

Opening weekend boxoffice
The Marvels - $47M
Aquarian 2 - $40M

Wrong again. Like all the years of you and yngjrny saying how great and successful DCs Snyderverse was going to be even though they took cheap shortcuts and sloppy storytelling. I tried telling you guys.

Way to go, RedWingFart!

Months of radio silence and you jump in with a weak sauce attempt at a burn.

The point is, The Marvels has a significantly larger production budget, and they spent a lot more money promoting it. Its failure has the studio standing back so they can take a looksee at how they're doing things. They also have the Kang actor fiasco to work around.

Therefore, it's "the bigger bomb." Does it all make sense? Try a little coffee in that mug with your whisky.

P.S. "Cheap shortcuts and sloppy storytelling" describes a lot of the MCU.

P.P.S. Tell me you didn't watch Zack Snyder's Justice League without telling me.

[Monker]

P.S. "Cheap shortcuts and sloppy storytelling" describes a lot of the MCU.

But, it describes Snyder's standard mode for his movies. "Rebel Moon" is full of the exact same issues he had with the MCEU. He rushed introducing characters, he spent time setting up the next movie rather than concentrating on the current movie. He introduced characters and then gave them nothing to do in the rest of the movie, he uses a dark and colorless pallet, he is now in this mode of using lenses that give an annoying very blurry background and at times even what is "in focus" is slightly blurry....which makes it distracting to watch the movie. He uses shock drama like beheading people. He introduces common archetypes for characters and doesn't do any character development but makes the entire plot predictable. He tries to introduce "Martha" type plot twists that fall flat because they are either laughable or predictable. And, of course, his directors cut will make it all better.

Snyder SUCKS at story telling.

And, saying "but, Marvels was the bigger bomb" is comical. You are just comparing one bad movie to another bad movie. I doubt VERY much that WB cares that Aquaman 2 had a smaller budget and less more money. You are just trying to distract from how horrible a guaranteed billion dollar film actually did.

[verslibre]

And, saying "but, Marvels was the bigger bomb" is comical. You are just comparing one bad movie to another bad movie. I doubt VERY much that WB cares that Aquaman 2 had a smaller budget and less more money. You are just trying to distract from how horrible a guaranteed billion dollar film actually did.

Irrelevant. They don't care, because Gunn doesn't care.

You know who cares? James Wan. For the first time in a fairly impressive career, he has a bomb on his c.v.

I don't "distract" from anything. I've responded to all your barbs, quips, retorts, slams, you name it (unless doing so was a complete waste of time). You do a lot of backpedaling, sidestepping and goalpost moving, but at least you do it consistently, unlike RWF, who supposedly has no dog in any race but shows up just to drop a weak sauce jab.

They barely started running ads for the movie several weeks before it opened. They did no press for it. Gunn wants everything out of the way because he's a narcissist and he thinks Superman: Legacy is New Coke (and we remember how well that did).

[verslibre]

Universal is expected to buy "a version of WB" in 2024.

Paramount has rejected any sort of merger.

Business insiders state that nobody takes Zaslav seriously.

There you have it.

[Monker]

And, saying "but, Marvels was the bigger bomb" is comical. You are just comparing one bad movie to another bad movie. I doubt VERY much that WB cares that Aquaman 2 had a smaller budget and less more money. You are just trying to distract from how horrible a guaranteed billion dollar film actually did.

Irrelevant. They don't care, because Gunn doesn't care.

I'm saying they don't care what a MCU movie does because WB has been losing money on DCEU movies since Black Adam released...and they need the money.

You know who cares? James Wan. For the first time in a fairly impressive career, he has a bomb on his c.v.

Then maybe he should have been smart and avoided a losing preposition like the DCEU.

I don't "distract" from anything.

When the topic is how bad Aquaman did and you do a "what about" and point to a Marvel movie, that is distracting away from how bad Aquaman did and how this forum GUARANTEED it would be a billion dollar film. It also distracts from the FACT that every DCEU movie since Black Adam has been a disappointment at the box office.

They barely started running ads for the movie several weeks before it opened. They did no press for it. Gunn wants everything out of the way because he's a narcissist and he thinks Superman: Legacy is New Coke (and we remember how well that did).

The same could be said about ANY movie being released the last couple months. There were actor and writer strikes going on that limited these things. Blaming Gunn for that is ridiculous. I saw even fewer ads for Wonka...and NONE for "The Color Purple". Is Gunn holding those films back, too...since they are WB?

[verslibre]

Then maybe he should have been smart and avoided a losing preposition like the DCEU.

You tend to say some really dumb stuff when you get desperate, but that takes the cake. When Wan was shown the offer to direct one of the movies (which was 2016, after BvS had nearly earned its 874 million), it was either The Flash or Aquaman. Wan went with the latter because he'd be able to show something onscreen that had never been done before (and don't bother with the Little Mermaid or Man from Atlantis jokes, those aren't the same thing).

There was nothing "losing" about the DCEU in 2016, especially when you factor in Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman ahead of the billion dollar-grossing Aquaman.

The same could be said about ANY movie being released the last couple months. There were actor and writer strikes going on that limited these things. Blaming Gunn for that is ridiculous. I saw even fewer ads for Wonka...and NONE for "The Color Purple". Is Gunn holding those films back, too...since they are WB?

Blah, blah, blah. Go look at Gunn's X timeline. ZERO content related to Aquaman. ZERO. That means ZIP. ZILCH. NADA.

The movie's principal photography had been complete for some time, but they kept ordering reshoots and then Gunn ordered all the Batman footage cut from the film, because the only Batman that can be onscreen now is Pattman. That leaves us with a very different movie than what was intended, and Wan has said as much.

[Monker]

Then maybe he should have been smart and avoided a losing preposition like the DCEU.

You tend to say some really dumb stuff when you get desperate, but that takes the cake. When Wan was shown the offer to direct one of the movies (which was 2016, after BvS had nearly earned its 874 million), it was either The Flash or Aquaman. Wan went with the latter because he'd be able to show something onscreen that had never been done before (and don't bother with the Little Mermaid or Man from Atlantis jokes, those aren't the same thing).

There was nothing "losing" about the DCEU in 2016, especially when you factor in Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman ahead of the billion dollar-grossing Aquaman.

BvS spawned a ton of controversy regarding the DCEU. It's also not a very good film. If he saw that and thought it deserved the Box Office it got, then he has issues.

Suicide Squad is a HORRIBLE film. If he saw that and thought it was a good film, he has issues. It also had studio interference from WB's jealousy of the MCU, and they wanted to make it more like Guardians of the Galaxy...so he should have known that interfering with movies was something the studio was going to do.

Justice League came out later that year...but he should have known how little WB cared about a directors vision and cared more about copying the MCU in style and tone...to the point where they hired MCU directors to try to duplicate Marvel's success....and that also includes MCU rejects like Patty Jenkins.

2017 was the start of the MCEU's fall..and everybody should have seen it coming. I did. It was around this time that you also started hearing crazy ideas like "black Superman", Batgirl taking over for Batman, Amazon Wonder Girl, Supergirl taking over for Superman, etc. This would really BOMB in this "put a chick in it and make her gay" atmosphere.

So, no, I don't have much sympathy for someone so naïve that they feel they can walk into that atmosphere and come out unscathed.

The same could be said about ANY movie being released the last couple months. There were actor and writer strikes going on that limited these things. Blaming Gunn for that is ridiculous. I saw even fewer ads for Wonka...and NONE for "The Color Purple". Is Gunn holding those films back, too...since they are WB?

Blah, blah, blah. Go look at Gunn's X timeline. ZERO content related to Aquaman. ZERO. That means ZIP. ZILCH. NADA.

The last couple times he did this with both Flash and Blue Beetle, they both bombed anyway. It's just a ridiculous critique...he spends time on X promoting HIS movies. Even Blue Beetle had Safran's investment in it.

The movie's principal photography had been complete for some time, but they kept ordering reshoots and then Gunn ordered all the Batman footage cut from the film, because the only Batman that can be onscreen now is Pattman. That leaves us with a very different movie than what was intended, and Wan has said as much.

So Wan should have adapted. If he's not a good enough director to do that, he should not be working with a franchise that does this all the time. Batman SHOULD be cut because there is no Batman cast for the DCU. You're lucky you even got Clooney in Flash. By having these guys in the film it gives hope that they will be returning...Gunn is making sure to not give people like you false hope. I seriously doubt it would have helped this film to keep him in anyway.

Maybe Gunn should have commissioned a statue of Momoa's Aquaman standing at Batman's grave with a caption saying, "Coulda used ya man..." as he takes a bite out of a Tasty Taco in one hand and holding a B-Bops in the other. Maybe you could read some hidden message in that.

[verslibre]

So Wan should have adapted. If he's not a good enough director to do that, he should not be working with a franchise that does this all the time. Batman SHOULD be cut because there is no Batman cast for the DCU. You're lucky you even got Clooney in Flash. By having these guys in the film it gives hope that they will be returning...Gunn is making sure to not give people like you false hope. I seriously doubt it would have helped this film to keep him in anyway.

Thanks for proving yet again that you are a shameless troll and have NO clue what you're talking about.

"Batman should be cut because there is no Batman cast for the DCU." Which explains Batfleck at the beginning of Flash, wearing a really bad suit. Yeah, right.

Batman figured largely in Aquaman 2's finale and nothing was getting cut till Gunn got the green light. Then he came in with the scalpel. Wan is a more than capable director. Suggesting "he should adapt" to Gunn's liberal scissoring is positively hysterical.

From Jason's Instagram, back in Summer of 2022. Freeze it at 0:30. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVm94JFv9JQ

We're "lucky we got Clooney in Flash"? WTF does that even mean? Gunn did that to be a troll. Nobody gives a shit about BatCloon.

[Monker]

So Wan should have adapted. If he's not a good enough director to do that, he should not be working with a franchise that does this all the time. Batman SHOULD be cut because there is no Batman cast for the DCU. You're lucky you even got Clooney in Flash. By having these guys in the film it gives hope that they will be returning...Gunn is making sure to not give people like you false hope. I seriously doubt it would have helped this film to keep him in anyway.

Thanks for proving yet again that you are a shameless troll and have NO clue what you're talking about.

"Batman should be cut because there is no Batman cast for the DCU." Which explains Batfleck at the beginning of Flash, wearing a really bad suit. Yeah, right.

Of course Afleck was at the beginning of Flash. They were going to use the movie to reset the DCEU...in various different ways depending on what the date was. but, anyway, Michael Keaton was to be in the final scene but that was axed because he was no longer going to be Batman in future movies.

Batman figured largely in Aquaman 2's finale and nothing was getting cut till Gunn got the green light. Then he came in with the scalpel. Wan is a more than capable director. Suggesting "he should adapt" to Gunn's liberal scissoring is positively hysterical.

That is the history of the DCEU, even when Wan signed on, if he can't play in the sandbox according to the rules of the owner of it (WB), then he shouldn't be there. Period.

Batman should not be in the final DCEU movie so NO hope is given for his return in the DCU.

We're "lucky we got Clooney in Flash"? WTF does that even mean? Gunn did that to be a troll. Nobody gives a shit about BatCloon.

So, that scene was cut...and replaced with a Batman nobody really wanted to continue with. If it were me, I would have never released the movie. But, if forced, I would have cut that scene and made the shoe/boot/whatever that of a chauffer and had him open the door for Danny DeVito to step out as Penguin, Flash say "Who the hell are you?" Then, squawk, squawk, squawk, Penguin waddles to the camera and opens up his umbrella to blacken the screen for credits. Makes no sense...but neither does anything else in the piece of shit movie. Or, cut the entire scene since it was only there to set up the next Batman anyway...you are lucky you got the scene at all, let alone with any actor playing Batman.

[verslibre]

you are lucky you got the scene at all, let alone with any actor playing Batman.

You're free to look at it that way. Personally, I thought it was stupid. I don't care for Batman Returns, so DeVito's Penguin would've been as bad.

As for the sandbox, you're still wrong. WB's meddling didn't get totally out of whack till after Wan got the go-ahead to do Aquaman. WB's approach was once "Here are the keys, drive. We'll see how you're doing later." That became "Here are the keys, now let me show you what position the wheel should be in before you put it in gear. No! Let the engine rev before you upshift. So what if I'm wrong, just listen! Wait! Did you release the parking brake? Now where the fuck are you going? Okay, pull over! Now move over! Screw it, let's pull into Goodyear and look at some tires!"

THAT is what has become of WB. I hope that analogy is simple enough for your contrarian mind to grasp.

Don't you have anything to post in the Marvel thread?

[verslibre]

Dolph Lundgren commented on Warner Bros' [Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom] reshoots, "I just realized that it was some kind of corporate decision that they try to limit Amber Heard and then I’m playing with her dad and went along with it. I was just disappointed for the moviegoers, because I thought the original script was great and the original cut — I saw a little bit of it, it was really good, so I didn’t see any reason to start reshooting and reshaping the story, which obviously led to disappointment in the moviegoers and not just me.”

[Monker]

Dolph Lundgren commented on Warner Bros' [Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom] reshoots, "I just realized that it was some kind of corporate decision that they try to limit Amber Heard and then I’m playing with her dad and went along with it. I was just disappointed for the moviegoers, because I thought the original script was great and the original cut — I saw a little bit of it, it was really good, so I didn’t see any reason to start reshooting and reshaping the story, which obviously led to disappointment in the moviegoers and not just me.”

That's interesting. I didn't know Old Spice commercials were that complicated.

[Monker]

Saw Flash via Amazon Prime. It's an OK 3/5 sorta mediocre film...with some big issues. I thought the whole "if you go back in time and change something both the past and the future changes." was stupid and makes no sense. It seems they wanted to do something different from Marvel and it just doesn't work. I felt Michael Keaton was not used very well....Supergirl was more interesting. The entire intro was a bit lame, almost like from a video game...Batman zooming around town chasing somebody, and Flash with the Baby Shower...no screaming goats, but an annoying screaming nurse. Wonder Woman showing up was an, "Ok, here is the expected Wonder Woman cameo...next." The "multiverse" scene had too much focus on Nicolas Cage...but whatever. Old Flash teaching Young Flash became a bit hard to watch. I agree with what was said about moving the tomatoes to the top shelf...you go through all of this crap because he put it in the cart but tries it all over again. Made no sense. How he lost his powers and then gained them back was a bit lame...he should have kept his powers, IMO. The scenes with Zod and crew were probably the best. The plot line with his mom was good, too. The final scene with Clooney was irrelevant and could have been anything....or they could have cut it completely along with the moving of the tomatoes and it probably would have worked better.

I think it had an OK plot and story but executed very mediocre. It feels like they had a 90min movie and added a bunch of crap for filler. Glad I skipped it in the theater, but it's a good streaming movie if you haven't seen it...and have lower expectations.

[Monker]

I wrote, "IMO, Dune is the movie that is going to bring people back to the theater. Not the pomp and nostalgia of Wonder Woman 1984, or the marvel of Black Widow. Definitely not the 'whatever' of Tenet. Dune is going to be the epic spectacle and story that is going to get people to buy a ticket."

Just have to pat myself on the back for getting this one right. Dune 2 is being held up as one greatest movies of all time, and being compared to "Empire Strikes Back" (Christopher Nolan) or "Return of the King". I have not read or heard a single bad review. Even skeptical people enter thinking, "it can't be that good..." and then post reactions of being speechless and blown away. Denis released a magnus opus of his career with the two Dune movies (which truly is ONE story). Dune is what movies SHOULD BE nowadays...not the mediocre and unimaginative crap that we have been getting the past few years. We don't need Kung Fu Panda 4 or a Ghostbusters sequel or a Beetlejuice sequel or CBM's that nobody knows or cares about (Madame Web. Blue Beetle, 2/3 of The Marvels). And, Snyder should take note that to make a scifi epic, it doesn't take slow motion, blurry backgrounds, and whatever artistic bullshit as in Rebel Moon.....take an epic story and make an equally epic movie and cut out your irrelevant artistic bullshit. That is what Peter Jackson did with LOTR, and that is what Denis did with Dune....and then Dune Messiah to reign people in who think it is a "white savior" trope, it's not...very, very far from it.

Also, Nolan should be happy Oppenheimer was released last year...Dune would definitely compete for his Oscars, and probably win some. And, Oppenheimer was a great film that deserves recognition as well.

[verslibre]

And, Snyder should take note that to make a scifi epic, it doesn't take slow motion, blurry backgrounds, and whatever artistic bullshit as in Rebel Moon.....take an epic story and make an equally epic movie and cut out your irrelevant artistic bullshit.

Tell that to Chloé Zhao.

Zack couldn't make a movie as bad as Eternals if he tried. That's a total faceplant for the MCU. A fuckin' 0/10!

[Monker]

And, Snyder should take note that to make a scifi epic, it doesn't take slow motion, blurry backgrounds, and whatever artistic bullshit as in Rebel Moon.....take an epic story and make an equally epic movie and cut out your irrelevant artistic bullshit.

Tell that to Chloé Zhao.

Zack couldn't make a movie as bad as Eternals if he tried. That's a total faceplant for the MCU. A fuckin' 0/10!

Comparing one bad movie to another bad movie does not make the first movie better. It's a weird comparison anyway.

Snyder DID make a worse movie. Even parodies like "Honest Trailers" and "Pitch Meeting" are more "real" than parody:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvaXqRS29cw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzczijDtnFY

I mean, seriously...it's bad, really bad. So bad that PARODIES are real. The entire movie is a meme. The funniest bit is that Zack TRIED to make a serious movie but it turned into a comedy because it is SO BAD.

And, THAT is Snyder's idea of being the next Star Wars. Then Dune comes out and blows everybody away. Denis could make Dune into a bigger franchise than what Star Wars currently is...Rebel Moon is going nowhere and is going to cost Netflix greatly.

[verslibre]

Comparing one bad movie to another bad movie does not make the first movie better. It's a weird comparison anyway.

Not weird at all. Two big budget films led by auteurs and ensemble casts and afforded sizeable VFX budgets. One evokes a certain franchise because it was originally pitched to that franchise. The other evokes generic SF and utilizes only the most recognizable elements of its source material for marketing purposes (and was basically a response to WB's announcement of New Gods, which got nixed by Gunn and Safran).

But Zhao's film takes massive liberties, employing actors with different accents to portray characters who are supposed to be ancient, powerful extraterrestrial humanoids but exhibit decidedly Terran mannerisms. Their dialogues are towel-on-face laughable. The needless attempts at comedy all fall flat. The "sidekick" trope also plays out via a human character who reacts as watching an armadillo cross his path. The narrative is wonky, the montages are underwhelming, the VFX is ofttimes dodgy and it takes forever for the movie to get going. Zhao admittedly borrows from DC/ZS, which is most evident in the battle scenes. Then, what's intended to be a tremendous emotional moment toward the end is anything but.

Don't get me started on the acting. It's not good. The only one who did fine was Salma Hayek. Everyone else was less than convincing, and Kumail Nanjiani is just being Kumail Nanjiani. The movie tested my patience like few others. The reviews on IMDb spell it out, if you don't want to believe me. "Eternal was the Runtime" is the title of one, which is hilarious. In fact, Eternals' 156-minute runtime is further evidence that concepts like (The) Eternals and Fourth World (the basis for New Gods, The Forever People, and OMAC) are better served by a series format, not standalone feature films.

Villeneuve's Dune is the third attempt to adapt Herbert's novel. It's good because it's done by someone who cares about the source material, though the films are space opera.

It's nice to return here and see Zack still lives rent-free in your mind, though. Never change.

[Monker]

Comparing one bad movie to another bad movie does not make the first movie better. It's a weird comparison anyway.

Not weird at all. Two big budget films led by auteurs and ensemble casts and afforded sizeable VFX budgets.

And, that is where the similarities END. One is a wannabe space opera Star Wars ripoff. The other is a CBM. One is a wannabe franchise. The other is in an existing comic book universe. They are completely different. If you want to compare a mediocre artsy CBM to a mediocre Snyder film, compare it to Watchmen.

One evokes a certain franchise because it was originally pitched to that franchise.

It was refused by LucasFilm...and it is obvious why. The story SUCKS.,

It does not just "evoke" Star Wars, it tries to copy as much of it as it can. But, it's not just emulating Star Wars. It directly copies the story from Seven Samurai...but sets it in space where it causes the story to not even make any sense. It copies War Hammer 40K in some costumes, character names, and scenes. There is a scene inside a cantina full of aliens. There is a costume that looks exactly like a LOTR Uruk-hai. There is a scene that directly copies Harry Potter. They copy the Nazi's in Inglorious Bastards, and keep them looking exactly like Nazi's...at least Lucas changed the costumes of the empire officers a bit. They took the guy from Gladiator and have him play basically the same part here. They have a fight with Shelob who coddles her babies like "Renala, Queen of the Full Moon" in Elden Ring. They even have a "I am your father" dude. Almost EVERYTHING in Snyder's film is copied from somewhere else. It is fucking ridiculous. I remember way back seeing Independence Day and thinking the same thing...that it copied from everywhere. ID4 was also supposed to be the next Star wars. But, at least that movie changed the "War of the Worlds" story enough to give it a new identity and story that makes sense. Taking Star Wars and adding a direct copy of "Seven Samurai" makes absolutely NO SENSE. All they have to do in Part 2 is take a planet killer, Death Star wannabe, and nuke the moon from orbit (copied from Aliens) - problem solved. The ENTIRE MOVIE IS STUPID. The story sucks. The blurry backgrounds gave me a headache..and look worse than green screened backgrounds. The slow motion is used for EVERYTHING... do we really need to see throwing grain on the ground in slow motion? The exposition dumps are incredibly boring and only serve to learn about the main hero...and she directly tells us that, "I'm only telling you this so you know who I am." She may as well be looking directly at the camera and saying it to the viewers - how lame. Do we need slow motion of slow motion? There is ZERO interaction between most of these heroes. The movie is so predictable that the "twists" are known an hour or more in advanced and were NOT a surprise. And, on and on and on...this movie is horrible. The last time I looked at the critics score on RT it was at %20...horrible. IMDB has 5.6/10. Horrible. I bet you have not even seen this pile of crap...lucky you.

The funny thing is he tried to make this an epic movie...not something worst than the worst of the MCU. But, that is what he did. There is not a worse movie in EITHER the MCU or DCEU than "Rebel Moon". It IS that bad of a movie.

The other evokes generic SF and utilizes only the most recognizable elements of its source material for marketing purposes (and was basically a response to WB's announcement of New Gods, which got nixed by Gunn and Safran).

So what. It is a mediocre and predictable CBM movie that tried to be all clever and artsy but ended up being extremely boring, just like "Watchmen".

Villeneuve's Dune is the third attempt to adapt Herbert's novel. It's good because it's done by someone who cares about the source material, though the films are space opera.

Sorry, but the mini-series (both of them) follow the books MUCH closer than Denis. They were also made by people who care about the source material...and it shows. Denis put his two films between the Lynch movie and the mini-series, making changes and removing things to speed up the narrative and push the idea that Paul is NOT the "messiah" but in the end is seeking revenge for his father's fall and death. In the end he embraces the prophesy as the only way to avenge his father, save the Fremen, and ensure his, his mother's, and his future sister's future. He is NOT a "what savior"...as the next film should prove. Neither the Lynch movie nor the mini-series did this...they both show Paul as embracing the prophecy and do not push the idea of using the Fremen for revenge. Dune Messiah will show the affect of this "holy war" (ie: Paul's line to the fediaken regarding the various ships in orbit from the other "great houses"...who do not recognize him as emperor, "Lead them to paradise". If you do not accept Paul as the new emperor, you will be killed.) and why turning a leader into a religion is dangerous...and how that leader can become trapped by those prophesies and the religion built up around him. Denis is essentially doing the Star Wars prequels...but he has a much better story to use as a guide.

And, to show how much Star Wars copied from Dune:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EdsZXcpz-I

So, again, Denis released a movie worthy of being called "the next Star Wars". Snyder released a piece of shit that NOBODY really likes.

[verslibre]

Comparing one bad movie to another bad movie does not make the first movie better. It's a weird comparison anyway.

Not weird at all. Two big budget films led by auteurs and ensemble casts and afforded sizeable VFX budgets.

And, that is where the similarities END. One is a wannabe space opera Star Wars ripoff. The other is a CBM. One is a wannabe franchise. The other is in an existing comic book universe. They are completely different. If you want to compare a mediocre artsy CBM to a mediocre Snyder film, compare it to Watchmen.

Except by consensus Watchmen is anything but mediocre, especially the Director's Cut. Just because you don't like it doesn't automatically mean it's "mediocre."

Also, the few defenders Eternals has praise it for being almost indistinguishable from other MCU movies, save the fleeting references that connect it.

It was refused by LucasFilm...and it is obvious why. The story SUCKS.,

And you're fully entitled to hold that opinion, but keep in mind the second film, The Scar Giver, is supposed to be significantly better.

The funny thing is he tried to make this an epic movie...not something worst than the worst of the MCU. But, that is what he did. There is not a worse movie in EITHER the MCU or DCEU than "Rebel Moon". It IS that bad of a movie.

Tell me you haven't watched Eternals without telling me. Bland performances, mystifying plot points, liberal borrowings from films of another franchise, the absence of any semblances of physical laws, and a stupid twist thrown in because the story's too predictable, with nary an explanation as to the title characters' goings-on while Thanos' armies were doing their taps on the face of the Earth. They must've been moonlighting for Door Dash.

I haven't seen a big budget film that bad in a while. Eternals really has no redeeming qualities. I'm sure Zhao laughed all the way to the bank while the movie struggled to break even.

It's past time to get Feige out of there. He'll just green-light projects to keep his job, to hell with continuity.

And, to show how much Star Wars copied from Dune:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EdsZXcpz-I

That's nothing new. Everyone knows George's concept is a patchwork.