Monker wrote: "needed to be..." Not true. Batman could have been established outside of a Superman film.
The world of "could-have's" aren't relevant to what is. There you go moving the goalposts once again. You must stay within' the confines of the film they chose to make. In this instance, yes, Batman needed to be established in order for future films to have a trickle down effect. BvS was a springboard for this to happen.
Not having to deal with all of those elements in one film would have made BvS a better film.
These "other elements" don't have to play out in Affleck's
"The Batman" film, which in turn, will make that film a much more grander experience; one where we don't have to sit through yet another origin film to expand this Batman's agenda and what he brings to the shared Universe. It's now a no holds bared universe to play in.
WTF is DC asking people to pay for? They want audiences to pay for incomplete plots that are spanned over multiple movies, and the movies taken individually don't make sense? That is HORRIBLE.
BvS is not difficult to understand. Bruce Wayne and his motives are NOT difficult to understand. Superman's arc is NOT difficult to understand. Those conflicts are squared away by the movies end. What BvS does do, is reference a Multiverse taking place and that's the point in connecting the dots to a shared Universe. It's apart of DC lore in how these worlds are connected. You're just not familiar with the DC world. Doing a Flashpoint; futuristic story to the Justice League that involves parallel worlds is ballsy and not yet established. The cameo's (like Flash) were meant to build intrigue in where the story is heading, not a clear cut answer, because, you know, future movies.
Obviously it's not DC's unique approach with BvS. Even Zootopia is more popular than BvS....a CARTOON.
Keep being a dickbag, you're doing well.
"Finding Dory" will probably be, too. A CLUELESS ANIMATED FISH will outsell BvS.
And more than half of Marvel movies as well and they are under the same umbrella and establishment.
Variety is NOT what is important...making quality, entertaining films is what is important....BvS shows that DC does not quite know how to do that.
What I mean by variety, is a variety of creative influence's and directional talent, which in turn, shows off the quality and entertainment through the eyes of another creator. BvS was Snyder's vision. Lets see what Ayers and Jenkins bring to the table.
It's a now a good thing to put Snyder's unique approach behind a curtain.
No, it has nothing to do with that but everything to do with passing the ball along to let others take a crack at their specific films that so happen to connect with what Snyder has already built.
That's definitely not the rhetoric you guys were spreading a year ago.
Nothing has changed. The main thing that was a step in the right direction was getting Terrio and Affleck onboard in bigger roles in the DCEU. Regardless of BvS's outcome, the changes that need to be takin' place for this Universe to flourish are happening behind the scenes. It was always a mission for Terrio to sign on and have Affleck be involved in one capacity or another. Now that Terrio has full control over the JL1 script rather than jousting with Goyer's screenplay, the tweaks are still in play.
Snyder needs to be fired, not just overshadowed.
Snyder won't be fired or he would have been already. JL1 is already filming and the tweaks I mentioned above that are happening behind the scenes are something fans always knew what would eventually take place. Zack Snyder doesn't need to be fired or overshadowed, he just needs better people around him. He's getting that.
You are making excuses for BvS being a bad and unpopular film.
It's not an unpopular film. It's a polarizing film. Two different things. If it were unpopular, it wouldn't cause such a huge backlash of the events it created. Whether negative or positive, the film is making wavelengths and people care to lift it up or they care to tear it down. It's a popular film to discuss, just like Man of Steel. More to come!
