Re: DC Extended Universe THREAD
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 6:57 am
verslibre wrote:Hot damn!
Is that Rocky's robot from Rocky III?
https://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/
https://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=60663
verslibre wrote:Hot damn!
RedWingFan wrote:verslibre wrote:Hot damn!
Is that Rocky's robot from Rocky IV?
YoungJRNYfan wrote:RedWingFan wrote:Is that Rocky's robot from Rocky IV?
Fixed.
verslibre wrote:Monker wrote:YoungJRNYfan wrote:Remember when Monker said Aquaman wouldn't even finish filming.
I doubt I ever said that. Quote it.
"Quote me or I never said or insinuated it" is the new standard, I see.
Monker wrote:After SS, I may have said that it may never be released.
Quote yourself. Did you really say that?
If you did, that was a mighty presumptuous thing to say.
That movie had nothing to do with Aquaman. It's a Batverse movie (and one Flash villain).
Monker wrote:Now you have a bunch of stand alone movies.
And?
Monker wrote:You are WAY over estimating the draw of Harley Quinn.
Wrong. She's the main draw of Suicide Squad, a $748 million grossing film, however which way you cut it.
What Marvel is overestimating is the draw of a Black Widow solo movie. Five years too late for that.
They just want to ride Wonder Woman's wave.
What a strange thing to say, considering Fox was never a threat.
Also, have a gander at how underwhelming the box office performance of X-Men: Apocalypse was. It made over 200 million less than Days of Future Past. One of the reasons that BS guy didn't get to do Dark Phoenix, among...other things.
(And First Class, a movie I like a lot, fell short, too.)
Monker wrote:There has to be an entire reimagining of the DCEU and how to get there...because Snyder failed. If you don't believe that, that's fine...keep playing in Snyder's DC sand box, which has turned into a litter box with a few turds in it.
Sure, sure. Whatever makes you feel better. Let's see if your remarks still apply in a world with Aquaman, Wonder Woman '84 and The Batman.
Monker wrote:I have NEVER made it a big talking point to argue against the release of Aquaman. In fact the only comment I have made was back in 3/17 saying "if it starts filming, doesn't mean it will finish."
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:Quote yourself. Did you really say that?
See above. You are confusing my points with TNC's, probably. After WW, I have NOT argued that such and such was not going to be made, or Aquaman would not finish filming. You are posting a lie.
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:If you did, that was a mighty presumptuous thing to say.
Irrelevent. All types of presumptious things are posting in these threads.
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:That movie had nothing to do with Aquaman. It's a Batverse movie (and one Flash villain).
It is a WB CBM set in the DCEU. Funny how you believe Batman is not part of the DCEU and is its own thing.
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:And?
...they don't want to be connected to Snyder's litter box full of turds.
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:Wrong. She's the main draw of Suicide Squad, a $748 million grossing film, however which way you cut it.
Irrelevant. Batman, Superman, and Wonderman - combined - were not a big enough draw to save Superfriends. Just because Harley Quinn is in a movie does not mean it will be a hit, or that it will be worth seeing...ie: it means very little to nothing.
Monker wrote:I never cared for a Black Widow solo movie anyway.
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:They just want to ride Wonder Woman's wave.
I doubt that. It's more likely they will use it to introduce more characters...and many fans demanded it. And, at this point, Marvel can afford a few movies that are not going to gross that much...as long as they are not "bad" movies.
Monker wrote:And, all of those films are about as competitive to Marvel as Superfriends was. Marvel grossed over $3billion this year. So, much that they could afford a throw away film like "Ant Man and the Wasp." The average gross over the entire set of films (around 20) is around $800million. That includes things like Hulk.
Compared to that, WB/DC is in a much lower class. Not even close to competing with Marvel.
Monker wrote:I'll give Aquaman about a 50/50 chance of being good. It's post Snyder, but they want to credit Snyder. It LOOKS good and epic and all that...but it is still "Aquaman" and it looks to be set in Bikini Bottom in some of the promos. So, hard to REALLY tell.
Monker wrote:"Wonder Woman 84" is going to be way over-hyped. There is a good chance it won't meet expectations. So, 50/50 chance. Can't really tell.
Monker wrote:And, you didn't even mention Shazzam..."Superman meets Tom Hank's 'Big'." Yeah, that sounds really dark and serious.
Monker wrote:I doubt any of these will connect in any meaningful way to Snyder's litterbox. WB/DC is wisely throwing out the litterbox and the cat along with it.
YoungJRNYfan wrote:We just hit the new goddamn DC ground runnin'! James f#@cking Wan, peeps. What a beauty. Shocked at how great these films look. There's still a ton of time to tighten the FX up, too. Looks like DC is back to focusing on the adventure while still creating a unique pallet. Beautiful! They finally got the memo: bring in good talent and make...it..good.
RedWingFan wrote:So now you don't prefer they old D.C. "dark, serious" movie tone? You're okay with the Marvel Style, lighter comedic tone of Aquaman, and the all out comedy of Shazaam???
YoungJRNYfan wrote:Also, Patty and Gal said WW84 isn't even a sequel to their smash hit Wonder Woman. It's going to be its own thing. I like this approach. You simply don't know where they'll head next and every story is contained. It'll be cool to see Cavill do a For Tomorrow Superman film and then the next a Kingdom Come or Red Son. Cool vibes all around.I'm more of the camp of good films. Tones, humor, dark, gritty, what the FUCK ever. Keep it goin and make more of these things. That's my jam.
YoungJRNYfan wrote:DCEU Officially Becomes Worlds of DC
https://movieweb.com/worlds-of-dc-new-title-dceu/
Worlds of DC, without question, absolutely owned SDCC 2018. That much is certain. To go along with the rebranding, Warner Bros. brought the house down with a ton of footage from their upcoming releases. They decided not to focus on announcing a bunch of future titles. Instead, they're sticking to what they actually have in the pipeline.
Monker wrote:And, you didn't even mention Shazzam..."Superman meets Tom Hank's 'Big'."
verslibre wrote:
The_Noble_Cause wrote:Monker wrote:And, you didn't even mention Shazzam..."Superman meets Tom Hank's 'Big'."
Just watched the trailer. Great description!
The_Noble_Cause wrote:Really shitty photo-shop job here. Film deserves better. Get Drew Struzan.
verslibre wrote:Nah.
verslibre wrote:For a full movie? Nah. Not necessarily. There's no confirmation of that anywhere. There's only speculation.
verslibre wrote:Really? Casino Royale and Skyfall both kick its ass. If there was more story-meat to back up those grandiose set pieces, Spectre could have been the best one yet. Could have been.
verslibre wrote:Nah. What's that word you like? It was a romp.
verslibre wrote:Nah. It's the best one. The sequels get progressively more silly. It's not like the Phantasm films, where some of the sequels are nearly on par with the original.
verslibre wrote:Don't believe everything you hear.
The_Noble_Cause wrote:Get Drew Struzan.