CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › DC Cinematic Universe Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DC Cinematic Universe Discussion

post #1 of 3550
Thread Starter 

Might as well make one of these for the other side.

 

First up: The Rock confirms he's Black Adam in Shazam.

 

https://twitter.com/TheRock/status/507189313579122689/photo/1

post #2 of 3550

I know I've ruined my own fantasy, but I would love it if this thread stayed at one post for the next 12 years.

post #3 of 3550
Thread Starter 
Impossible. Too much vitriol waiting in the wings!
post #4 of 3550

Shaun is Ernest, I'm the troll.

 

post #5 of 3550
I don't think the WB has the machinery to make this work, or the proper creative forces on the ground. They currently have Zack Snyder as a field commander. Marvel currently has Whedon. One of these things is not like the other in the least complimentary way imaginable. As little interest as I have in the latter as a creative entity, I am perturbed by the existence of the former.

I've said this before, but in some ways, Nolan indirectly screwed the WB with his closed off universe in terms of their being prepared to respond to Marvel's business model. Of course, Nolan was in the middle of prepping the last film when Marvel's plan really started to get results, but still.*

I mean the film that is meant as the true maiden voyage for this shared universe has had two of its primary figures marginalized. Goyer appears to have been unofficially kicked off the project, and Snyder's actors graciously pay him in backhanded compliments.

BvS is like a cram session for an exam where a failing grade potentially costs you billions of dollars in future revenue.





*I'm not saying that's important to me or that I would have liked it , because I'm not and I wouldn't have, but playing Devil's advocate, I'm sure the WB would have, in hindsight, preferred a better starting point than they currently have.
post #6 of 3550

Yeah, I don't care. I can bitch about Marvel all I want, but at least I can tell they have some form of plan. Sony, Fox, and DC are all playing catch-up at this point, and it doesn't look good for any future projects.

 

Stupid shared universes. 

post #7 of 3550

This business about Goyer and the backhanded compliments?  I didn't even know he was off, is there a link to some coverage of this?

post #8 of 3550
Ben Affleck credited Chris Terrio as the writer and called Snyder a great *visual* director. Goyer was not mentioned at all. Using the qualifier "visual", something Michael Shannon also did, is pretty telling.
post #9 of 3550

It's unfortunate for the sake of Synders feelings I suppose, but those are very telling back handed compliments.  I'm glad they are aware of the limitations and the strengths of their team.

post #10 of 3550

Seems to me DC has one advantage over Marvel, potentially: With the Re-Boots of Batman, first by Nolan and now by Snyder, they've established a true "open ended" Universe (or hey! an Multiverse!) for their characters. This could enable them to create really interesting story arcs like the Nolan Batman films, but keep the franchise going as they are with Batman Vs. Superman. They can have their cake and eat it too. 

 

Of course that assumes that there is one working brain cell that also is capable of imaginative exertions.

 

I'll cop to being interested in The Rock as Black Adam.

post #11 of 3550

Just as long as it doesn't turn into the "alternate universes interacting with each other" CRAP that comics are so fond of.  If it's treated like Fringe or something that could actually be cool...  But that's not often the case is it?

post #12 of 3550

Think of it Freeman! Bale Batman Vs. Batfleck! IN 3D!

post #13 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

Think of it Freeman! Bale Batman Vs. Batfleck! IN 3D!
Routh Superman vs Cavill Superman vs CGI Christopher Reeve Superman. Boom...mind blown.
post #14 of 3550
I know hindsight is 20/20 but if Warner Bros had given the Superman Returns take another go* they could have folded it in with Nolan's take. Looking back, and especially after TDKR, Nolan's trilogy isn't as beholden to 'realism' as a lot of people think. Superman existing in that world isn't as big a stretch as some people say.

*As Josh points out. It wasn't a financial failure.
post #15 of 3550
I see absolutely no reason why Nolan's movie couldn't have slowly gone more and more comic book. By the third movie give us something like clay face, and then Man of Steel basically being the same movie it was. There's no reason it had to stop the continuity aside from Nolan maybe not wanting to continue.
post #16 of 3550

Are there people who claim THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is not comic booky? That it's some kind of realistic techno-thriller? MAN OF STEEL is cinema verite compared to it (not a handheld-servo zoom pun).

post #17 of 3550
That's really what I was going for. It bordered on camp at times.
post #18 of 3550
I think it's less to do with the silliness and more to do with nobody having "powers"
post #19 of 3550

True, there probably was some kind of attempt to ground the characters in realism. But not the setting or the events. Still, it would be a very small step to go from Bane to someone with superpowers, I'd even call it downshifting...

post #20 of 3550
It's like an itch I had Nolan just refused to scratch. "Introduce clay face! Do Ivy correctly! Killer Croc!" As much as I loved the Begins origins section once the first half is done, I wish he had let go of the leash a bit more. The movie goes from this beautiful oscar worthy thing to EVERYTHING IS SILLY. I would have preferred Begins to be that oscar movie for its entire run time, but OK, if we're going to be so silly, go all the way.

I just hate that he committed to the no powers thing so completely, like its Batmans no kill rule or something.
post #21 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post

True, there probably was some kind of attempt to ground the characters in realism. But not the setting or the events. Still, it would be a very small step to go from Bane to someone with superpowers, I'd even call it downshifting...

The Pit chiropractor had superpowers. He fixed Bruce by punching him in the back, pushing the verterbra further in. Thats so miraculous it has to be superpowered.
post #22 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike's Pants View Post

That's really what I was going for. It bordered on camp at times.

 

No, it didn't.  For as grandiose as Bane's scheme was, there was still no way that Flash or Green Lantern would've fit into that setting. 

post #23 of 3550
Not as it is. But if TDKR had been released as part of a shared universe it wouldn't have needed a whole of tweaking to fit in.

I think Batman as a character is independent enough that you can have an intimidate story like The Dark Knight* with someone like Superman doing his thing in Metropolis.

*Compared to Man of Steel.
post #24 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul755 View Post


Routh Superman vs Cavill Superman vs CGI Christopher Reeve Superman. Boom...mind blown.

I thought Routh Superman WAS CGI Christopher Reeve Superman.

 

(No love for Dean Cain?)

post #25 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike's Pants View Post

Not as it is. But if TDKR had been released as part of a shared universe it wouldn't have needed a whole of tweaking to fit in.

I think Batman as a character is independent enough that you can have an intimidate story like The Dark Knight* with someone like Superman doing his thing in Metropolis.

*Compared to Man of Steel.

 

You can't involve Superman in a story like TDK, though, which is the entire point of the shared universe. 

 

I just don't buy that TDKR is intentionally arch or secretly having fun with its comic book-ness.  It's as ashamed of its pulp roots as ever, and if the increasing scale of the story makes the realism less believable than ever, the film is no less committed to that aesthetic or self-serious for it.  But you're also sort of talking about a hypothetical TDKR that would be different from the one that exists, so it's hard to say with any certainty what would've worked better or worse if the film had different priorities. 

post #26 of 3550
You're certainly right in that I'm rewriting TDKR to suit my theory which makes it a bit pointless.

I don't think a shared universe necessarily means that Superman or the Flash must be involved in a Batman film. If you tried to slot Superman into The Dark Knight it ceases to be The Dark Knight, but I wouldn't have a problem watching The Dark Knight knowing that Brandon Routh is lifting things a few hundred miles away if that makes sense.

I'm not articulating my point very well.
post #27 of 3550
Thread Starter 

The idea of an overpowered, wacky Superman existing out there, lifting shit, in the Nolan universe is jarring to the tone he set. The movies certainly have silly elements, but they strike a tone where Bruce is struggling against fairly grounded threats that someone like Superman would overcome in about 20 seconds. There's silly, and then there's silly.

post #28 of 3550
Thread Starter 

Looks like this movie will exist outside of the connected universe they're establishing: http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/09/03/shazam-movie-rock-fun/

post #29 of 3550

But with that said does that mean that going forward we won't accept a stand alone Batman story? I agree that "Where's Superman" is a lot more problematic than "Where's Hawkeye?" but isn't there room to have a standalone Batman/Joker story without Kal-El being a factor?

 

I know you refer to Nolan's adherence to a somewhat realistic tone but as Schwartz said, I'm sort of talking about an alternate universe where Warner greenlit a shared universe when Returns and Begins were released.

post #30 of 3550
Thread Starter 

But by speaking in hypotheticals it already renders your argument moot.

post #31 of 3550

Justice League Unlimited made it seem believable that Superman couldn't be everywhere at once, with so many crisis always happening across the planet and galaxy. And they made a point of showing problems that needed the unique skills and mindsets of the other characters to solve.

 

What a great show. It made me appreciate the mainline DC heroes in a way I never did before. It makes you believe a good cinematic DCU could possible, with the right writing and approach...*sigh* best not to think about that too hard, with the Dini/Timm brain trust being locked out of the DCU forever.

 

I'm still looking forward to BvS though. Whatever it ends up being, it'll at least be an intense visual experience on that first IMAX viewing.

post #32 of 3550

I guess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post
 

But by speaking in hypotheticals it already renders your argument moot.

Ouch. I wasn't really arguing any point in particular, just pondering. I'm very tired.

post #33 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Reese View Post

with the Dini/Timm brain trust being locked out of the DCU forever.


 



Could someone explain this to me? Why would WB purposefully ostracize the main guys that helped keep their DC properties relevant on TV, and one can even argue, the movies? I keep getting the feeling that the Supes vs Batman movie is going to fail badly and that's that wrt to DC on the movie screen for at least another decade.
post #34 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by donde View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Reese View Post
 

with the Dini/Timm brain trust being locked out of the DCU forever.

 



Could someone explain this to me? Why would WB purposefully ostracize the main guys that helped keep their DC properties relevant on TV, and one can even argue, the movies? I keep getting the feeling that the Supes vs Batman movie is going to fail badly and that's that wrt to DC on the movie screen for at least another decade.

But I don't particularly think the inclusion of Dini or Timm automatically mean better DC films. I think they're far more effective when they have a TV series to build off of. 

 

Which is particularly why Justice League and Young Justice.

post #35 of 3550

But how would you know?  Do they have film experience?

post #36 of 3550
Thread Starter 
Quote:

Warner Bros. is planning on expanding their DC Cinematic Universe in a big way in the coming years, as one could gather when they announced release dates for nine additional films from 2016 to 2020. We have an idea of what some of these films will be (Justice League, Shazam, Aquaman), but could they be planning one from out of left field?

 

Latino-Review brings word on a new rumor that WB is developing a feature film of the Legion of Super-Heroes, the 30th century superhero team. The site reports that the studio is taking the project out to writers to see what kind of pitch they can come up with for the film, and that they're hoping this could be their answer to Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy (which just outgrossed Man of Steel at the domestic box office). Keep in mind, this one is strictly a rumor for the time being, but check back for any updates as we learn them.

 

First appearing in Adventure Comics #247 back in 1958, the Legion of Super-Heroes is a group of superpowered teens operating as a team in the far future. Some of their notable members include Cosmic Boy, Lightning Lad, Saturn Girl, Earth Man, Chameleon Girl, and countless others.

 

The big question, should a "Legion" film get made, is how it will tie into the larger DCCU and in particular Man of Steel? Given Superman's association with the team in the source material, could we see Henry Cavill popping up in the film in some form?

post #37 of 3550

PleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePleasePlease

 

Bouncingboy.png

post #38 of 3550
Dont forget Matter-Eater Lad!
post #39 of 3550

I wonder if they would throw in Superboy just for the hell of it.

post #40 of 3550

If Wonder Woman gets introduced as already being active for a while in BvS as has been rumoured what would be the plot of her eventual solo movie?  Are they going to do a prequel or just follow her adventures after that film?  My vote...they should adapt THIS and make it as serious as possible:

 

post #41 of 3550

With Warner Brothers experiencing layoffs I wonder if these plans for the DC verse will fade away, or be slapped together so poorly that they will deep six the studio for good.

 

Kevin Smith must be going nuts writing screenplays for all these properties.

post #42 of 3550

Going back to the idea of trying to make Nolan Bats and Superman: Returns fit into the same universe: The foundation of Returns' story pretty much takes care of the 'why wasn't Superman helping out?' question for the Batfilms. He left for ~8 years, and nobody knew where he was. You can adjust the timeline for Rises slightly and squeeze the entire Nolan trilogy into the time when Superman was searching for Krypton.

post #43 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fafhrd View Post
 

Going back to the idea of trying to make Nolan Bats and Superman: Returns fit into the same universe: The foundation of Returns' story pretty much takes care of the 'why wasn't Superman helping out?' question for the Batfilms. He left for ~8 years, and nobody knew where he was. You can adjust the timeline for Rises slightly and squeeze the entire Nolan trilogy into the time when Superman was searching for Krypton.

 

Logistically, sure, but tonally it's still a rough fit.  It just doesn't gibe with with the Nolan trilogy's thematic thrust about what an aberration Batman is, and how destabilizing he is to the fabric of Gotham, that this would be a world that has already been familiar with a godlike alien superhero for years. 

 

In fact, I was thinking about this, and I don't think it's so entirely Nolan's aesthetic that makes Batman so difficult to integrate into a broader universe, so much as something more inherent to the character's position within the DC universe.  And that is that the appeal of Batman changes drastically when you put him in a Justice League context vs a solo adventure.  On his own, Batman is essentially a superman in a Nietzschean sort of way.  He's aspirational, in that he's the best at absolutely everything he does (on top of being the richest and handsomest there is).  But surround him with Superman and Green Lantern and so forth, and his lack of overt superhumanity makes him something of a scrappy underdog, a prospect that is ludicrous for someone with his resources and fantastical skillset in any vaguely "real world" setting. 

 

So it's not just Nolan's overly grounded style that makes it difficult to wed a Batman solo series to an expanded universe (not that it does any favors on that score).  It's certainly possible to pull it off, but it would require a creative team to have two distinct takes on the character at the same time (and it's hard enough to find one that's successful), and the ability to flip between and reconcile them to the point that it feels like the same character.  That's a more difficult prospect than most realize, I think.


Edited by Schwartz - 9/16/14 at 4:34pm
post #44 of 3550
Thread Starter 
Quote:

Yet another DC Comics property is heading to the small screen as Deadline reports that FOX has snagged "Lucifer," a pilot based on the Vertigo title by Mike Carey, which will follow the adventures of the fallen angel, Lucifer Morningstar. "Californication" creator Tom Kapinos will both write and executive produce.

 

Largely inspired by John Milton's approach to the character in "Paradise Lost," this version of Lucifer first appeared in Neil Gaiman's "Sandman" (itself in the process of heading to the big screen. Carey expanded the character into a solo title in 2000. The popular series was published through 2006 and ran 75 issues.

 

The new series is said to follow Carey's run, following Lucifer as he gives up his rule of Hell and opens a piano bar in Los Angeles. "Lucifer" will join the ever-growing slate of small screen DC Comics adaptations, including the returning "Arrow," the soon-to-premiere "Constantine," "The Flash" and "Gotham," and the in-development "Supergirl" and "Titans".

post #45 of 3550

The most savvy thing DC has done lately is really push the expansion of its lesser roster on the small screen.  Any or all of these shows could suck, but at least they will have a chance to plant some flags in territory Marvel hasn't conquered yet. 

 

It's kind of assbackwards, as I always understood conventional wisdom to bethat Marvel excelled at the street-level, more human superheroes (more suited to episodic TV), while DC was more concerned with creating a pantheon of latter-day gods (whose epic epicness would cry out for the big screen), but I suppose you have to play the ball as it lies.

post #46 of 3550
There admittedly isn't much to go on, but one would hope they get better at matching material to director. Green Lantern is a very difficult character to translate to the screen, but choosing Martin Campbell as the guy to do it didn't help matters (Nolan approached them, so I'm not counting that).

Marvel may be establishing a rough history with its directors, but their generally reaching out to the right people.
post #47 of 3550

I mean, technically DC hasn't even begun making those announcements, all we have to work on is Snyder regarding their "tastes."

post #48 of 3550
Thread Starter 
Quote:

Following the reveal last week that a “Supergirl” TV series was in fact in development, Deadline reports that CBS has given a series commitment to the show. Greg Berlanti of “Arrow” and “The Flash” will be teaming up with “Chuck” and “No Ordinary Family” producer Ali Adlerto write and executive produce the series.The series is said to focus on Superman’s cousin Kara Zor-El beginning to use her superpowers which she has kept hidden for much of her life on Earth.

 

This deal not only mirrors Fox’s “Gotham” commitment from last season but also means that DC Entertainment now has comic based shows on ever major network, not including the Disney owned ABC.

 

The cousin of the Man of Steel himself, Supergirl was previously adapted into a feature film in 1984, often considered one of the worst superhero films, starring Helen Slater as the character. Laura Vandervoort later appeared as the character on The CW’s “Smallville” in the later seasons. A number of characters have taken on the name of Supergirl in the source material, with some ranging as far back as the 1950s.

 

I find it weird that in MAN OF STEEL they chose to set up that easter-egg-of-a-shot of the open pod in order to tie into the comic revealing it was Supergirl, only to now abandon her to television. (Not that I expected her to pop up in the series of movies they're about to start pedaling out.) But it's DC/WB, so I shouldn't find it weird and should, instead, expect it.

post #49 of 3550
Thread Starter 
Warner Bros. and DC entertainment have been planning a feature film based on the legendary “Task Force X,” better known as Suicide Squad, for many years. Now it seems it might be close to finally happening as The Hollywood Reporter brings word this afternoon that End of Watch and Fury director David Ayer is circling the big screen adaptation of the villains-turned-heroes tale.

Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li and The Jungle Book scribe Justin Marks was previously attached to write a script for the film, but that was reportedly put on the back burner following WB’s interest in developing the upcoming Justice League film.

Created by Robert Kanigher and Ross Andru back in 1959, the team has included countless DC villains among its ranks including Deadshot, Captain Boomerang, Bane, Killer Frost, Poison Ivy, Count Vertigo, Deathstroke, and Harley Quinn. The CW’s “Arrow” introduced their own version of the team in the most recent season of the series and the recent animated film, Assault on Arkham, offered its own version of the team.
post #50 of 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

Logistically, sure, but tonally it's still a rough fit.  It just doesn't gibe with with the Nolan trilogy's thematic thrust about what an aberration Batman is, and how destabilizing he is to the fabric of Gotham, that this would be a world that has already been familiar with a godlike alien superhero for years. 

In fact, I was thinking about this, and I don't think it's so entirely Nolan's aesthetic that makes Batman so difficult to integrate into a broader universe, so much as something more inherent to the character's position within the DC universe.  And that is that the appeal of Batman changes drastically when you put him in a Justice League context vs a solo adventure.  On his own, Batman is essentially a superman in a Nietzschean sort of way.  He's aspirational, in that he's the best at absolutely everything he does (on top of being the richest and handsomest there is).  But surround him with Superman and Green Lantern and so forth, and his lack of overt superhumanity makes him something of a scrappy underdog, a prospect that is ludicrous for someone with his resources and fantastical skillset in any vaguely "real world" setting. 

So it's not just Nolan's overly grounded style that makes it difficult to wed a Batman solo series to an expanded universe (not that it does any favors on that score).  It's certainly possible to pull it off, but it would require a creative team to have two distinct takes on the character at the same time (and it's hard enough to find one that's successful), and the ability to flip between and reconcile them to the point that it feels like the same character.  That's a more difficult prospect than most realize, I think.
And this kind of insight is why I look forward to lengthy Schwartz posts. Bravo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › DC Cinematic Universe Discussion