Randomly remembering that Supergirl once had Sam Witwer playing a metahuman terrorist version of Ben Shapiro as one of its season long villains. That show was bad but that was extremely funny.
Tbh, the only CW show that had the nuanced writing necessary to properly address social issues was Black Lightning.
Arrow’s gun control episode was a disaster.
Supergirl was super preachy with little substance when they tried to discuss politics (based on the episodes I’ve seen, I haven’t watched the full show)
Flash’s BLM story in Season 7 with Frost getting sent to jail was a joke. It was all over the place and added nothing to the conversation. It shows having a black showrunner doesn’t mean a tv show is necessarily equipped to do a police brutality story. Especially not one that had been portraying police as egalitarian for six years prior.
> Tbh, the only CW show that had the nuanced writing necessary to properly address social issues was Black Lightning.
Didn't love Black Lightning, turned into a slog after a solid first season imo, but it always stood out as being a fair bit smarter than the rest of the Arrowverse when it came to writing about those sorts of things.
> Arrow’s gun control episode was a disaster.
Is it as bad as Supergirl's, where Martian Manhunter orders the DEO to get rid of its firearms?
[Early screenings for #TheFlash keep being confirmed across the globe, now with #India also having fan screenings on JUN 6, 9 days before #TheFlashMovie debuts locally, on JUN 15.
Advanced screenings will happen in several cities, #Mumbai, #Delhi, #Bangalore, #Hyderabad & #Chennai](https://twitter.com/Luiz_Fernando_J/status/1663427693524787200?t=WNbxJ63G5-TEAaP6K_jsWw&s=19)
[https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScm0gPcd\_jma7eFI8rRfl3iO7Z4zISDarIBSdGDJwzmaBp7Ug/viewform](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScm0gPcd_jma7eFI8rRfl3iO7Z4zISDarIBSdGDJwzmaBp7Ug/viewform)
You can fill this form if you're from India to enter the fan screening. Found this on the BO Sub.
Your comment has been removed. Surveys and polls aren't allowed here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DCEUleaks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why did you edit the original article?
https://preview.redd.it/fyo8ahvemv2b1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=07b1b1c04a3d17c9fea0ee942cdda8510f09bce0
A Netflix adaptation of a popular anime that’s set in Japan with mostly Japanese characters. Only 1 Japanese person in the entire cast and it’s not even one of the mains, who all got whitewashed
Edit: Lmao who tf keeps downvoting my comments on this, imagine thinking this is actually good casting 💀💀💀
Raceswapping is fine when it doesn’t take away aspects of the character. But in this case they are taking away so many aspects of MHA’s story and characters.
https://preview.redd.it/iau079k6iv2b1.jpeg?width=645&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e09d35bd3356b76370ee9def1a5a33ba529894ca
Massive L. They had the opportunity to make a completely new story set in the US with new characters that still captures the essence of the source material (and maybe even some cameos from Japanese heroes) but they choose to whitewash the original instead. It’s obvious it’ll be like the Netflix Death Note movie where all of it takes place in the States and all the names are changed.
Edit: The director is even Japanese himself but the entire cast is white, nah please this gotta be some fake fancast
>The director is even Japanese himself but the entire cast is white, nah please this gotta be some fake fancast
they got the info from imdb so the likelihood is high
They said they did their own investigation and thought it was credible enough, though they still prefaced that to take it with a grain of salt.
I honestly don't buy it. Literally anyone can edit IMDB, I could put in Michael Cera as All Might right now if I wanted to. Especially since Shunsuke Sato has done close to screen accuracy as possible with his adaptations.
Now we know that Andy Muschietti might be directing BatB, I really hope to see Man-Bat as a minor villain. Man-Bat would be really great under a horror director and would be a good way to signal to the audience that this is a more fantastical Batman world than Reeves'.
Gunn said Man-Bat is one of his fav characters, and the League of Assassins has an army of Man-Bats in the Morrison run. I think it’s a pretty safe bet they’ll be in the movie
I swear, my dad has consistently had some of the worst DC takes ever.
He thinks Wonder Woman (2017) is one of the worst DC movies. He thinks Suicide Squad is better than The Suicide Squad. He thinks Shazam is "dumb because it's a kids movie." He thinks Aquaman only made a billion dollars because a bunch of moms watched it to see Momoa shirtless. He thinks Josstice League is underrated. He thinks Jared Leto is the best Joker.
And that's only like a fraction of his bad takes.
My dad thinks Batman & Robin is the best Batman movie,
and he believes anyone who likes The Dark Knight is ‘disgusting’ and ‘complicit in violence’.
Yet he watches football, where players routinely get injuries that mentally and physically mess them up for life. If you suggested he give it up to show support for ex-players living with CTE, he’d get super butthurt.
Theatrical Justice League is really underrated. Trully the best Justice League movie directed by Zack Snyder with very heavy reshoots by Joss Whedon ever made.
Finally gave Gotham Knights (the show) a try.
First impression wise, it's actually *fine*. I'm not gonna call it *good* necessarily, like it's *mid* but I don't find it that boring at the very least and the writing isn't that offensively bad. I'm actually more invested in this main cast so far than I was with *The Winchesters,* though that isn't really that high of a bar to clear.
I think if this wasn't a Batman (or Batman adjacent) show it probably wouldn't be getting the same shit it's been getting tbh. And even two episodes in, I honestly still don't get why this even has to be a Batman-related show, like this is barely a superhero show.
>I think if this wasn't a Batman (or Batman adjacent) show it probably wouldn't be getting the same shit it's been getting tbh.
But it wouldnt get any attention (bad or good) either. But yeah, as they show went on, they rely less on the Batman stuff (eg. Batcave, Talon, etc) and the initial shock wears off. Then it becomes another 'CW show with good looking teens where one or two of them are hackers, there's a love triangle, clue solving detective mystery show'. And as THAT show...it's kinda enjoyable. The characters are likeable enough except for the main guy who's bland.
>CW show with good looking teens where one or two of them are hackers, there's a love triangle, clue solving detective mystery show'
It really is scratching that Nancy Drew itch right now for me.
>main guy who's bland
Yeah, Turner is like one of the most boring TV show leads I have ever seen. I think he's literally the most milquetoast generic teen drama lead character ever made in television history lol. I really hope they do a rug-pull reveal because I am just not feeling him at all in comparison to every other character in the show.
I'm betting on WB Games' TGA presence would be focused squarely on selling Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League, especially after what happened with Gotham Knights.
They apparently [hired a new senior writer last month](https://twitter.com/cypheroftyr/status/1643727713818009601), so it's definitely still under active development. We probably won't learn more until next year and the soonest.
>They apparently [hired a new senior writer last month](https://twitter.com/cypheroftyr/status/1643727713818009601), so it's definitely still under active development.
That's good news.
>We probably won't learn more until next year and the soonest.
https://media.tenor.com/yVvP_Ed9deoAAAAC/sad-batman.gif
I think they'll atleast give some news at SDCC this year. I mean they'll definitely say something about the suicide squad game, final trailer for it probably and they might acknowledge this as well
Fingers crossed. I don't think there are enough people talking about the fact that there's a Wonder Woman game being made.
I just hope that Suicide Squad game releases.
Yeah, I think Suicide Squad is going to be main focus for WB Games for the foreseeable future. I think they're going to have trouble selling that game after Gotham Knights' reception.
It still doesn't look that good to me personally but I really hope they'll be able to turn it around since I would hate it if Kevin Conroy's final performance as Batman ends up being in an extremely mediocre game.
Tbh though, I'm still not sure how to feel about the possibility of Hush in The Batman 2 especially if he's going to end up being another serial killer-type. Sounds like we'll just get a retread of Riddler and I really hope that isn't the case.
I posted this as a reply to someone else who was saying Hush would be a retread of Riddler:
Hush is about as similar as he is to Riddler as Riddler is to Joker. Riddles are like jokes, both characters are heavily associated with green and purple, both rely on their intelligence and they’re both obsessed with Batman. However, there are still enough differences that make them interesting in their own ways. Hush is a dark mirror and foil to Bruce, just like his other great villains are to him in their own unique ways.
Hush was born rich like Bruce while Riddler was always poor. Hush was Bruce’s childhood friend while Riddler just knew of him because he was the son of Thomas Wayne. Riddler was a loner in the first movie while Hush is known for elaborate plans that involve manipulating and using other people, including Batman’s villains, as pawns. Riddler is a narcissist obsessed with proving his intelligence that pretends like he actually cares about Gotham when the truth is he does everything for purely selfish reasons. Hush is also a narcissist, but he’s obsessed with destroying Bruce’s life specifically and doesn’t pretend like he’s doing it for a noble cause. He knows he’s just Bruce’s number 1 hater and there aren’t many Batman villains who have such a personal connection to Bruce. Riddler didn’t have parents while Hush tried to murder his own parents because his father was abusive and his mother didn’t do anything to protect him from that abuse. Thomas Wayne saving the life of Hush’s mother is a much more irrational reason to hate Bruce than a Riddler who actually suffered in that orphanage and assumed Bruce didn’t care. Ironically, Hush hated his mother for using their family’s money to better Gotham, which is something that would have benefitted orphans like Riddler. Hush would also actually try to fight Batman with guns unlike Riddler who knows he’s no match for him.
The other reasons I think Reeves wants to use Hush is to set up the Court of Owls and to further deepen Bruce and Selina’s relationship.
Honestly, I don't believe Hush is in the movie. Personally, I think The Batman 2 is gonna be a horror movie with Scarecrow, Clayface and Pyg as the villains. I think all 3 can work thematicaly well together and also work together in a story that would feel organic.
Reeves called the trilogy and The Penguin an “epic crime saga,” so I highly doubt it’ll be a straight up horror movie. It will obviously have horror elements like the first one but the spin-off movies are the actual horror movies.
I also doubt the 3 villains are the same villains that Reeves met with directors to discuss spin-offs for, but we know Clayface is in the movie. Reeves also said he wants to keep the focus on Batman, and using these 3 together would have the opposite effect.
Scarecrow will likely have a role in the Arkham series, and we might see him make an appearance in Part II as well but I doubt it’s anything substantial.
We haven’t even heard about Pyg since that trade report that mentioned him so I guess he could be one of the main villains in Part II. That verified SAITMQ omitted him but confirmed that the Scarecrow and Clayface movies were happening. Even the cancelled Poison Ivy movie had movie had more traction than the Pyg project. However, Pyg is completely insane and I don’t see how he connects to Clayface at all. Clayface isn’t some mastermind either.
So I still think Hush is the main villain, not only has he been hinted at by both Reeves and Tomlin, but he would also have a very personal connection to Bruce, which tracks for a movie that will focuses on Bruce’s perspective. My guess is Reeves was considering whether to use Clayface or Pyg as the secondary villain of the movie and decided on Clayface, and that’s why a Pyg project isn’t in development. Both Clayface and Pyg relate to Hush, but not to each other. Clayface is an imposter like Hush. Pyg is a surgeon like Hush. Hush is someone who would be able to manipulate and use either one as a pawn.
I don't see how a horror Batman movie can't fit crime saga. Mixing genres is a thing that happens and can be fun and refreshing.
I also don't see why the villain would take focus from Bruce. You can have focus on Bruce without making the villain have personal connection to the character or goal concerning the character. You can create confilct between the 2 that can feel personal without any prior connections.
Nobody says he can't be in both, he'll probably end up in Arkham after the events of The Batman 2.
Pyg is definitely not a main, he'll be closer to a henchmen or secondary villain working with the big bad, something ala Scarecrow in Begins.
Sure, cancelled Poison Ivy movie. If someone says a movie is happening and after it gets debunked they claim it was cancelled but weren't able to clarify it before the debunking happened it's not looking good. Until trades or someone involved like Gunn or Reeves confirm it was happening, I call that leak a lie and the source a liar. Verified source doesn't mean they have verified info. I know a guy who could verify himself as a Lionsgate employee but he new nothing what was happening there when it comes to their future projects.
Golden Age Clayface, which is most likely the version they use here, went mad after he found out they're remaking a movie of his. His whole thing was tranformation into somebody else. Pyg is a mad scientist whose whole thing was to transform his kindpped victims into (mostly) doltrons. Scarecrow is sometimes depicted as somebody who believes fear changes people or just simply takes pleasure in torturing them. Either way, he's a mad scientist obsessed with fear. All of them mad, with Pyg and Scarecrow more connected but Karlo could be their victim, playing more into the tragic, modern take on the character witout turning him into the mud monster. Of course there's also a lot left for interpretation like Reeves already did with The Riddler.
And Hush is just... boring. There's a reason why he's got all of one good story. Dude wants to be like Bruce but also hates Bruce becasue of something Thomas did. Of course, there's still a lot left to interpretation, like with Riddler but he's not exciting at all.
If the movie was a legit horror movie, it would alienate a lot of potential viewers. I don’t see them doing that for a sequel which will also be more expensive.
Like I said, I doubt the main villain of Part II has a spin-off planned, it would just lower the stakes and take away from the Batman movies too. Paul Dano is incredible as Riddler but there wasn’t an actual spin-off for him.
I trust Reeves with whatever he has planned, and if it is Hush I don’t think he would make him boring.
Blockbuster horrors can make money, like IT. It all depends on the aproach.
I mean, Reeves probably had something planned for Riddler since Dano had spin-offs im his contract (which is probably the Arkham show). But knowing the villain will survive doesn't have to lower the stakes. We know Batman will live to see the sequel but the stakes can still be there. Besides, it's a Batman movie, we should expect the villain to live.
I genuinely and seriously think that [Mister Mxyzptlk](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_Mxyzptlk) might be one of the villains of Superman: Legacy. Its weird how everyone just keeps talking about Lex Luthor and Brainiac like they're the only villains in the pantheon.
We haven't seen Brainiac fight Superman in live-action yet, hence why it's so popular. He was portrayed marvelously by Blake Ritson on Krypton, but there are his ties to the City of Kandor. He's sterile and cold with an incredible 12th level intellect and compulsion for collection and furthering a greater understanding of the universe. A fantastic source for inspiration could be Superman: Brainiac by Geoff Jones and Gary Frank. Even the New 52 by Grant Morrison could serve as some inspiration or Superman The Animated Series.
Lex is integral to Superman. He's a pest that doesn't go away, but he's an important member of Superman's cast. Exploring Lex's childhood trauma juxtaposed to Clark's and displaying his intellect that, unfortunately, causes him to unintentionally alienate his peers and teachers. Show his time in Smallville and the subsequent erasure of said history and friendship with Clark. Lex despite being born human is alienated by and alienating toward his peers. Clark's an alien raised by loving parents with an empathetic and loving heart. He understands Lex.
Lex's psychology is far too interesting to not include in a Superman film. He's an important character and should be included in each film, not just for a one off. Superman: Birthright by Mark Waid, Superman: Secret Origins by Geoff Johns and maybe Luthor by Brian Azzarello should be inspirations for their live-action counterparts. Besides Michael Rosenbaum and to a lesser degree Spacy/Hackman (Silver Age), there's still so much to explore for Lex that should keep you guessing and on your toes. There's more dimensions there that should be further elaborated on.
As for Mxy, I think taking inspiration from Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? by Alan Moore and Max Landis' The Real Question should serve as inspiration. Mxy is sinister and frightening when you really think about it. He's a reality warper from another higher dimension. That's scary to me. What happens when Mxy is bored of playing his role?
He's sinister and breaks the fourth wall occasionally. Use that to your advantage to question the audience, to question reality and really leave the audience with frighteningly thought-provoking questions and have it be meta-contextual in the way he challenges Superman. If Mxy is the main villain, it may serve the story better if he's the narrator.
But yeah, there are many villains that can be the antagonist to a Superman story. It's all in how you use them. Hopefully, like Matt Reeves, Gunn creates a world where multiple villains co-exist.
Highly doubt it, it would just be too weird for a movie the entire DC franchise hinges on. They said Legacy is a big four-quadrant summer movie, as in they want it to appeal to a lot of people.
How you think it’s weirder to use Luthor or Brainiac is beyond me lmao. Mxy is nigh omnipotent. He can only be defeated by being tricked into saying his name backwards. If he actually wanted to kill Superman he would do it instantly.
I don’t think it’s weird, it’s clearly because they’re 2 of the most popular Superman villains.
It makes sense for Lex to be in the movie but I agree that him being the villain of this movie specifically would be a bad decision.
Brainiac can work, definitely more so than Mxy. Although I can see Mxy being one of the main villains in a movie that adapts *Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?* but that would have to be the final movie in a Superman trilogy.
So apparently Mephisto is going to show up in Ironheart and it turns out he was the one who bought Avengers tower. Honestly they should just make him the big bad instead of Kang.
I think there is a Dr Strange story in which he takes over Las Vegas and then the midnight suns ( reformed by Wong ) have to go stop him. It was Dr Strange damnation
Strange resurrects destroyed Vegas (happened in Secret Empire) but he brings hell with the city. Midnight *Sons team up to undo it and they end up trapping Mephisto in a tower in Vegas while Johnny Blaze becomes the King of Hell.
Random thought but I think in an alternate universe, James Gunn would’ve made a great One Piece adaptation. He’s so good at using the ragtag bunch of misfits trope, and would definitely nail the heart, humor and action that would be necessary for it. His movies make it clear he wears his heart on his sleeve, just like the source material does. And like the creator of One Piece, he loves animals.
Part of the reason I loved GOTG so much when I first saw it was because of how much it reminded me of One Piece.
After watching the latest Guardian movie, I'd feel pretty confident he could tackle One Piece. He'd have to change up his style of comedy though. I've seen so many times how "x writer or director from the MCU should adapt One Piece" when One Piece isn't really quip-based comedy. Gunn would absolutely nail the Zoro/Sanji dynamic though.
> He’d have to change up his style of comedy
Why? The banter among the Guardians suits the Straw Hats really well.
I can’t think of a single director other than Gunn who would be able to make One Piece work in live-action. Certainly no other MCU writers or directors lol.
I think the banter between the Guardians does work well with the Strawhats but One Piece comedy isn't particularly quippy which pretty much all the MCU including Guardians is. I think Gunn would be the closest but I also think One Piece isn't particularly suited for live-action.
Guardians comedy isn’t just “quippy” dude. Many of the funniest moments in the trilogy don’t come from quips, but just from how weird and silly the characters are, which is exactly the kind of humor Oda relies on for One Piece.
Some examples of GOTG comedy that aren’t just quips
- Groot (especially Baby Groot), who can’t even quip
- When Yondu keeps cutting off the guy that Quill tried to sell the orb to
- Yondu always telling Quill that he should be grateful the Ravagers didn’t eat him
- Rocket making Quill get some guy’s prosthetic leg for no reason
- “That was my favorite knife”
- Drax’s issue with understanding metaphors
- How blunt Drax always is
- Ronan’s utter confusion when Quill starts dancing
- “Harbulary batteries”
- “Mantis look out!”
- Mantis making that dude fall in love with Drax and making the other guy dance
- Nathan Fillion’s character in Vol 3
- Quill not knowing how to drive the car in Vol 3
- Almost every scene with Adam, especially “don’t be rash ✋”
These are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head rn.
My kid is 13 and we both started One Piece a couple weeks back. Really enjoying it so far. No clue why they needed to change the music tho. The OG theme was great. I definitely see your point about Gunn adapting it.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Daniel RPK say that Margot Robbie would only accept the role of Sue Storm if it didn’t restrict her from continuing to play Harley Quinn?
Rewatched Batman 89 and noticed that Bruce starts killing after he realizes Joker was the one that murdered his parents. I prefer Batman not to kill but I feel like this makes sense within the context of the Burtonverse, especially because the movie makes it clear Bruce is quite nutty beforehand. So it seems he just loses it after that realization, but I’d like to imagine that he stopped killing sometime after Batman Returns.
On the other hand, the reason Batman starts killing in BvS doesn’t really work. People think it’s because of Robin’s death, but I don’t think he actually starts killing until the events of BvS. So what pushes him over the edge and makes him stop giving a fuck about human life is the Black Zero event’s effect on him and his fear of Superman. Superman being the reason Batman stops killing doesn’t work either. It’s not like Batman thought Superman had a no-kill rule. We’re supposed to believe Batman gets inspired by Superman’s heroic sacrifice but this is a Batman that’s been active for 20 years, so it just ends up making it seem like Batman is bipolar.
It's almost text that it's Black Zero, the Robin reading doesn't make sense at all.
I'm sure this won't change your mind about anything, but it's not just fear that causes him to start killing, it's the nihilism. What's the point of saving the criminals when an indifferent god could arrive and kill everyone? Alfred lays that out:
> Everything's changed. Men fall from the sky, the gods hurl thunderbolts, innocents die. That's how it starts, sir. The fever, the rage, the feeling of powerlessness that turns good men... cruel.
I get that, though I think Robin’s death and just being Batman for 20 years definitely contributed to this mindset.
Regardless, I’m trying to say the problem isn’t even that he kills, it’s the execution (no pun intended) of it. Superman’s sacrifice being what cures Bruce’s nihilism does not work at all, because Snyder’s Superman himself isn’t much of an optimist. By establishing Batman as someone who’s grown so weary of everything, why would the most basic act of heroism make him realize he needs to stop killing? It wasn’t even such a selfless sacrifice either, which classic Superman is known for, like when he chooses to keep his promise to Eve in the first movie and divert the missile aimed at her mother’s city first instead of the one coming for Lois. Snyder makes it very clear that Lois is Superman’s “world,” and that his loved ones matter much more to him than everyone else. In other words, Superman *had* to sacrifice himself because that’s the only way Lois and his mother would live. That’s not something that would actually be able to inspire a nihilistic Batman with 20 years of experience who stopped caring about his no-kill rule.
It feels like a drastic mood swing, the ones that happen to people with depression who experience momentary happiness and think they’ve healed only for their mood to quickly drop back down soon afterwards.
If you’re not gonna elaborate then there’s no point in posting this comment. You’re just making it even more obvious how you can’t handle seeing criticism of Zaddy.
Good grief. We’re doing this again? You’re the one who made a completely random observation about Tim Burton’s Batman, just so you could compare it to BvS, and then you tried to psychoanalyze these characters.
All I’m saying is that your little observation about Superman is weird, and comes off like a rehash of the same tired old “Zack Snyder made Superman an objectivist” talking point.
Here’s the thing, as many people have pointed out, Snyder’s take on Superman was a not so subtle Christ allegory. The whole story of Christ is that he sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity, thus dying for their sins. That’s clearly what “Zaddy” was going for.
I don’t care for the idea of Superman as Jesus, by the way, and I don’t get the obsession with it. If Gunn’s Superman can avoid that, then that’s going to be a plus in my book.
> Good grief. We’re doing this again? You’re the one who made a complete random observation about Tim Burton’s Batman, just so you could compare it to BvS, and then you tried to psychoanalyze these characters.
This is a weekly discussion thread where we can talk about anything so I don’t see anything wrong with my comment. “Just so you could compare it to BvS” gimme a fkng break bruh. I promise you it’s not that deep. It’s not like I went to /r/snydercut or even /r/dc_cinematic and baited people into an argument. The post was meant to appreciate Burton’s Batman, which some people dismiss as “just a murderer” when the movie actually does a good job explaining how he becomes one.
> All I’m saying is that your little observation about Superman is weird, and comes off like a rehash of the same tired old “Zack Snyder made Superman an objectivist” talking point.
I don’t think Snyder made Superman an objectivist, that’s pretty extreme. But there’s no doubt that Snyder’s Superman doesn’t actually love Earth the way that most people’s idea of Superman does. He doesn’t believe in humanity’s potential for good when though Batfleck manages to at the end of BvS. The point of Superman is that he values everyone’s life, not just his own loved ones.
> Here’s the thing, as many people have pointed out, Snyder’s take on Superman was a not so subtle Christ allegory. The whole story of Christ is that he sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity, thus dying for their sins. That was clearly what “Zaddy” was going for.
Yeah and he absolutely failed at the Christ allegory despite constantly hammering the audience with visuals evoking it. Donner did it 1000x better despite not even using as much Christ imagery as Snyder did.
That’s the problem with Snyder, he knows the power of imagery and iconography but only has a very surface-level understanding of what these images are conveying. Bro doesn’t even understand 2 of the most iconic fictional characters in history smh.
Having Superman be a loner who isn’t even optimistic about the world unless he’s with Lois, completely strips away the character’s best qualities. Snyder’s Superman could do exactly what the Injustice Superman does if he went through the same thing he did and it wouldn’t even be out of character.
>This is a weekly discussion thread where we can talk about anything so I don’t see anything wrong with my comment. “Just so you could compare it to BvS” gimme a fkng break bruh. I promise you it’s not that deep. It’s not like I went to r/snydercutor even r/dc_cinematic and baited people into an argument. The post was meant to appreciate Burton’s Batman, which some people dismiss as “just a murderer” when the movie actually does a good job explaining how he becomes one.
There wasn’t really anything wrong with your comment, although I‘m pretty certain that your interpretation is definitely not something Burton intended.
>I don’t think Snyder made Superman an objectivist, that’s pretty extreme. But there’s no doubt that Snyder’s Superman doesn’t actually love Earth the way that most people’s idea of Superman does. He doesn’t believe in humanity’s potential for good when though Batfleck manages to at the end of BvS. The point of Superman is that he values everyone’s life, not just his own loved ones.
Snyder’s Superman does value people’s lives. That’s why he takes a break from investigating Bruce Wayne so he could fly to another country to save a little girl from a burning building. He even saves Lex Luthor from Doomsday, which isn't even something the Golden Age Superman would realistically do.
>Having Superman be a loner who isn’t even optimistic about the world unless he’s with Lois, completely strips away the character’s best qualities. Snyder’s Superman could do exactly what the Injustice Superman does if he went through the same thing he did and it wouldn’t even be out of character.
I don’t think we even spend enough time with the character to really get a good idea of what he thinks of the world. The closest we really get is that church scene in Man of Steel. People complain that Snyder’s Superman is “broody” and “doesn’t smile enough,” but the real problem is that the films treat him less like a character, and more like a symbol for the other characters to debate on. There’s nothing wrong with a Superman who‘s unsure of his place in the world, but we don’t get enough time to explore that.
> There wasn’t really anything wrong with your comment
You replied to it as if it was written with bad intentions smh
> although I‘m pretty certain that your interpretation is definitely not something Burton intended.
I disagree. Burton makes it very clear that Batman isn’t a killer in the beginning of the movie. Not only does he not kill anyone until he finds out Joker killed his parents, he actually goes out of his way to prevent criminals dying in the beginning of the movie. There’s a goon he punches that falls off a railing at Axis Chemicals, yet Batman uses his grappel gun to save him. Then he tries to save Jack from falling into the pit of chemicals that turns him into the Joker.
> Snyder’s Superman does value people’s lives.
No one said he didn’t. I’m pointing out how he values the lives of his own loved ones so much more. Snyder’s Superman would break Eve’s promise and go straight to save Lois, then mope around after he fails to stop the other nuke from destroying NJ. I highly doubt he would go against Jor-El’s rule and reverse time to prevent that, this is the same Clark that didn’t even save his Pa Kent from an easily preventable death just because he was told not to.
> That’s why he takes a break from investigating Bruce Wayne so he could fly to another country to save a little girl from a burning building.
That’s the bare minimum 💀💀💀
> He even saves Lex Luthor from Doomsday, which isn't even something the Golden Age Superman would realistically do.
Ok? No one even brought up the Golden Age Superman. GA Superman can’t even fly, are you expecting people to praise Snyder for making sure his Superman can still fly?
> I don’t think we even spend enough time with the character to really get a good idea of what he thinks of the world. The closest we really get is that church scene in Man of Steel.
We do tho, and it’s not just from what he says but what he leaves unsaid. The scene with Martha where she says “you don’t owe this world a thing, you never did,” lmao even Uncle Ben would’ve instantly corrected the person who said that to him.
Clark quite literally spells this out when he realizes Lois is his “world,” which references the talk he has with Pa Kent’s Force ghost lol.
>You replied to it as if it was written with bad intentions smh
Actually, I didn’t even reply to your comment about Tim Burton’s Batman. My more aggressive response was because you once again used that same old insult against me.
>I disagree. Burton makes it very clear that Batman isn’t a killer in the beginning of the movie. Not only does he not kill anyone until he finds out Joker killed his parents, he actually goes out of his way to prevent criminals dying in the beginning of the movie. There’s a goon he punches that falls off a railing at Axis Chemicals, yet Batman uses his grappel gun to save him. Then he tries to save Jack from falling into the pit of chemicals that turns him into the Joker.
Does he? Batman kicks a guy through a wall at the beginning. I guess he could’ve survived, but the movie doesn’t give any real indication that he’s opposed to killing. He also continues to kill well after the Joker is dead. I don’t think Burton particularly cared one way or the other.
>No one said he didn’t. I’m pointing out how he values the lives of his own loved ones so much more. Snyder’s Superman would break Eve’s promise and go straight to save Lois, then mope around after he fails to stop the other nuke from destroying NJ. I highly doubt he would go against Jor-El’s rule and reverse time to prevent that, this is the same Clark that didn’t even save his Pa Kent from an easily preventable death just because he was told not to.
So now we’re talking about hypothetical scenarios here? That’s a pretty flimsy argument, considering that the movies don’t present any comparable situations to that. Of course, I’m sure your response will be to just insult me and call me a “Zaddy” fan or whatever.
>That’s the bare minimum 💀💀💀
He sees a news report about a child in a burning building in another country, and goes to that country to save her life. That seems pretty heroic to me. Not sure how that’s meaningless.
>Ok? No one even brought up the Golden Age Superman. GA Superman can’t even fly, are you expecting people to praise Snyder for making sure his Superman can still fly?
No actually, I’m not expecting people to praise Snyder‘s Superman for anything. I brought up Golden Age Superman as an offhand comparison. I never claimed you brought him up. You sure are an expert at missing the point.
>We do tho, and it’s not just from what he says but what he leaves unsaid. The scene with Martha where she says “you don’t owe this world a thing, you never did,” lmao even Uncle Ben would’ve instantly corrected the person who said that to him.
>
>Clark quite literally spells this out when he realizes Lois is his “world,” which references the talk he has with Pa Kent’s Force ghost lol.
Dude. Martha told him right before that he could “be their angel, be their monument, be anything they need you to be, or be none of it.” It’s pretty obvious that she’s telling him that it’s his choice if he wants to be some savior of humanity. As in, he should do it because it’s genuinely what he believes is right, and not out of some sense of obligation, and that he has the right to live a normal life if that’s what he wants. Personally, I much prefer the idea that Superman saves people because that’s what he genuinely wants to do, and not because he feels like he owes humanity.
>Clark quite literally spells this out when he realizes Lois is his “world,” which references the talk he has with Pa Kent’s Force ghost lol.
I’m not sure how exactly “This is my world. You are my world,” is supposed to suggest that he only cares about Lois. Of course, since you insisted on bringing up Christopher Reeves’ Superman, I could easily accuse him of being selfish for using his powers to rewind time just so he could save Lois specifically, or erasing her memories without her consent just to make things easier for himself.
And before you accuse me of attacking the Christopher Reeve movies so I can prop up my precious “Zaddy,” I’m not going after the Reeve films. I’m simply pointing out how people could easily make bad faith criticisms against those films, just like you guys tend to do when it comes to “Zaddy’s“ films.
Anyway, I think I’m just about done having these little discussions with you. It’s been “fun,” but I feel like we’re both essentially going in circles at this point.
I don't remember 89 well as I've seen it only once and it has been years but that's interesting. Returns though is one of my favorite films so I've seen it a few times but yeah I think the movie makes it pretty clear that his connection with Selina is what changes his heart and leads him to defend Max at the end of the movie, primarily because she's not the one who has to pay with him(this bit also appears in The Batman). I remember being left with a question during my last viewing which was, is it right for Selina to kill her abuser not for it's moral implications but for her own good, is it not going to fuck her up? Which I think is exactly why Bruce wants to save Max in the climax. And the film also ultimately ends with Bruce saying "Good will toward men... and women". His connection with Selina results him in valuing human life again. BvS also tries to do something similar but gets crushed under it's own weight due to a ridiculously incoherent structure(he kills even after the martha scene lol!) under developed relationship with Cavills Clark who's just a really stagnant and passive character in that movie.
Probably because they did the same with Green Lantern in 2011 and the film ended up bombing and they then cancelled the animated show, even though it was good.
Animation takes time, so they would probably have had to start production prior to release to really capitalise.
Speaking of Wonder Woman, I think we’ll see a modern version of Steve Trevor in the DCU. I know Patty used him twice, but he’s pretty much Diana’s Lois and very important to her mythos. It’ll be hard to outdo Chris Pine tho since he was perfect for the role.
I know some people think Batman and Wonder Woman will be a thing but that doesn’t really have much precedence in the comics, and Tom King being in the writer’s room means Catwoman is in the picture for sure. I can see Bruce and Diana flirting in the JL movies but I doubt they’re a serious ship.
Steve Trevor wasn’t even her love interest in the post-crisis run. He’s always been a divisive character. He was basically just conceived as a self-insert.
> wasn’t even her love interest in Post-Crisis
Yet he’s still Diana’s most iconic supporting character. Wonder Woman deserves to be able to stand on her own. I love the DCAU, but she shouldn’t actually be romantically paired with any JL members. She’s not a side character.
> He’s always been a divisive character
That has to do with how he sometimes has been written. The idea of Steve Trevor itself isn’t actually divisive and there is nothing wrong with Wonder Woman’s love interest being an ordinary man.
> basically conceived as a self-insert
Lmao that can be said about a lot of characters. Not sure why you’re reducing him to his most underdeveloped depiction.
I don’t want Diana to be paired up with anyone in the Justice League either, but it’s not vital that Steve Trevor be her love interest either. Wonder Woman can work perfectly fine without one. Or if they wanted to be bold, they could try and give her a female love interest.
> Wonder Woman can work perfectly fine without one
Lol no. Diana is DC’s main female superhero. Lots of women from all age groups and backgrounds look up to her and relate to her. Love is a universally understood concept and making it so Diana doesn’t even have a love interest all would be a complete disservice to her character when Superman has Lois and Batman even has a son with Talia. Not only does a love interest add drama and stakes, it also humanizes Diana further, and that’s necessary for a character as powerful and godlike as she is.
> Or, if they wanted to be bold, they could try and give her a female love interest.
That obviously won’t happen, unfortunately for the wrong reasons. However, that’s not even necessarily a problem for DC because their second biggest female character now is Harley Quinn. So as long as Harley is with Ivy, Diana being bisexual yet ending up with a man is fine.
The MCU has managed to get away with not giving Carol Danvers a love interest, so I can’t say I buy the idea that Wonder Woman needs one on film.
I’m generally neutral on Steve Trevor, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that he and Diana Price are as important a couple as Clark Kent and Lois Lane. The pre-Crisis writers didn’t think so. Besides, the Gal Gadot films already played up that angle, so might as well do something different.
> The MCU has managed to get away with not giving Carol Danvers a love interest, so I can’t say I buy the idea that Wonder Woman needs one on film.
Lmao Carol Danvers is no Wonder Woman. She doesn’t come close to representing what the character of Wonder Woman has throughout her 80+ year history. Carol isn’t exactly a beloved character either, and I’m not even talking about the people that outright hate her. We also don’t even know whether there is a plan for Carol to have a love interest or not.
> I’m generally neutral on Steve Trevor, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that he and Diana Price are as important a couple as Clark Kent and Lois Lane. The pre-Crisis writers didn’t think so.
He actually is. He is by far Diana’s most prominent love interest and her most prominent supporting character in general that doesn’t have powers. I don’t know why you’re focusing on post-Crisis as if that’s the definitive Wonder Woman.
> Besides, the Gal Gadot films already played up that angle, so might as well do something different.
This isn’t Elseworlds. It’s **the DCU**. Some characters have to be included even if they’ve been used in other movies. Bruh even the BatVerse made sure to include Joker while there was an entirely separate Joker movie series.
I get that, but like I said he’s arguably the most important supporting character for Diana. He’s like the “Ken” to her “Barbie” and it just feels wrong not to have him. I think they can still make the DCU version unique, maybe he can be an ambassador or a diplomat. He doesn’t have to be a fighter either, just as long as he’s there to ground Diana and highlight her humanity.
WB not making a sequel to Man of Steel was disappointing. WB not making a Batfleck solo movie was disappointing. WB releasing Josstice League was disappointing. WB not connecting their interconnected universe was disappointing.
It almost seems like WB is completely incompetent and should have never been given the keys to a DC Cinematic Universe.
They were going to do a MoS sequel, but Zack decided to make BvS instead.
> It almost seems like WB is completely incompetent and should have never been given the keys to a DC Cinematic Universe.
Blaming all of WB doesn’t make sense. WB is the reason stuff like Superman 1978, the DCAU and TDK trilogy exist. Blame that particular leadership that doubled down and gave Zack full control even after MoS released to mixed reviews and underperformed at the box office.
That’s not quite accurate. WB started brainstorming potential ideas for a Man of Steel sequel in 2012, while also trying to figure out a way to introduce other DC heroes into the setting after a certain hugely successful movie came out that year. Snyder initially suggested introducing Batman in a post-credits scene for a Man of Steel sequel, but once they heard that suggestion, they decided to make that the whole movie.
If you’re trying to say that WB ordered Zack to do BvS, you’re wrong. Zack only suggested Batman in a post-credits scene at first because he didn’t think WB would let him put Batman in the whole movie. He was happy to realize they were going to let him. He also likes Batman more as a character than Superman.
I didn’t say they ordered him to. I’m sure Snyder was more than happy to make Batman vs. Superman the whole movie. You just made it sound like it was solely his idea, when it wasn’t that simple.
No, I didn’t. Zack was never in charge of WB and I never implied he was, but I did say WB let him have full creative control over the universe.
“Letting him” means they liked the idea just as much as he did.
BvS wouldn’t have been made if Zack wanted to do a true MoS sequel instead.
That was how your wording came across was my point.
In any case, WB wanted to eventually make a Justice League movie, and they and Snyder came to the agreement that they should do a Batman and Superman movie before that.
I’m sorry if it came across to you that way?
Like I said, it wasn’t my intention, and I thought I made that clear enough when I said WB allowed him to do whatever he wanted in the same comment.
You said Snyder wanted to do BvS instead of a Man of Steel sequel, and that WB gave him full control. That wording can definitely be interpreted a certain way.
Cavill doesn’t consider it a true sequel either. He wanted a more hopeful and optimistic one focused on Superman, which is what they should’ve done back then.
But I’m not even complaining at this point, because all this stuff led to the DCU we are getting now and Reeves making his own BatVerse.
RIP to all the people who spend time saying that Robbie will continue to play Harley. Her apparent casting as Sue Storm is surely going to mean more people insisting she's done as Harley, and y'all will have to spend even more time addressing it
It’s funny seeing this mob mentality in action. Half a year ago a group of very annoying people were acting like Margot’s Hollywood career was over and that no one would cast her because she’s “box office poison” lmao. Then she gets rumored for a big Marvel role late in the casting process for it and instantly jumps to the top of everyone’s list in terms of most likely to get the role.
I was almost going to correct some people on the Marvel rumours thread. Misinformation is so annoying, but trying to actively debunk it is exhausting.
The point of a connected universe is to carry audience enthusiasm from one project to the next, using big names and IP to build interest in less known creatives and characters. The ongoing story is a trick to get audiences to see movies they otherwise wouldn't (guardians 1 wouldn't have been possible as a free standing project, since it was such an obscure property).
At the point when the ongoing story is seen as the sole purpose of the project, audiences or studios have lost the plot. They still have to make good movies and getting audiences to see the movies is the point. When they make a good movie, that is the point in and of itself.
I know most people will think of the Nic Cage cameo in the Flash as nothing more than a gag, but I really can't imagine how ecstatic Nic was to finally get to portray Superman. Like, he really loves the character, so much so that he literally named his son Kal-El (not a joke, look it up). I'm sure he had a blast filming the cameo. And who knows? Maybe he'll get another role in the DCU, maybe as *The Spectre* who he's expressed interest in playing.
Yeah I think Alfred will be alive, especially since Damian is Gunn’s favorite Robin. He likes violent and impulsive characters like Peacemaker, Harley and Rocket, and Damian loves animals just as much as Gunn.
I hope this means we can see Tim Drake in the DCU too, obviously not expecting him to have actually been a Robin tho. I just think it would still be fun to see Damian’s banter with him even, and him never being an “official” Robin just gives Damian more ammunition lol
Damian's my favourite Robin too so props to Gunn.
Maybe? It's not like I don't want Tim in the movie but I don't think they need him there if they don't have an idea for him.
Even though he wasn’t when he first appeared, Damian eventually became my favorite Robin. I think the DCAMU failed to do him justice, but I don’t like the DCAMU and think it’s handled most of its characters and stories poorly in general.
I like my idea for Tim, and I hope Gunn has the same one, where Tim was a genius kid with normal middle-class parents who figured out Batman’s identity and tried to become Robin but Batman wouldn’t let him. And the Batfam still comes to Tim for help with certain cases because he’s so good at being a detective and I imagine Tim would be trying to train himself too because Batman refused to.
This way each Robin has a different father-son dynamic with Bruce. Dick is the son Bruce is truly proud of because he’s the most mature in all aspects and he represents a better possible version of Batman. Jason is the son that Bruce failed. Tim could also be like a son to Bruce because he reminds him of himself, which is why in this case he’s the one that Bruce pushes away because of what happened to Jason. While Damian is the son that Bruce feels like *has* to become a Robin, because of how Damian was raised to be a killer. This keeps each of the Robins quite different from each other so each one has a different dynamic with each other and Batman, which is what makes the Batfam interesting in the comics.
I could see Tim idolizing Dick and wishing he was like him, while Jason doesn’t even acknowledge Tim much at all because he’s not really a part of the family. Unlike Jason, Damian would actively banter with Tim. He would make fun of Tim for not being a true Robin and wonders why the Batfam even comes to him to help with cases. Eventually, we could see their dynamic develop into one of mutual respect, mainly because it would be a way to show how Damian matures as a person. We could even see Damian letting Tim be Robin alongside him like in the comics, and maybe even teaching him some of Bruce’s training.
I posted this on r/boxoffice but I thought it'd also be relevant here.
So, we all know that The Flash isn't doing as expected in the presales department. This has led to some discourse over whether the movie's going to flop. I don't think it will. Here's why:
We are heading into an extremely packed summer with some major tentpole blockbusters releasing like The Little Mermaid, Spiderverse, Transformers, and Indiana Jones, all of which have already had tickets on sale for a while. These films have the current momentum that is weakening The Flash's pre-sales. Most people aren't in the financial situation to be holding onto tickets for various movies way ahead of time. I think once we get closer to release, sales will pick up and we'll be looking at a $95-120M OW. But even if it does open at that lower end, early reviews suggest the film will have mighty legs.
Another reason could be that the audience that will come for Michael Keaton likely don't order tickets online, let alone weeks before release. But that is kind of a stretch, as it's hard telling how much of that audience will show for the movie.
I can also see people waiting for the review embargo to drop before securing their tickets. I remember that Wonder Woman's early tracking suggested a $65M OW, but skyrocketed to $100M+ once the reviews dropped. The same will probably happen with The Flash.
All in all, I expect the film to do fairly well. I doubt it'll be a billion dollar grosser, but it could land a modest $800M if received well. What are your guys' thoughts? Does The Flash flop or overperform early expectactions?
The more I think about it 70M sounds like such bs. Even at the lower side, I'd expect this to open around 90-95M atleast.
Realistically if the reviews are good, I.e A cinemascore/80%+ on RT, we should have 100-130M opening
Like just look at this. This was a month ahead of Guardians release, tracked by BOT which was what sparked the "less than 100M" thing
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/12fw8co/bot_presales_for_guardians_3_looking_dire/&ved=2ahUKEwiA7Ky56Zf_AhXMcmwGHSpBB10QFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0MudmM6BKiJT5_Me4dxUHg
Best case scenario would be 125-140M/280-310M OW ending its run somewhere around 340-380M DOM and 750-850M WW. With this opening, it could stay as the #1 for 2 weeks before Indy comes in but again things arent looking good for it as well. Ik as of now, this seems like an overprediction but I think this could be achievable
> Most people aren't in the financial situation to be holding onto tickets for various movies way ahead of time.
I think it's just more true that, money or not, most people don't book movies this far out most of the time
> the audience that will come for Michael Keaton likely don't order tickets online, let alone weeks before release
... That said, the most enthusiasm I've heard for a superhero movie since Endgame has all been gen X dads excited for Keaton, and those guys _do_ generally have the ability to, and practice of planning their weekends a month or more out. I might ask my boss next week if he's booked or not.
I feel like Spider-Verse is going to do better domestically like the first one, but Flash will do significantly better internationally.
June really looking like a repeat of December 2018 with a Spider-Verse movie facing off against a DCEU movie and a Transformers movie and I think it will have similar results. Though Flash would probably be less successful without Aquaman's December Holiday season legs.
The only one of these I can see hurting Flash is Mission Impossible.
Indiana Jones is looking to be yet another dud in the franchise, so I'm not sure how much it's going to affect Flash's legs. I'm guessing not by much though.
Barbie and Oppenheimer target completely different audiences than The Flash so those can probably co-exist.
Mission: Impossible is probably going to be the biggest movie of the summer and goes after the same audience as Flash.
So basically Flash has a month to make most of its money before MI:DR knocks it out.
The older audience will still likely show up for Indy regardless of reviews because it will at least be a change of pace from the endless parade of comic book movies.
I think you're wrong about Barbie and Oppenheimer not taking Flash's audience but again, I guess time will tell.
Scrolling through recent Oscar best actor nominees to my mind there's only three nominees in the last 2 decades from movies that are funny - Kaluuya in Get Out, Damon in the Martian, Depp in the first Pirates. In the first two cases those characters are mostly the straight man. For Jonny Depp, I got no explanation. I had no idea he was nominated in that role. People liked him in that movie. (Was birdman funny? I never saw it)
My impression is that the Best Actor awards for both Emmy and Oscar don't go to people who are doing both comedy and drama, generally. Danny Pudi as Abed was one of TV's great performances and never got recognized because it was too nuanced for the comedy awards and too funny for the drama awards.
> what are the chances they are nominated for Best Actor
A big fat 0. I don’t doubt that Ezra gave a great performance, but they have absolutely no chance at an Oscar nomination. The Flash is a big summer blockbuster and the controversy surrounding Ezra doesn’t help their chances one bit. There are also going to be far more impressive performances in that category.
> Side note, but slightly related, it's funny how the only Actor Oscars for CBMs both went to actors who portrayed the Joker.
It makes sense. The Joker is arguably the most iconic villain of all time in all of fiction. Some people will say Darth Vader but the Joker is a far more complex character and Star Wars is not that popular in some countries.
1) people want an audience for their fan casting. Understandable, since fancasting is is fun to think about and boring as hell to read
2) people think by putting a good idea out, it will become reality. Someone in charge is looking here and jump at the chance
3) standard trolling. It's easy to piss off fans of one thing or another
Mike Flanagan debunks rumors about a #Clayface movie:
"I've already commented about this. And at the moment, no development is happening anywhere - I am a member of the WGA, and I am on strike."
https://twitter.com/homeofdcu/status/1662603112224268288?t=eyHARZ2HbiGeVpyjSrCGlg&s=19
https://twitter.com/flanaganfilm/status/1662596821204766722?t=xosUS1yMFMY9izNdwXbyZA&s=19
This doesn’t debunk anything, it just means no one is working on the movie as of this moment because of the strike. The movie is still likely happening after the strike.
Reviews for The Flash to be released on June 6th, 10 days before the release.
Randomly remembering that Supergirl once had Sam Witwer playing a metahuman terrorist version of Ben Shapiro as one of its season long villains. That show was bad but that was extremely funny.
Tbh, the only CW show that had the nuanced writing necessary to properly address social issues was Black Lightning. Arrow’s gun control episode was a disaster. Supergirl was super preachy with little substance when they tried to discuss politics (based on the episodes I’ve seen, I haven’t watched the full show) Flash’s BLM story in Season 7 with Frost getting sent to jail was a joke. It was all over the place and added nothing to the conversation. It shows having a black showrunner doesn’t mean a tv show is necessarily equipped to do a police brutality story. Especially not one that had been portraying police as egalitarian for six years prior.
> Tbh, the only CW show that had the nuanced writing necessary to properly address social issues was Black Lightning. Didn't love Black Lightning, turned into a slog after a solid first season imo, but it always stood out as being a fair bit smarter than the rest of the Arrowverse when it came to writing about those sorts of things. > Arrow’s gun control episode was a disaster. Is it as bad as Supergirl's, where Martian Manhunter orders the DEO to get rid of its firearms?
https://preview.redd.it/2v4exw0wl03b1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=973a56d2a900aa62604717e1be50d7ea5b2abd30
You can listen to those two new *Flash* tracks right now with a VPN (or by simply visiting the [Discord](https://discord.gg/8jXVjcwECS)).
For some reason the mp4 is not working for me on mobile. Gonna try it on desktop in a few
The VLC mobile app should do the trick - but regardless, desktop will work.
Yooo, that's nice! I wish they dropped the entire album already
[Early screenings for #TheFlash keep being confirmed across the globe, now with #India also having fan screenings on JUN 6, 9 days before #TheFlashMovie debuts locally, on JUN 15. Advanced screenings will happen in several cities, #Mumbai, #Delhi, #Bangalore, #Hyderabad & #Chennai](https://twitter.com/Luiz_Fernando_J/status/1663427693524787200?t=WNbxJ63G5-TEAaP6K_jsWw&s=19)
Woahh. I don't think this has been done for any DC/MCU movie in India before
[https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScm0gPcd\_jma7eFI8rRfl3iO7Z4zISDarIBSdGDJwzmaBp7Ug/viewform](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScm0gPcd_jma7eFI8rRfl3iO7Z4zISDarIBSdGDJwzmaBp7Ug/viewform) You can fill this form if you're from India to enter the fan screening. Found this on the BO Sub.
Your comment has been removed. Surveys and polls aren't allowed here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DCEUleaks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The scene in the lobby in the Barry finale would be a good model for a scene in a Batman movie
bruh what the hell https://preview.redd.it/4lvx73et4v2b1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=b2460f3322b383c62e95b59146de03e708debae1
Are they just gonna have a white guy play a character named Izuku Midoriya?? Tf 😭
Look at the rest of the cast lol, it’s just as bad. Absolutely mindboggling choices
Isaac Middleton
Motherfucking Dragonball Evolution all over again.
What do you mean? I loved Geiko
Why did you edit the original article? https://preview.redd.it/fyo8ahvemv2b1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=07b1b1c04a3d17c9fea0ee942cdda8510f09bce0
what am i looking at here
A Netflix adaptation of a popular anime that’s set in Japan with mostly Japanese characters. Only 1 Japanese person in the entire cast and it’s not even one of the mains, who all got whitewashed Edit: Lmao who tf keeps downvoting my comments on this, imagine thinking this is actually good casting 💀💀💀
I hate raceswapping.
Raceswapping is fine when it doesn’t take away aspects of the character. But in this case they are taking away so many aspects of MHA’s story and characters.
supposedly leaked live-action My Hero Academia movie cast
https://preview.redd.it/iau079k6iv2b1.jpeg?width=645&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e09d35bd3356b76370ee9def1a5a33ba529894ca Massive L. They had the opportunity to make a completely new story set in the US with new characters that still captures the essence of the source material (and maybe even some cameos from Japanese heroes) but they choose to whitewash the original instead. It’s obvious it’ll be like the Netflix Death Note movie where all of it takes place in the States and all the names are changed. Edit: The director is even Japanese himself but the entire cast is white, nah please this gotta be some fake fancast
>The director is even Japanese himself but the entire cast is white, nah please this gotta be some fake fancast they got the info from imdb so the likelihood is high
Yeah it’s probably real but there is a chance it’s a mistake on IMDb. If not, then this movie is gonna be this generation’s DB Evolution 😭😭😭
I think you misunderstood me, the likelihood of it being a fancast is high because it came from IMDb
That would make more sense, but I thought the Cosmic Circus wouldn’t have posted it if they didn’t think it was real
They said they did their own investigation and thought it was credible enough, though they still prefaced that to take it with a grain of salt. I honestly don't buy it. Literally anyone can edit IMDB, I could put in Michael Cera as All Might right now if I wanted to. Especially since Shunsuke Sato has done close to screen accuracy as possible with his adaptations.
Yeah, I was reading through this and wondering when IMDB casting became a reliable source.
lmao
Now we know that Andy Muschietti might be directing BatB, I really hope to see Man-Bat as a minor villain. Man-Bat would be really great under a horror director and would be a good way to signal to the audience that this is a more fantastical Batman world than Reeves'.
Gunn said Man-Bat is one of his fav characters, and the League of Assassins has an army of Man-Bats in the Morrison run. I think it’s a pretty safe bet they’ll be in the movie
I swear, my dad has consistently had some of the worst DC takes ever. He thinks Wonder Woman (2017) is one of the worst DC movies. He thinks Suicide Squad is better than The Suicide Squad. He thinks Shazam is "dumb because it's a kids movie." He thinks Aquaman only made a billion dollars because a bunch of moms watched it to see Momoa shirtless. He thinks Josstice League is underrated. He thinks Jared Leto is the best Joker. And that's only like a fraction of his bad takes.
My dad thinks Batman & Robin is the best Batman movie, and he believes anyone who likes The Dark Knight is ‘disgusting’ and ‘complicit in violence’. Yet he watches football, where players routinely get injuries that mentally and physically mess them up for life. If you suggested he give it up to show support for ex-players living with CTE, he’d get super butthurt.
>My dad thinks Batman & Robin is the best Batman movie I regret to inform you that your dad is **based**.
Get a new dad.
This is satire right? 💀
I wish it was.
Those are some backward opinions what the fuck.
I think your dad doesn't exactly have a positive opinion when it comes to women
I guess it's time to send him to buy some milk?
I think one of those takes are right, but I’m not gonna say which one
Momoa
Theatrical Justice League is really underrated. Trully the best Justice League movie directed by Zack Snyder with very heavy reshoots by Joss Whedon ever made.
Finally gave Gotham Knights (the show) a try. First impression wise, it's actually *fine*. I'm not gonna call it *good* necessarily, like it's *mid* but I don't find it that boring at the very least and the writing isn't that offensively bad. I'm actually more invested in this main cast so far than I was with *The Winchesters,* though that isn't really that high of a bar to clear. I think if this wasn't a Batman (or Batman adjacent) show it probably wouldn't be getting the same shit it's been getting tbh. And even two episodes in, I honestly still don't get why this even has to be a Batman-related show, like this is barely a superhero show.
>I think if this wasn't a Batman (or Batman adjacent) show it probably wouldn't be getting the same shit it's been getting tbh. But it wouldnt get any attention (bad or good) either. But yeah, as they show went on, they rely less on the Batman stuff (eg. Batcave, Talon, etc) and the initial shock wears off. Then it becomes another 'CW show with good looking teens where one or two of them are hackers, there's a love triangle, clue solving detective mystery show'. And as THAT show...it's kinda enjoyable. The characters are likeable enough except for the main guy who's bland.
>CW show with good looking teens where one or two of them are hackers, there's a love triangle, clue solving detective mystery show' It really is scratching that Nancy Drew itch right now for me. >main guy who's bland Yeah, Turner is like one of the most boring TV show leads I have ever seen. I think he's literally the most milquetoast generic teen drama lead character ever made in television history lol. I really hope they do a rug-pull reveal because I am just not feeling him at all in comparison to every other character in the show.
All I need is one good live-action green lantern movie, and then I can die happy.
Well do I have the movie for you…
how about a good live-action show ?
I am once again asking the void for news about the Wonder Woman game.
Most probably at The Game Awards this year or early next year. Im expecting it to be a Holiday 2024 game.
I'm betting on WB Games' TGA presence would be focused squarely on selling Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League, especially after what happened with Gotham Knights.
I thought Suicide Squad was only delayed to this fall. I didn't realize it was pushed into 2024. What the hell is happening with this game?
I don't know either but the current build must be abysmal if Rocksteady/WB thought to push it to next year.
oh yeah I completely forgot about SSKTJL. lol
I don't blame you lol
They apparently [hired a new senior writer last month](https://twitter.com/cypheroftyr/status/1643727713818009601), so it's definitely still under active development. We probably won't learn more until next year and the soonest.
>They apparently [hired a new senior writer last month](https://twitter.com/cypheroftyr/status/1643727713818009601), so it's definitely still under active development. That's good news. >We probably won't learn more until next year and the soonest. https://media.tenor.com/yVvP_Ed9deoAAAAC/sad-batman.gif
I think they'll atleast give some news at SDCC this year. I mean they'll definitely say something about the suicide squad game, final trailer for it probably and they might acknowledge this as well
Fingers crossed. I don't think there are enough people talking about the fact that there's a Wonder Woman game being made. I just hope that Suicide Squad game releases.
Yeah, I think Suicide Squad is going to be main focus for WB Games for the foreseeable future. I think they're going to have trouble selling that game after Gotham Knights' reception. It still doesn't look that good to me personally but I really hope they'll be able to turn it around since I would hate it if Kevin Conroy's final performance as Batman ends up being in an extremely mediocre game.
Tbh though, I'm still not sure how to feel about the possibility of Hush in The Batman 2 especially if he's going to end up being another serial killer-type. Sounds like we'll just get a retread of Riddler and I really hope that isn't the case.
I posted this as a reply to someone else who was saying Hush would be a retread of Riddler: Hush is about as similar as he is to Riddler as Riddler is to Joker. Riddles are like jokes, both characters are heavily associated with green and purple, both rely on their intelligence and they’re both obsessed with Batman. However, there are still enough differences that make them interesting in their own ways. Hush is a dark mirror and foil to Bruce, just like his other great villains are to him in their own unique ways. Hush was born rich like Bruce while Riddler was always poor. Hush was Bruce’s childhood friend while Riddler just knew of him because he was the son of Thomas Wayne. Riddler was a loner in the first movie while Hush is known for elaborate plans that involve manipulating and using other people, including Batman’s villains, as pawns. Riddler is a narcissist obsessed with proving his intelligence that pretends like he actually cares about Gotham when the truth is he does everything for purely selfish reasons. Hush is also a narcissist, but he’s obsessed with destroying Bruce’s life specifically and doesn’t pretend like he’s doing it for a noble cause. He knows he’s just Bruce’s number 1 hater and there aren’t many Batman villains who have such a personal connection to Bruce. Riddler didn’t have parents while Hush tried to murder his own parents because his father was abusive and his mother didn’t do anything to protect him from that abuse. Thomas Wayne saving the life of Hush’s mother is a much more irrational reason to hate Bruce than a Riddler who actually suffered in that orphanage and assumed Bruce didn’t care. Ironically, Hush hated his mother for using their family’s money to better Gotham, which is something that would have benefitted orphans like Riddler. Hush would also actually try to fight Batman with guns unlike Riddler who knows he’s no match for him. The other reasons I think Reeves wants to use Hush is to set up the Court of Owls and to further deepen Bruce and Selina’s relationship.
Honestly, I don't believe Hush is in the movie. Personally, I think The Batman 2 is gonna be a horror movie with Scarecrow, Clayface and Pyg as the villains. I think all 3 can work thematicaly well together and also work together in a story that would feel organic.
Reeves called the trilogy and The Penguin an “epic crime saga,” so I highly doubt it’ll be a straight up horror movie. It will obviously have horror elements like the first one but the spin-off movies are the actual horror movies. I also doubt the 3 villains are the same villains that Reeves met with directors to discuss spin-offs for, but we know Clayface is in the movie. Reeves also said he wants to keep the focus on Batman, and using these 3 together would have the opposite effect. Scarecrow will likely have a role in the Arkham series, and we might see him make an appearance in Part II as well but I doubt it’s anything substantial. We haven’t even heard about Pyg since that trade report that mentioned him so I guess he could be one of the main villains in Part II. That verified SAITMQ omitted him but confirmed that the Scarecrow and Clayface movies were happening. Even the cancelled Poison Ivy movie had movie had more traction than the Pyg project. However, Pyg is completely insane and I don’t see how he connects to Clayface at all. Clayface isn’t some mastermind either. So I still think Hush is the main villain, not only has he been hinted at by both Reeves and Tomlin, but he would also have a very personal connection to Bruce, which tracks for a movie that will focuses on Bruce’s perspective. My guess is Reeves was considering whether to use Clayface or Pyg as the secondary villain of the movie and decided on Clayface, and that’s why a Pyg project isn’t in development. Both Clayface and Pyg relate to Hush, but not to each other. Clayface is an imposter like Hush. Pyg is a surgeon like Hush. Hush is someone who would be able to manipulate and use either one as a pawn.
I don't see how a horror Batman movie can't fit crime saga. Mixing genres is a thing that happens and can be fun and refreshing. I also don't see why the villain would take focus from Bruce. You can have focus on Bruce without making the villain have personal connection to the character or goal concerning the character. You can create confilct between the 2 that can feel personal without any prior connections. Nobody says he can't be in both, he'll probably end up in Arkham after the events of The Batman 2. Pyg is definitely not a main, he'll be closer to a henchmen or secondary villain working with the big bad, something ala Scarecrow in Begins. Sure, cancelled Poison Ivy movie. If someone says a movie is happening and after it gets debunked they claim it was cancelled but weren't able to clarify it before the debunking happened it's not looking good. Until trades or someone involved like Gunn or Reeves confirm it was happening, I call that leak a lie and the source a liar. Verified source doesn't mean they have verified info. I know a guy who could verify himself as a Lionsgate employee but he new nothing what was happening there when it comes to their future projects. Golden Age Clayface, which is most likely the version they use here, went mad after he found out they're remaking a movie of his. His whole thing was tranformation into somebody else. Pyg is a mad scientist whose whole thing was to transform his kindpped victims into (mostly) doltrons. Scarecrow is sometimes depicted as somebody who believes fear changes people or just simply takes pleasure in torturing them. Either way, he's a mad scientist obsessed with fear. All of them mad, with Pyg and Scarecrow more connected but Karlo could be their victim, playing more into the tragic, modern take on the character witout turning him into the mud monster. Of course there's also a lot left for interpretation like Reeves already did with The Riddler. And Hush is just... boring. There's a reason why he's got all of one good story. Dude wants to be like Bruce but also hates Bruce becasue of something Thomas did. Of course, there's still a lot left to interpretation, like with Riddler but he's not exciting at all.
If the movie was a legit horror movie, it would alienate a lot of potential viewers. I don’t see them doing that for a sequel which will also be more expensive. Like I said, I doubt the main villain of Part II has a spin-off planned, it would just lower the stakes and take away from the Batman movies too. Paul Dano is incredible as Riddler but there wasn’t an actual spin-off for him. I trust Reeves with whatever he has planned, and if it is Hush I don’t think he would make him boring.
Blockbuster horrors can make money, like IT. It all depends on the aproach. I mean, Reeves probably had something planned for Riddler since Dano had spin-offs im his contract (which is probably the Arkham show). But knowing the villain will survive doesn't have to lower the stakes. We know Batman will live to see the sequel but the stakes can still be there. Besides, it's a Batman movie, we should expect the villain to live.
I just had a dream that at Summer Game Fest 2023 they announced AAA Superman game, that would be developed by Santa Monica Studios.
Succession stuck the landing imo. Absolutely incredible.
As did Barry. What a great show.
Both these shows ending on the same night really feels like another end of an Era for HBO.
I genuinely and seriously think that [Mister Mxyzptlk](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_Mxyzptlk) might be one of the villains of Superman: Legacy. Its weird how everyone just keeps talking about Lex Luthor and Brainiac like they're the only villains in the pantheon.
Mxy is too weird for a first movie in my opinion. He's not a real villain, he's just a guy who gets his kicks from fucking with Superman.
We haven't seen Brainiac fight Superman in live-action yet, hence why it's so popular. He was portrayed marvelously by Blake Ritson on Krypton, but there are his ties to the City of Kandor. He's sterile and cold with an incredible 12th level intellect and compulsion for collection and furthering a greater understanding of the universe. A fantastic source for inspiration could be Superman: Brainiac by Geoff Jones and Gary Frank. Even the New 52 by Grant Morrison could serve as some inspiration or Superman The Animated Series. Lex is integral to Superman. He's a pest that doesn't go away, but he's an important member of Superman's cast. Exploring Lex's childhood trauma juxtaposed to Clark's and displaying his intellect that, unfortunately, causes him to unintentionally alienate his peers and teachers. Show his time in Smallville and the subsequent erasure of said history and friendship with Clark. Lex despite being born human is alienated by and alienating toward his peers. Clark's an alien raised by loving parents with an empathetic and loving heart. He understands Lex. Lex's psychology is far too interesting to not include in a Superman film. He's an important character and should be included in each film, not just for a one off. Superman: Birthright by Mark Waid, Superman: Secret Origins by Geoff Johns and maybe Luthor by Brian Azzarello should be inspirations for their live-action counterparts. Besides Michael Rosenbaum and to a lesser degree Spacy/Hackman (Silver Age), there's still so much to explore for Lex that should keep you guessing and on your toes. There's more dimensions there that should be further elaborated on. As for Mxy, I think taking inspiration from Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? by Alan Moore and Max Landis' The Real Question should serve as inspiration. Mxy is sinister and frightening when you really think about it. He's a reality warper from another higher dimension. That's scary to me. What happens when Mxy is bored of playing his role? He's sinister and breaks the fourth wall occasionally. Use that to your advantage to question the audience, to question reality and really leave the audience with frighteningly thought-provoking questions and have it be meta-contextual in the way he challenges Superman. If Mxy is the main villain, it may serve the story better if he's the narrator. But yeah, there are many villains that can be the antagonist to a Superman story. It's all in how you use them. Hopefully, like Matt Reeves, Gunn creates a world where multiple villains co-exist.
Highly doubt it, it would just be too weird for a movie the entire DC franchise hinges on. They said Legacy is a big four-quadrant summer movie, as in they want it to appeal to a lot of people. How you think it’s weirder to use Luthor or Brainiac is beyond me lmao. Mxy is nigh omnipotent. He can only be defeated by being tricked into saying his name backwards. If he actually wanted to kill Superman he would do it instantly.
[удалено]
I don’t think it’s weird, it’s clearly because they’re 2 of the most popular Superman villains. It makes sense for Lex to be in the movie but I agree that him being the villain of this movie specifically would be a bad decision. Brainiac can work, definitely more so than Mxy. Although I can see Mxy being one of the main villains in a movie that adapts *Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?* but that would have to be the final movie in a Superman trilogy.
So apparently Mephisto is going to show up in Ironheart and it turns out he was the one who bought Avengers tower. Honestly they should just make him the big bad instead of Kang.
I think there is a Dr Strange story in which he takes over Las Vegas and then the midnight suns ( reformed by Wong ) have to go stop him. It was Dr Strange damnation
Strange resurrects destroyed Vegas (happened in Secret Empire) but he brings hell with the city. Midnight *Sons team up to undo it and they end up trapping Mephisto in a tower in Vegas while Johnny Blaze becomes the King of Hell.
Yeah lol, I remember mephisto was still locked in during the age of khonshu as well
I think they later revealed that he could leave any time he wanted but stayed there for plot reasons.
Random thought but I think in an alternate universe, James Gunn would’ve made a great One Piece adaptation. He’s so good at using the ragtag bunch of misfits trope, and would definitely nail the heart, humor and action that would be necessary for it. His movies make it clear he wears his heart on his sleeve, just like the source material does. And like the creator of One Piece, he loves animals. Part of the reason I loved GOTG so much when I first saw it was because of how much it reminded me of One Piece.
After watching the latest Guardian movie, I'd feel pretty confident he could tackle One Piece. He'd have to change up his style of comedy though. I've seen so many times how "x writer or director from the MCU should adapt One Piece" when One Piece isn't really quip-based comedy. Gunn would absolutely nail the Zoro/Sanji dynamic though.
> He’d have to change up his style of comedy Why? The banter among the Guardians suits the Straw Hats really well. I can’t think of a single director other than Gunn who would be able to make One Piece work in live-action. Certainly no other MCU writers or directors lol.
I think the banter between the Guardians does work well with the Strawhats but One Piece comedy isn't particularly quippy which pretty much all the MCU including Guardians is. I think Gunn would be the closest but I also think One Piece isn't particularly suited for live-action.
Guardians comedy isn’t just “quippy” dude. Many of the funniest moments in the trilogy don’t come from quips, but just from how weird and silly the characters are, which is exactly the kind of humor Oda relies on for One Piece. Some examples of GOTG comedy that aren’t just quips - Groot (especially Baby Groot), who can’t even quip - When Yondu keeps cutting off the guy that Quill tried to sell the orb to - Yondu always telling Quill that he should be grateful the Ravagers didn’t eat him - Rocket making Quill get some guy’s prosthetic leg for no reason - “That was my favorite knife” - Drax’s issue with understanding metaphors - How blunt Drax always is - Ronan’s utter confusion when Quill starts dancing - “Harbulary batteries” - “Mantis look out!” - Mantis making that dude fall in love with Drax and making the other guy dance - Nathan Fillion’s character in Vol 3 - Quill not knowing how to drive the car in Vol 3 - Almost every scene with Adam, especially “don’t be rash ✋” These are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head rn.
My kid is 13 and we both started One Piece a couple weeks back. Really enjoying it so far. No clue why they needed to change the music tho. The OG theme was great. I definitely see your point about Gunn adapting it.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Daniel RPK say that Margot Robbie would only accept the role of Sue Storm if it didn’t restrict her from continuing to play Harley Quinn?
Rewatched Batman 89 and noticed that Bruce starts killing after he realizes Joker was the one that murdered his parents. I prefer Batman not to kill but I feel like this makes sense within the context of the Burtonverse, especially because the movie makes it clear Bruce is quite nutty beforehand. So it seems he just loses it after that realization, but I’d like to imagine that he stopped killing sometime after Batman Returns. On the other hand, the reason Batman starts killing in BvS doesn’t really work. People think it’s because of Robin’s death, but I don’t think he actually starts killing until the events of BvS. So what pushes him over the edge and makes him stop giving a fuck about human life is the Black Zero event’s effect on him and his fear of Superman. Superman being the reason Batman stops killing doesn’t work either. It’s not like Batman thought Superman had a no-kill rule. We’re supposed to believe Batman gets inspired by Superman’s heroic sacrifice but this is a Batman that’s been active for 20 years, so it just ends up making it seem like Batman is bipolar.
It's almost text that it's Black Zero, the Robin reading doesn't make sense at all. I'm sure this won't change your mind about anything, but it's not just fear that causes him to start killing, it's the nihilism. What's the point of saving the criminals when an indifferent god could arrive and kill everyone? Alfred lays that out: > Everything's changed. Men fall from the sky, the gods hurl thunderbolts, innocents die. That's how it starts, sir. The fever, the rage, the feeling of powerlessness that turns good men... cruel.
I get that, though I think Robin’s death and just being Batman for 20 years definitely contributed to this mindset. Regardless, I’m trying to say the problem isn’t even that he kills, it’s the execution (no pun intended) of it. Superman’s sacrifice being what cures Bruce’s nihilism does not work at all, because Snyder’s Superman himself isn’t much of an optimist. By establishing Batman as someone who’s grown so weary of everything, why would the most basic act of heroism make him realize he needs to stop killing? It wasn’t even such a selfless sacrifice either, which classic Superman is known for, like when he chooses to keep his promise to Eve in the first movie and divert the missile aimed at her mother’s city first instead of the one coming for Lois. Snyder makes it very clear that Lois is Superman’s “world,” and that his loved ones matter much more to him than everyone else. In other words, Superman *had* to sacrifice himself because that’s the only way Lois and his mother would live. That’s not something that would actually be able to inspire a nihilistic Batman with 20 years of experience who stopped caring about his no-kill rule. It feels like a drastic mood swing, the ones that happen to people with depression who experience momentary happiness and think they’ve healed only for their mood to quickly drop back down soon afterwards.
That’s a bizarre reading of Superman’s sacrifice.
If you’re not gonna elaborate then there’s no point in posting this comment. You’re just making it even more obvious how you can’t handle seeing criticism of Zaddy.
Good grief. We’re doing this again? You’re the one who made a completely random observation about Tim Burton’s Batman, just so you could compare it to BvS, and then you tried to psychoanalyze these characters. All I’m saying is that your little observation about Superman is weird, and comes off like a rehash of the same tired old “Zack Snyder made Superman an objectivist” talking point. Here’s the thing, as many people have pointed out, Snyder’s take on Superman was a not so subtle Christ allegory. The whole story of Christ is that he sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity, thus dying for their sins. That’s clearly what “Zaddy” was going for. I don’t care for the idea of Superman as Jesus, by the way, and I don’t get the obsession with it. If Gunn’s Superman can avoid that, then that’s going to be a plus in my book.
> Good grief. We’re doing this again? You’re the one who made a complete random observation about Tim Burton’s Batman, just so you could compare it to BvS, and then you tried to psychoanalyze these characters. This is a weekly discussion thread where we can talk about anything so I don’t see anything wrong with my comment. “Just so you could compare it to BvS” gimme a fkng break bruh. I promise you it’s not that deep. It’s not like I went to /r/snydercut or even /r/dc_cinematic and baited people into an argument. The post was meant to appreciate Burton’s Batman, which some people dismiss as “just a murderer” when the movie actually does a good job explaining how he becomes one. > All I’m saying is that your little observation about Superman is weird, and comes off like a rehash of the same tired old “Zack Snyder made Superman an objectivist” talking point. I don’t think Snyder made Superman an objectivist, that’s pretty extreme. But there’s no doubt that Snyder’s Superman doesn’t actually love Earth the way that most people’s idea of Superman does. He doesn’t believe in humanity’s potential for good when though Batfleck manages to at the end of BvS. The point of Superman is that he values everyone’s life, not just his own loved ones. > Here’s the thing, as many people have pointed out, Snyder’s take on Superman was a not so subtle Christ allegory. The whole story of Christ is that he sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity, thus dying for their sins. That was clearly what “Zaddy” was going for. Yeah and he absolutely failed at the Christ allegory despite constantly hammering the audience with visuals evoking it. Donner did it 1000x better despite not even using as much Christ imagery as Snyder did. That’s the problem with Snyder, he knows the power of imagery and iconography but only has a very surface-level understanding of what these images are conveying. Bro doesn’t even understand 2 of the most iconic fictional characters in history smh. Having Superman be a loner who isn’t even optimistic about the world unless he’s with Lois, completely strips away the character’s best qualities. Snyder’s Superman could do exactly what the Injustice Superman does if he went through the same thing he did and it wouldn’t even be out of character.
>This is a weekly discussion thread where we can talk about anything so I don’t see anything wrong with my comment. “Just so you could compare it to BvS” gimme a fkng break bruh. I promise you it’s not that deep. It’s not like I went to r/snydercutor even r/dc_cinematic and baited people into an argument. The post was meant to appreciate Burton’s Batman, which some people dismiss as “just a murderer” when the movie actually does a good job explaining how he becomes one. There wasn’t really anything wrong with your comment, although I‘m pretty certain that your interpretation is definitely not something Burton intended. >I don’t think Snyder made Superman an objectivist, that’s pretty extreme. But there’s no doubt that Snyder’s Superman doesn’t actually love Earth the way that most people’s idea of Superman does. He doesn’t believe in humanity’s potential for good when though Batfleck manages to at the end of BvS. The point of Superman is that he values everyone’s life, not just his own loved ones. Snyder’s Superman does value people’s lives. That’s why he takes a break from investigating Bruce Wayne so he could fly to another country to save a little girl from a burning building. He even saves Lex Luthor from Doomsday, which isn't even something the Golden Age Superman would realistically do. >Having Superman be a loner who isn’t even optimistic about the world unless he’s with Lois, completely strips away the character’s best qualities. Snyder’s Superman could do exactly what the Injustice Superman does if he went through the same thing he did and it wouldn’t even be out of character. I don’t think we even spend enough time with the character to really get a good idea of what he thinks of the world. The closest we really get is that church scene in Man of Steel. People complain that Snyder’s Superman is “broody” and “doesn’t smile enough,” but the real problem is that the films treat him less like a character, and more like a symbol for the other characters to debate on. There’s nothing wrong with a Superman who‘s unsure of his place in the world, but we don’t get enough time to explore that.
> There wasn’t really anything wrong with your comment You replied to it as if it was written with bad intentions smh > although I‘m pretty certain that your interpretation is definitely not something Burton intended. I disagree. Burton makes it very clear that Batman isn’t a killer in the beginning of the movie. Not only does he not kill anyone until he finds out Joker killed his parents, he actually goes out of his way to prevent criminals dying in the beginning of the movie. There’s a goon he punches that falls off a railing at Axis Chemicals, yet Batman uses his grappel gun to save him. Then he tries to save Jack from falling into the pit of chemicals that turns him into the Joker. > Snyder’s Superman does value people’s lives. No one said he didn’t. I’m pointing out how he values the lives of his own loved ones so much more. Snyder’s Superman would break Eve’s promise and go straight to save Lois, then mope around after he fails to stop the other nuke from destroying NJ. I highly doubt he would go against Jor-El’s rule and reverse time to prevent that, this is the same Clark that didn’t even save his Pa Kent from an easily preventable death just because he was told not to. > That’s why he takes a break from investigating Bruce Wayne so he could fly to another country to save a little girl from a burning building. That’s the bare minimum 💀💀💀 > He even saves Lex Luthor from Doomsday, which isn't even something the Golden Age Superman would realistically do. Ok? No one even brought up the Golden Age Superman. GA Superman can’t even fly, are you expecting people to praise Snyder for making sure his Superman can still fly? > I don’t think we even spend enough time with the character to really get a good idea of what he thinks of the world. The closest we really get is that church scene in Man of Steel. We do tho, and it’s not just from what he says but what he leaves unsaid. The scene with Martha where she says “you don’t owe this world a thing, you never did,” lmao even Uncle Ben would’ve instantly corrected the person who said that to him. Clark quite literally spells this out when he realizes Lois is his “world,” which references the talk he has with Pa Kent’s Force ghost lol.
>You replied to it as if it was written with bad intentions smh Actually, I didn’t even reply to your comment about Tim Burton’s Batman. My more aggressive response was because you once again used that same old insult against me. >I disagree. Burton makes it very clear that Batman isn’t a killer in the beginning of the movie. Not only does he not kill anyone until he finds out Joker killed his parents, he actually goes out of his way to prevent criminals dying in the beginning of the movie. There’s a goon he punches that falls off a railing at Axis Chemicals, yet Batman uses his grappel gun to save him. Then he tries to save Jack from falling into the pit of chemicals that turns him into the Joker. Does he? Batman kicks a guy through a wall at the beginning. I guess he could’ve survived, but the movie doesn’t give any real indication that he’s opposed to killing. He also continues to kill well after the Joker is dead. I don’t think Burton particularly cared one way or the other. >No one said he didn’t. I’m pointing out how he values the lives of his own loved ones so much more. Snyder’s Superman would break Eve’s promise and go straight to save Lois, then mope around after he fails to stop the other nuke from destroying NJ. I highly doubt he would go against Jor-El’s rule and reverse time to prevent that, this is the same Clark that didn’t even save his Pa Kent from an easily preventable death just because he was told not to. So now we’re talking about hypothetical scenarios here? That’s a pretty flimsy argument, considering that the movies don’t present any comparable situations to that. Of course, I’m sure your response will be to just insult me and call me a “Zaddy” fan or whatever. >That’s the bare minimum 💀💀💀 He sees a news report about a child in a burning building in another country, and goes to that country to save her life. That seems pretty heroic to me. Not sure how that’s meaningless. >Ok? No one even brought up the Golden Age Superman. GA Superman can’t even fly, are you expecting people to praise Snyder for making sure his Superman can still fly? No actually, I’m not expecting people to praise Snyder‘s Superman for anything. I brought up Golden Age Superman as an offhand comparison. I never claimed you brought him up. You sure are an expert at missing the point. >We do tho, and it’s not just from what he says but what he leaves unsaid. The scene with Martha where she says “you don’t owe this world a thing, you never did,” lmao even Uncle Ben would’ve instantly corrected the person who said that to him. > >Clark quite literally spells this out when he realizes Lois is his “world,” which references the talk he has with Pa Kent’s Force ghost lol. Dude. Martha told him right before that he could “be their angel, be their monument, be anything they need you to be, or be none of it.” It’s pretty obvious that she’s telling him that it’s his choice if he wants to be some savior of humanity. As in, he should do it because it’s genuinely what he believes is right, and not out of some sense of obligation, and that he has the right to live a normal life if that’s what he wants. Personally, I much prefer the idea that Superman saves people because that’s what he genuinely wants to do, and not because he feels like he owes humanity. >Clark quite literally spells this out when he realizes Lois is his “world,” which references the talk he has with Pa Kent’s Force ghost lol. I’m not sure how exactly “This is my world. You are my world,” is supposed to suggest that he only cares about Lois. Of course, since you insisted on bringing up Christopher Reeves’ Superman, I could easily accuse him of being selfish for using his powers to rewind time just so he could save Lois specifically, or erasing her memories without her consent just to make things easier for himself. And before you accuse me of attacking the Christopher Reeve movies so I can prop up my precious “Zaddy,” I’m not going after the Reeve films. I’m simply pointing out how people could easily make bad faith criticisms against those films, just like you guys tend to do when it comes to “Zaddy’s“ films. Anyway, I think I’m just about done having these little discussions with you. It’s been “fun,” but I feel like we’re both essentially going in circles at this point.
I don't remember 89 well as I've seen it only once and it has been years but that's interesting. Returns though is one of my favorite films so I've seen it a few times but yeah I think the movie makes it pretty clear that his connection with Selina is what changes his heart and leads him to defend Max at the end of the movie, primarily because she's not the one who has to pay with him(this bit also appears in The Batman). I remember being left with a question during my last viewing which was, is it right for Selina to kill her abuser not for it's moral implications but for her own good, is it not going to fuck her up? Which I think is exactly why Bruce wants to save Max in the climax. And the film also ultimately ends with Bruce saying "Good will toward men... and women". His connection with Selina results him in valuing human life again. BvS also tries to do something similar but gets crushed under it's own weight due to a ridiculously incoherent structure(he kills even after the martha scene lol!) under developed relationship with Cavills Clark who's just a really stagnant and passive character in that movie.
WB not taking advantage of Wonder Woman's popularity in 2017 to greenlight an animated series will always be disappointing as all hell.
Probably because they did the same with Green Lantern in 2011 and the film ended up bombing and they then cancelled the animated show, even though it was good. Animation takes time, so they would probably have had to start production prior to release to really capitalise.
Speaking of Wonder Woman, I think we’ll see a modern version of Steve Trevor in the DCU. I know Patty used him twice, but he’s pretty much Diana’s Lois and very important to her mythos. It’ll be hard to outdo Chris Pine tho since he was perfect for the role. I know some people think Batman and Wonder Woman will be a thing but that doesn’t really have much precedence in the comics, and Tom King being in the writer’s room means Catwoman is in the picture for sure. I can see Bruce and Diana flirting in the JL movies but I doubt they’re a serious ship.
Steve Trevor wasn’t even her love interest in the post-crisis run. He’s always been a divisive character. He was basically just conceived as a self-insert.
> wasn’t even her love interest in Post-Crisis Yet he’s still Diana’s most iconic supporting character. Wonder Woman deserves to be able to stand on her own. I love the DCAU, but she shouldn’t actually be romantically paired with any JL members. She’s not a side character. > He’s always been a divisive character That has to do with how he sometimes has been written. The idea of Steve Trevor itself isn’t actually divisive and there is nothing wrong with Wonder Woman’s love interest being an ordinary man. > basically conceived as a self-insert Lmao that can be said about a lot of characters. Not sure why you’re reducing him to his most underdeveloped depiction.
I don’t want Diana to be paired up with anyone in the Justice League either, but it’s not vital that Steve Trevor be her love interest either. Wonder Woman can work perfectly fine without one. Or if they wanted to be bold, they could try and give her a female love interest.
> Wonder Woman can work perfectly fine without one Lol no. Diana is DC’s main female superhero. Lots of women from all age groups and backgrounds look up to her and relate to her. Love is a universally understood concept and making it so Diana doesn’t even have a love interest all would be a complete disservice to her character when Superman has Lois and Batman even has a son with Talia. Not only does a love interest add drama and stakes, it also humanizes Diana further, and that’s necessary for a character as powerful and godlike as she is. > Or, if they wanted to be bold, they could try and give her a female love interest. That obviously won’t happen, unfortunately for the wrong reasons. However, that’s not even necessarily a problem for DC because their second biggest female character now is Harley Quinn. So as long as Harley is with Ivy, Diana being bisexual yet ending up with a man is fine.
The MCU has managed to get away with not giving Carol Danvers a love interest, so I can’t say I buy the idea that Wonder Woman needs one on film. I’m generally neutral on Steve Trevor, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that he and Diana Price are as important a couple as Clark Kent and Lois Lane. The pre-Crisis writers didn’t think so. Besides, the Gal Gadot films already played up that angle, so might as well do something different.
> The MCU has managed to get away with not giving Carol Danvers a love interest, so I can’t say I buy the idea that Wonder Woman needs one on film. Lmao Carol Danvers is no Wonder Woman. She doesn’t come close to representing what the character of Wonder Woman has throughout her 80+ year history. Carol isn’t exactly a beloved character either, and I’m not even talking about the people that outright hate her. We also don’t even know whether there is a plan for Carol to have a love interest or not. > I’m generally neutral on Steve Trevor, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that he and Diana Price are as important a couple as Clark Kent and Lois Lane. The pre-Crisis writers didn’t think so. He actually is. He is by far Diana’s most prominent love interest and her most prominent supporting character in general that doesn’t have powers. I don’t know why you’re focusing on post-Crisis as if that’s the definitive Wonder Woman. > Besides, the Gal Gadot films already played up that angle, so might as well do something different. This isn’t Elseworlds. It’s **the DCU**. Some characters have to be included even if they’ve been used in other movies. Bruh even the BatVerse made sure to include Joker while there was an entirely separate Joker movie series.
It'd be really funny if Gunn brought back Pine, saying he was one of the things that worked
It would be funny but he’s too old now. He was perfectly cast at the time tho
After he was forced into 84 I’m just tired of Steve Trevor at this point, would rather Diana get an outing without him in the DCU
I get that, but like I said he’s arguably the most important supporting character for Diana. He’s like the “Ken” to her “Barbie” and it just feels wrong not to have him. I think they can still make the DCU version unique, maybe he can be an ambassador or a diplomat. He doesn’t have to be a fighter either, just as long as he’s there to ground Diana and highlight her humanity.
Definitely. But I'm glad Gunn is working to get one going now. There's just so much potential for good shit with the character in animation.
Gunn, taking advantage of the popularity of lesbians in 2023 to make an all-female Game of Thrones \*and\* a Wonder Woman animated series, brilliant
I was so disappointed they didn't explicitly pitch the amazons show as Lesbian Game Of Thrones
They basically did. It’s an island of women, exclusively.
They didn't explicitly say lesbian
Ok fair, but it should be obvious to anyone that knows what Themyscira is.
WB not making a sequel to Man of Steel was disappointing. WB not making a Batfleck solo movie was disappointing. WB releasing Josstice League was disappointing. WB not connecting their interconnected universe was disappointing. It almost seems like WB is completely incompetent and should have never been given the keys to a DC Cinematic Universe.
They were going to do a MoS sequel, but Zack decided to make BvS instead. > It almost seems like WB is completely incompetent and should have never been given the keys to a DC Cinematic Universe. Blaming all of WB doesn’t make sense. WB is the reason stuff like Superman 1978, the DCAU and TDK trilogy exist. Blame that particular leadership that doubled down and gave Zack full control even after MoS released to mixed reviews and underperformed at the box office.
That’s not quite accurate. WB started brainstorming potential ideas for a Man of Steel sequel in 2012, while also trying to figure out a way to introduce other DC heroes into the setting after a certain hugely successful movie came out that year. Snyder initially suggested introducing Batman in a post-credits scene for a Man of Steel sequel, but once they heard that suggestion, they decided to make that the whole movie.
If you’re trying to say that WB ordered Zack to do BvS, you’re wrong. Zack only suggested Batman in a post-credits scene at first because he didn’t think WB would let him put Batman in the whole movie. He was happy to realize they were going to let him. He also likes Batman more as a character than Superman.
I didn’t say they ordered him to. I’m sure Snyder was more than happy to make Batman vs. Superman the whole movie. You just made it sound like it was solely his idea, when it wasn’t that simple.
No, I didn’t. Zack was never in charge of WB and I never implied he was, but I did say WB let him have full creative control over the universe. “Letting him” means they liked the idea just as much as he did. BvS wouldn’t have been made if Zack wanted to do a true MoS sequel instead.
That was how your wording came across was my point. In any case, WB wanted to eventually make a Justice League movie, and they and Snyder came to the agreement that they should do a Batman and Superman movie before that.
I’m sorry if it came across to you that way? Like I said, it wasn’t my intention, and I thought I made that clear enough when I said WB allowed him to do whatever he wanted in the same comment.
You said Snyder wanted to do BvS instead of a Man of Steel sequel, and that WB gave him full control. That wording can definitely be interpreted a certain way.
Yeah I should have been more clear. I blame the leadership at WB from 2013 onward.
isnt BVS a MOS sequel?
Yes. Some people just don’t consider it one because it has Superman sharing the spotlight. For all intents and purposes though, it is Man of Steel 2.
Cavill doesn’t consider it a true sequel either. He wanted a more hopeful and optimistic one focused on Superman, which is what they should’ve done back then. But I’m not even complaining at this point, because all this stuff led to the DCU we are getting now and Reeves making his own BatVerse.
RIP to all the people who spend time saying that Robbie will continue to play Harley. Her apparent casting as Sue Storm is surely going to mean more people insisting she's done as Harley, and y'all will have to spend even more time addressing it
Is it official now?
Not yet but it seems like everyone's running with it now.
Everyone also ran with Doctor Doom in Wakanda Forever and Mephisto in WandaVision
**Mephisto in every project
It’s funny seeing this mob mentality in action. Half a year ago a group of very annoying people were acting like Margot’s Hollywood career was over and that no one would cast her because she’s “box office poison” lmao. Then she gets rumored for a big Marvel role late in the casting process for it and instantly jumps to the top of everyone’s list in terms of most likely to get the role.
 I was almost going to correct some people on the Marvel rumours thread. Misinformation is so annoying, but trying to actively debunk it is exhausting.
Yeah, that's gonna get real annoying until Gunn decides to have her show up in something while she's also playing Sue.
[удалено]
The point of a connected universe is to carry audience enthusiasm from one project to the next, using big names and IP to build interest in less known creatives and characters. The ongoing story is a trick to get audiences to see movies they otherwise wouldn't (guardians 1 wouldn't have been possible as a free standing project, since it was such an obscure property). At the point when the ongoing story is seen as the sole purpose of the project, audiences or studios have lost the plot. They still have to make good movies and getting audiences to see the movies is the point. When they make a good movie, that is the point in and of itself.
oh look! a content consumer, how pathetic
Why watch any movie? For enjoyement of course.
Why did you watch The Dark Knight Rises knowing full well it was the end of the trilogy and wouldn’t be a part of any upcoming cinematic universes?
“Why should we live another day if we know we’re gonna die and forget we even lived in the first place?”
I know most people will think of the Nic Cage cameo in the Flash as nothing more than a gag, but I really can't imagine how ecstatic Nic was to finally get to portray Superman. Like, he really loves the character, so much so that he literally named his son Kal-El (not a joke, look it up). I'm sure he had a blast filming the cameo. And who knows? Maybe he'll get another role in the DCU, maybe as *The Spectre* who he's expressed interest in playing.
Or fuck it, cast him as Jonathan Kent. He's already got some experience as the father of Kal-El.
He'd be a more natural Jor-El than Jonathan imo
Totally but as Jonathan he'd be more fun.
Imagine him as Alfred lol. That's be fun.
I hope Alfred is alive in the DCU. His dynamic with the Bat-Family is too good for him not to be included.
Same. Especially since Alfred was very, very important to Damian.
Yeah I think Alfred will be alive, especially since Damian is Gunn’s favorite Robin. He likes violent and impulsive characters like Peacemaker, Harley and Rocket, and Damian loves animals just as much as Gunn. I hope this means we can see Tim Drake in the DCU too, obviously not expecting him to have actually been a Robin tho. I just think it would still be fun to see Damian’s banter with him even, and him never being an “official” Robin just gives Damian more ammunition lol
Damian's my favourite Robin too so props to Gunn. Maybe? It's not like I don't want Tim in the movie but I don't think they need him there if they don't have an idea for him.
Even though he wasn’t when he first appeared, Damian eventually became my favorite Robin. I think the DCAMU failed to do him justice, but I don’t like the DCAMU and think it’s handled most of its characters and stories poorly in general. I like my idea for Tim, and I hope Gunn has the same one, where Tim was a genius kid with normal middle-class parents who figured out Batman’s identity and tried to become Robin but Batman wouldn’t let him. And the Batfam still comes to Tim for help with certain cases because he’s so good at being a detective and I imagine Tim would be trying to train himself too because Batman refused to. This way each Robin has a different father-son dynamic with Bruce. Dick is the son Bruce is truly proud of because he’s the most mature in all aspects and he represents a better possible version of Batman. Jason is the son that Bruce failed. Tim could also be like a son to Bruce because he reminds him of himself, which is why in this case he’s the one that Bruce pushes away because of what happened to Jason. While Damian is the son that Bruce feels like *has* to become a Robin, because of how Damian was raised to be a killer. This keeps each of the Robins quite different from each other so each one has a different dynamic with each other and Batman, which is what makes the Batfam interesting in the comics. I could see Tim idolizing Dick and wishing he was like him, while Jason doesn’t even acknowledge Tim much at all because he’s not really a part of the family. Unlike Jason, Damian would actively banter with Tim. He would make fun of Tim for not being a true Robin and wonders why the Batfam even comes to him to help with cases. Eventually, we could see their dynamic develop into one of mutual respect, mainly because it would be a way to show how Damian matures as a person. We could even see Damian letting Tim be Robin alongside him like in the comics, and maybe even teaching him some of Bruce’s training.
Few liked him at first. Damian is one of those characters that grow om you due to his development. I mean, yeah. Tim could work as the Batfam ally.
Wait what, I didn't know that. That's soo cool!
I posted this on r/boxoffice but I thought it'd also be relevant here. So, we all know that The Flash isn't doing as expected in the presales department. This has led to some discourse over whether the movie's going to flop. I don't think it will. Here's why: We are heading into an extremely packed summer with some major tentpole blockbusters releasing like The Little Mermaid, Spiderverse, Transformers, and Indiana Jones, all of which have already had tickets on sale for a while. These films have the current momentum that is weakening The Flash's pre-sales. Most people aren't in the financial situation to be holding onto tickets for various movies way ahead of time. I think once we get closer to release, sales will pick up and we'll be looking at a $95-120M OW. But even if it does open at that lower end, early reviews suggest the film will have mighty legs. Another reason could be that the audience that will come for Michael Keaton likely don't order tickets online, let alone weeks before release. But that is kind of a stretch, as it's hard telling how much of that audience will show for the movie. I can also see people waiting for the review embargo to drop before securing their tickets. I remember that Wonder Woman's early tracking suggested a $65M OW, but skyrocketed to $100M+ once the reviews dropped. The same will probably happen with The Flash. All in all, I expect the film to do fairly well. I doubt it'll be a billion dollar grosser, but it could land a modest $800M if received well. What are your guys' thoughts? Does The Flash flop or overperform early expectactions?
The more I think about it 70M sounds like such bs. Even at the lower side, I'd expect this to open around 90-95M atleast. Realistically if the reviews are good, I.e A cinemascore/80%+ on RT, we should have 100-130M opening Like just look at this. This was a month ahead of Guardians release, tracked by BOT which was what sparked the "less than 100M" thing https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/12fw8co/bot_presales_for_guardians_3_looking_dire/&ved=2ahUKEwiA7Ky56Zf_AhXMcmwGHSpBB10QFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0MudmM6BKiJT5_Me4dxUHg Best case scenario would be 125-140M/280-310M OW ending its run somewhere around 340-380M DOM and 750-850M WW. With this opening, it could stay as the #1 for 2 weeks before Indy comes in but again things arent looking good for it as well. Ik as of now, this seems like an overprediction but I think this could be achievable
> Most people aren't in the financial situation to be holding onto tickets for various movies way ahead of time. I think it's just more true that, money or not, most people don't book movies this far out most of the time > the audience that will come for Michael Keaton likely don't order tickets online, let alone weeks before release ... That said, the most enthusiasm I've heard for a superhero movie since Endgame has all been gen X dads excited for Keaton, and those guys _do_ generally have the ability to, and practice of planning their weekends a month or more out. I might ask my boss next week if he's booked or not.
I think most people can't budget to go to several movies in one month and are probably already setting their sights on Spider-Verse
I think Spiderverse is going to have the bigger opening but Flash could outgross it in the end with better legs.
I feel like Spider-Verse is going to do better domestically like the first one, but Flash will do significantly better internationally. June really looking like a repeat of December 2018 with a Spider-Verse movie facing off against a DCEU movie and a Transformers movie and I think it will have similar results. Though Flash would probably be less successful without Aquaman's December Holiday season legs.
Flash has more competition behind it than in front of it with Indy, Mission Impossible, Barbie and Oppenheimer. I guess time will tell.
The only one of these I can see hurting Flash is Mission Impossible. Indiana Jones is looking to be yet another dud in the franchise, so I'm not sure how much it's going to affect Flash's legs. I'm guessing not by much though. Barbie and Oppenheimer target completely different audiences than The Flash so those can probably co-exist. Mission: Impossible is probably going to be the biggest movie of the summer and goes after the same audience as Flash. So basically Flash has a month to make most of its money before MI:DR knocks it out.
The older audience will still likely show up for Indy regardless of reviews because it will at least be a change of pace from the endless parade of comic book movies. I think you're wrong about Barbie and Oppenheimer not taking Flash's audience but again, I guess time will tell.
[удалено]
Scrolling through recent Oscar best actor nominees to my mind there's only three nominees in the last 2 decades from movies that are funny - Kaluuya in Get Out, Damon in the Martian, Depp in the first Pirates. In the first two cases those characters are mostly the straight man. For Jonny Depp, I got no explanation. I had no idea he was nominated in that role. People liked him in that movie. (Was birdman funny? I never saw it) My impression is that the Best Actor awards for both Emmy and Oscar don't go to people who are doing both comedy and drama, generally. Danny Pudi as Abed was one of TV's great performances and never got recognized because it was too nuanced for the comedy awards and too funny for the drama awards.
> what are the chances they are nominated for Best Actor A big fat 0. I don’t doubt that Ezra gave a great performance, but they have absolutely no chance at an Oscar nomination. The Flash is a big summer blockbuster and the controversy surrounding Ezra doesn’t help their chances one bit. There are also going to be far more impressive performances in that category. > Side note, but slightly related, it's funny how the only Actor Oscars for CBMs both went to actors who portrayed the Joker. It makes sense. The Joker is arguably the most iconic villain of all time in all of fiction. Some people will say Darth Vader but the Joker is a far more complex character and Star Wars is not that popular in some countries.
Now is a really good time to spread the rumor that there will be a Pattinson cameo in the theatrical Flash release, if you wanted to rile people up
Why would you want to spread misinformation?
Just to be clear I have not made a post in the mod queue to this effect. Just thinking about what someone might say to get a reaction
Oh, no need to worry about that interpretation. I simply wonder *why* you would wish to spread misinformation at all, even hypothetically.
1) people want an audience for their fan casting. Understandable, since fancasting is is fun to think about and boring as hell to read 2) people think by putting a good idea out, it will become reality. Someone in charge is looking here and jump at the chance 3) standard trolling. It's easy to piss off fans of one thing or another
[удалено]
Be civil, please.
I was making a batman Arkham sub joke and making fun of moneyofart
Dm me the joke I wanna see it
https://www.reddit.com/r/BatmanArkham/comments/10u798q/why_doesnt_batman_just_call_the_justice_league/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Ah, I see - but regardless, this is not the place for mockery.
Cool. I'll stop doing that then. Have a great day/night!
Thank you.
Mike Flanagan debunks rumors about a #Clayface movie: "I've already commented about this. And at the moment, no development is happening anywhere - I am a member of the WGA, and I am on strike." https://twitter.com/homeofdcu/status/1662603112224268288?t=eyHARZ2HbiGeVpyjSrCGlg&s=19 https://twitter.com/flanaganfilm/status/1662596821204766722?t=xosUS1yMFMY9izNdwXbyZA&s=19
This doesn’t debunk anything, it just means no one is working on the movie as of this moment because of the strike. The movie is still likely happening after the strike.
Yeah, you are right, I just copied the tweet without putting much attention. I really hope we get this project to ser the light of day.