DC Comics Cinematic Universe (2013 - present)

1201202204206207220

Comments

  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,619
    https://www.cbr.com/the-flashs-ezra-miller-arrested-again-in-hawaii/

    I wish we could post some positive news here again.
  • Risico007 wrote: »
    I think with Discovery having bought wb my guess is Cavill MOS 2 is a go which for Cavill as bond fans sadly this means no chance he will be 007... but this opens the door for other actors

    I'm okay with this as long as it means a new solo Superman film.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I would like a Superman film to move past Luthor though...


    in much the same way I will take any unused villain for The Batman (yes even condiment King or Nicholas Cage as EggHead he says he has brilliant idea for Egg Head lets see it)

    Superman and Batman both have (and really need to start using) never-before-seen villains in their movies. No more trodding out the Joker for the umpteenth time please. Give the Eggheads of the world their day.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    I’m fine with Joker and Lex Luthor appearing, so long as unused villains are brought on board during one’s tenure.

    It’s actually more infuriating with Superman because there’s a large rogues gallery that’s basically been untouched compared to Batman. We’ve had a cinematic Superman since 1978, and in all those 44 years since we’ve yet to get even a hint of Brainiac. HOW???
  • We've had four different cinematic Jokers in the past 15 years (five if you count Lego Batman) and every film Batman has been in has included the Joker with the exception of The Dark Knight Rises and Batman vs. Superman...where the villain was Lex Luthor. I don't think audiences are going to revolt if the Joker sits a film out every six or seven films or so.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    And most of those actors have only played the Joker once. They're complete George Lazenbies.
  • I guess that would make Leto the Dalton of Jokers, pulling off a twofer. He's actually the only actor who has ever played the Joker more than once in a film. Which, as far as I can tell, is as good enough evidence as we're likely to find that the universe is a cruel and uncaring void.
  • Posts: 2,917
    Caesar Romero did have the honor of portraying the Joker in a TV show and a theatrically released movie. But your point stands nonetheless--the Joker can take a break.

    In the next Batman film I want to see him take on any of the following z-listers:

    Clock King
    The Spinner
    The Getaway Genius
    Atomic Man
    Kite Man
    Professor Milo
    The Eraser
    Killer Moth
    Calendar Man
    Maxie Zeus
    Crazy Quilt
    The Ten-Eyed Man
    Zodiac Master
    The Terrible Trio
    Mr. Nice
    Mirror-Man
    Catman
    Dr. No-Face
    Dr. Double X
    Professor Radium
    Jojo the Flinker
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    https://www.cbr.com/the-flashs-ezra-miller-arrested-again-in-hawaii/

    I wish we could post some positive news here again.

    So much for #RestoreTheSnyderVerse.

    Aside from maybe WONDER WOMAN 3 and AQUAMAN 2, I imagine Discovery is looking at all of this and thinking “to hell with it, wipe the slate clean”.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,092
    rm_gaps_fill_623559_1025344_ba0bb672-a794-4458-bb18-446c3a5a5f1b.jpg
    I would like to see Bat's go up against Bookworm, though I doubt anyone could better Roddy McDowall.
  • Posts: 9,846
    Revelator wrote: »
    Caesar Romero did have the honor of portraying the Joker in a TV show and a theatrically released movie. But your point stands nonetheless--the Joker can take a break.

    In the next Batman film I want to see him take on any of the following z-listers:

    Clock King
    The Spinner
    The Getaway Genius
    Atomic Man
    Kite Man
    Professor Milo
    The Eraser
    Killer Moth
    Calendar Man
    Maxie Zeus
    Crazy Quilt
    The Ten-Eyed Man
    Zodiac Master
    The Terrible Trio
    Mr. Nice
    Mirror-Man
    Catman
    Dr. No-Face
    Dr. Double X
    Professor Radium
    Jojo the Flinker




    interestingly enough Calander Man became a much different character thanks to the Long Halloween and Arkham City



    definitly a much more creepy character.. could he warrant his own film no but could he be a secondary villain yes


    Catman also isnt outside the realm of possibility he is essentially Kraven the hunter

    Maxie Zeus is a riot and could easily be used as well.

    I was hoping for Ventriliquist and Man-Bat to be honest
  • Posts: 2,917
    Risico007 wrote: »
    interestingly enough Calander Man became a much different character thanks to the Long Halloween and Arkham City

    Yes, and I hear Polka-Dot Man, another classic Z-Lister, has been used and revamped in the second Suicide Squad film, which I haven't yet seen.
    I was hoping for Ventriloquist and Man-Bat to be honest

    Those would be very good choices for the next Bat-film but I didn't include them since they're A or B rather than Z-List. I think there's something great in turning an embarrassingly corny old villain into a great character, just as Batman: The Animated Series turned Mr. Freeze from a minor gimmick villain to a tragic antihero.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,619
    Revelator wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    interestingly enough Calander Man became a much different character thanks to the Long Halloween and Arkham City

    Yes, and I hear Polka-Dot Man, another classic Z-Lister, has been used and revamped in the second Suicide Squad film, which I haven't yet seen.
    I was hoping for Ventriloquist and Man-Bat to be honest

    Those would be very good choices for the next Bat-film but I didn't include them since they're A or B rather than Z-List. I think there's something great in turning an embarrassingly corny old villain into a great character, just as Batman: The Animated Series turned Mr. Freeze from a minor gimmick villain to a tragic antihero.

    Some villains would work best as a side villain(s). ManBat and the Ventriloquist arguably would fit this, from a cinematic point of view, I feel. Toyman would be the same for Superman, cinematically.
  • Posts: 9,846
    if they did a Mob war so Penguin versus ventriloquist with a killer playing both sides against each other with a killer pitting each side against the other sort of long Halloween style.. heck you could use Calendar man as the killer
  • MaxCasino wrote: »

    "Appointing someone with limited comic book knowledge to potentially oversee future movies just because they delivered a box office hit sounds like a very Warner Bros.-type thing to do..."

    That was my immediate thought upon reading the headline. Joker was not remotely a typical DC film. It's also not the kind of film that builds you a Marvel-style comic book movie universe, even one with a darker or more realistic approach. In many respects Joker was an anti-comic book movie.
    MaxCasino wrote: »

    Talk about an alternate timeline!
    MaxCasino wrote: »

    DC has two delayed movies for Aquaman and Flash right now, one featuring Amber Heard and the other starring Ezra Miller. They just had a big success with Batman, but that was unfortunately a film outside their DCEU. Dwayne Johnson's Black Adam could still be a big success for their film universe this fall though.

    Other than that, they have Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman and Henry Cavill's Superman, both of whom have been well received. For some reason there's been no movement on either a Wonder Woman 3 or Man of Steel 2. This is very good news if a new Cavill Superman is coming, but DC really needs to get it together.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    MaxCasino wrote: »

    "Appointing someone with limited comic book knowledge to potentially oversee future movies just because they delivered a box office hit sounds like a very Warner Bros.-type thing to do..."

    That was my immediate thought upon reading the headline. Joker was not remotely a typical DC film. It's also not the kind of film that builds you a Marvel-style comic book movie universe, even one with a darker or more realistic approach. In many respects Joker was an anti-comic book movie.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    This is the exact mentality they had in 2008 when TDK became a hit: "That was so successful, you know what that means? The Superman reboot must be dark and gritty with Nolan as the producer!"
  • MaxCasino wrote: »

    "Appointing someone with limited comic book knowledge to potentially oversee future movies just because they delivered a box office hit sounds like a very Warner Bros.-type thing to do..."

    That was my immediate thought upon reading the headline. Joker was not remotely a typical DC film. It's also not the kind of film that builds you a Marvel-style comic book movie universe, even one with a darker or more realistic approach. In many respects Joker was an anti-comic book movie.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    This is the exact mentality they had in 2008 when TDK became a hit: "That was so successful, you know what that means? The Superman reboot must be dark and gritty with Nolan as the producer!"

    I always forget that Nolan was a producer on Man of Steel, and I don't think I even realized until now that he continued to be a producer on Batman vs. Superman and Justice League. You have a point that Superman traditionally has not been a "dark and gritty" character like Batman and therefore Nolan might not have been the best fit on paper. However, the difference is that Nolan's Dark Knight films were still very much traditional comic book movies (just ones that were very well done and unusually realistic), and I personally think Man of Steel was a successful Nolanizing of Superman.

    In fact, looking back, DC had a rather strong start going: Man of Steel, Batman vs. Superman [extended edition], Wonder Woman, Justice League (had Snyder been able to complete his original vision initially), Aquaman...

    They really only went off the rails with Suicide Squad (thanks to studio interference and butchering in the editing room), Justice League (on account of tragic unforeseeable circumstances and the misguided hiring of Joss Whedon), and Birds of Prey and Wonder Woman 1984 (both apparently doomed from script stage). The lack of a Ben Affleck solo Batman film further derailed things for them.

    I actually like that the DCEU was differentiated from the MCU by its visually and tonally darker and grittier approach. They just need to figure out a way to move forward with some of the road bumps they're experiencing (currently troubled leads, losing Batfleck, declining quality in scripts) so they can get their groove back. It sounds like Michael Keaton might be their answer to losing Affleck, and I'd say it's a great answer too.

    I also agree with that one article that Cavill's Superman is the real key to how they can successfully move forward and would add Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman there too. Hopefully Black Adam is also a rousing success and a bit of back-on-track for them.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    I always see the extended cut of BvS being propped up as an improvement. I really don’t get that. All that’s added is a boring subplot of Clark investigating something and more gore, bloating it to three hours. It doesn’t fix the broken concept of Batman acting like a total doofus.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    I always see the extended cut of BvS being propped up as an improvement. I really don’t get that. All that’s added is a boring subplot of Clark investigating something and more gore, bloating it to three hours. It doesn’t fix the broken concept of Batman acting like a total doofus.

    It really is an improvement in my opinion because some things are better explained, and, indeed, there's more gore as you put it. I dig that stuff. I recall from two theatrical viewings that it felt like scenes were missing. Then I saw the extended cut and I noticed more "connective tissue", more plot logic as it were. I recognise that the film is long; I also appreciate the length of the film. I can fill an entire night with this movie--and yes, to me, that's a good thing since I enjoy the visual style. The two negatives: the Martha thing (though it's not that big a deal in the end) and weird Luthor (though I overall like Eisenberg's take on the character.)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    I was really excited about Eisenberg’s casting because I thought he’d actually be a good modernization of the post-Crisis Luthor. A more ruthless Mark Zuckerberg.

    As he is in BVS, he reminds me more of Toyman.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,619
    I was really excited about Eisenberg’s casting because I thought he’d actually be a good modernization of the post-Crisis Luthor. A more ruthless Mark Zuckerberg.

    As he is in BVS, he reminds me more of Toyman.

    I’m really surprised that they haven’t used Toyman as a villain, particularly during the CR films. I was also thinking Jim Carrey’s Riddler for the first time I saw it.
  • edited June 2022 Posts: 6,844
    I always see the extended cut of BvS being propped up as an improvement. I really don’t get that. All that’s added is a boring subplot of Clark investigating something and more gore, bloating it to three hours. It doesn’t fix the broken concept of Batman acting like a total doofus.

    You mean Batman giving criminals veritable death sentences? Not my favorite part of the film, but I think that was done to show Batman taking his vigilantism to an extreme and having his own moral ambiguity in contrast to the fallout from Superman's actions. He's also shown resorting to guns against parademons in a future/alternate reality/dream scenario, and that's arguably still not even as extreme as Batman straight up killing criminals in Burton's films. It's just taking the concept of instilling fear a step further and showing how fine a line Batman sometimes walks.

    Anyways, I don't see Batman vs. Superman as necessarily the perfect film. I neither loved it nor despised it upon release. But the extended version did clear up some things that were confusing and made it a stronger, more coherent film as a whole. As @DarthDimi said, it added back in the connective tissue it needed. There were some things in BvS that didn't work and some things that really did work. I found the "Martha" scene unintentionally hysterical upon first watch, and it's still silly but I can roll with it for the sake of the good stuff. Ben Affleck as Bruce and Jeremy Irons as Alfred are great in this. It's a visually great looking film too as @DarthDimi says, and the ending is just a fantastic cliffhanger in my opinion. A definite case of the good outweighing the bad.

    Ultimately, it was a strong enough middle film in the Snyder trilogy, which really was a Superman trilogy.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    It’s more so Batman actually thinking that Superman is the bad guy. I just don’t buy it. The film doesn’t do a good job at making that conflict feel natural. The fight itself is even more contrived and unintentionally hilarious because Superman is barely doing enough to try to talk it out. I literally laughed out loud at this part:

    “BRUCE, I NEED TO TALK TO YOU!” *push*

    superman-batman.gif

    It’s almost as funny as Matt Murdock pleading Frank Castle not to take lives when he’s basically destroying quality of life.

    “FRANK DON’T DO IT!!!!”
  • It is a contrived situation. Of course, the reason the film gives is that Superman's efforts to save Metropolis led to wide-scale damage and the loss of lives, and Bruce thought there needed to be accountability—something that would come up again later in the DCEU. It's the same situation as in Civil War actually where they had Iron Man and Captain America fight each other. In both situations, I thought the efforts to get the good guys to do battle with one another were strained. At the end of the day, you have to accept the film's reasons for why they end up fighting each other. Or not. In both cases, I ultimately decided the films were good enough for me to want to buy into the fact that the good guys wanted to whoop on each other. At least in the case of Batman vs. Superman it was only one part of the film and not the whole film.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2022 Posts: 16,369
    It's kind of a fundamental issue with superheroes really: they need to have physical fights in order to have any worth. Sometimes heroes should just be able to talk or solve problems with their minds rather than being able to punch really hard.

    I thought that Civil War did a great job with the characters actually disagreeing in a way which felt believable, but the audience have to be entertained so that meant that they had to come to blows, which made them all seem a bit stupid really.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    CIVIL WAR had the benefit of its heroes having a history that builds up to Cap and Iron Man fighting. After seeing Tony go through so much I can believe he’d lose his cool when facing the man that killed his parents. In an alternate universe, BVS isn’t just the second DCEU but something we could have gotten last year where a lot of time has passed and we see a fragmentation build up.

    BVS trying to juggle elements of TDKR and the Death of Superman just feels waaayyy too soon.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The Joker sequel has the working title Joker: Folie a Deux.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    Ugghh whyyy?

    Rhetorical of course. I’m still astounded that pretentious film made over a billion dollars.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    Ugghh whyyy?

    Rhetorical of course. I’m still astounded that pretentious film made over a billion dollars.

    I'm astounded too. But not because it’s a pretentious film because I don't think it is. I really love Joker. I just never would have expected that little arthouse movie to haul in so much money.
Sign In or Register to comment.