DCEU Complete REBOOT?

[Bonehead]

I knew this was coming. He just can't help himself.

Spoken like someone who has no idea...

Those D Listers proved alot of people wrong...

No they didn't. The overall opinion on Phase 4 was disappointing to say the least.

I've been a Marvel fan since '77 and learned to read reading my cousin's books. You're the one who knows nothing.

When will the Marvel Hate stop already picking sides is getting old...

You first. You attack DC all the time.

I love how Marvel is SO bad but DC has had "Ehh they're not so good"

Mismanagement ******* off Actors rushing things out and your NEW Discovery CEO "Can't wait for the Flash Movie because he's excited for it"

WOW! totally forgetting that Miller has a criminal record at last checked is still on the run...

But Marvel is horrible because of their "lackluster" phase 4 (But Phase 1-3) was forgotten?

See this is why I can't stand some DC fans because an actor could murder someone but they will still back them and want them to continue....

Give me a break....

Are you having a nervous breakdown or something?

Can you translate this for me?

Hyperion or Captain Britain

Yep. More D-Listers.

[dan1980]

I think my biggest problem is how many different projects are going on.
Like if you think in roughly the same amount of time the MCU (including tv shows) we have had 4 superman, 4 batman, 3 catwoman, 7 jokers, 2 riddler, 2 Wonder Woman, 2 aquaman and 3 flash. And they are scrapping them all and starting again.
I always feel like “oh here we go again.” But I always give them all a go, from the movies to Gotham to the arrowverse and smallville etc etc

[Megalodon]

I've been a Marvel fan since '77 and learned to read reading my cousin's books. You're the one who knows nothing.

Well then you've been out of touch

You first. You attack DC all the time.

Wrong (Again) look back at other posts i've made to see this point is once again wrong..

Are you having a nervous breakdown or something?

Can you translate this for me?

Wow! it was right in front of you but OK so with the new CEO OF WB/Discovery is excited for the Flash movie even with all of Ezra Miller's legal problems:

https://people.com/movies/warner-bro...e-flash-movie/

Not a smart thing to do when you become the NEW Ceo to be saying this but I guess any publicity is good for business...

Yep. More D-Listers.

Ok once again in YOUR opinion but those "D" listers did much better that what DC has done.

And last time I checked besides Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman who ELSE is an A lister in your mind? Oh wait that's right there isn't.....

See since I follow and liked them BOTH (As well as other comic companies) I CAN and WILL give props and tear them down for doing dumb things.We all know what DC has done and maybe you should LOOK UP the Marvel Post where I tear into them as well instead of "pretending" I only "Pick On DC"

https://www.he-man.org/forums/boards...-thread/page13

Post #125

Your welcome....

[Mikey]

Well then you've been out of touch





Wrong (Again) look back at other posts i've made to see this point is once again wrong..




Wow! it was right in front of you but OK so with the new CEO OF WB/Discovery is excited for the Flash movie even with all of Ezra Miller's legal problems:

https://people.com/movies/warner-bro...e-flash-movie/

Not a smart thing to do when you become the NEW Ceo to be saying this but I guess any publicity is good for business...






Ok once again in YOUR opinion but those "D" listers did much better that what DC has done.

And last time I checked besides Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman who ELSE is an A lister in your mind? Oh wait that's right there isn't.....

See since I follow and liked them BOTH (As well as other comic companies) I CAN and WILL give props and tear them down for doing dumb things.We all know what DC has done and maybe you should LOOK UP the Marvel Post where I tear into them as well instead of "pretending" I only "Pick On DC"

https://www.he-man.org/forums/boards...-thread/page13

Post #125

Your welcome....

For me ALL DC Comics characters are A-Listers, but I never bash other comics franchises. Bashing is stupid behaviour anyway and one I will not engage in.

[Rikki Roxx]

What kills me is that some people actually believe that after 700 tries and misfires that THIS TIME under Gunn and his mythical "10-Year Plan" it's all gonna work out.

Like they didn't already have a "grand plan" and an "overseer" back in 2014 or whatever. It's not like "Put one guy in charge and have everything sync up to their grand plan" is just some idea they never had until Right Now. Snyder was "the architect", and his was "The Grand Plan"... until the mixed reviews made WB gun-shy, and then Geoff Johns was "the NEW architect"... for 5 minutes, until HE got the heave. And so on. It's a cycle that we'll see repeat itself again soon, on that you can go ahead and put some money down.

Anybody who thinks Gunn actually has a blank check to enact "his grand plan" over a full decade simply has never paid ANY attention to how WB operates. The MINUTE they inevitably only pull in $350 million on a DC movie that cost $200 mil, That's It, and then HE'LL get nudged aside while WB scrambles for yet another "course correction". Anybody who truly thinks they're gonna be fully hands-off and let him do his thing is in serious denial. For one thing, we already saw with The Suicide Squad how well Gunn's "unfiltered vision" goes over with audiences - VERY poorly, it turned out - and for another thing, lest we forget WB initially promised Zack the exact same thing, carte blanche and a blank check... UNTIL his work fell a little short of the arbitrary metrics, at which point he immediately went from The Overseer to A Pariah. It'll happen again, mark my words. Gunn is destined to find out the hard way that he was given this job overseeing DC movies mostly because NOBODY else in Hollywood ****ing wants it!

I still can't even fathom how he got this position after the complete and total disaster his Squad movie ended up being. AND he's gonna write the Superman movie. Someone at WB must really, REALLY wanna hear Superman make a bunch of d*ck jokes, and thinks a billion other people also want that.

They'll find out the hard way. I refuse to say "They'll learn" because those who work higher-up at WB seem thoroughly incapable of "learning" anything. But they will indeed be scrambling again like headless chickens once Panic Move #95 fails to get them those billion-dollar grosses they're so obsessed with. "The Avengers Guy didn't work... the guy who did the Talking Racoon movie for Marvel didn't work... Jesus, can we just hire Robert Downey Jr. to be Superman? That HAS to do the trick! ...Right?"

**** 'em.

[Adam_Prince of Eternia]

Anybody who thinks Gunn actually has a blank check to enact "his grand plan" over a full decade simply has never paid ANY attention to how WB operates. . . . Anybody who truly thinks they're gonna be fully hands-off and let him do his thing is in serious denial. . . . lest we forget WB initially promised Zack the exact same thing, carte blanche and a blank check . . . UNTIL his work fell a little short of the arbitrary metrics, at which point he immediately went from The Overseer to A Pariah. It'll happen again, mark my words.

. . . They'll find out the hard way. I refuse to say "They'll learn" because those who work higher-up at WB seem thoroughly incapable of "learning" anything. But they will indeed be scrambling again like headless chickens once Panic Move #95 fails to get them those billion-dollar grosses they're so obsessed with.

Ayer received the same promise . . . until Deadpool became the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time. Then they decided that Suicide Squad needed to be a comedy too, and hired a trailer company to re-edit his film. Warner Bros. hires creatives with vision, but then does not trust them to execute their vision, and immediately intereferes, and forces a product by committee. By by trying to please everyone, they end up pleasing no one. There is not a single DCU film that I like without caveats. It is just a disaster.

[Mikey]

I always find something good in the DC movies I've seen (except for the R-Rated ones which I tend to avoid since I am not an R-Rated movie fan, except for the Snyder Cut of Justice League which I loved, some of the language not so much, but the characterisations and story which I did love). I'm no prude and I love all Bette Midler's jokes - I just don't feel that coarse language and comic book movies blend so well.

[Rikki Roxx]

Ayer received the same promise . . . until Deadpool became the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time. Then they decided that Suicide Squad needed to be a comedy too, and hired a trailer company to re-edit his film. Warner Bros. hires creatives with vision, but then does not trust them to execute their vision, and immediately intereferes, and forces a product by committee. By by trying to please everyone, they end up pleasing no one. There is not a single DCU film that I like without caveats. It is just a disaster.

I agree with a lot of this, except for the fact that there is very little I'd change of either MoS or BvS. But as far as WB's complete lack of ability to make a plan and stick with it and their generally poor operations as a rule, I'd say we're pretty well on the same page.

I mean, you pretty much nailed it. "We love what you do and how you do it, come do a bunch more for us! Oh, wait, nevermind, you're 50 mil short, now you're fired and we hate you." That's how they've been rolling for a very long time, I honestly don't see How or Why anyone could expect this time to be any different. It won't be. It'll just be a different set of justifications as to WHY the movies under-performed against expectations.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, when Snyder was in charge the rabble kept screeching "ALL they have to do is lighten up and be FUN, like Marvel! Then it'll all fall in line!" Then they did that and started bleeding money all over the floor, hundreds of millions at a time. And it's very funny how people either stay silent or dig way deep in their ass to come up with an explanation for it all, since "ALL they had to do.." turned out not to be the magic bullet after all. Before, the movies "failed" (not really, they made a ton of money) because they were "too dark"; so they went lighter, ACTUALLY failed objectively by losing a ton of money, and nobody can say anything except "Well, people were scared off by the earlier movies!" Nonsense. The Shazam! trailers made it pretty frickin' clear it was an MCU movie in DC skin, for example, and it STILL did pretty lousy box office, and the same goes for Black Adam in the present, so I think we can retire the "This is all still because BvS was divisive" talking point, there's no way that's a tangible factor Now. It also didn't hold back Wonder Woman or Aquaman. No, I think DC fans don't actually want DC movies that are Xeroxes of MCU fare, but I also think they aren't entirely sure what it is that they want. It's a very schizophrenic fanbase and they do a very poor job of articulating themselves. They can tell you what they hate and why, but when it comes to being positive they're suddenly at a loss for words, which is probably why they're so hard to please. "What DO these people want?" I honestly couldn't say, myself.

Frankly, I think WB set themselves up for failure from the start by insisting they go dollar-for-dollar with Disney/Marvel. I get the need to be "competitive", but that machine was already too big by 2014. Only a handful of movies had ever made a billion dollars by then, it was unreasonable for WB to scrawl "Batman + Superman = $1.2 billion!" on a chalkboard and rest their entire company's future on that arbitrary standard. It sounds defeatist, but a smart businessperson knows better than to try and punch above their weight class. They should have been content with "only" making $700 mil or $800 mil per picture and slowly building on it. Demanding billion-dollar box office and then hitting Reset every time they come up short has been a total disaster. Again, I get it, "be competitive", but... you're not, you can't be, don't even play the game that way. WB is not and never have been Disney; they're like Dollar-Store Disney, always were and always will be. Yet they're trying to be Just Like Them and they keep embarrassing themselves.

It's like in wrestling; you can't compete with WWE, anyone who tries ends up buried, so you don't even try. You carve out your own niche, knowing for a fact that you'll never match them dollar-for-dollar, but instead cater to fans who feel under-served by that particular company. That's how you find "success" in that situation, you make your own road. Sure, it's "settling for less", and some may call that defeatist, but I'd argue it's a lot less embarrassing - and costly - than it is to keep trying to match up with a company that's a hundred times bigger than yours and falling harder and harder on your face every time.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm no prude and I love all Bette Midler's jokes

I notice you say this a lot. Are you aware that it's a lot like saying, "I'm no prude... I once flashed my ankle at a gentleman caller, so you can tell I'm quite bawdy when the mood takes me!"

Like, I can see how her act may have gotten some gasps in the 1970s. You hear more outrageous things in an Elementary school cafeteria these days, though. Just sayin'. Saying you're a fan of hers and thus cannot be "a prude" is kinda like a person saying "I had a black friend when I was 10 so there's no way I can be racist."

I'unno, maybe if you said you were a fan of like, Eddie Murphy's standup, or Sarah Silverman if we're strictly on the subject of female comedians. Y'know, comedians who are Actually Shocking. Bette Midler? Like, she's fine, but when most of the audience is peoples' grandmas, it's time to stop holding that person up as an example of someone who's "edgy". Maybe once upon a time.

"I love rap music! I'm a HUGE Vanilla Ice fan!" "Uhhh... what exactly does the second thing have to do with the first thing?" I'unno. ((shrug)) I've just been meaning to comment on this quirk of yours for years and I kept forgetting until Just Now.

I mean I'll gladly take your word for it that you're not a prude; I just don't think being a Bette Midler fan does anything at all to support that statement, is all. Frankly, I think it actively hurts your case, if anything. It's like when my Mom would try and prove how "hip" she was to my friends and started pulling out her Beatles records. Complete opposite effect as intended.

[Mikey]

I notice you say this a lot. Are you aware that it's a lot like saying, "I'm no prude... I once flashed my ankle at a gentleman caller, so you can tell I'm quite bawdy when the mood takes me!"

Like, I can see how her act may have gotten some gasps in the 1970s. You hear more outrageous things in an Elementary school cafeteria these days, though. Just sayin'. Saying you're a fan of hers and thus cannot be "a prude" is kinda like a person saying "I had a black friend when I was 10 so there's no way I can be racist."

I'unno, maybe if you said you were a fan of like, Eddie Murphy's standup, or Sarah Silverman if we're strictly on the subject of female comedians. Y'know, comedians who are Actually Shocking. Bette Midler? Like, she's fine, but when most of the audience is peoples' grandmas, it's time to stop holding that person up as an example of someone who's "edgy". Maybe once upon a time.

"I love rap music! I'm a HUGE Vanilla Ice fan!" "Uhhh... what exactly does the second thing have to do with the first thing?" I'unno. ((shrug)) I've just been meaning to comment on this quirk of yours for years and I kept forgetting until Just Now.



I mean I'll gladly take your word for it that you're not a prude; I just don't think being a Bette Midler fan does anything at all to support that statement, is all. Frankly, I think it actively hurts your case, if anything. It's like when my Mom would try and prove how "hip" she was to my friends and started pulling out her Beatles records. Complete opposite effect as intended.

For me Bette Midler is as edgy as it gets. I also love Whoopi Goldberg.

[Rikki Roxx]

So "edgy" in your world is essentially Safety Scissors. Thanks for clarifying.

I grew up on George Carlin, myself. Sooooooo, yeah.

[BCI Guy]

Ayer received the same promise . . . until Deadpool became the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time. Then they decided that Suicide Squad needed to be a comedy too, and hired a trailer company to re-edit his film. Warner Bros. hires creatives with vision, but then does not trust them to execute their vision, and immediately intereferes, and forces a product by committee. By by trying to please everyone, they end up pleasing no one. There is not a single DCU film that I like without caveats. It is just a disaster.

Agreed. I've been a huge DC fan since the 70s. Grew up on comics, Super Friends, Adam West, Chris Reeve and Lynda Carter. Still adore the Donner Superman films and the Burton Batmans. I cherish the Fleischer Superman and the entire "Timm-verse" of cartoons, and thouroughly enjoyed the CG Green Lantern, the LoSH cartoon and most of the Batman cartoons since. But from Batman Begins through Black Adam there is not a single DC movie I've watched a 2nd time. There are pieces of many of them that I do enjoy, but not enough to sit through them again.

[Megalodon]

Agreed. I've been a huge DC fan since the 70s. Grew up on comics, Super Friends, Adam West, Chris Reeve and Lynda Carter. Still adore the Donner Superman films and the Burton Batmans. I cherish the Fleischer Superman and the entire "Timm-verse" of cartoons, and thouroughly enjoyed the CG Green Lantern, the LoSH cartoon and most of the Batman cartoons since. But from Batman Begins through Black Adam there is not a single DC movie I've watched a 2nd time. There are pieces of many of them that I do enjoy, but not enough to sit through them again.

This one for me

[Adam_Prince of Eternia]

Frankly, I think WB set themselves up for failure from the start by insisting they go dollar-for-dollar with Disney/Marvel.

I think Warner Bros. could have gone dollar-for-dollar with Disney. DC arguably has a stronger portfolio of characters. Where they set themselves up for failure is thinking they could go dollar-for-dollar without doing the work. They thought they could skip establishing an interconnected film universe through a series of solo films, and just skip to the team up and get the same results. People are invested in the MCU, and are willing to take chances on properties and characters with which they are not familiar, because each film is a stepping stone to something else, and people want to see how they are all connected. By skipping to the end, Warner Bros. looks like it is just trying to play catch up. Had they taken their time, the DCU would have been just as popular as the MCU, and they would have the benefit of being in second place. That is, they could learn from the mistakes that Disney made, and not repeat them. Phase four or Marvel is kind of a dud right now, and if DC was only in phase two or three, they could have easily pulled into first place. But Warner Bros. wants instant results, so here we are.

From a storytelling perspective, the DCU was not well-plotted at all. It is the equivalent of starting the universe wtih Captain Marvel, and then following it with Iron Man. You need to start with a street-level crime fighter with no super powers, and continue to escalate through the demigod who people thought was only a myth, to the most powerful man on Earth who is an alien from another world. It is like planting a seed that grows into a tree. It needs to start small and continue to get bigger. They are just all over the place. Anything and everything goes. Anything we can pull from our source material that we think can make us money, do it, regardless if it makes sense.

- - - Updated - - -

Agreed. I've been a huge DC fan since the 70s. Grew up on comics, Super Friends, Adam West, Chris Reeve and Lynda Carter. Still adore the Donner Superman films and the Burton Batmans. I cherish the Fleischer Superman and the entire "Timm-verse" of cartoons, and thouroughly enjoyed the CG Green Lantern, the LoSH cartoon and most of the Batman cartoons since. But from Batman Begins through Black Adam there is not a single DC movie I've watched a 2nd time. There are pieces of many of them that I do enjoy, but not enough to sit through them again.

Warner Bros. started interfering more after Batman Returns. Even though the film and the merchandise performed well, critics said the film was "too dark" for children. Never mind that people voted with their wallets. The critics complained, and they got spooked. Then the directives came to make the films lighter, ultimate culminating in Batman and Robin, which killed the franchise for almost a decade. It is like they cannot help but get in their own way.

[TheDeviot]

I'm not entirely surprised. I always preferred DC comics to the Marvel ones when I was reading and collecting comics years ago.
But I'm not blind to the "Me too" approach WB has taken with a lot of these movies over the last decade or more.
It's very spotty and checkered. A lot of them I liked. A lot of them were passable. A lot of them were stinkers.
Compared to the Marvel ones where a lot of obvious time, research, and care went into making something cohesive that could both
please the die-hard fans of the characters and also be comprehensible to the average person, a lot of the DC films did not. They
made decisions that made no sense to the core fan in a sad attempt to cast a wide net and ended up pleasing nobody.
On top of that, it's like they learned the wrong lessons from the movies that did well. Chief among them, "Everything must be dark and gritty".
Even in the dark age of comics, DC didn't lean *that* far into it. Sure we got the Death of Superman, and Batman got paralyzed for a while.
But it wasn't like every comic book became Youngblood or Spawn.

And even when they've had a pretty good movie it's still got something in it that split the audience.

I will say that I do think both Disney and WB should space out the films a lot more. The genre is oversaturated when it comes to the average person.
A really good movie about Superman, or Spiderman, or even second stringer characters from either company will work.
They just need a compelling story that pay respect to the source material while being something the casual moviegoer can easily follow. Everyone 5-95
will gladly go to the theatre or stream a movie or buy a Blu Ray once or twice a year for a comic movie. But expecting them to go watch Spider-man 7 to understand
the plot of The Incredible Hulk 10 and having to see both of those to have enough knowledge to understand the subplot of Dr. Strange 5 is asking way too much.
You can't forcibly turn a casual fan into a hardcore one. That is something that happens organically. And even if you could, the average amount of entertainment time for even
the most ardent fan is limited. Are they going to skip every non-comic film, TV show, Video Game, Rock Concert, Night out with the drinking buddies so they can comprehend
a magnum opus? Probably not.

I haven't seen nearly every DC or Marvel film but of what I have seen of the more recent DC ones:


Man Of Steel (Seems you either like the movie or you hate it. No one ever says "It was okay" I was in the liked it camp)
Batman Vs. Superman - Suffered from Spider-man 3 syndrome, trying to cram way too much into too little, and it was kind of crappy as a result.
Justice League - initial release was pretty rough. The Director's cut was a lot better, but still not what I would call great.
Wonder Woman- Terrific. Pretty great. Enjoyed it.
Shazam- Terrific. Loved it. Awesome movie.
Black Adam - Not sure why people treat this like it was one of the awful Fantastic Four movies. Not the most original storyline. But the action was cool, actors did fine. It was decent. Not fantastic by any means. But not terrible.
Aquaman- Average. Nothing special. I'll give it a few brownie points for having Dolph Lundgren in it.
The Batman - Really good movie. I liked the focus more on Batman's detective skills, the terrorist take on Riddler worked, pretty cool. A bit too long for repeat viewing for me, but good.
Suicide Squad- Hated it. How do you make a rogues gallery this boring?
The Suicide Squad - Not as bad as the first attempt. But still pretty bad. One or two comic relief moments worked. But other than that not much else.

And that's just my two cents. If you love what I didn't like or vice versa, that's cool.

I welcome a reboot, though I can't help but feel bad for how Cavil lost the Superman job. Imagine you leave your job cleaning bathrooms at Walmart because the
local town hall said you were a shoo-in for a clerical desk job that paid double. But then you get there, and they tell you that they decided to go in another direction
and give the job to a 16-year-old high-school dropout who is baked all of the time. Sure, that's their discretion, and they're totally in their right to do that. But you'd like
to think they would tell you that "Hey we prefer this inept person who is stoned 24 hours a day." right away.
Fortunately, Cavil got that Warhammer gig right away and the farewell note he gave was a very classy "This is show business, this stuff happens. No hard feelings"
exit. It shows he's a professional, whereas many other people might have left something unpleasant on their boss's desk.

[Mikey]

Aquaman is my favourite of the DC movies and I can't wait to see the sequel next year. I just wish I didn't have to wait a whole year.

- - - Updated - - -

So "edgy" in your world is essentially Safety Scissors. Thanks for clarifying.

I grew up on George Carlin, myself. Sooooooo, yeah.

I do have to question those who doubt Bette Midler's edginess and ask if they have actually seen any of her shows. I have them all on DVD, and I have her comedy album Mud Will Be Flung Tonight, which is definitely edgy.

[Rikki Roxx]

I've seen a couple of her routines, but I don't remember the names. I remember some jokes about breasts and such. Ohhhh, Katie bar the door, we got us a firecracker!

I'unno maybe her older stuff had more "bite". Can't speak to what I haven't seen.

[A Dalek]

DC's problem with their movies is that they tend over correct.

They tried to start of their movie universe with Green Lantern and what was effectively a poor man's attempt at the MCU style. After that they decided to try and go for a more serous approach (as well as ditching Green Lantern as the starting point).

This in of itself wasn't a bad idea. While Marvel did tackle more serous topics and generally go a bit darker than DC (keep in mind I'm talking about both companies classical eras in the silver age), it was considerably more tongue in cheek with it's stories and general approach than DC was (which tended to play things more straight). The problem is they looked at the success of the Dark Knight Trilogy and decided that being super dark and edgy and totally for big boys was the way to go. Despite that approach not working for the vast majority of DC characters and creating a setting that had all the worst trappings of DC's much disliked New 52. And then proceeded to clearly not know what they wanted it to be when that didn't work out. I also suspect part of their more serous approach was a vain attempt to avoid being scene as a rip off of the MCU.

In reality they should have just embraced the sillier more colorful fun aspect of DC's comics, without descending into being as comedic as Marvel was.

There is also the problem of WB infamous lack of confidence with any DC property that doesn't involved Batman and to a lesser degree Superman. Yes they are the big 2, the 2 biggest superheroes ever in fact, but they put them on such a pedestal in terms of importance that it diminished everyone else. In Superman's case making him so powerful that he practically made the rest of the League redundant.

Superman should be powerful but he should still have his limits, at least when it comes to adaptations that make him a part of a team. That's one thing the DCAU absolutely got right with the character (aside from season 1 of Justice League, were he was subject to the worf effect a few to many times).

[Mikey]

I just want more DC Comics movies, I love them, not so much the R-Rated ones, but the rest for me have been wonderful.

[Mark M]

I would like some DC movies actually like the comics and characters they are based on instead of trying to make them real world and gritty and Marvel rip offs.
A Batman movie with Killer Croc, Man Bat etc and for them to actually have proper costumes that look somewhat like the comics costumes.
Same for Superman, and Wonder Woman.
Cavill was good as Superman but the movies he acted in were awfully written.
Gal Gadot was okay but in my opinion she didn't really look like Wonder Woman. Again not the best written movie but a lot better than other DCEU movies.
Ares should have been in the first movie more. The second film was terrible.

[Ornclown]

I would like some DC movies actually like the comics and characters they are based on instead of trying to make them real world and gritty and Marvel rip offs.

I don't think that they are ripping off Marvel, per se... however, you are absolutely correct about DC trying to be too "real world" and gritty.

These are stories about an invincible alien who falls in love with the founding fathers' ideals, an orphaned millionaire who dresses as a bat to fight the criminal underworld, a semi-Greek goddess who was sculpted out of clay, and a prince from Atlanta who can talk to fish.

If the movies followed the fun, entertaining, and respected writing of most of the DC Animated features, this wouldn't even be a conversation right now.

Movies like Green Lantern: First Flight, Throne of Atlantis, Flashpoint Paradox, New Frontier, Dark, Justice Society: WWII, JL:War, etc., etc.. are awesome examples of how incredible the DC stable of characters can be.

Even the book adaptations translate well to the screen... the silverscreen movies need to inject some of this adventure and fun into the DC universe and cut back on the dark realism, IMHO.

[Rikki Roxx]

Cavill was good as Superman but the movies he acted in were awfully written.

The movies Snyder directed Cavill in as Superman were heavily based on the Byrne/Jurgens/Wolfman run of Superman comics from 1986-1996, with a little bit of Mark Waid's "Birthright" sprinkled in. They also managed to put in a little bit of every bit of Superman lore from 1938 through "present day", which is rather impressive in its own right, but it's predominantly based on the Byrne/Jurgens material. They're not word-for-word and note-for-note but they are "spiritually faithful" in many ways.

This is why I take issue with people who say "They need to just do it like the comics!", and frankly, the scriptwriters hate that too, because "WHICH comics?" Every single fan will say, "The comics that *I* like best, obviously!" Despite the fact that after 80+ Years tons of the source material conflicts. The Superman of 1938 and the Superman of 1998 were barely even the same character in many ways. What I find is, people who want a Superman "like the comics!" either mean Silver Age Superman that was incredibly silly, goofy and childish, or something that is heavily inspired by that such as All-Star Superman, which I kind of get why people like it but I personally don't really care for it. It's well-intentioned but it takes every single thing I detest about the Silver Age and dials it to 11, so suffice to say that's not the comic I personally want to see adapted to film.

I mean personal mileage varies, but to say I vehemently disagree with the assertation that those movies were "awfully written" would be an understatement. To be blunt, despite being a comic book fan I find most comic book movies to be pandering garbage with everything dumbed down for mass consumption, with no depth of character or nuance of conflict to be found. MoS and BvS at least tried to be movies that were ABOUT something. Specifically, they were about how difficult it is to be a heroic, selfless person in a world that actively punishes people for wanting to be Good People, and furthermore how true heroes don't stop doing the right thing just because it's difficult; rather, they endure and persevere. That was the entire point; to me, that's heroic and inspiring.

They were also movies about Superman learning how to BE "Superman", which to me was incredibly interesting because it's something no movie has ever bothered with. They always just have him show up, fully-formed and perfect, and everyone loves him because he can fly. Well, not only is that not "realistic", it's not even faithful to the comics; in every version of the Superman origin that's ever seen print, there's a ton of people who don't trust him at all when he shows up, and it always takes him years of practice before he finally becomes "Superman as we know him". The movies usually skip over his entire developmental arc, this time they chose to explore it in-depth. I understand that some people aren't interested in that kind of thing but I disagree with those who say that the take was "wrong" on its face; they were simply keeping in line with the comics, which so many people claim they "should do" and yet complain about when they actually do.

I also loved how the movies kept it so real in how people would truly react if men who could fly and move mountains suddenly existed. I always remind people, the last time a guy came "out of the sky" and said he was here to save us all, we stuck him on the cross. Our world only creates heroes so we can tear them down and punish them for not being "perfect"; the movies simply turned the mirror back on the audience and showed how it would go if Superman was real, because our society literally crucifies the best of its people. Not a take that works for everyone, maybe, but to NOT present it that way, to me, would be intellectually dishonest even if it would have gone down smoother with some people. Plus, we already had the fairy-tale version in the '70s.

For everyone who's ever told me they hated MoS, there are three others who told me that was the first time they ever had any appreciation for the character at all. "Like, I always thought he was so perfect and boring, but I *get* it now; like, how HARD must it be, to be That Guy and having all that responsibility, all that power, and no manual on how to go and 'Be Superman'? And then all you wanna do is help people, and they tell you you're either doing Too Much or Not Enough? But he just keeps going. Like wow, man, I get it now. That's why he's The Best... not because being him is easy, but because it's SO hard... and he never gives up." So clearly those stories had an affect on some people, if they went from thinking Superman was stupid and boring to suddenly being huge fans once they got a look into his inner turmoil through those films.

I know some people just wanted fun romps. Me, I'm over that stuff. Everybody can have their own opinion, obviously, but quite frankly MoS and BvS are two of a very small number of comic book films I plan to still watch years into the future. I'm still finding new things to appreciate every time I see them, whether it be Easter eggs or some kind of metaphorical/symbolic stuff, and that's always fun, but it also helps that they're not vapid as so many others are. There's those two, the first Reeve movie, and a couple of the Batman movies; those are the only comic book films I've ever cared to watch more than a couple or handful of times.

So yeah, suffice to say I disagree that the movies had bad stories. I think a lot of it has to do with the individual and what they personally wanted, and an ability to meet a creator halfway on a project which not everyone possesses or cares to indulge. The latter is a thing most people seem very bad at doing, anymore. If, as in this case, a movie tries to be an introspective exploration about the very nature of "heroism" and what kind of person it takes to be "the greatest hero" in a world that scorns its heroes as a matter of course, what you find is people railing against it for not being a romp, rather than objectively judge whether the movie did a good or bad job at what kind of story it WAS trying to be. You get a lot of "What they SHOULD have done was..." and "What I wanted INSTEAD was..." And that's allowed, it's just... kind of unfair. It's like saying you hated the cheeseburger you were served because it wasn't a hot dog. I always feel that you should judge things more for what they Are and not what they Are Not. I know that's not really how things work anymore, but it's something I try and adhere to whenever I critique things. With those movies, the negativity is HEAVILY slanted towards those who are of the mindset of, "It's bad because I didn't like it for my own personal reasons". Which is fine until those people take an Attack Stance on anyone who likes the movies, which inevitably happens everywhere they're discussed. Which is entirely why the people who DO like them, never say so out loud anymore. "What's the point? Someone who's never read a Superman comic in their lives is just gonna call you a r*tard because it's not exactly like the cartoon show." It's rather disheartening, but such is what happens when we create a society were Only Consensus Counts.

So... That's my very long way of saying "I very much disagree with your assessment". Hah.

- - - Updated - - -

the silverscreen movies need to inject some of this adventure and fun into the DC universe and cut back on the dark realism, IMHO.

Explain then why Shazam!, Birds of Prey, The Suicide Squad, and now Black Adam - with their goofy-ass trailers that emphasized and beat viewers over the head with the idea that these DC movies were "Fun Fun FUN!!!" all did horrible box office. Squad gets an asterisk because of the pandemic BUT other comic book films released to theaters around the same time did MUCH better than that one. There's no excuse whatsoever for the other movies I cited doing so badly, considering they went out of their way to do EXACTLY what you say they "Needed" to do and should keep doing.

I've seen and heard people say "It's because people were already scared off by MoS and BvS" but that is 100% nonsense. For starters, Wonder Woman and Aquaman were very Snyder Movie-adjacent and both made a TON of money. Furthermore, as I already stated, those "fun" DC films all had trailers that crammed "fun and funny" down your throat, so no one could ever claim they had no idea those movies were romps. They were clearly marketed as "fun, lighthearted movies" and they ALL failed (Shazam! was saved by a low budget; its net intake at the box office was pathetic). There simply is NO chance at all that millions of people all refused to pay to see those movies, "Because I watched a DC movie in 2017 and it made me sad, now I avoid all of them." That scenario simply did not happen.

I can understand how a person who prefers comic book movies all be romps to say, "All they need to do is THIS, and they'll succeed!" That's what you personally want, so you assume it's a straight line to the bank from there. Objective Reality, however, shows us that it's a SERIOUS oversimplification to suggest that, because they have TRIED to play the game that way and lost more and more money every time they tried it.

I don't have any idea what the "magic bullet" for DC movies to finally be popular is, myself. I just know that it's NOT "just embrace the absurd and the whimsical" because they HAVE tried that repeatedly ever since Whedon's JL and those are their most embarrassing box office failures to date. So what you're suggesting is actually, "Just keep repeating an approach that has actively failed badly for them, and hope that eventually the results will be different." It's a way to go, I guess, but I'd never suggest that it's a blueprint or road map, just one of many suggestions of what they COULD try. It hasn't worked for them yet, though, so there's no promise it will or would.

It's like all those people who said "ALL they need to do is make a TMNT movie with Bebop and Rocksteady and Krang, and make it super goofy like the cartoon, and it'll make ALL the money!" People said that insistently for 30 years, then they made That Movie and it was a horrific disaster that lost a ton of money. Clearly the "magic bullet" was actually a blank. It happens. But that's why I wish people wouldn't speak with so much conviction on matters such as these. So many times, "ALL they have to do... it's SO easy!" turns out NOT to be the case at all. To say nothing of, if there was a blueprint on How To Make Billion-Dollar Movies in the first place, no movie would EVER under-perform.

End of the day, none of us knows jack **** about how this stuff "SHOULD be done", because if we did we would be there doing it, and not heckling from the cheap seats. So clearly, none of us here are actually all that clairvoyant or creative. We just like to pretend that if things were in our hands, we would succeed where others failed. We have "the secret wisdom" that They simply lack or choose to ignore, after all. Surely.

If there's a map to success for DC movies, it's clearly a lot more complicated than "Lighten Up, be more fun." Tried it, lost money. Tried it again, lost a ton more. Again, I don't have any answers, I just know That ain't it, either. It clearly is not so simple.

[Mikey]

I don't think that they are ripping off Marvel, per se... however, you are absolutely correct about DC trying to be too "real world" and gritty.

These are stories about an invincible alien who falls in love with the founding fathers' ideals, an orphaned millionaire who dresses as a bat to fight the criminal underworld, a semi-Greek goddess who was sculpted out of clay, and a prince from Atlanta who can talk to fish.

If the movies followed the fun, entertaining, and respected writing of most of the DC Animated features, this wouldn't even be a conversation right now.

Movies like Green Lantern: First Flight, Throne of Atlantis, Flashpoint Paradox, New Frontier, Dark, Justice Society: WWII, JL:War, etc., etc.. are awesome examples of how incredible the DC stable of characters can be.

Even the book adaptations translate well to the screen... the silverscreen movies need to inject some of this adventure and fun into the DC universe and cut back on the dark realism, IMHO.

As always I completely agree with you Ornclown!

- - - Updated - - -

It's like all those people who said "ALL they need to do is make a TMNT movie with Bebop and Rocksteady and Krang, and make it super goofy like the cartoon, and it'll make ALL the money!" People said that insistently for 30 years, then they made That Movie and it was a horrific disaster that lost a ton of money. Clearly the "magic bullet" was actually a blank. It happens. But that's why I wish people wouldn't speak with so much conviction on matters such as these. So many times, "ALL they have to do... it's SO easy!" turns out NOT to be the case at all. To say nothing of, if there was a blueprint on How To Make Billion-Dollar Movies in the first place, no movie would EVER under-perform.

I actually loved the TMNT movies. I still don't care about critics, box office and other people's negativity.

[Mark M]

....This is why I take issue with people who say "They need to just do it like the comics!", and frankly, the scriptwriters hate that too, because "WHICH comics?" Every single fan will say, "The comics that *I* like best, obviously!" Despite the fact that after 80+ Years tons of the source material conflicts. The Superman of 1938 and the Superman of 1998 were barely even the same character in many ways. What I find is, people who want a Superman "like the comics!" either mean Silver Age Superman that was incredibly silly, goofy and childish, or something that is heavily inspired by that such as All-Star Superman, which I kind of get why people like it but I personally don't really care for it. It's well-intentioned but it takes every single thing I detest about the Silver Age and dials it to 11, so suffice to say that's not the comic I personally want to see adapted to film....

There was some good things in Man Of Steel but it was still quite boring and the bland look and lack of colour didn't help.
I found Batman Vs Superman and Justice League to have far too much stuff crammed into the movies which spoiled it.
It was cool seeing the fight scene homaging Dark Knight Returns but that was literally the only real good part of that movie.

At least Man Of Steel was better written than Superman Returns.

- - - Updated - - -

It's like all those people who said "ALL they need to do is make a TMNT movie with Bebop and Rocksteady and Krang, and make it super goofy like the cartoon, and it'll make ALL the money!" People said that insistently for 30 years, then they made That Movie and it was a horrific disaster that lost a ton of money. Clearly the "magic bullet" was actually a blank. It happens. But that's why I wish people wouldn't speak with so much conviction on matters such as these. So many times, "ALL they have to do... it's SO easy!" turns out NOT to be the case at all. To say nothing of, if there was a blueprint on How To Make Billion-Dollar Movies in the first place, no movie would EVER under-perform.

To be fair being made by Michael Bay didn't help those awful TMNT movies.

- - - Updated - - -

If the movies followed the fun, entertaining, and respected writing of most of the DC Animated features, this wouldn't even be a conversation right now.

Movies like Green Lantern: First Flight, Throne of Atlantis, Flashpoint Paradox, New Frontier, Dark, Justice Society: WWII, JL:War, etc., etc.. are awesome examples of how incredible the DC stable of characters can be.

A LOT of the Animated DC movies are awesome. Those writers and directors should be working on the live action movies.

- - - Updated - - -

So... That's my very long way of saying "I very much disagree with your assessment". Hah.

A comment should be a few lines, several at the most. Not the Gettysburg Address.

[Ornclown]

A LOT of the Animated DC movies are awesome. Those writers and directors should be working on the live action movies.

Exactly.

These creators seem to 'get' the characters a whole lot more than the Hollywood writers and directors...

Just imagine if the DC Movies, going back to Man of Steel, had half the creativity, heart, and fun of the animated versions.

I actually loved the TMNT movies. I still don't care about critics, box office and other people's negativity.

Agreed.

Regardless of how the brothers actually look (apparently a major sticking point for some), the movies are tried and true TMNT fare.

They bring the juvenile humor, ninja choreography, brotherhood / family bond and mix it in with amazing action set pieces. I always enjoy these movies whenever I watch them.

It's a shame that the trilogy didn't get to conclude properly...

[Mikey]

Agreed.

Regardless of how the brothers actually look (apparently a major sticking point for some), the movies are tried and true TMNT fare.

They bring the juvenile humor, ninja choreography, brotherhood / family bond and mix it in with amazing action set pieces. I always enjoy these movies whenever I watch them.

It's a shame that the trilogy didn't get to conclude properly...

I especially loved that Whoopi Goldberg was in the first new TMNT movie and Stephen Amell was in the second new TMNT movie. I quite like Megan Fox as well as April and as Lila in Jonah Hex.

I only just wish Karai had been featured more in both movies, she's one of my favourite characters.

I loved Krang, Baxter Stockman, Rocksteady and Bebop too. I would love a TMNT movie with The Rat King and/or Leatherhead.