-
[QUOTE=Cmbmool;4694412]The reason why we will not get the so call Snyder cut is the depends on the entire foundations of the DC films. In other words....WB/DC wants SUCCESSFUL FILMS that are both financial and critical and audience beloved films. Not controversial films that the Snyder based films has gotten them thus far. There is a reason WHY THEY”RE REBUILDING THEMSELVES.
Second, while the Studio heads of before are to blame for their current movie mess...[B]Snyder also is to be blamed for how far they allowed his vision to go[/B].
Third: Say that they do release the Snyder Cut, then what happens next as the players for the Justice League are gone and/or recasted ? So what’s the point if this was truly the end of Snyder’s vision of DC comics heroes ? Especially given that this was originally supposed to be a 2 PARTER MOVIE.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't make any sense. How is snyder to blame for doing things his way? If wb really didn't want it. They could have gone their separate ways.I said this before,this basically asking kirby to draw like alex ross. And no, i am not comparing kirby to snyder. Before anyone gets on that train.
3) Jl will be pretty self contained in that it will deal with how they got together, superman's return and steppenwolf defeat. Yeah! There will also be buildup to darkseid. Darkseid can be easily not follwed up on.
-
Men's Health article/interview: Henry Cavill Is Still Superman
[I]
Wait, is that dude . . . STILL Superman? Cavill’s stayed silent about such gossip for a long time, to his occasional frustration. He fought for years, facing down countless rejections and close calls, to land a part as cosmically iconic as Superman. It’s a role, and a character, he guards fiercely—and insists he hasn’t let go. “The cape is in the closet,” Cavill says. “It’s still mine.”
Man of Steel? “A great starting point. If I were to go back, I don’t think I’d change anything.” Batman v Superman? “Very much a Batman movie. And I think that realm of darkness is great for a Batman movie.” Justice League? “It didn’t work.”
Cavill almost reprised his Superman role for a blip-sized cameo in this year’s Shazam! but says he couldn’t do it because of his Fallout schedule. That absence—coupled with the fact that The Witcher could wind up as a Game of Thrones–like epic that eats up a huge chunk of his calendar—furthered the speculation that his time in the cape was finished. “I’m not just going to sit quietly in the dark as all this stuff is going on,” Cavill says of the rumors. “I’ve not given up the role. There’s a lot I have to give for Superman yet. A lot of storytelling to do. A lot of real, true depths to the honesty of the character I want to get into. I want to reflect the comic books. That’s important to me. There’s a lot of justice to be done for Superman. The status is: You’ll see.”[/I]
Full article: [url]https://www.menshealth.com/entertainment/a29774618/henry-cavill-the-witcher-superman-interview/[/url]
-
[QUOTE=Last Son of Krypton;4695087]Men's Health article/interview: Henry Cavill Is Still Superman
[I]
Wait, is that dude . . . STILL Superman? Cavill’s stayed silent about such gossip for a long time, to his occasional frustration. He fought for years, facing down countless rejections and close calls, to land a part as cosmically iconic as Superman. It’s a role, and a character, he guards fiercely—and insists he hasn’t let go. “The cape is in the closet,” Cavill says. “It’s still mine.”
Man of Steel? “A great starting point. If I were to go back, I don’t think I’d change anything.” Batman v Superman? “Very much a Batman movie. And I think that realm of darkness is great for a Batman movie.” Justice League? “It didn’t work.”
Cavill almost reprised his Superman role for a blip-sized cameo in this year’s Shazam! but says he couldn’t do it because of his Fallout schedule. That absence—coupled with the fact that The Witcher could wind up as a Game of Thrones–like epic that eats up a huge chunk of his calendar—furthered the speculation that his time in the cape was finished. “I’m not just going to sit quietly in the dark as all this stuff is going on,” Cavill says of the rumors. “I’ve not given up the role. There’s a lot I have to give for Superman yet. A lot of storytelling to do. A lot of real, true depths to the honesty of the character I want to get into. I want to reflect the comic books. That’s important to me. There’s a lot of justice to be done for Superman. The status is: You’ll see.”[/I]
Full article: [url]https://www.menshealth.com/entertainment/a29774618/henry-cavill-the-witcher-superman-interview/[/url][/QUOTE]
I like Cavill. I think he could do great things. I just wish WB would lay out the plan for DC's superhero universe. Any plan. Just lay it out there. The uncertainty hurts long-term, holistic buy-in from audiences. What we have now is a movie-to-movie audience, which judges each movie on its own merits.
-
[QUOTE=Krypto's Fleas;4695237]I like Cavill. I think he could do great things. I just wish WB would lay out the plan for DC's superhero universe. Any plan. Just lay it out there. The uncertainty hurts long-term, holistic buy-in from audiences. What we have now is a movie-to-movie audience, which judges each movie on its own merits.[/QUOTE]
Is that a bad thing though? If anything I think that’s what WB wants right now.
-
[QUOTE=Last Son of Krypton;4695087]Men's Health article/interview: Henry Cavill Is Still Superman
[I]
Wait, is that dude . . . STILL Superman? Cavill’s stayed silent about such gossip for a long time, to his occasional frustration. He fought for years, facing down countless rejections and close calls, to land a part as cosmically iconic as Superman. It’s a role, and a character, he guards fiercely—and insists he hasn’t let go. “The cape is in the closet,” Cavill says. “It’s still mine.”
Man of Steel? “A great starting point. If I were to go back, I don’t think I’d change anything.” Batman v Superman? “Very much a Batman movie. And I think that realm of darkness is great for a Batman movie.” Justice League? “It didn’t work.”
Cavill almost reprised his Superman role for a blip-sized cameo in this year’s Shazam! but says he couldn’t do it because of his Fallout schedule. That absence—coupled with the fact that The Witcher could wind up as a Game of Thrones–like epic that eats up a huge chunk of his calendar—furthered the speculation that his time in the cape was finished. “I’m not just going to sit quietly in the dark as all this stuff is going on,” Cavill says of the rumors. “I’ve not given up the role. There’s a lot I have to give for Superman yet. A lot of storytelling to do. A lot of real, true depths to the honesty of the character I want to get into. I want to reflect the comic books. That’s important to me. There’s a lot of justice to be done for Superman. The status is: You’ll see.”[/I]
Full article: [url]https://www.menshealth.com/entertainment/a29774618/henry-cavill-the-witcher-superman-interview/[/url][/QUOTE]
Those are some pretty strong statements.
-
I prefer they go with a clean slate and get a new actor as I want Superman rebooted like it looks like Batman is going to be for Matt Reeves Batman but if Cavil and Warners can work things out I’d be cool with Cavil wearing the cape one more time. But I still prefer that Cavil pass down the cape to another actor. He definitely isn’t the only actor who can play the role and I want a new interpretation.
-
If THE BATMAN is going to be in the 1990s, then I think a Superman movie should also be a period movie. But maybe go back even further in time. Since there's been live action Superman movies and TV shows in the 1940s, 1950s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s that leaves the 1930s and the 1960s open. A 1930s movie could exploit the Depression era Champion of the Oppressed territory, while a 1960s movie could mine the space opera Man of Tomorrow optimism.
-
[QUOTE=Vordan;4695247]Is that a bad thing though? If anything I think that’s what WB wants right now.[/QUOTE]
Is it bad? Not if EVERY SINGLE MOVIE clicks with critics on its own. What you want to have, is brand equity, like Marvel, where their subpar entries (as recent as Captain Marvel) get the benefit of the doubt because everyone can see how the single film fits into a larger picture or plan.
-
[QUOTE=Vordan;4686862]In the DCEU Black Adam would barely differ from the other heroes. Superman kills. WW kills. Batman straight up plans premeditated murder and only backs out at the last possible second so he can go mow down people with machine guns.[/QUOTE]
And Shazam frequents strip joints. DCEU is hardcore.
-
[QUOTE=Krypto's Fleas;4695491]Is it bad? Not if EVERY SINGLE MOVIE clicks with critics on its own. What you want to have, is brand equity, like Marvel, where their subpar entries (as recent as Captain Marvel) get the benefit of the doubt because everyone can see how the single film fits into a larger picture or plan.[/QUOTE]
Eh I don’t think you need a cinematic universe to build up brand equity. Look at famous directors like Nolan or Spielberg. Not every film they make takes place in the same universe but people will automatically get excited because they know who those guys are and expect a certain level of quality from them. DC had that after the Nolan Batman movies. People were excited to go see Man of Steel based on DC’s brand power, Superman’s brand power, and that Nolan was involved. DC is getting back to that rep with its last three success, they just need to make good movies.
-
[QUOTE=Jim Kelly;4695377]If THE BATMAN is going to be in the 1990s, then I think a Superman movie should also be a period movie. But maybe go back even further in time. Since there's been live action Superman movies and TV shows in the 1940s, 1950s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s that leaves the 1930s and the 1960s open. A 1930s movie could exploit the Depression era Champion of the Oppressed territory, while a 1960s movie could mine the space opera Man of Tomorrow optimism.[/QUOTE]
Supposedly the Supergirl movie was going to be set in the 1970s so if Supergirl is Superman's long lost cousin then a Superman movie set in the 1960s with infant Kal-El arriving in the 1940s would seem to be the appropriate place to start.
-
[QUOTE=Osiris-Rex;4695693]Supposedly the Supergirl movie was going to be set in the 1970s so if Supergirl is Superman's long lost cousin then a Superman movie set in the 1960s with infant Kal-El arriving in the 1940s would seem to be the appropriate place to start.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, that Supergirl movie...
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;4695880]Oh yeah, that Supergirl movie...[/QUOTE]
Is that even happening anymore? Since they got JJ Abrams all talk of Supergirl getting a movie has died down and now it seems to revolve around WB getting Abrams to reboot Supes.
-
[QUOTE=Vordan;4696220]Is that even happening anymore? Since they got JJ Abrams all talk of Supergirl getting a movie has died down and now it seems to revolve around WB getting Abrams to reboot Supes.[/QUOTE]
At this point it feels like most of the satellite DC movies are in tentative production status.
-
[QUOTE=Jim Kelly;4695377]If THE BATMAN is going to be in the 1990s, then I think a Superman movie should also be a period movie. But maybe go back even further in time. Since there's been live action Superman movies and TV shows in the 1940s, 1950s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s that leaves the 1930s and the 1960s open. A 1930s movie could exploit the Depression era Champion of the Oppressed territory, while a 1960s movie could mine the space opera Man of Tomorrow optimism.[/QUOTE] This post makes me wonder if Warners could consider doing a elseworlds one-offs for heroes . I kind of want to see a black & white Batman movie set in the 30’s(yeah, I know it wouldn’t be commercially viable) but I kind of wanna see it.