DC/WB Films/Worlds (No Spoilers)

[Punisher007]

He says that he's BEEN Batman for 20 years, and the idea is that Gotham hasn't improved much in those two decades, hence his extra-cynical and brutal thought process.

[SiegePerilous02]

The film does make it clear that Batman's increasing brutality is a recent thing. And if the Joker doesn't want to be found, he won't be found.

Not a great idea to start the universe off this way, but there is some internal logic with Bruce not killing the Joker at least.

Well, JL wasn't rushed in THAT sense. Keep in mind that JL came out 4 years after Man of Steel, which is how many years Avengers came out after Iron Man.

The "rushed" part was that we really should have gotten an ACTUAL sequel to Man of Steel, and about 3-5 additional solo films featuring the Justice League. Instead, we really only got BvS and Wonder Woman. But this is the problem with WB owning DC versus DC being its own film studio.

I think it was rushed in both senses. We needed a MOS sequel without Batman (or probably Snyder) to develop what worked in MOS and tweak/remove what didn't. And solos for the other characters. Failing that, putting the brakes on things following BvS before going into JL would have been the next best thing.

Superman should have been resurrected in his own movie. That way he could be present for the duration of a JL movie, and be neither the brainwashed evil puppet or overwhelmingly the heavy muscle.

[stargazer01]

Aquaman and Wonder Woman were a lot alike, if not in plot then definitely in structure, and it's a structure that has been utilized by Marvel since 2008.

If we want to say it goes as far back as say, Superman The Movie, then so be it. My point is that Snyder is not a guy who wants to adhere to the typical super hero formula, which makes him a great choice for a film like Watchmen but a bad choice for JL.

Apparently Snyder knows his films are divisive but he doesn't care because that's his style... I guess he forgot to tell WB about it..

[kjn]

Aquaman and Wonder Woman were a lot alike, if not in plot then definitely in structure, and it's a structure that has been utilized by Marvel since 2008.

If we want to say it goes as far back as say, Superman The Movie, then so be it. My point is that Snyder is not a guy who wants to adhere to the typical super hero formula, which makes him a great choice for a film like Watchmen but a bad choice for JL.

So what is the structure that is alike between Aquaman and Wonder Woman, and all (or even most of) the Marvel movies? Because then you would probably find that it is shared with a lot of other films as well. When I watched Aquaman it felt most like an 80's action comedy than anything else.

From a perspective of tone, character work, and rhetorics, I'd rather say that Wonder Woman is much more similar to Logan than the MCU movies or Aquaman.

Maybe I am being Captain Obvious, but if you don't care about the characters you probably won't care about the movie. You can have good, likeable characters in a bad movie but seldom does a good movie have characters that people don't like or care about.

There is a reason why the eight deadly words in sf reading circles are "I don't care what happens to these people". Even if you are making a movie about Superman or Batman, part of your job is to make sure people care about the characters. Now, that job is immensely easier with Superman compared with using (say) Captain Obvious, but it's still something that must be done with care. Going by the response from a lot of people, instead Snyder botched it.

[stargazer01]

While what you say is pretty much true in that not everything is going to be universally liked and people are perfectly entitled to like Zack Snyder as a filmmaker...

There's a clear formula established by Marvel (and utilized by Wonder Woman and Aquaman) that is the way to go with making these films. Zack Snyder has shown and expressed no interest in adhering to that formula, which made him a bad choice to helm the DCEU.

I don't think Wonder Woman used the marvel formula, whatever that is. It used Superman the Movie as inspiration within the DCEU. And Aquaman was like an 80s action movie closer to Indiana Jones and the original Star Wars.

[Krypto's Fleas]

Bruce mentions he hasn't been Batman in 20 years to Alfred.

No, he mentions that he HAS been Batman for 20 years and nothing has changed in Gotham, in fact, it's gotten worse.

[Frontier]

The film does make it clear that Batman's increasing brutality is a recent thing. And if the Joker doesn't want to be found, he won't be found.

Not a great idea to start the universe off this way, but there is some internal logic with Bruce not killing the Joker at least.

Even the whole killing thing is inconsistent since a tie-in prequel comic established that Batman was brutal but he still didn't kill.

(Unless we're getting into the semantics Snyder used to justify why Batman acted the way he did in BvS).

[SiegePerilous02]

Even the whole killing thing is inconsistent since a tie-in prequel comic established that Batman was brutal but he still didn't kill.

(Unless we're getting into the semantics Snyder used to justify why Batman acted the way he did in BvS).

More people saw the movie than read the tie in prequel comic I imagine, so an outside media inconsistency isn't the fault of the film itself. Was Snyder even aware of the tie in comic?

But the take failed to take off, so it's all rather moot now anyway

[Pinsir]

I just had dinner with my family and when I told them about Shazam getting fantastic reviews they said things like, "Well they should have done bright movies from the start!" and "They shouldn't have Superman breaking peoples necks!" How can people be so ignorant!?

[Krypto's Fleas]

I just had dinner with my family and when I told them about Shazam getting fantastic reviews they said things like, "Well they should have done bright movies from the start!" and "They shouldn't have Superman breaking peoples necks!" How can people be so ignorant!?

What? How is your conclusion that they're ignorant?

[Pinsir]

What? How is your conclusion that they're ignorant?

That Zach Snyder's interpretation of the character is the closest adaptation of Siegel and Schuster original vision and MoS and BvS are outstanding films in their own regard.

[SiegePerilous02]

That Zach Snyder's interpretation of the character is the closest adaptation of Siegel and Schuster original vision and MoS and BvS are outstanding films in their own regard.

Siegel and Shuster's Superman would be less morose. Not that he didn't have good reason at times within the context of the films, but people didn't want it.

I'd kill to have seen Cavill play Golden Age Supes (or his closest modern approximation, Morrison's New 52 Supes) compared to how he was forced to play it.

[Pinsir]

Siegel and Shuster's Superman would be less morose. Not that he didn't have good reason at times within the context of the films, but people didn't want it.

I'd kill to have seen Cavill play Golden Age Supes (or his closest modern approximation, Morrison's New 52 Supes) compared to how he was forced to play it.

It would also be more topical, Superman v. the 1%.

[Nite-Wing]

He says that he's BEEN Batman for 20 years, and the idea is that Gotham hasn't improved much in those two decades, hence his extra-cynical and brutal thought process.

But that's par for the course even in the comics MORE villains and even WORSE supervillains actually show up because of Batman, when he started out it was just mobsters
The catharsis of him not getting anything done is unearned because that's what Batman always deals with. NOW if they made the reasoning because of Robin's death I would have no problem but either way I'm a fan of Snyder's Batman all the way just not his old and broken take on the character ultimately he was planning on killing Batman and having the JL go on from there.
Not my cup of tea on that move but everything else was sound imo

I don't care about Superman nearly as much as some of the people on this forum do and seeing as WB is happy enough to let big blue languish in limbo I suspect not many suits are hot on the character either. Frankly Zack should have just started with Batman(a character he is passionate about) vs trying to utilize Superman which is something he clearly doesn't get but I guess relaunching the character so soon after the Nolan trilogy was just gonna work.

[Frontier]

Siegel and Shuster's Superman would be less morose. Not that he didn't have good reason at times within the context of the films, but people didn't want it.

I'd kill to have seen Cavill play Golden Age Supes (or his closest modern approximation, Morrison's New 52 Supes) compared to how he was forced to play it.

I don't really see Cavill as New 52 Supes but admittedly the writing for his Superman was all over the place that it's hard for me to gauge what his Superman should've been like other then being better then what he was given to work with.