DC/WB Films/Worlds (No Spoilers)

[Gaius]

Their logic is that Endgame uses time travel to resolve everything and Snyder was going to use time travel too, and since Snyder is a brilliant visionary who came up with the idea of time traveling to undo past mistakes, Feige must have stolen the idea once Johns passed along the JL 2 and 3 scripts (which were never written). Never mind that Snyder and WB clearly chose Darkseid because Marvel was using Thanos, so if anyone was ripping the other off it was Snyder and WB.

Sucks to be Darkseid. His ripoff gets to the movies first and he debuts looking like an angry 2007 video game mid-level boss.

[Vakanai]

Sorry for the late reply. Of course its subjective; your question upon my reasoning was based on my subjective opinion. Objectively I'm sure that movie will do well.

And hip-shot because after Bens Batman moved a bit out of reach and the reviews weren't as glowing as they hoped they would be they pressed the emergency "release another Batman no matter what even if Affleck does no do it" button. All along with (subjective perception on events) careful crapping on DCEU to make stand alone movies more interesting but not to much to not burn to many bridges; especially after most other DCEU movies became successes or even 1bn smash hits in AQMs case.

I don't think that was the reasoning at all. I got the sense they wanted a new Batman because it'd be profitable, saw that the DCEU Batman stuff wasn't amazing and had problems with Affleck not into it at that time, so said screw it we'll reboot. That's neither panic nor a hip shot, just a sound business choice at that time. They know Batman makes them money, and they weren't in a great spot to make it the Affleck version. So they went another direction.

I mean, if you're a big DCEU fan I can see why you might not like it, but logically and divorced from fandom, seems like the right move on their end at that time when Affleck wasn't feeling it.

[Vakanai]

Why is there so much drama behind closed doors at DC/WB! Honestly all of this started when they greenlighted the Snyder Cut! I just want to move on form the Snyder era films! We’re finally getting good films and then this happens

...how on Earth can you blame this on the Snyder Cut?

[Vakanai]

Yeah! Superdad is very much accepted outside this forum and maybe even in this forum as well, as the superman .
Hey! If you are right. I gain some interesting content with superman, that would just be enjoyed by rest of the fanbase. If you're wrong. Then i would just be stuck with a superman i don't particularly enjoy and rest of the fanbase might enjoy . So, i hope i am wrong and you are right.

I don't think that the outside fandom cares about Superman being Superdad, they just don't want to see a somber, melancholy movie when they go to see Superman. They want fun. You can probably get a more Golden Age inspired Superman to really take off these days - just don't make the movie a drag or a bummer.

[Pinsir]

What does that mean in old people that still think twitter is a glorified chatroom language?

I mean I guess its a good thing; but is it a relevant good thing?

Twitter is the reason why we got the Snyder Cut.

[Vakanai]

Twitter is the reason why we got the Snyder Cut.

Is it? I thought it was more covid shutdown + need for streaming content + Snyder pitched it again at the right time in the right way. The fans probably played a part in the final calculation, but I wouldn't give them the main credit here.

[SiegePerilous02]

Is it? I thought it was more covid shutdown + need for streaming content + Snyder pitched it again at the right time in the right way. The fans probably played a part in the final calculation, but I wouldn't give them the main credit here.

I think they were gearing up to green light the Snyder cut even before Covid happened, but I'm not sure.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Is it? I thought it was more covid shutdown + need for streaming content + Snyder pitched it again at the right time in the right way. The fans probably played a part in the final calculation, but I wouldn't give them the main credit here.

And AT&T buying out WB.

[Pinsir]

Is it? I thought it was more covid shutdown + need for streaming content + Snyder pitched it again at the right time in the right way. The fans probably played a part in the final calculation, but I wouldn't give them the main credit here.

They would have to think there was a market for this product though and the Snyder fandom primarily used Twitter to get their message out.

[Holt]

Why is there so much drama behind closed doors at DC/WB!

Most studios have drama, WB is just exceptionally terrible about hiding theirs.

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't think that the outside fandom cares about Superman being Superdad, they just don't want to see a somber, melancholy movie when they go to see Superman. They want fun. You can probably get a more Golden Age inspired Superman to really take off these days - just don't make the movie a drag or a bummer.

Sure, the problem is there is level of flaw to character like recklessness, certain disregard for rules, short-temperedness... Etc that's associated. There is also the inherent solitude . If you round him up, have him think he knows better and should be preaching you naturally have a superdad. That's the general tendency with the character. Fans eagerly want the character to tame itself and remove the dangerous aspect far too quickly. They wrinkle their nose when superman is reckless. For example, seeing this as out of character.



They do it as well. Superman becomes this flying paragon of virtues and is seen in that context only. And then what? We hit dead end?Moreover, it takes hell of a time for a person to develop and somepeople don't change or shoulders change . Superman should have that dangerous aspect to the character,not just the kind-caring aspect. If you don't you are left with a bland character. Finally,virtues and vices are interchangeable to begin with depending on the context. Virtues can become vices and vice-versa. Superman's recklessness makes him act. It can solve problems and get him into problems. If you remove that, he doesn't act and is entirely complacent. He will be well rounded. But, would lose that sharpness as character.So, sometimes that kind of negotiations shouldn't happen at all. But, that's what happens. Fans make a fuss about superman being "dick" . But, Can you imagine a superman who doesn't break chains or a luffy that doesn't punch a strong wall?
I guess, what i am saying is. Superman is a wild white wolf. He shouldn't get too tame.

[Vordan]

Most studios have drama, WB is just exceptionally terrible about hiding theirs.

They’ve purged all their head people like what, 3 times by now? I think they fired the head of HBO Max who approved the Snyder Cut as well (although Hamada is still there for now). Really goes to show how impressive a job Feige has done, dude runs a tight ship.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

They’ve purged all their head people like what, 3 times by now? I think they fired the head of HBO Max who approved the Snyder Cut as well (although Hamada is still there for now). Really goes to show how impressive a job Feige has done, dude runs a tight ship.

I also find it hilarious that the same hilariously untalented actress took down the head of both WB and NBC/Universal. That woman must have one seriously magical p****.

[Konja7]

Sure, the problem is there is level of flaw to character like recklessness, certain disregard for rules, short-temperedness... Etc that's associated. There is also the inherent solitude . If you round him up, have him think he knows better and should be preaching you naturally have a superdad. That's the general tendency with the character. Fans eagerly want the character to tame itself and remove the dangerous aspect far too quickly. They wrinkle their nose when superman is reckless. For example, seeing this as out of character.



They do it as well. Superman becomes this flying paragon of virtues and is seen in that context only. And then what? We hit dead end?Moreover, it takes hell of a time for a person to develop and somepeople don't change or shoulders change . Superman should have that dangerous aspect to the character,not just the kind-caring aspect. If you don't you are left with a bland character. Finally,virtues and vices are interchangeable to begin with depending on the context. Virtues can become vices and vice-versa. Superman's recklessness makes him act. It can solve problems and get him into problems. If you remove that, he doesn't act and is entirely complacent. He will be well rounded. But, would lose that sharpness as character.So, sometimes that kind of negotiations shouldn't happen at all. But, that's what happens. Fans make a fuss about superman being "dick" . But, Can you imagine a superman who doesn't break chains or a luffy that doesn't punch a strong wall?
I guess, what i am saying is. Superman is a wild white wolf. He shouldn't get too tame.

I think we need to define what we understand by Superdad, so people could say if they want that or not from the character.

[manwhohaseverything]

I think we need to define what we understand by Superdad, so people could say if they want that or not from the character.

Superdad is this dude done in a bad way for me.The guy that preaches morality like you are 10 year old in a condescending manner.It's essentially, superman's "hey! Kids" routine

Essentially, nonsense like this.

I am sorry. Clark is a jackass. He is guy with everything going for him lecturing a guy struggling to keep himself sane and do some good in the process. Clark's moral platitudes he can keep to himself. He talks alot yet he says very little and does even less.As if clark does anything to substantially help bruce get over his trauma and whatever he goes through when putting on that suit. Ever.