DC Extended Universe (POST NO SPOILERS HERE!)

[TooFlyToFail]

They did give Snyder free reign. It is after giving him free reign that they were shocked when he gave them a movie over three hours... several parts weren't in the script. That is why there was the UE versus the theatrical cut. That is why they didn't give Patty Jenkins free reign. They were nervous.

Not really. He signed up for a MoS trilogy, but was told to make the DoJ as the 2nd movie.

[TooFlyToFail]

Copied from another thread. 'DC Characters loosing appeal'.


Okay its time to reflect and be honest. To your question the answer is both yes and no.

No DC characters don't have that mass appeal. The only characters who have right now are Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. They are too ingrained in pop culture that to think that they are irrelevant is laughable.

Let us be honest. I think you have love for Zack Snyder. And its perfectly fine. Art is subjective in nature. I looked at the poll of JL. About 9 people till now including me have said that Justice League is one of the best comic book movies of all time. This figure was a lot more with BvS. If you wish to do so check that thread again. There's a screen shot posted there. I was not there to vote last year but that number was 42. I stand by my decision as should everyone else. When something works for me just as well as Dark Knight and Avengers why shall i change my opinion? I have my opinion just as the others have theirs.

The point is that while art is subjective one can't ignore the commercial aspect. The fact that the films are made to be box office successes. To do this one can't simply rely on the subjectivity but also something objective. Metrics like Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic and Cinemascore do not lie. Zack Snyder is a wonderful film maker. He is a visionary and has love and passion for what he does. But what he does appeals to a few people. Not the majority. And when you are looking for box office success you can't ignore it. No film series is critic proof. Look at Transformers. They kept earning 1 billion dollars while their scores were really low. But now the earnings have gone down. Here's a link.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/fr...rs#tab=summary

The truth is these scores fairly reflect what is audience sentiment. Here's a link of how they work.

https://screenrant.com/rotten-tomato...ore-explained/

Read this. Think it over and then some DC fan can cry bias. Discuss and remove this cry and confusion here. Let me put this straight. DC has put three back to back 'divisive' films if i am being kind. While i like BvS to an extent, its still terrible. How do i know? The RT is 27%. The box office drop was 69% next weekend. It ran with hardly any competition but it earned just about two times its worldwide opening weekend. Its Cinemascore is B.

http://in.ign.com/batman-v-superman-...ore-as-catwoma

Audiences thought it was as terrible as Catwoman. Just as entertaining as Green Lantern which only recouped its budget. Why are drops and multipliers important? Why is Cinemascore important? That indicates repeat audiences. No film can break a billion without repeat audiences. People will love it. They will tell others. They will come again and again with friends and family. That's how you break 1 billion dollars. Wonder Woman was like that. It kept earning and earning. She had phenomenal legs.

So, the truth is when you make 'divisive' movies three times in a row people loose trust. That's one important factor.

Another reason is behind the scenes. All those unpleasant news including reshoots and others which seemed to keep coming one after another means audiences perception was soured. Why trust a product like this? There was also this late embargo which was made worse by that 'See It/Skip It' stunt which is not favorable at all. Do you know that while the embargo was removed at Wednesday the actual RT score was to be revealed at 12.01 am or something like that. But even after that the scores were not shown at Rotten Tomatoes website. There was the link to that Facebook show and no reviews were posted. Here's an article.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc.../#73ae39aa5683

Its suspicious. It might not be malicious but it can create suspicion. When there's so much behind the scenes stuff like Affleck, Joss Whedon and then reshoots by Whedon it does not inspire confidence.

I feel the marketing was not done well too. Do you know why BvS earned 166 million dollars in US in first weekend and around 434 million dollars worldwide? Its because people were interested to see Batman and Superman. Say what you will Superman is popular all around the world. He is not just any hero. His symbol is among the most popular symbols around the planet. His origin movie Man of Steel was divisive. It had 55% RT. But guess what it still earned 667 million dollars worldwide. At that point only Spider-man's origin film had earned more and Spider-man is acclaimed. Its score is 89%. Iron Man earned 589 million at 94%. Wonder Woman earned 819 million at 92%. Back in 2005 Batman Begins the origin film earned 376. Superman Returns a sequel to a film 20 years ago and which lacks any proper action sequences earned more then Begins.

Superman may not be the top tog. But he is a big thing. Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are icons. They hid him in the marketing. Its not a good idea. All of us knew he was coming back. What was the point in hiding him?

The trailers and promotion were generic affairs. At least Suicide Squad had something quirky and exotic going on. It was eye catching and attractive. Thus, 135 million. This film tried to push a team up of DC heroes. A team up is nothing new. It has a feel of been there done that. There is nothing special in uniting heroes anymore. And people either did not know or did not care for the superheroes like Flash, Cyborg and Aquaman.

There are more reasons but i feel this catches the major ones.


At this moment Marvel heroes appeal to the masses. They make good to excellent films. Marvel has earned the trust of the people and have not turned it down. When they promise there is a fight between Iron Man and Captain America, this is precisely what you will get. The structure may be similar but Marvel has taken risks. Ant Man-heist film. Doctor Strange- Magic. (Did you observe that how long they took before introducing magic? It would have clashed with the sci-fi heroes like Iron Man, Captain America and Hulk. They plan so much). GoG-Star Wars. Say what you will the films are enjoyed by everyone at the theaters. Fans and non-fans alike. Except for some DC fanboys who seem to hate it. But that's okay. All are entitled to their opinion. And the opinion in the mind of the public is Marvel films are always an enjoyable experience in theaters. They vote with their wallets. They voted Wonder Woman too. But that is an exception.

So, as long as they don't make films which can appeal to everyone they won't succeed. That's the simple truth. Or else the graph goes down. BvS-166, SS-135, WW-103, JL-96. The only time it increased was from MoS to BvS. But that was because there was something delicious and exotic something never done before: Batman and Superman together. Also, the first movie of Wonder Woman. When you give consistently good results the numbers increase not decrease. Even if they decrease they have an inherent stability.

The characters have a history. I am posting how they managed to get Superman right in the first attempt. I am not dishing MoS. I have defended it. Its a good film. But try to look what is the thinking behind Superman The Movie. I think they did not think this through with respect to Superman and later DCEU as a whole. (For instance Man of Steel is supposed to be Superman in the real world. Fine. Its new. One shall not be dogmatically attached to the past. Look at Superman Returns. But its hard to believe this is the real world when after so much destruction the film ends within 5 minutes and the city seems to be doing fine. If there is so much destruction what is the aftermath? Don't tell me its BvS. We did not get MoS 2. It was repurposed to BvS. That's the thing with the film and DCEU as a whole. There are lots of good ideas. But they don't follow the ideas through. Leaving an unfulfilled experience at best for most people while hatred the worst.)

Here's the video.



Again i am repeating. It may or may not be good to have a different tone and trying things differently from comics. Sin is in not thinking it as a whole. Making a film which appeals to everyone and be of a reasonably good quality that people keep coming again and again is difficult. Maybe they should not have went with Snyder in the beginning. His Superman was too divisive. Iron Man on the other hand was a runaway success. Perhaps, they could have changed course after the BvS debacle. People would have thought wrt JL 'This is the sequel of BvS. Not interested.' Or maybe let him make his Man Of Steel sequel. And not made it a door for JL by introducing Batman and Wonder Woman. Of course i think that trying to go too far away from Superman of Donner was a mistake. Stick too close its boring. Go too far it is divisive. They always kept a reactive mode throughout. Marvel has Avengers let us make JL as fast as possible. BvS was not liked by people make things lighter.

I don't care for Superman the Movie because the movie literally skips all his development as a person, and he's Supes after a timeskip. Don't get why people find it interesting.

[TooFlyToFail]

Probably the best video essay I have seen.

I can post a video essay saying the movie is good, what's your point?

[byrd156]

I can post a video essay saying the movie is good, what's your point?

If you watch it you'll get my point.

[Baggie_Saiyan]

Not really. He signed up for a MoS trilogy, but was told to make the DoJ as the 2nd movie.

Yup, he wanted to bring Batman in as the "villain" for MoS2 but WB in their infinite wisdom thought this was a perfect opportunity to start a CU so BvS ended up getting delayed... (Mostly Due to visuals... In others they wanted to shove Doomsday in there) Terrio comes to rewrite the script to mould what WB wanted, Snyder does what they want, they then cut his film up a month before release.

Gotta love Warner.

[TooFlyToFail]

If you watch it you'll get my point.

I've watched that video already. I agree, and disagree, with parts of it.

Mostly disagree.

Now how about you watch these two videos, that share a different perspective.

[TooFlyToFail]

There's also this video which points out how the world in BvS actually matters, when compared to CW.

[manofsteel1979]

I don't care for Superman the Movie because the movie literally skips all his development as a person, and he's Supes after a timeskip. Don't get why people find it interesting.

Because nostalgia gogles can blind anyone to the faults of something and then inversely blind that same person to the good in something new that isn't what one grew up with.

MOS and the Donner Superman movies are both equally great and both equally flawed in different ways. To hold either on a pedestal is foolish and a big part of the reason Superman has struggled in all media for a couple decades now.



I've said it before elsewhere and I still believe it, the first Donner SUPERMAN movie is both the best and the worst thing to happen to the character across media. It made comic book superhero films a legit genre and was a good first step ( with the 1989 Batman movie the next significant step) . It was a great distillation of the character up to that point, but it was an adaptation of the original source material.

The problem is that adaptation has dominated so much of Superman's portrayle in media since that it has created a somewhat false,expectation of the character that he be portrayed a certain way and his universe portrayed a certain way and anything that falls outside of that wheelhouse even slightly is deemed " not muh Superman" or otherwise rejected, even if it is consistent with past alternate interpretations. That it a prescription for one Ultimate outcome... Stagnation.

[TooFlyToFail]

Because nostalgia gogles can blind anyone to the faults of something and then inversely blind that same person to the good in something new that isn't what one grew up with.

MOS and the Donner Superman movies are both equally great and both equally flawed in different ways. To hold either on a pedestal is foolish and a big part of the reason Superman has struggled in all media for a couple decades now.



I've said it before elsewhere and I still believe it, the first Donner SUPERMAN movie is both the best and the worst thing to happen to the character across media. It made comic book superhero films a legit genre and was a good first step ( with the 1989 Batman movie the next significant step) . It was a great distillation of the character up to that point, but it was an adaptation of the original source material.

The problem is that adaptation has dominated so much of Superman's portrayle in media since that it has created a somewhat false,expectation of the character that he be portrayed a certain way and his universe portrayed a certain way and anything that falls outside of that wheelhouse even slightly is deemed " not muh Superman" or otherwise rejected, even if it is consistent with past alternate interpretations. That it a prescription for one Ultimate outcome... Stagnation.

Basically. It gets people talking about how Diana was portrayed in WW, as how they all need to be portrayed, with no regard to context.

Clark is unsure of himself, because he lives in a world full of suspision, and corruption. His parent were cautious with him because of how this world can turn on, and use people.

Bruce became unhinged because his 20 year war was futile, and the losses were getting too much for him. He feels powerless in his own city, let alone the world, and now there's alien invasions? Of course he becomes more brutal, and dangerous. He's desperate, and he was already an overly cautious man to start.

But, nope, all that context is ignored.

[Soubhagya]

I don't care for Superman the Movie because the movie literally skips all his development as a person, and he's Supes after a timeskip. Don't get why people find it interesting.

Because you don't find it interesting doesn't mean others don't. See you can have an opinion. That's fine but there are other opinions. I think this is one of the best superhero films of all time. I watched it as an adult when i grew up with awesome films like Sam Raimi's Spider-man and Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy and it still holds up really well.

You may not like it but i love it. And in its time it was a phenomenal success. The point i was making is about intent and execution. Snyder's films of DCEU has wonderful intent but poor execution. Results are there to see.

One can disregard any good work. I may find Citizen Kane boring but that's an opinion. Which is fine. I find it boring and its boring to me. Not necessarily for everyone.


I like Man Of Steel. There are many good things here. While i prefer Donner and i still believe that, his kind of Superman can work even now by making some changes, i can see that MoS is a pretty good film.

The problem began with BvS. Instead of trying to make a proper film the intent was to respond to Marvel. The result is a terrible film which i kind of like. Its a film which has something meaningful too, seeing that there are a lot of fans who keep on fighting for it. I admire that. But it did not work. Fair and square. A clamor for return to classical takes is inevitable seeing that Marvel is successful by accepting that they are comic book films which respect the source material instead of DC which thinks it respects the source material but keeps running as far from it.

[Carabas]

One can disregard any good work. I may find Citizen Kane boring but that's an opinion. Which is fine. I find it boring and its boring to me. Not necessarily for everyone.

The reason why Citizen Kane is so important is because it premiered a bunch of stuff that had never or rarely done before in a movie, but that e don't think twice of nowadays.
Like non-lineair story-telling. Or ceilings.

[Soubhagya]

The reason why Citizen Kane is so important is because it premiered a bunch of stuff that had never or rarely done before in a movie, but that e don't think twice of nowadays.
Like non-lineair story-telling. Or ceilings.

And still keeps topping those charts with best films of all time. My point was there are varied opinions. There are fans here who don't like Superman The Movie i on the other hand love it. And just because some fans feel its a poor film does not make it poor. It was and still is the gold standard of comic book films.

I, for one, have trouble viewing returning to the 1978-2012 status quo for DC superhero films as anything to be excited about. Sure, there were many good films in that era, but they were never about a DC UNIVERSE...just DC superheroes in isolation. Didn't we get enough of that from 1978-2012? Is the concept of a vibrant DCU in cinema really that impossible to achieve?

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

I am bored with such a future too. Honestly speaking i would watch only the Superman film. I am first and foremost a Superman fan. WW 2 is for sure because i loved WW. And Matt Reeves Batman. And that's it. I will check any other film if it gets great reviews and/or fans would recommend it.

WB shall be wise. There's an example of a failure in Dark Universe. There's a success in MCU, the highest earning franchise of all time. There's proof of success and there's proof of failure in front of their own eyes.

There are many ways to do this. I can give an option. Reboot. Start right from the beginning. You have two of the greatest superheros of all time. Batman and Superman. Batman always earns money. Batman Begins after the car crash that was Batman and Robin earned 375 million dollars back then when such numbers for superhero films were excellent. Superman always earns money. People forget that for a film with mixed reception Man of Steel after the poor SR, earned 668 million dollars. Of which 291 was stateside which is nothing to sneeze at, while worldwide it earned 378 million dollars. For reference that's more then the worldwide earnings of the first Captain America. When you have Superman and Batman in the arsenal there is nothing to fear. Make a few good to great films starting with Batman and Superman. Let the other characters get standalone films. But these characters are in the same world. But the world building shall be bonus material not plot points. Look from 52 minutes from the video i posted. It mentions how the marvel cinematic universe is a shared cultural experience which transcends all borders. I am from India and i am looking forward to Avengers IW. That's phenomenal considering the fact that i did not know that there's an actual team named Avengers when it came out in 2012.



And towards the end of the video specifically from 1:19:00 there's something i totally agree with. DC shall not be ashamed of itself.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

There's also this video which points out how the world in BvS actually matters, when compared to CW.

This video doesn't touch on the main issue at all: that Civil War's narrative was cohesive and well-structured, while BvS's was not. Giving the spotlight to normal people doesn't really matter if the story you're telling isn't that good. Civil War's conflict between Tony and Steve made sense and was well-developed. The conflict in BvS was rushed and made little sense at all.

Plus, you gotta love a video that glosses over the fact that the entire reason for the fight between the main characters is the fact that normal people are backlashing against their recklessness. The grieving mother who confronts Tony, Zemo who lost his family, and even T'Chaka, who was at the UN because of the Wakandans killed in the blast are all examples of civilians who have their role in the Civil War narrative.

[Amadeus Arkham]

[Jokerz79]

Did Rotten Tomatoes hurt Justice League? Probably but that's not the critics fault for giving their opinions and Justice League like most DCEU films had bigger issues.

1. there are with both BvS and Justice League storyline issues and with Justice League CGI issues.

2. The DC Trinity are beyond comic book characters they're Americana in the United States and people have preconceived opinions on them and how they should be interpreted this is an issue Marvel doesn't have to deal with and many people disagreed with Snyder's versions.

3. Snyder yeah I feel Snyder was an issue because IMO he's a guy who takes great source materials and makes good movies. I always go back to his first film Dawn of the Dead it's good a great remake in fact but it has none of the depth that Romero's Classic does.

4. Fool me once. Wonder Woman was a stand alone film but Justice League definitely was a directed "sequel" to BvS down to directed with the same guy with the same cast if someone didn't like BvS why go see Justice League?

While I liked Justice League it had issues it had it's own issues and inherited issues and nothing critics said was ever going to fix that.