I'd be lying if I said part of me didn't want to see this movie just to see how much of be train wreck it was. The only thing stopping me is the part of me that doesn't want to support the current ethos of the DC film universe.
Man of Steel would've been a much better movie if it wasn't a Superman movie
It would have been better but probably not by that much. The film still has a lot of glaring problems in its structure, character development, and plot.
The ideas aren't developed enough for it to be a good sci-fi movie. The characters are bland, although Michael Shannon's over the top acting is pretty amusing at times. The flashbacks don't really connect to anything or tie into any major themes. There are some pretty glaring plot problems that could have been fixed rather easily with a few lines of dialogue or extra scenes.
I think it probably would've been even more incomprehensible as anything other than a Superman movie. As it is, the film only works to the extent that you decide Superman is altruistic at heart, because he's Superman. If you take away the fact that he's Superman, that kind of problem infects every other aspect of the movie, because Snyder is bad at world-building. Supe's parents' motivation for sending him to Earth becomes even more obtuse, the entire opening sequence becomes more arbitrary and out of place, the existence of the Fortress of Solitude becomes increasingly implausible, the fact that Lois Lane is even a character in this movie becomes weird...
As it is, half this stuff works just because you've seen it before and you expect it to be that way. Oh hey, Lois Lane? Yeah, okay, she's Superman's girlfriend. Oh, random ice fortress? Right, that's Superman's summer home.
I'm still holding out hope that BvS is going to be good, or at least interesting. Nobody expected Watchmen to be good, and Snyder somehow made it work.
I mean, I'm expecting it to be thoroughly broken, but stranger things have happened.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
At the very least, I hope they'll make Lex Luthor a more subtle and insidious villain. Rather than someone who comes out vocally against Superman, it would be interesting if Lex tries to befriend Superman to learn his secrets and persuade him to his way of thinking. That would fit more with the less experienced and secure Superman.
As much as I'd love Brave and the Bold OUTRAGEOUS Aquaman, I think the Superfriends Aquaman is still culturally dominant, ergo the need to get away from that ASAP.
If they just channel the JL/JLU Aquaman into Momoa's presence and performance, they'll be just fine.
Him being in the film to begin with, along with the 2314 other people they are apparently cramming in, is another matter entirely. But making Aquaman an enjoyable, serious character has been done thoroughly and well in the past - not worried on that front.
We're talking about introducing Batman, having him develop a meaningful and realistic relationship with Superman, Lex Luthor and his big villain plot, and fitting in the other Justice League members while ensuring that they're not just glorified cameos and/or totally distracting. In about 2 hours.
I mean, X-Men Days of Future Past shows that it's not impossible to juggle a lot of material, but they'll really need a strong point of focus.
I get the feeling Bats and Supes will get most screen time, with smaller scenes for Wonder Woman, Cyborg, and Aquaman. They even said first time you see WW she's not suited up. I bet they loosely follow the New 52 JL origin, making Cyborg a core team member from the start and teasing Green Lantern or Martian Manhunter.
I am going in with low expectations since I was a little underwhelmed by Man of Steel. If they can handle Batman and Superman on screen together well and don't shoehorn in too many characters, I believe it can be good. I just won't expect it to be.
Perhaps it's something along the lines of Batman assembling a team to deal with Superman, having seen the destruction he caused in Man of Steel.
He knows who Wonderwoman really is, and having been recruited she calls upon her mythic past to suggest they get Aquaman who is the closest person she knows of who can rival Superman's strength?
Meanwhile superman's plot is running alongside this, taking a slightly more minor role to start with but setting up the second half of the film, introducing the main villain they'll inevitably have to team up to deal with.
So Batman and Wonderwoman taking centre stage for the first part, with superman coming in to oppose them at the end of the second act, then joining with them for the third against the real baddie at the end? Seems to be the more obvious way to go if you're going to have Wonderwoman being a main character who's only introduced in this movie, have her be a major part of Batman's bit rather than some completely separate storyline going on at the same time. Think it'd probably also be a lot easier to write a story where Superman is the adversary in the background, who then becomes the inspiring symbol at the end. You'd then have the film going from Dark and Gritty at the beginning, towards being brighter and more hopeful at the very end - so if you were watching these as a series, it's the turning point towards the more 'adventurery' style of stories that the wider cast of characters needs compared to the previous more grounded Batman/Arrow stories.
The movie will open with a speed dating scene attended by all the Justice League members in civilian clothes. They soon realise there's only one woman there and become mortal enemies in order to win her heart.
Perhaps it's something along the lines of Batman assembling a team to deal with Superman, having seen the destruction he caused in Man of Steel.
He knows who Wonderwoman really is, and having been recruited she calls upon her mythic past to suggest they get Aquaman who is the closest person she knows of who can rival Superman's strength?
Meanwhile superman's plot is running alongside this, taking a slightly more minor role to start with but setting up the second half of the film, introducing the main villain they'll inevitably have to team up to deal with.
So Batman and Wonderwoman taking centre stage for the first part, with superman coming in to oppose them at the end of the second act, then joining with them for the third against the real baddie at the end? Seems to be the more obvious way to go if you're going to have Wonderwoman being a main character who's only introduced in this movie, have her be a major part of Batman's bit rather than some completely separate storyline going on at the same time. Think it'd probably also be a lot easier to write a story where Superman is the adversary in the background, who then becomes the inspiring symbol at the end. You'd then have the film going from Dark and Gritty at the beginning, towards being brighter and more hopeful at the very end - so if you were watching these as a series, it's the turning point towards the more 'adventurery' style of stories that the wider cast of characters needs compared to the previous more grounded Batman/Arrow stories.
Not a bad idea.
Have Wayne take the role of old styled Lex Luthor. Vocal opposition to this new demi-god that showed up and destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure.
Show him in the bat cave researching. Lex Luthor becomes more like Wayne of old, trying to align himself with Supes and say hey the world hates you, but if you listen to me maybe we can do something about that. Him being a new age business tycoon (technology) you can set him up to be developing some sort of mind control device so that there's actually a conflict between Batman and Supes. Show some scenes regarding a reallllllly big bad guy (darkseid or doomsday maybe?) and how it's a pending conflict on Earth.
Make superman and batman do their battle, batman discovers the first remnants of kryptonite, uses it to disable Supes and remove the mind control. Maybe show Doomsday landing on earth and wreaking havoc in like Russia or something.
Show Batman and Superman assembling a team of heroes, because it's earth's only hope.
I'd be okay with switching out Doomsday for those Alien things that were in the JL cartoon too, but I think this movie wants to follow The Dark Knight Returns' storyline more than anything. Luthor would be taking the place of Reagan in this setting because TDKR made no sense in terms of Superman. Not that it made much sense in a whole lot of the story (lol stealing sunlight from plants, supramen plz).
Maybe as the final scene have Batman and Superman discussing how to deal with the threat and Superman using what he did in MoS as advocating that death isn't the solution to dealing with Doomsday because of the heavy cost it carries to the person who needs to do it. Of course make Batman dissent, this is going to be a badass Batman, he argues that Doomsday needs to be dealth with this way, although it's terrible, because you can't just lock him up, and if you don't kill him, he'll hurt more people than he already has. Then cut away.
That's how I'd do this movie anyways.
I just hope Batman beats the shit out of Mutants in a Gotham that's in chaos. I want him to use the "You don't get it, do you son? This isn't a mud hole..." line.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
I'm most curious about how they're even going to get to a place where "suddenly there are superheroes everywhere" feels plausible.
Avengers, watched in a vacuum, worked because we accepted that the world has been seeing all these weird super-shenanigans for years, and these guys all seemed to know about each other already. It wasn't like Iron Man was all, "Holy shit, a Norse god, where'd you come from?! OMG a super-soldier with a magic shield, wtf is going on?" It was like, "Oh yeah, I've heard about you. Nice cape."
In a meta-context, Avengers worked because Marvel had been setting up the frame story of SHIELD and the Avengers project over the course of four previous movies, so we weren't just going in there blind, we'd seen all this building up.
So what would Avengers have looked like if Marvel had just given us Iron Man, but with the whole SHIELD subplot removed? Well, probably really weird. You go from "There's this one extraordinary guy in a suit" to "it's raining superheroes" with no breath in between. And that's what it seems like BvS is trying to do.
The world of MoS, as best I can tell, had never seen any weird superhero stuff before. They did not seem familiar with the notion of this guy with a cape and a secret identity running around saving people. So we can assume that Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Batman, and whoever else they're throwing in there are unknown to the general public. Which means they're all going to suddenly turn up for the first time in BvS, which will make one wonder: why now? Why are there suddenly no fewer than four superheroes turning up all at the same time? (Discounting the obvious answer of "We need there to suddenly be a bunch of superheroes because we want to make a Justice League movie.")
I'm thinking it might almost be more difficult to do the JL movie after MoS. If MoS didn't exist, you could start up BvS by showing that these heroes had been around for a while, kind of in the shadows but not completely unnoticed. It would've solved the "where did everyone come from all of a sudden, and why now?" problem in a way that might be harder to pull off now that MoS is out there.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+2
Options
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
edited August 2014
Well, one thing they could do that might be cheaper (And faster) than creating new movies for each hero, especially when they seem to suck like the Green Lantern movie, is use the CW Flash and Arrow shows to introduce them through cameos or other-hero based episodes. A little like when Batman TAS just had a Jonah Hex episode with barely any Batman for some reason. Someone give someone else a blank check, and you get slightly more grounded heroes like Bats, The Question, etc. into Arrow as a kind of buildup to the movie, and put the more fantastical dudes in the Flash show, like Aquaman, Supes, Wonder Woman, The Martian Manhunter, Green Lantern, Hawkgirl/man, Doctor Fate, etc.
It would be better than nothing. Also because I want more people to watch Arrow and Flash. And I would get a nerdgasm from it.
Well, one thing they could do that might be cheaper (And faster) than creating new movies for each hero, especially when they seem to suck like the Green Lantern movie, is use the CW Flash and Arrow shows to introduce them through cameos or other-hero based episodes. A little like when Batman TAS just had a Jonah Hex episode with barely any Batman for some reason. Someone give someone else a blank check, and you get slightly more grounded heroes like Bats, The Question, etc. into Arrow as a kind of buildup to the movie, and put the more fantastical dudes in the Flash show, like Aquaman, Supes, Wonder Woman, The Martian Manhunter, Green Lantern, Hawkgirl/man, Doctor Fate, etc.
It would be better than nothing. Also because I want more people to watch Arrow and Flash. And I would get a nerdgasm from it.
I'm glad they're not doing that. The shows are doing really, really good stuff - and they'd become under the movie division's authority, not the other way around. You'd be giving Snyder and Goyer power over those continuities, which I'd rather not have. The Timm-verse was awesome since the people in charge knew what they were doing and respected the source material. Goyer thinks She-Hulk is a porn star and hates Martian Manhunter.
If they want a Justice League movie, just do a Justice League movie. Hit the ground running, no origins, in media res opening showing what everyone does, everyone knows each other and has been working together a while, and it's just a world with superheroes in them.
Like any other team based ensemble cast movie, except instead of performing a heist on a casino or whatever they punch the badguys or whatever.
If they want a Justice League movie, just do a Justice League movie. Hit the ground running, no origins, in media res opening showing what everyone does, everyone knows each other and has been working together a while, and it's just a world with superheroes in them.
Like any other team based ensemble cast movie, except instead of performing a heist on a casino or whatever they punch the badguys or whatever.
Nah, do what Marvel did. WB/DC will punish the characters for its failure, and they will fail at this juncture. We've waited long enough for a Wonder Woman solo movie, when Justice League fails they'd put her on the backburner for a decade or longer until she gets another chance - if she's lucky. WB/DC has no fucking idea what to do with Wonder Woman, that's part of the reasons why she's been missing in action in the media in solo projects and she gets the shaft when she does financially ok when they'd accept going forward with a male character, like the Wonder Woman animated movie.
I'm most curious about how they're even going to get to a place where "suddenly there are superheroes everywhere" feels plausible.
Avengers, watched in a vacuum, worked because we accepted that the world has been seeing all these weird super-shenanigans for years, and these guys all seemed to know about each other already. It wasn't like Iron Man was all, "Holy shit, a Norse god, where'd you come from?! OMG a super-soldier with a magic shield, wtf is going on?" It was like, "Oh yeah, I've heard about you. Nice cape."
In a meta-context, Avengers worked because Marvel had been setting up the frame story of SHIELD and the Avengers project over the course of four previous movies, so we weren't just going in there blind, we'd seen all this building up.
So what would Avengers have looked like if Marvel had just given us Iron Man, but with the whole SHIELD subplot removed? Well, probably really weird. You go from "There's this one extraordinary guy in a suit" to "it's raining superheroes" with no breath in between. And that's what it seems like BvS is trying to do.
The world of MoS, as best I can tell, had never seen any weird superhero stuff before. They did not seem familiar with the notion of this guy with a cape and a secret identity running around saving people. So we can assume that Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Batman, and whoever else they're throwing in there are unknown to the general public. Which means they're all going to suddenly turn up for the first time in BvS, which will make one wonder: why now? Why are there suddenly no fewer than four superheroes turning up all at the same time? (Discounting the obvious answer of "We need there to suddenly be a bunch of superheroes because we want to make a Justice League movie.")
I'm thinking it might almost be more difficult to do the JL movie after MoS. If MoS didn't exist, you could start up BvS by showing that these heroes had been around for a while, kind of in the shadows but not completely unnoticed. It would've solved the "where did everyone come from all of a sudden, and why now?" problem in a way that might be harder to pull off now that MoS is out there.
Does this film exist in the same continuity as the Dark knight Trilogy? Cos yeah, that's gonna be challenging to pull off.
Well, one thing they could do that might be cheaper (And faster) than creating new movies for each hero, especially when they seem to suck like the Green Lantern movie, is use the CW Flash and Arrow shows to introduce them through cameos or other-hero based episodes. A little like when Batman TAS just had a Jonah Hex episode with barely any Batman for some reason. Someone give someone else a blank check, and you get slightly more grounded heroes like Bats, The Question, etc. into Arrow as a kind of buildup to the movie, and put the more fantastical dudes in the Flash show, like Aquaman, Supes, Wonder Woman, The Martian Manhunter, Green Lantern, Hawkgirl/man, Doctor Fate, etc.
It would be better than nothing. Also because I want more people to watch Arrow and Flash. And I would get a nerdgasm from it.
I'm glad they're not doing that. The shows are doing really, really good stuff - and they'd become under the movie division's authority, not the other way around. You'd be giving Snyder and Goyer power over those continuities, which I'd rather not have. The Timm-verse was awesome since the people in charge knew what they were doing and respected the source material. Goyer thinks She-Hulk is a porn star and hates Martian Manhunter.
It is probably unreasonable of me to be this angry that David Goyer has a job writing superhero films when he hate superheroes and the people who like them.
If they want a Justice League movie, just do a Justice League movie. Hit the ground running, no origins, in media res opening showing what everyone does, everyone knows each other and has been working together a while, and it's just a world with superheroes in them.
Like any other team based ensemble cast movie, except instead of performing a heist on a casino or whatever they punch the badguys or whatever.
Nah, do what Marvel did. WB/DC will punish the characters for its failure, and they will fail at this juncture. We've waited long enough for a Wonder Woman solo movie, when Justice League fails they'd put her on the backburner for a decade or longer until she gets another chance - if she's lucky. WB/DC has no fucking idea what to do with Wonder Woman, that's part of the reasons why she's been missing in action in the media in solo projects and she gets the shaft when she does financially ok when they'd accept going forward with a male character, like the Wonder Woman animated movie.
I was going to say "there's no way this movie doesn't make bargeloads of cash even if it's horrible," but it's entirely possible it will make bargeloads of cash, with execs expecting to make Death Stars of cash. So yeah, it could "fail" like the last Spider-Man movie.
If they want a Justice League movie, just do a Justice League movie. Hit the ground running, no origins, in media res opening showing what everyone does, everyone knows each other and has been working together a while, and it's just a world with superheroes in them.
Like any other team based ensemble cast movie, except instead of performing a heist on a casino or whatever they punch the badguys or whatever.
Nah, do what Marvel did. WB/DC will punish the characters for its failure, and they will fail at this juncture. We've waited long enough for a Wonder Woman solo movie, when Justice League fails they'd put her on the backburner for a decade or longer until she gets another chance - if she's lucky. WB/DC has no fucking idea what to do with Wonder Woman, that's part of the reasons why she's been missing in action in the media in solo projects and she gets the shaft when she does financially ok when they'd accept going forward with a male character, like the Wonder Woman animated movie.
I was going to say "there's no way this movie doesn't make bargeloads of cash even if it's horrible," but it's entirely possible it will make bargeloads of cash, with execs expecting to make Death Stars of cash. So yeah, it could "fail" like the last Spider-Man movie.
I'm talking about failing like Green Lantern. WB isn't bulletproof with Superman and Batman. They're losing ground to Marvel with each movie Marvel makes.
I'm most curious about how they're even going to get to a place where "suddenly there are superheroes everywhere" feels plausible.
Avengers, watched in a vacuum, worked because we accepted that the world has been seeing all these weird super-shenanigans for years, and these guys all seemed to know about each other already. It wasn't like Iron Man was all, "Holy shit, a Norse god, where'd you come from?! OMG a super-soldier with a magic shield, wtf is going on?" It was like, "Oh yeah, I've heard about you. Nice cape."
In a meta-context, Avengers worked because Marvel had been setting up the frame story of SHIELD and the Avengers project over the course of four previous movies, so we weren't just going in there blind, we'd seen all this building up.
So what would Avengers have looked like if Marvel had just given us Iron Man, but with the whole SHIELD subplot removed? Well, probably really weird. You go from "There's this one extraordinary guy in a suit" to "it's raining superheroes" with no breath in between. And that's what it seems like BvS is trying to do.
The world of MoS, as best I can tell, had never seen any weird superhero stuff before. They did not seem familiar with the notion of this guy with a cape and a secret identity running around saving people. So we can assume that Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Batman, and whoever else they're throwing in there are unknown to the general public. Which means they're all going to suddenly turn up for the first time in BvS, which will make one wonder: why now? Why are there suddenly no fewer than four superheroes turning up all at the same time? (Discounting the obvious answer of "We need there to suddenly be a bunch of superheroes because we want to make a Justice League movie.")
I'm thinking it might almost be more difficult to do the JL movie after MoS. If MoS didn't exist, you could start up BvS by showing that these heroes had been around for a while, kind of in the shadows but not completely unnoticed. It would've solved the "where did everyone come from all of a sudden, and why now?" problem in a way that might be harder to pull off now that MoS is out there.
I actually don't think Avengers works in a vacuum. By itself, cut off from the other MCU films, it's rather a mess. All the characters are shallow. Cap and Tony maybe get some characterization. But Thor shows up as almost a literal "deus ex machina" and his only relation to the plot... is his relation to Loki. Banner's repeated mentions of "the other guy" make no sense. And then everybody gets misty eyed and rallies behind the death of somebody you saw for maybe 2 minutes total. The movie is shallow in so many ways... and yet it can be because we already had all that depth take place in other movies. It doesn't have to waste time dealing with or explaining everything, it can just jump right to the good stuff.
BvS is going to make one of two mistakes. Either it realizes its characters are shallow and tries to spend time fleshing them out, but then wastes time doing so and the actual plot suffers. Or it doesn't and tries to pull off what the Avengers did, and now we're wondering who this amazon girl and fish guy are and why they're so important.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
0
Options
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
I wouldn't mind just having a JL movie without any origin stories. Technically, JLU did that in the pilot (Not counting Bats and Supes' series) and gave a logical reason to have an origin for Martian Manhunter, as his origin had everything to do with the enemy in the pilot.
Or hell, having a simple but extremely well done story like Dredd 2012 would work too. No drawn out origins, straight to the point, awesome.
I wouldn't mind just having a JL movie without any origin stories. Technically, JLU did that in the pilot (Not counting Bats and Supes' series) and gave a logical reason to have an origin for Martian Manhunter, as his origin had everything to do with the enemy in the pilot.
JLU was made by professionals above Snyder and Goyer, it being live action is another hurdle the cartoon didn't have to over-come. They have greater freedom with making animation than a live action movie. People's expectations are lower, too. JLU also didn't exist in a vacuum, it grew from the Justice League series that was built on Superman and Batman cartoons. before JLU's first episode that universe was explained with hours of cartoons, making it similar to what Marvel's doing. The only thing we have for the DCCU is Man of Steel, which only explains Superman.
Or hell, having a simple but extremely well done story like Dredd 2012 would work too. No drawn out origins, straight to the point, awesome.
Dredd is a setting that doesn't need that much set up and it was an origin, for Anderson.
I'm most curious about how they're even going to get to a place where "suddenly there are superheroes everywhere" feels plausible.
Avengers, watched in a vacuum, worked because we accepted that the world has been seeing all these weird super-shenanigans for years, and these guys all seemed to know about each other already. It wasn't like Iron Man was all, "Holy shit, a Norse god, where'd you come from?! OMG a super-soldier with a magic shield, wtf is going on?" It was like, "Oh yeah, I've heard about you. Nice cape."
In a meta-context, Avengers worked because Marvel had been setting up the frame story of SHIELD and the Avengers project over the course of four previous movies, so we weren't just going in there blind, we'd seen all this building up.
So what would Avengers have looked like if Marvel had just given us Iron Man, but with the whole SHIELD subplot removed? Well, probably really weird. You go from "There's this one extraordinary guy in a suit" to "it's raining superheroes" with no breath in between. And that's what it seems like BvS is trying to do.
The world of MoS, as best I can tell, had never seen any weird superhero stuff before. They did not seem familiar with the notion of this guy with a cape and a secret identity running around saving people. So we can assume that Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Batman, and whoever else they're throwing in there are unknown to the general public. Which means they're all going to suddenly turn up for the first time in BvS, which will make one wonder: why now? Why are there suddenly no fewer than four superheroes turning up all at the same time? (Discounting the obvious answer of "We need there to suddenly be a bunch of superheroes because we want to make a Justice League movie.")
I'm thinking it might almost be more difficult to do the JL movie after MoS. If MoS didn't exist, you could start up BvS by showing that these heroes had been around for a while, kind of in the shadows but not completely unnoticed. It would've solved the "where did everyone come from all of a sudden, and why now?" problem in a way that might be harder to pull off now that MoS is out there.
I actually don't think Avengers works in a vacuum. By itself, cut off from the other MCU films, it's rather a mess. All the characters are shallow. Cap and Tony maybe get some characterization. But Thor shows up as almost a literal "deus ex machina" and his only relation to the plot... is his relation to Loki. Banner's repeated mentions of "the other guy" make no sense. And then everybody gets misty eyed and rallies behind the death of somebody you saw for maybe 2 minutes total. The movie is shallow in so many ways... and yet it can be because we already had all that depth take place in other movies. It doesn't have to waste time dealing with or explaining everything, it can just jump right to the good stuff.
BvS is going to make one of two mistakes. Either it realizes its characters are shallow and tries to spend time fleshing them out, but then wastes time doing so and the actual plot suffers. Or it doesn't and tries to pull off what the Avengers did, and now we're wondering who this amazon girl and fish guy are and why they're so important.
Banner's shtick gets explained to Cap (and thus the audience) by Coulson.
I'm most curious about how they're even going to get to a place where "suddenly there are superheroes everywhere" feels plausible.
Avengers, watched in a vacuum, worked because we accepted that the world has been seeing all these weird super-shenanigans for years, and these guys all seemed to know about each other already. It wasn't like Iron Man was all, "Holy shit, a Norse god, where'd you come from?! OMG a super-soldier with a magic shield, wtf is going on?" It was like, "Oh yeah, I've heard about you. Nice cape."
In a meta-context, Avengers worked because Marvel had been setting up the frame story of SHIELD and the Avengers project over the course of four previous movies, so we weren't just going in there blind, we'd seen all this building up.
So what would Avengers have looked like if Marvel had just given us Iron Man, but with the whole SHIELD subplot removed? Well, probably really weird. You go from "There's this one extraordinary guy in a suit" to "it's raining superheroes" with no breath in between. And that's what it seems like BvS is trying to do.
The world of MoS, as best I can tell, had never seen any weird superhero stuff before. They did not seem familiar with the notion of this guy with a cape and a secret identity running around saving people. So we can assume that Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Batman, and whoever else they're throwing in there are unknown to the general public. Which means they're all going to suddenly turn up for the first time in BvS, which will make one wonder: why now? Why are there suddenly no fewer than four superheroes turning up all at the same time? (Discounting the obvious answer of "We need there to suddenly be a bunch of superheroes because we want to make a Justice League movie.")
I'm thinking it might almost be more difficult to do the JL movie after MoS. If MoS didn't exist, you could start up BvS by showing that these heroes had been around for a while, kind of in the shadows but not completely unnoticed. It would've solved the "where did everyone come from all of a sudden, and why now?" problem in a way that might be harder to pull off now that MoS is out there.
I actually don't think Avengers works in a vacuum. By itself, cut off from the other MCU films, it's rather a mess. All the characters are shallow. Cap and Tony maybe get some characterization. But Thor shows up as almost a literal "deus ex machina" and his only relation to the plot... is his relation to Loki. Banner's repeated mentions of "the other guy" make no sense. And then everybody gets misty eyed and rallies behind the death of somebody you saw for maybe 2 minutes total. The movie is shallow in so many ways... and yet it can be because we already had all that depth take place in other movies. It doesn't have to waste time dealing with or explaining everything, it can just jump right to the good stuff.
BvS is going to make one of two mistakes. Either it realizes its characters are shallow and tries to spend time fleshing them out, but then wastes time doing so and the actual plot suffers. Or it doesn't and tries to pull off what the Avengers did, and now we're wondering who this amazon girl and fish guy are and why they're so important.
Banner's shtick gets explained to Cap (and thus the audience) by Coulson.
Also if the audience wants to know about the Avengers and Fury they can watch the solo movies they are in. They can't with Dawn of Justice or a Justice League movie that's starting a combined universe.
I don't think it'll be that hard to introduce some of the heroes. The destruction caused by the World Engine could have disturbed Atlantis and roused Aquaman, it could have also released some edritch horror that Wonder Woman and the Amazons have been tasked to keep imprisoned. Cyborg could be created by the government experimenting with Kryptonian technology.
Ironically, Batman is the only hero who doesn't really fit since MoS heavily implies that there were no superheroes before Superman.
Eh, just make Batman an urban legend (or open secret) in Gotham, and you're good to go.
Yeah, if he's de-escalated down to being a detective/vigilante (breaking up muggings, leaving breadcrumbs for police to follow on dead-end cases etc.) then it'd make sense for him not to get involved in a battle involving alien spaceships (hell, even Rises' "The Bat" would be pretty useless during Zod's smackdown of Metropolis). The followup would be Bats thinking "Okay, how do I tackle THESE kinds of villains..." and starting to up his arsenal using Wayne Enterprises.
Posts
I'd be lying if I said part of me didn't want to see this movie just to see how much of be train wreck it was. The only thing stopping me is the part of me that doesn't want to support the current ethos of the DC film universe.
That is what people are going to call the Captain Marvel movie.
squee good for him
Dude definitely has a tendency to be cast as the role of Warrior-King
Which isn't the worst thing in the world to be known
Hancock sequel?
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
I mean, I'm expecting it to be thoroughly broken, but stranger things have happened.
This is what was missing from Man of Steel.
As much as I'd love Brave and the Bold OUTRAGEOUS Aquaman, I think the Superfriends Aquaman is still culturally dominant, ergo the need to get away from that ASAP.
Him being in the film to begin with, along with the 2314 other people they are apparently cramming in, is another matter entirely. But making Aquaman an enjoyable, serious character has been done thoroughly and well in the past - not worried on that front.
We're talking about introducing Batman, having him develop a meaningful and realistic relationship with Superman, Lex Luthor and his big villain plot, and fitting in the other Justice League members while ensuring that they're not just glorified cameos and/or totally distracting. In about 2 hours.
I mean, X-Men Days of Future Past shows that it's not impossible to juggle a lot of material, but they'll really need a strong point of focus.
I am going in with low expectations since I was a little underwhelmed by Man of Steel. If they can handle Batman and Superman on screen together well and don't shoehorn in too many characters, I believe it can be good. I just won't expect it to be.
He knows who Wonderwoman really is, and having been recruited she calls upon her mythic past to suggest they get Aquaman who is the closest person she knows of who can rival Superman's strength?
Meanwhile superman's plot is running alongside this, taking a slightly more minor role to start with but setting up the second half of the film, introducing the main villain they'll inevitably have to team up to deal with.
So Batman and Wonderwoman taking centre stage for the first part, with superman coming in to oppose them at the end of the second act, then joining with them for the third against the real baddie at the end? Seems to be the more obvious way to go if you're going to have Wonderwoman being a main character who's only introduced in this movie, have her be a major part of Batman's bit rather than some completely separate storyline going on at the same time. Think it'd probably also be a lot easier to write a story where Superman is the adversary in the background, who then becomes the inspiring symbol at the end. You'd then have the film going from Dark and Gritty at the beginning, towards being brighter and more hopeful at the very end - so if you were watching these as a series, it's the turning point towards the more 'adventurery' style of stories that the wider cast of characters needs compared to the previous more grounded Batman/Arrow stories.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Not a bad idea.
Have Wayne take the role of old styled Lex Luthor. Vocal opposition to this new demi-god that showed up and destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure.
Show him in the bat cave researching. Lex Luthor becomes more like Wayne of old, trying to align himself with Supes and say hey the world hates you, but if you listen to me maybe we can do something about that. Him being a new age business tycoon (technology) you can set him up to be developing some sort of mind control device so that there's actually a conflict between Batman and Supes. Show some scenes regarding a reallllllly big bad guy (darkseid or doomsday maybe?) and how it's a pending conflict on Earth.
Make superman and batman do their battle, batman discovers the first remnants of kryptonite, uses it to disable Supes and remove the mind control. Maybe show Doomsday landing on earth and wreaking havoc in like Russia or something.
Show Batman and Superman assembling a team of heroes, because it's earth's only hope.
I'd be okay with switching out Doomsday for those Alien things that were in the JL cartoon too, but I think this movie wants to follow The Dark Knight Returns' storyline more than anything. Luthor would be taking the place of Reagan in this setting because TDKR made no sense in terms of Superman. Not that it made much sense in a whole lot of the story (lol stealing sunlight from plants, supramen plz).
Maybe as the final scene have Batman and Superman discussing how to deal with the threat and Superman using what he did in MoS as advocating that death isn't the solution to dealing with Doomsday because of the heavy cost it carries to the person who needs to do it. Of course make Batman dissent, this is going to be a badass Batman, he argues that Doomsday needs to be dealth with this way, although it's terrible, because you can't just lock him up, and if you don't kill him, he'll hurt more people than he already has. Then cut away.
That's how I'd do this movie anyways.
I just hope Batman beats the shit out of Mutants in a Gotham that's in chaos. I want him to use the "You don't get it, do you son? This isn't a mud hole..." line.
Avengers, watched in a vacuum, worked because we accepted that the world has been seeing all these weird super-shenanigans for years, and these guys all seemed to know about each other already. It wasn't like Iron Man was all, "Holy shit, a Norse god, where'd you come from?! OMG a super-soldier with a magic shield, wtf is going on?" It was like, "Oh yeah, I've heard about you. Nice cape."
In a meta-context, Avengers worked because Marvel had been setting up the frame story of SHIELD and the Avengers project over the course of four previous movies, so we weren't just going in there blind, we'd seen all this building up.
So what would Avengers have looked like if Marvel had just given us Iron Man, but with the whole SHIELD subplot removed? Well, probably really weird. You go from "There's this one extraordinary guy in a suit" to "it's raining superheroes" with no breath in between. And that's what it seems like BvS is trying to do.
The world of MoS, as best I can tell, had never seen any weird superhero stuff before. They did not seem familiar with the notion of this guy with a cape and a secret identity running around saving people. So we can assume that Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Batman, and whoever else they're throwing in there are unknown to the general public. Which means they're all going to suddenly turn up for the first time in BvS, which will make one wonder: why now? Why are there suddenly no fewer than four superheroes turning up all at the same time? (Discounting the obvious answer of "We need there to suddenly be a bunch of superheroes because we want to make a Justice League movie.")
I'm thinking it might almost be more difficult to do the JL movie after MoS. If MoS didn't exist, you could start up BvS by showing that these heroes had been around for a while, kind of in the shadows but not completely unnoticed. It would've solved the "where did everyone come from all of a sudden, and why now?" problem in a way that might be harder to pull off now that MoS is out there.
It would be better than nothing. Also because I want more people to watch Arrow and Flash. And I would get a nerdgasm from it.
I'm glad they're not doing that. The shows are doing really, really good stuff - and they'd become under the movie division's authority, not the other way around. You'd be giving Snyder and Goyer power over those continuities, which I'd rather not have. The Timm-verse was awesome since the people in charge knew what they were doing and respected the source material. Goyer thinks She-Hulk is a porn star and hates Martian Manhunter.
http://www.themarysue.com/david-goyer-calls-she-hulk-sex-fantasy/
Like any other team based ensemble cast movie, except instead of performing a heist on a casino or whatever they punch the badguys or whatever.
Nah, do what Marvel did. WB/DC will punish the characters for its failure, and they will fail at this juncture. We've waited long enough for a Wonder Woman solo movie, when Justice League fails they'd put her on the backburner for a decade or longer until she gets another chance - if she's lucky. WB/DC has no fucking idea what to do with Wonder Woman, that's part of the reasons why she's been missing in action in the media in solo projects and she gets the shaft when she does financially ok when they'd accept going forward with a male character, like the Wonder Woman animated movie.
Does this film exist in the same continuity as the Dark knight Trilogy? Cos yeah, that's gonna be challenging to pull off.
Steam: adamjnet
It is probably unreasonable of me to be this angry that David Goyer has a job writing superhero films when he hate superheroes and the people who like them.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
The Dark Knight trilogy isn't in continuity, this is a new Batman.
I was going to say "there's no way this movie doesn't make bargeloads of cash even if it's horrible," but it's entirely possible it will make bargeloads of cash, with execs expecting to make Death Stars of cash. So yeah, it could "fail" like the last Spider-Man movie.
I'm talking about failing like Green Lantern. WB isn't bulletproof with Superman and Batman. They're losing ground to Marvel with each movie Marvel makes.
I actually don't think Avengers works in a vacuum. By itself, cut off from the other MCU films, it's rather a mess. All the characters are shallow. Cap and Tony maybe get some characterization. But Thor shows up as almost a literal "deus ex machina" and his only relation to the plot... is his relation to Loki. Banner's repeated mentions of "the other guy" make no sense. And then everybody gets misty eyed and rallies behind the death of somebody you saw for maybe 2 minutes total. The movie is shallow in so many ways... and yet it can be because we already had all that depth take place in other movies. It doesn't have to waste time dealing with or explaining everything, it can just jump right to the good stuff.
BvS is going to make one of two mistakes. Either it realizes its characters are shallow and tries to spend time fleshing them out, but then wastes time doing so and the actual plot suffers. Or it doesn't and tries to pull off what the Avengers did, and now we're wondering who this amazon girl and fish guy are and why they're so important.
Or hell, having a simple but extremely well done story like Dredd 2012 would work too. No drawn out origins, straight to the point, awesome.
JLU was made by professionals above Snyder and Goyer, it being live action is another hurdle the cartoon didn't have to over-come. They have greater freedom with making animation than a live action movie. People's expectations are lower, too. JLU also didn't exist in a vacuum, it grew from the Justice League series that was built on Superman and Batman cartoons. before JLU's first episode that universe was explained with hours of cartoons, making it similar to what Marvel's doing. The only thing we have for the DCCU is Man of Steel, which only explains Superman.
Dredd is a setting that doesn't need that much set up and it was an origin, for Anderson.
Also if the audience wants to know about the Avengers and Fury they can watch the solo movies they are in. They can't with Dawn of Justice or a Justice League movie that's starting a combined universe.
Ironically, Batman is the only hero who doesn't really fit since MoS heavily implies that there were no superheroes before Superman.
Batman's not the problem, he's the easiest to put in a movie. It's everybody else that we're worried about.