| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The disappearing heroes were
Superman
Prince
David Bowie
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I stopped drinking coke and eating sweets and I began losing weight after two weeks. My belly visibly shrank. I'm waiting to reach 220lb before I start exercising so I don't damage my joints.
[tangent] My 2 liter-bottle-a-day Mt. Dew habit turned out to be the only sacrifice I needed to make to no longer be diabetic, and to keep the weight off. (That said, I never liked cookies, brownies, cake and most candies, so really, pie and ice cream were my only stumbling blocks.)
I've recently switched from Coke Zero/Pepsi Max (whichever was cheaper that week, 'cause I am the cheapness) to Arizona Diet Green Tea, to get away from the phosphoric acid and whatnot in diet sodas. It's not wonderful, but it's not water, either.
I hear that some people can drink water, but I never touch the stuff, and refuse to believe such wild allegations. [/tangent]
Still haven't seen Justice League. Maybe this weekend.
Maybe I'll wait ten years and they'll have a Justice League movie with Booster Gold and Vixen in it.
Maybe I'll also be elected Supreme Dictator of Earth (and be able to *order* a Justice League movie with Booster Gold and Vixen!)...
Edit to add: Gosh, you people are tall!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
7' / 210cm here '_'I’m 6’2” ^w^I'm 5'9"!Dammit orthos, stop being taller than me!You is smol? :3
*hugs Freehold*
I think europeans cheat or something. I remember when i was getting ready to go to france they were like "oh you'll be short over there..."
I mean i'm used to being big but walking around france was more like "look its godzillia..."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'll wait ten years and they'll have a Justice League movie with Booster Gold and Vixen in it.
Well, Vixen's been pretty well received on the CW so that may well be plausible someday. Heck, they have TWO Vixens, so that's cool.
[tangent]I am 5'4". *stands on chair and looms over you all* Actually the doc says I shrank to 5' 3 3/4" due to spinal stenosis but I am in denial. We shall not discuss what I weigh, it's impolite. I don't drink sugared soda except maybe once every 1-2 mos as a treat. I drink mostly water (and water infusions like tea and coffee). It drives me crazy when people say "I stopped drinking soda and lost a million pounds" because it didn't do s&*@ for me. (But I still don't drink soda.) I do sometimes have juice at breakfast (which does contain sugar, but I watch the content). I eat mostly healthily, EXCEPT I just eat out waaay too much because I live alone and don't have a dishwasher and cleaning up after cooking all the time sucks, especially when you have task management issues due to ADD, and that is a source of extra weight. Having a sweettooth is a problem; try to do things in moderation. I take a medication that makes any possible weightloss very very slow. I don't exercise enough but more than I used to. I do what I can to improve things. It's not enough. I am not ever giving up gluten no matter what people say. My A1C, blood sugar, cholesterol, and blood pressure are good tho, and that's probably pretty important. [/tangent]
On topic: I'm surprised Justice League did as poorly as it did, bad reviews or no. After all BvS was reviewed worse and people still saw it in droves. Mind, in perspective, I think it was still #1 at the box office, it just didn't earn what they hoped for. Was it too close to Ragnarok, perhaps?
|
Maybe I'll wait ten years and they'll have a Justice League movie with Booster Gold and Vixen in it.
Well, Vixen's been pretty well received on the CW so that may well be plausible someday. Heck, they have TWO Vixens, so that's cool.
[tangent]I am 5'4". *stands on chair and looms over you all* Actually the doc says I shrank to 5' 3 3/4" due to spinal stenosis but I am in denial. We shall not discuss what I weigh, it's impolite. I don't drink sugared soda except maybe once every 1-2 mos as a treat. I drink mostly water (and water infusions like tea and coffee). It drives me crazy when people say "I stopped drinking soda and lost a million pounds" because it didn't do s#@@ for me. (But I still don't drink soda.) I do sometimes have juice at breakfast (which does contain sugar, but I watch the content). I eat mostly healthily, EXCEPT I just eat out waaay too much because I live alone and don't have a dishwasher and cleaning up after cooking all the time sucks, especially when you have task management issues due to ADD, and that is a source of extra weight. Having a sweettooth is a problem; try to do things in moderation. I take a medication that makes any possible weightloss very very slow. I don't exercise enough but more than I used to. I do what I can to improve things. It's not enough. I am not ever giving up gluten no matter what people say. My A1C, blood sugar, cholesterol, and blood pressure are good tho, and that's probably pretty important. [/tangent]
On topic: I'm surprised Justice League did as poorly as it did, bad reviews or no. After all BvS was reviewed worse and people still saw it in droves. Mind, in perspective, I think it was still #1 at the box office, it just didn't earn what they hoped for. Was it too close to Ragnarok, perhaps?
People were probably still burned from BvS, but being so close to Ragnarok was most likely a silver bullet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. I know in my case it was a choice of "I'm going to see one of these in theatres and one will wait until it releases, or maybe in the dollar theater in a month and a half if I really want to see it sooner" and the one to see in theaters was Ragnarok by a HUGE margin.
I hear that some people can drink water, but I never touch the stuff, and refuse to believe such wild allegations.
Likewise.
Back to the movie: Prince and David Bowie? Seriously? But David Bowie was a hero...just for one day.
Maybe I'll wait ten years and they'll have a Justice League movie with Booster Gold and Vixen in it.
Well, Vixen's been pretty well received on the CW so that may well be plausible someday. Heck, they have TWO Vixens, so that's cool.
[tangent]I am 5'4". *stands on chair and looms over you all* Actually the doc says I shrank to 5' 3 3/4" due to spinal stenosis but I am in denial. We shall not discuss what I weigh, it's impolite. I don't drink sugared soda except maybe once every 1-2 mos as a treat. I drink mostly water (and water infusions like tea and coffee). It drives me crazy when people say "I stopped drinking soda and lost a million pounds" because it didn't do s$!& for me. (But I still don't drink soda.) I do sometimes have juice at breakfast (which does contain sugar, but I watch the content). I eat mostly healthily, EXCEPT I just eat out waaay too much because I live alone and don't have a dishwasher and cleaning up after cooking all the time sucks, especially when you have task management issues due to ADD, and that is a source of extra weight. Having a sweettooth is a problem; try to do things in moderation. I take a medication that makes any possible weightloss very very slow. I don't exercise enough but more than I used to. I do what I can to improve things. It's not enough. I am not ever giving up gluten no matter what people say. My A1C, blood sugar, cholesterol, and blood pressure are good tho, and that's probably pretty important. [/tangent]
On topic: I'm surprised Justice League did as poorly as it did, bad reviews or no. After all BvS was reviewed worse and people still saw it in droves. Mind, in perspective, I think it was still #1 at the box office, it just didn't earn what they hoped for. Was it too close to Ragnarok, perhaps?
i remember you as being much taller!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone in this thread:
STOP BEING TALLER THAN ME!
That is all.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
i remember you as being much taller!
That's the power of good posture and big stompy boots.
I lost some weight walking to my work...no way am I paying 400 a year for on campus parking which may or may not be filled up by the time I arrive. Of course, we will see if I regret this decision with winter weather coming in...
Hoping to start a diet after New Years. No way can I start one what with holiday baking season starting, what with me making about a million cookies between now and then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually i think i would be happy just being 5'11.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People were probably still burned from BvS, but being so close to Ragnarok was most likely a silver bullet.
Maybe I'll wait ten years and they'll have a Justice League movie with Booster Gold and Vixen in it.
Well, Vixen's been pretty well received on the CW so that may well be plausible someday. Heck, they have TWO Vixens, so that's cool.
[tangent]I am 5'4". *stands on chair and looms over you all* Actually the doc says I shrank to 5' 3 3/4" due to spinal stenosis but I am in denial. We shall not discuss what I weigh, it's impolite. I don't drink sugared soda except maybe once every 1-2 mos as a treat. I drink mostly water (and water infusions like tea and coffee). It drives me crazy when people say "I stopped drinking soda and lost a million pounds" because it didn't do s#@@ for me. (But I still don't drink soda.) I do sometimes have juice at breakfast (which does contain sugar, but I watch the content). I eat mostly healthily, EXCEPT I just eat out waaay too much because I live alone and don't have a dishwasher and cleaning up after cooking all the time sucks, especially when you have task management issues due to ADD, and that is a source of extra weight. Having a sweettooth is a problem; try to do things in moderation. I take a medication that makes any possible weightloss very very slow. I don't exercise enough but more than I used to. I do what I can to improve things. It's not enough. I am not ever giving up gluten no matter what people say. My A1C, blood sugar, cholesterol, and blood pressure are good tho, and that's probably pretty important. [/tangent]
On topic: I'm surprised Justice League did as poorly as it did, bad reviews or no. After all BvS was reviewed worse and people still saw it in droves. Mind, in perspective, I think it was still #1 at the box office, it just didn't earn what they hoped for. Was it too close to Ragnarok, perhaps?
A new Pixar movie (and a great one at that) coming out so closely too probably didn't help things either.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On topic: I'm surprised Justice League did as poorly as it did, bad reviews or no. After all BvS was reviewed worse and people still saw it in droves. Mind, in perspective, I think it was still #1 at the box office, it just didn't earn what they hoped for. Was it too close to Ragnarok, perhaps?
I've read what I consider to be reasonable speculation that it was a combination of:
*Too close to Ragnarok
*Too many viewers afraid this would be yet another super dark DC movie
*Leaving Superman out of the advertising, expect for one but that could have been a dream of Lois's
*Fears about how either Zack Snyder or Joss Whedon or just the change of directors would screw the whole thing up
Saw it.
Liked it fine.
It's a grand, glorious cheeseburger of a film- much like Avengers, which it... basically parallels with a couple of different details. Had it come out five years ago, it'd be a massive monster hit.
A shame- it deserves to do better than it is.
Is it high art? No.
Is it even terribly well-written or complex? No.
But most Marvel flicks- Thor: Ragnarok, which I loved most definitely included- have the same problem, and they make out like gangbusters.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But most Marvel flicks- Thor: Ragnarok, which I loved most definitely included- have the same problem, and they make out like gangbusters.
It is interesting that DC movies are sometimes seen to be held to a higher standard.
The last two Thor movies, IMO, kind of sucked. They weren't monstrously bad, or anything, but Hemsworth's bumbling comedic version of Thor feels about as faithful (to me) to the comic book version as Snyder's brooding hopeless Superman.
Going into Thor 3, I was kind of in the 'acceptance' phase, and had accepted that I was there for big goofy fun, with a character that shared little more than a name with the comic book Thor. With Waititi, Marvel had given up on trying at an even halfway serious take on Thor, and went full gonzo, and it was colorful and fun and even a little liberating to just abandon the pretense that this was going to be something majestic or mythic.
I imagine the expectations are so much higher with characters like Superman and Batman that hopes have further to fall, and it's harder to just sit back and accept stylistic or tonal differences, than it is with less-iconic characters like Ant-Man or Dr. Strange.
Another thought would be that even when Thor sucks at being anything like the Thor from the comic books, Ragnarok was at least a *fun* movie. If a Superman movie was just a glorious colorful romp through alien worlds, or centered on some sort of Myztlplk (not gonna bother spellchecking that one...)-centric magical trippy (or red kryptonite-based) episode, it might be easier to swallow stepping away from the majesty and inspiration surrounding the character if the movie was at least balls-to-the-wall gonzo fun.
LEGO Batman could be such an example (if a willfully over-the-top one!). It is *nothing* like a serious or faithful or even respectful adaptation of Batman, whose fans are rightly protective of the integrity of the character, and yet, it's fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I lost about ten pounds. Then I found it again.
There seems to be more yammering in here about the movie showing or not showing Gal Godot's butt than there was showing of it in the movie.
But most Marvel flicks- Thor: Ragnarok, which I loved most definitely included- have the same problem, and they make out like gangbusters.It is interesting that DC movies are sometimes seen to be held to a higher standard.
The last two Thor movies, IMO, kind of sucked. They weren't monstrously bad, or anything, but Hemsworth's bumbling comedic version of Thor feels about as faithful (to me) to the comic book version as Snyder's brooding hopeless Superman.
Going into Thor 3, I was kind of in the 'acceptance' phase, and had accepted that I was there for big goofy fun, with a character that shared little more than a name with the comic book Thor. With Waititi, Marvel had given up on trying at an even halfway serious take on Thor, and went full gonzo, and it was colorful and fun and even a little liberating to just abandon the pretense that this was going to be something majestic or mythic.
I imagine the expectations are so much higher with characters like Superman and Batman that hopes have further to fall, and it's harder to just sit back and accept stylistic or tonal differences, than it is with less-iconic characters like Ant-Man or Dr. Strange.
Another thought would be that even when Thor sucks at being anything like the Thor from the comic books, Ragnarok was at least a *fun* movie. If a Superman movie was just a glorious colorful romp through alien worlds, or centered on some sort of Myztlplk (not gonna bother spellchecking that one...)-centric magical trippy (or red kryptonite-based) episode, it might be easier to swallow stepping away from the majesty and inspiration surrounding the character if the movie was at least balls-to-the-wall gonzo fun.
LEGO Batman could be such an example (if a willfully over-the-top one!). It is *nothing* like a serious or faithful or even respectful adaptation of Batman, whose fans are rightly protective of the integrity of the character, and yet, it's fun.
It's not just that... but people seem to expect the BEST... and everything has to be better than anything they've ever seen before!!! I've tried to explain to people that it isn't black and white.. or right and wrong... There is a GRAND scale between 'AWESOMELY AMAZING BEST THING EVER!!! and 'It Sucks!!! Stupid piece of Garbage and waste of everyone's time...' There's also things like 'Slightly disappointing' and 'It was ok, but could have been better'...
Having lived through the years of Catwoman and Steel and Elektra... Marvel hasn't actually put out a BAD movie since they started the Iron Man franchise. Even the likes of Iron Man 2 and 3 or Thor 2 are merely 'Could have been better' and nowhere NEAR the levels of Steel or Catwoman.
Batman v Superman? I would label that as Sucks, Fant4stic? That sucked... Justice League? It was pretty good and I enjoyed it.... Had it come out 5 years ago, it would have blown everyone away.
But most Marvel flicks- Thor: Ragnarok, which I loved most definitely included- have the same problem, and they make out like gangbusters.It is interesting that DC movies are sometimes seen to be held to a higher standard.
I think it's less that and more that they've set themselves up with a rather poor track record.
Man of Steel sucked.
Batman v Superman sucked.
Wonder Woman was amazing, but every bit of information that leaked about Justice League seemed to be pointing toward that getting ruined
Add in the growing distrust and dislike of Zach Snyder, whose name was attached to the film from the get-go and who was only disconnected from it - in my knowledge at least - about two weeks before it came out, and you have a high bar to clear.
All the other stuff that has already been mentioned - competing against Thor: Ragnarok and a new Pixar film, primarily - only further deepened the pit it had to climb out of.
I'm not surprised at all it did as bad as it did.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But most Marvel flicks- Thor: Ragnarok, which I loved most definitely included- have the same problem, and they make out like gangbusters.It is interesting that DC movies are sometimes seen to be held to a higher standard.
The last two Thor movies, IMO, kind of sucked. They weren't monstrously bad, or anything, but Hemsworth's bumbling comedic version of Thor feels about as faithful (to me) to the comic book version as Snyder's brooding hopeless Superman.
Going into Thor 3, I was kind of in the 'acceptance' phase, and had accepted that I was there for big goofy fun, with a character that shared little more than a name with the comic book Thor. With Waititi, Marvel had given up on trying at an even halfway serious take on Thor, and went full gonzo, and it was colorful and fun and even a little liberating to just abandon the pretense that this was going to be something majestic or mythic.
I imagine the expectations are so much higher with characters like Superman and Batman that hopes have further to fall, and it's harder to just sit back and accept stylistic or tonal differences, than it is with less-iconic characters like Ant-Man or Dr. Strange.
Another thought would be that even when Thor sucks at being anything like the Thor from the comic books, Ragnarok was at least a *fun* movie. If a Superman movie was just a glorious colorful romp through alien worlds, or centered on some sort of Myztlplk (not gonna bother spellchecking that one...)-centric magical trippy (or red kryptonite-based) episode, it might be easier to swallow stepping away from the majesty and inspiration surrounding the character if the movie was at least balls-to-the-wall gonzo fun.
LEGO Batman could be such an example (if a willfully over-the-top one!). It is *nothing* like a serious or faithful or even respectful adaptation of Batman, whose fans are rightly protective of the integrity of the character, and yet, it's fun.
Yeah, I think you got the right out of it. The DC films tried to be taken serious with its dark themes and pathos but finalized to deliver, resulting in them being criticized as pretentious and stupid. Marvel films, with the exception of the Captain America trilogy, are to varying degrees of comedic and light-hearted, with there themes being more down Earth (Hero's Journey, Overcoming Trauma, Learning to be Humble, the Power of Teamwork, etc) when compared to Snyder's Randian Superman, so fans and even critics judge them less harshly because their not calming to be anything incredibly profound.
Marvel has a formula and for the most part it works. DC on the otherhand is all over the same when it comes to tone and direction, which makes people wonder how the hell Batman V Superman, Wonder Woman and Suicide Squad all exist in the same universe.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually i think i would be happy just being 5'11.
You're now 1' 1" taller than X.
Then again I'm 6'4 so that's to be expected.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like reading the posts above was that they had to build to getting to Justice League and that was part of the problem. It would have been better if they'd gotten to it faster. I'm more starting to agree with those who have said BvS was basically trying to set up the stage for Justice League and was very much "darkness before the dawn." Which makes sense as to why BvS felt like it had no real plot... it was just a lot of plate spinning and a lot of time wasted to establish a setting. If BvS had been GOOD maybe it'd've been different but it was 2 hours of wheels spinning and Zack Snyder bashing his action figures together.
I wonder if you had Superman die or disappear at the end of Man of Steel (which is actually a movie I for the most part LIKED except for the stupid tornado scene; personally I thought some of the complaints about it were overblown; it wasn't that dark and had moments where I was smiling a lot), and either went from there to Wonder Woman to Justice League if it would have done better.
I'd forgotten about Coco coming out, and it does look good. I always have to weigh if I'm going to see a Pixar film because I can only weep in the movie theater so much. (SOOO excited about the Incredibles 2 tho...)
The upshot of this is that it is now proven that Snyder (and Whedon) aren't guaranteed moneymakers and maybe they will stop relying on his vision for what is to come. Hand the reins to Patty Jenkins maybe... clearly she knows how to make a top grossing film.
ETA: Forgot something I wanted to say... Batman and Superman are especially hard, as so many expectations are built up around them. They've also had a lot of movies already, some great, some terrible, with a variety of tones that are, in sum total, guaranteed to create a split fanbase (some will never accept any Superman other than Reeve; some liked the slightly dark-yet-campy Burton-era Batman).
The problem is if you go on without them, all hardcore fans will demand is Superman and Batman and will dominate all discussion about. You could've made a "Justice League" say with just Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash, and Cyborg (maybe throw in Black Canary and Green Lantern or Martian Manhunter) and it could have been amazing, but people would have b*##*ed because Superman and Batman wasn't in it, even to the degree it might've flopped even if it was a good movie (though given how good Wonder Woman did, maybe she would have been a draw if she'd been cast as the leader).
I've seen DC TV shows struggle because they try to go around Batman and SUperman's existence. Way back when Birds of Prey the TV show came out, all people wanted was to see Batman, since it took place in Gotham, and were pissed it was meant to be a future-world where Batman had disappeared. The show was also terrible, but the constant drumbeat of "where's Batman" didn't help. Even the CW shows, often people have tried to demand Batman show up or it's "not really a DC universe"; Arrow's relative success was in spite of the demand for Batman, and of course they're hinting at people from the Batverse showing up all the time. Supergirl just went ahead and said "Yes, Superman's here doing his thing in Metropolis, we're just focused on National City" and I personally think they've handled him well on the show, but I've also seen utterly annoyingly unpleasable fanboys whine about his role or lack thereof, to the point of utterly derailing/threadcrapping discussions about the show--which is not, reminder, about Superman (and Supergirl, while not the best thing EVER, is consistently a decent show and has improved steadily for the most part and has a lot of great cast members, e.g., J'onn and Alex and Lena Luthor).
Moral of the story: whiny fanboys ruin everything. No, that's not really where I was going, but DC is challenged by the fact with the "problem" that they have some of the most popular legendary superheroic characters of all time. Marvel on the other hand, built from Iron Man, a not-too-iconic character from their own universe, so no one had ridiculous expectations for him. DC could have built from other characters, but the "where's Superman/Batman" refrain would make it impossible to move forward. So no, I take it back, whiny fanboys do ruin everything.
If you feel like, in reading this, I am calling YOU (whomever you are) a whiny fanboy: breathe, relax, and don't take it personally. If you love Batman and Superman that is okay. I love them too. I personally don't need to see them in every DC universe story, but I love them too, and it is okay to love Batman and Superman.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like reading the posts above was that they had to build to getting to Justice League and that was part of the problem. It would have been better if they'd gotten to it faster. I'm more starting to agree with those who have said BvS was basically trying to set up the stage for Justice League and was very much "darkness before the dawn." Which makes sense as to why BvS felt like it had no real plot... it was just a lot of plate spinning and a lot of time wasted to establish a setting. If BvS had been GOOD maybe it'd've been different but it was 2 hours of wheels spinning and Zack Snyder bashing his action figures together.
I wonder if you had Superman die or disappear at the end of Man of Steel (which is actually a movie I for the most part LIKED except for the stupid tornado scene; personally I thought some of the complaints about it were overblown; it wasn't that dark and had moments where I was smiling a lot), and either went from there to Wonder Woman to Justice League if it would have done better.
I'd forgotten about Coco coming out, and it does look good. I always have to weigh if I'm going to see a Pixar film because I can only weep in the movie theater so much.
The upshot of this is that it is now proven that Snyder (and Whedon) aren't guaranteed moneymakers and maybe they will stop relying on his vision for what is to come. Hand the reins to Patty Jenkins maybe... clearly she knows how to make a top grossing film.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssssssss.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hand the reins to Patty Jenkins maybe... clearly she knows how to make a top grossing film.
...
*Starts preparing his mojo to assist in this directorial option*
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ETA: Forgot something I wanted to say... Batman and Superman are especially hard, as so many expectations are built up around them.
Yeah, their 'iconic' status really plays against them, in a way that it doesn't for less-household-name characters like Iron Man and Thor, in that a fan of Superman or Batman may not just be a fan of the character in general, but of a specific interpretation of the character, and be as ready to come at the movie with knives out if it focusses on a different interpretation or otherwise 'gets it wrong.'
The problem is if you go on without them, all hardcore fans will demand is Superman and Batman and will dominate all discussion about. You could've made a "Justice League" say with just Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash, and Cyborg (maybe throw in Black Canary and Green Lantern or Martian Manhunter) and it could have been amazing, but people would have b%#$@ed because Superman and Batman wasn't in it, even to the degree it might've flopped even if it was a good movie (though given how good Wonder Woman did, maybe she would have been a draw if she'd been cast as the leader).
Marvel really lucked out in having so many of their big name characters unavailable (Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, the X-Men) and having to dive a little deeper into their catalog, in that sense.
I'd kill for a Justice League story (comic or movie) involving lesser-known characters like the Black Canary, Booster Gold, Vixen, Element Woman, Amazing Man, etc. But it is true that the 'fans' would riot in the streets if a Justice League movie wasn't all Superman, Batman and 'those other people.' There are *nine* 'classic satellite-era' Leaguers *without* the 'big seven;' Green Arrow, Black Canary, Hawkman, Hawkwoman, Red Tornado, Firestorm, Zatanna, Atom, the Elongated Man. And that's not counting cool characters who came later!
I feel the same way about the Avengers. There've been plenty of lineups in the past that didn't have Cap, Tony and Thor, and I'd be fine to see such a lineup make the big screen some day, with lesser-seen Avengers like Monica Rambeau, the Black Knight, She-Hulk, Tigra, USAgent, Stingray, etc.
I'm hardly a fan of the Elongated Man, to pick one recent arrival on TV, but it annoys me that we've had six or seven different live-action Supermen and Batmen in the time it took to get a single Ralph Dibney.
I'm not sure I agree. In many ways it felt like it was happening too fast.
I read an article somewhere that put it nicely: "DC saw what Marvel was getting with their movie universe, and wanted the same thing, and wanted it now." Marvel spent a few years of releases - and far longer than that in preproduction and filming, no doubt - setting up their shared universe with Iron Man 1 and 2, Captain America 1 and 2, Thor, and Hulk. All movies of strongly varying quality, sure, but they were there, and the universe had time to get set up before they put out Avengers and tried to run everything together.
And yet for all of their work in building that universe, they were still solid - if not all spectacular - movies in their own individual rights. They could stand on their own as well as contribute to the shared whole.
DC didn't do that. DC put out two Superman movies (one of which happened to also have Batman and Wonder Woman in it), a completely-unconnected movie in Suicide Squad, and Wonder Woman. It felt like - again, barring WW - they were more interested in push, push, push for the shared universe rather than letting it set up at its own pace with a decent amount of released films, so the whole thing looks haphazard and rushed.
To be blunt, we should not have seen Justice League until 2018 or 2019. MoS and BvS should have been done with a little less of the intent of setting up the world and more on being self-sustaining films on their own, and let the universe build naturally by following it up with Wonder Woman, a Flash film, a Cyborg origin film rather than smashing it into JL, etc. if they really wanted to beat Marvel at their own game.
But they were already four or five years behind and probably felt they couldn't afford to jump into the Shared Movie Universe Thing any later or they'd miss the zeitgeist or something. So it got rushed out with the fourth (or fifth if you count SS) movie in the series, instead of letting it build up properly like Marvel did.
Marvel has it easier because their big names just aren't as powerful and are regionally limited. Superman changes your entire planet: any time a threat more serious than a bank robbery occurs on the planet you need to explain why he didn't hear people shouting for help on tweeter and then bust through the core of the planet to make it there in 45 seconds or less.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be blunt, we should not have seen Justice League until 2018 or 2019. MoS and BvS should have been done with a little less of the intent of setting up the world and more on being self-sustaining films on their own, and let the universe build naturally by following it up with Wonder Woman, a Flash film, a Cyborg origin film rather than smashing it into JL, etc. if they really wanted to beat Marvel at their own game.
I'm not sure that there is one magic bullet, here.
Marvel themselves are mixing it up. There were indeed characters established first, such as Cap, Thor and Stark, but there have more recently also been characters who were introduced in team movies before getting their solos (Spider-Man and Black Panther). What DC attempted could have worked, IMO, had their movies been better.
Starting with a big whiz bang team movie and then spinning off solos for the most successful individual characters from that team movie, might have worked as well as Marvel's approach (and perhaps even worked better in the sense that there might have been less likely to be some less-stellar franchises, as Thor might be seen to be, compared to Captain America and Iron Man). By focusing on solos before team, Marvel was taking a risk that those solos would all find an audience (and that fans wouldn't have preferred a Vision or Black Widow movie over another installment in the Thor trilogy).
I think it could have worked, if it had been done better.
Wonder Woman bucked the formula, being introduced in a team(ish) movie, and then going on to a pretty cool solo outing. I hope that Black Panther similarly defies this formula.
That said, I'm not optimistic that the Wonder Woman success story will necessary carry over to Aquaman, Cyborg or Flash, although I hope for greatness for all three.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like reading the posts above was that they had to build to getting to Justice League and that was part of the problem. It would have been better if they'd gotten to it faster.
One of the factors being speculated on -- which I forgot to mention above -- was that Justice League came out too soon, in the sense that the general viewing public hadn't been introduced to Aquaman or Cyborg and so there was less buzz about getting this particular group of heroes together, compared to the Avengers. Not sure I agree with that; DC was already lagging behind Marvel, and shouldn't have waited several more years to to a team movie.
If BvS had been GOOD maybe it'd've been different but it was 2 hours of wheels spinning and Zack Snyder bashing his action figures together.
LOL!
I'd forgotten about Coco coming out, and it does look good. I always have to weigh if I'm going to see a Pixar film because I can only weep in the movie theater so much.
Coco was very good. There is more than one twist. And a Huge horned, winged panther with feathery wings and parrot coloring.
I'd kill for a Justice League story (comic or movie) involving lesser-known characters like the Black Canary, Booster Gold, Vixen, Element Woman, Amazing Man, etc. But it is true that the 'fans' would riot in the streets if a Justice League movie wasn't all Superman, Batman and 'those other people.' There are *nine* 'classic satellite-era' Leaguers *without* the 'big seven;' Green Arrow, Black Canary, Hawkman, Hawkwoman, Red Tornado, Firestorm, Zatanna, Atom, the Elongated Man. And that's not counting cool characters who came later!
I feel the same way about the Avengers. There've been plenty of lineups in the past that didn't have Cap, Tony and Thor, and...
The real problem wouldn't be comics fans rioting in the streets, though, it'd be the general movie-going public having no clue who any of those characters are...and the very real possibility that the writers/directors would feel the need to substantially change them in order to make them more appealing to millions of movie goers rather than the smaller number of people who buy comics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The general public not knowing who B-list superheroes are didn't stop Guardians of the Galaxy from being successful that kind of saved Marvel after a lackluster Age of Ultron. A Doom Patrol or Metal Men film could do the same as long as it catches audiences eye with an unique premise and interesting visuals. Ultimately, I think the real trick is DC making several films in a row to win audiences back.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The general public not knowing who B-list superheroes are didn't stop Guardians of the Galaxy from being successful that kind of saved Marvel after a lackluster Age of Ultron. A Doom Patrol or Metal Men film could do the same as long as it catches audiences eye with an unique premise and interesting visuals. Ultimately, I think the real trick is DC making several films in a row to win audiences back.
Some 'smaller' teams like the Doom Patrol might indeed be a breath of fresh air, to get away from the big Justice League/Superman/Batman drama. Others like the Outsiders or Secret Six or Birds of Prey or Mystic U could also work to explore some of the edges of the universe without focusing like a laser on Metropolis and Gotham's most famous residents.
Something DeathQuaker mentioned above was how some fans criticize shows like Arrow for not having enough Batman in them, and I remember having to avoid forums about Gotham for this exact reason. "Where's Batman? When are we going to see Batman?" Ugh. It's not a Batman show. It's a Gotham show. I suspect as long as a vocal subset of the audience is fired up to watch anything with Batman in it, and then go on the internet to complain that it wasn't done right anyway, DC will continue to pander to them (since they buy tickets before they crap all over the latest actor to play Batman) by making movies about these 'iconic' characters instead of anything riskier.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Age of Ultron was fairly awful (tho iirc it fared fine at the box office). I agree with the post up thread that Guardians did well in spite of its "b-list" status AND that Ultron was less than stellar; importantly it looked unabashedly fun when there was a lot about Ultron that was a downer, quippy dialogue aside.
You don't have to have a well known hero to be successful---Iron Man above all is massive proof of that. And again, I think a huge problem with Batman and Superman is an eternally divided fanbase that can never be wholly pleased. Perhaps indeed the best thing the DCEU could do is move away Bats and Supes and focus on other characters for awhile. The fanboys can cry on their Bruce Wayne waifu pillows while everyone else enjoys movies fewer people will fight over.
I won't argue further about the timing of Justice League. It appears it was both five years too early and five years too late. Again, unpleasable fanbase.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought Ultron was fine. Far from the best movie in the MCU by far, but not the worst either. Thoroughly entertaining, if very much a popcorn flick.
But then, that might be the problem with me and DC movies. I'd rather have a less-than-stellar but highly entertaining movie (Age of Ultron, Thor's entire cinematic run, etc.) than the grim and gritty stuff that has been DC's purview thus far, minus WW, even if the latter is "technically" the "better movie".
Couple that with a general personal preference for Marvel's comics and characters over most of DC's, and it's probably no surprise that Snyder's work has not caught my favor thus far. I'm too far from his target audience.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually i think i would be happy just being 5'11.You're now 1' 1" taller than X.
Then again I'm 6'4 so that's to be expected.
keep feeding him whatever youre feeding him.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like reading the posts above was that they had to build to getting to Justice League and that was part of the problem. It would have been better if they'd gotten to it faster. I'm more starting to agree with those who have said BvS was basically trying to set up the stage for Justice League and was very much "darkness before the dawn." Which makes sense as to why BvS felt like it had no real plot... it was just a lot of plate spinning and a lot of time wasted to establish a setting. If BvS had been GOOD maybe it'd've been different but it was 2 hours of wheels spinning and Zack Snyder bashing his action figures together.
I wonder if you had Superman die or disappear at the end of Man of Steel (which is actually a movie I for the most part LIKED except for the stupid tornado scene; personally I thought some of the complaints about it were overblown; it wasn't that dark and had moments where I was smiling a lot), and either went from there to Wonder Woman to Justice League if it would have done better.
I'd forgotten about Coco coming out, and it does look good. I always have to weigh if I'm going to see a Pixar film because I can only weep in the movie theater so much. (SOOO excited about the Incredibles 2 tho...)
The upshot of this is that it is now proven that Snyder (and Whedon) aren't guaranteed moneymakers and maybe they will stop relying on his vision for what is to come. Hand the reins to Patty Jenkins maybe... clearly she knows how to make a top grossing film.
ETA: Forgot something I wanted to say... Batman and Superman are especially hard, as so many expectations are built up around them. They've also had a lot of movies already, some great, some terrible, with a variety of tones that are, in sum total, guaranteed to create a split fanbase (some will never accept any Superman other than Reeve; some liked the slightly dark-yet-campy Burton-era Batman).
The problem is if you go on without them, all hardcore fans will demand is Superman and Batman and will dominate all discussion...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps indeed the best thing the DCEU could do is move away Bats and Supes and focus on other characters for awhile.
No lie, I said something along these lines a couple of years ago...
If I had a magic wand to run the DCEU, Batman and Superman would totally exist. And they would totally show up for a team movie now and then. But otherwise they'd just be referenced in news headlines and villain dialogue while characters that haven't had...
Batman: 10 live-action feature films counting Batman vs. Superman, Justice League, and the 1966 Adam West movie, then two serial installments from the 1940s... point is, if you want a Batman movie, by now there's probably one to suit your taste.
Superman: 8 live-action feature films counting the aforementioned group efforts, plus a 1951 theatrical-length "pilot," a series of 1940s cartoons
Get their chance to shine.
Wonder Woman: Three movies, only one of them NOT a group effort. And look whose solo movie set the box office ablaze...
Green Lantern: One movie, and boy was it a paint by numbers dud.
Captain Marvel (IFR to call him Shazam, dammit, but they'd probably have to): 1 film serial in 1941, one tie-in to a Good Humor Man bit.
And so on.
Perhaps indeed the best thing the DCEU could do is move away Bats and Supes and focus on other characters for awhile.No lie, I said something along these lines a couple of years ago...
*nods* It seems an obvious issue. I think it's a hard one to work around.
Batman: 10 live-action feature films counting Batman vs. Superman, Justice League, and the 1966 Adam West movie, then two serial installments from the 1940s... point is, if you want a Batman movie, by now there's probably one to suit your taste.
Superman: 8 live-action feature films counting the aforementioned group efforts, plus a 1951 theatrical-length "pilot," a series of 1940s cartoons
Get their chance to shine.
Wonder Woman: Three movies, only one of them NOT a group effort. And look whose solo movie set the box office ablaze...
Green Lantern: One movie, and boy was it a paint by numbers dud.
They could do way better with Green Lantern. Fortunately there are a lot of different GLs to choose from. The cameo of a GL in the ancient war flashback in Justice League was cool.
Captain Marvel (IFR to call him Shazam, dammit, but they'd probably have to): 1 film serial in 1941, one tie-in to a Good Humor Man bit.
I'd rather call him Captain Marvel than Shazam, if only because of the way my dad says, "Captain Marvel!" when reminiscing about his comic reading days (unfortunately he threw away his old comics when he went to college; he could have had a fortune!). But I don't mind calling him Shazam either, since while it is the name of the wizard, it is also the initials of the entities that grant him power so it makes sense as a name. Sadly there's all kinds of weird rights stuff with that because of the Foster Comics rights and then Mar-Vell and all that.
And so on
Steel and Catwoman are the only two I can think of, and both movies were pretty bad--a shame in both cases because both could have been amazing. Speaking of Catwoman, Gotham City Sirens I believe is still on the menu as a movie being made, but the question is will it be more Wonder Woman or more Suicide Squad....