DC Movie Universe

[43M]

1 hour ago, StLunatic88 said:

I think it’s absolutely debatable who should be your “centerpiece” when doing a DC Universe. If done correctly, it could honestly be any one of the Trinity. But you don’t ever actually center around one character, it’s about the Dynamic between the three of them. Or between Batman/Superman at the very least.

And in reality, they guy who is about to run this entire thing seems beyond keen to tell a Superman story. So I’m mostly basing the start of the new DCU on that, rather than who I would go with first. 

Trust me, Batman is my favorite character ever, so I will never be upset with more Batman Films. But I think they are going to go with a very different tone for this Universe than what recent interpretations of the bat on screen have provided (at the very least for the first phase). A hopeful, campy and even funny tone, so when it needs to get serious, that stands out, instead of being the brooding norm. So in that thought, bringing in Batman for JL, along with the world/universe threatening villain, really shows you how much the stakes have been raised. (on top of the other benefits; finishing the Reeves run and building a bigger JL draw on the debut)

And if they do what should be done in JL (not a completely clean win) leads into the Phase 2 that has a tonal shift, it leads Batman have the focus (probably fitting in 2 Bat-films in that phase) and then you let Diana be the focus of the third phase and we head toward hope. 

Batman (done right) is easily the most marketable of all the characters.   Thats where Im coming from.   Superman isnt nearly as popular as he was 20 or 30 years ago.   Wonder Woman can work if done right,  but not nearly as well as Batman.

They are going to do what they want, and I admit it does seem as if Gunn intends to make Superman "the guy", but if we are discussing what is best for the long term success of the new DCU, I think Batman is the key.   Again, not saying the others cant work, but I feel like Batman taking a backseat for several years in the DCU is not going to work out for the best UNLESS they absolutely crush it with the other characters, which Im not convinced will happen.   

We will see.   Im not very optimistic, but Im very curious to see which direction they go.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

I heard rumblings of Kingdom Come? That seems very ambitious. 

Also, as much as I love Batman, he's just been way too overexposed the last decade-plus with different iterations. Getting a little Bat-fatigued. Feels like the character needs a 5 year break. 

Edited December 24, 2022 by TecmoSuperJoe

[kingseanjohn]

25 minutes ago, TecmoSuperJoe said:

I heard rumblings of Kingdom Come? That seems very ambitious. 

Also, as much as I love Batman, he's just been way too overexposed the last decade-plus with different iterations. Getting a little Bat-fatigued. Feels like the character needs a 5 year break. 

If I were running DC, I'd have a 20 year plan that culminates with Kingdom Come. It could easily be their Endgame. Pretty sure they're only doing a 10 year plan though. That isn't anywhere near enough time for the build up that KC should get imo.

[StLunatic88]

13 hours ago, 43M said:

Batman (done right) is easily the most marketable of all the characters.   Thats where Im coming from.   Superman isnt nearly as popular as he was 20 or 30 years ago.   Wonder Woman can work if done right,  but not nearly as well as Batman.

I think Batman is the easiest to currently do right and market. But mostly because that template has been hammered out over the last few decades

I don’t think we know how popular Superman can be today, because he was so bungled the last iteration (I will always say it, Snyder wanted to make a Batman move, but they gave him Superman, and Supes just doesn’t have the mass appeal when brooding like that). And I’m sure the straight up Big Blue Boy-scout wouldn’t completely work l that well either in 202?, but taken a notch down, with some nuance, the idea of ‘hope’ especially when pitching/kicking off a brand new universe is much more appealing than the dark/gothic tone that inherently comes with doing Batman.   

[43M]

22 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

That isn't anywhere near enough time for the build up that KC should get imo.

Sounds exactly like something WB would do.  

[MacReady]

22 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

If I were running DC, I'd have a 20 year plan that culminates with Kingdom Come. It could easily be their Endgame. Pretty sure they're only doing a 10 year plan though. That isn't anywhere near enough time for the build up that KC should get imo.

I don't understand why people don't get this. It's not just a ten year plan, it's the first ten years planned.

They're not going to follow through with the ten years and then be like, "Welp, that's it."

They want this to last twenty years. It's just they're planning the first ten.

[kingseanjohn]

6 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I don't understand why people don't get this. It's not just a ten year plan, it's the first ten years planned.

They're not going to follow through with the ten years and then be like, "Welp, that's it."

They want this to last twenty years. It's just they're planning the first ten.

If it's a ten year plan, then what follows isn't their plan

[MacReady]

15 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said:

If it's a ten year plan, then what follows isn't their plan

You plan your breakfast for the morning. Does that mean you don't have a general idea of what follows breakfast?

How are we arguing this?

Do you really think they're just going to end it after ten years?

[kingseanjohn]

57 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

You plan your breakfast for the morning. Does that mean you don't have a general idea of what follows breakfast?

How are we arguing this?

Do you really think they're just going to end it after ten years?

"We spent the past couple days with a group of some of the best thinkers in the industry, the best writers in the industry starting to map out that eight to 10-year plan of what it’s going to look like in theater, in TV, in animation, across the board for these characters." - James Gunn

Do you really trust DC to pick up where they leave off after 10 years?

[MacReady]

2 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

"We spent the past couple days with a group of some of the best thinkers in the industry, the best writers in the industry starting to map out that eight to 10-year plan of what it’s going to look like in theater, in TV, in animation, across the board for these characters." - James Gunn

Do you really trust DC to pick up where they leave off after 10 years?

Marvel had a ten year plan did they quit after ten years?

If it’s successful, it will continue.

How is that a debate?

[kingseanjohn]

27 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Marvel had a ten year plan did they quit after ten years?

If it’s successful, it will continue.

How is that a debate?

Feige signed up for the long haul. Gunn and Safran haven’t. They’ve specifically stated their timeline. Could that change? Sure. But right now, year 11+ isn’t in the plans.

[MacReady]

10 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

Feige signed up for the long haul. Gunn and Safran haven’t. They’ve specifically stated their timeline. Could that change? Sure. But right now, year 11+ isn’t in the plans.

Citation needed. If you can show where they signed a 10 year contract that specifically states it's a 10 year contract, I will eat my hat.

I don't know why this is a contentious topic. You don't hear any head coach in the NFL say, "I've got a three year plan..." and then reach that 3 year plan and then retire as coach of that team.

There's no language or logic.

[43M]

14 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

Feige signed up for the long haul. Gunn and Safran haven’t. They’ve specifically stated their timeline. Could that change? Sure. But right now, year 11+ isn’t in the plans.

Feige's "long haul" entirely depended on the early success of the MCU.  

So does the DCU.   If its successful, it will last.   Does that mean Gunn and Safran will both be there in 10 years?   No, but there was no guarantee Feige would either.

Gunn and Safran need to make sure the first 5 years go well, otherwise WB will be starting over again in 10.

That being said, they can obviously lay some long term groundwork for POSSIBLE future projects.   Thats what building a connected universe is all about.

[Mox]

Yeah, we're jumping the gun a bit here. DC making it ten years at all with a connected universe would be an achievement.

[THE DUKE]

Whether they make it 10 years or not is besides the point. They need to plan a 10 year narrative arc so they aren't pissing in the wind like the Star Wars sequel trilogy did if they can make it work.

Snyder had a plan, the problem was the plan kind of sucked. That they made it even worse deviating from the plan doesn't change the fact the original plan sucked too.