Justice League

[StLunatic88]

27 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

They've also really screwed up the abilities of the characters.  The Justice League (minus Superman) couldn't handle freaking Steppenwolf?  Seriously?  What the heck are the rest of them going to do when Darkseid shows up?  Just get out of the way of Superman?  They pretty much half to add some more powerful beings before that showdown, like Green Lantern or Martian Manhunter.  

Ive got many qualms about your assessment of this movie (Affleck is a darn good Batman, not as good in this film, but still darn good) but you havr to remember. Other than Batman and Wonder Woman, the rest of the League hasnt really fought anyone. Flash straight up says it "all I do is push people and run away". Cyborg is not only still evolving as a machine, but has been hidden in an apartment since it happened and hasnt even had human interaction much less been in a fight. And Aquaman is basically just a water cop/bouncer at this point, who for all we know hasnt ever squared off against more than a drunk in a bar. As much as I love him, Batman is just a man. And Diana has really the only experience against anything of this magnitude (and she has been in hiding for almost a decade)

Going against Steppenwolf isnt some small task. I am well aware that they didnt do a good enough job of explaining this in JL, but he is a New God. He is the right hand man to Darkseid, and the heads the Army of Apokolips. Not to mention they are also fighting off an army of flying Parademons, and trying to clear civilians. We also saw that it took more than 3 entire ARMIES to take him down last time

For Comparison, until now, we really havent seen The Avengers take on anyone of this caliber, while all of them were active heros for a while before the Battle of New York (other than Hulk who had been in hiding). The army of Parademons is very comparable to the Chitari invasion, and along with them Loki really doesn do much and is squashed pretty quickly (the bigger threat they take care of is the Nuke headed to NYC). And then the fight against Ultron is probably closer, but we have now added 5 extra members to the team. 2 seasoned War Fighters (War Machine & Falcon) and 3 newbies (Quick Silver, Scarlet Witch, Vision) all of whom (maybe not QS) are probably more powerful then what they have given to the JL at this point.

[MKnight82]

3 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Affleck is a darn good Batman

I can't express how much I disagree with this.

[StLunatic88]

5 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

I can't express how much I disagree with this.

You are in the VAST minority

[diamondbull424]

I didn’t even know this was a thread, but I very much disagree with the idea that the DCEU should reboot with Batman. Would be a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE idea.

Like I explained in another thread is Iron Man was a “B” character before the MCU. He was a name brand that general fans had no idea about. So his story, once the glowing critical reviews flowed in really created momentum.

Everyone and their mother knows the story of how Bruce Wayne becomes Batman, we just don’t know how he becomes THAT VERSION of Batman. That leaves nothing to the imagination. Especially with Nolan’s Batman so new and prominent in the mind. Batman is an A+ character.

We need NEW characters that we don’t know about as extensively to build momentum. If Batman was to be explored they should’ve built up interest in a new Batman movie by making him the Nick Fury of the team that galvanizes the forces, but is mysterious. Tease us, make us wonder who this new Batman is before giving us his origin story. Have him assist the other heroes in their solo movies and allow us to salivate.

Batman making constant appearances in an Aquaman film, the Wonder Woman, the flash, and the like would have been the best way to handle his (to this point) over-saturated character.

[43M]

2 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

I didn’t even know this was a thread, but I very much disagree with the idea that the DCEU should reboot with Batman. Would be a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE idea.

Like I explained in another thread is Iron Man was a “B” character before the MCU. He was a name brand that general fans had no idea about. So his story, once the glowing critical reviews flowed in really created momentum.

Everyone and their mother knows the story of how Bruce Wayne becomes Batman, we just don’t know how he becomes THAT VERSION of Batman. That leaves nothing to the imagination. Especially with Nolan’s Batman so new and prominent in the mind. Batman is an A+ character.

We need NEW characters that we don’t know about as extensively to build momentum. If Batman was to be explored they should’ve built up interest in a new Batman movie by making him the Nick Fury of the team that galvanizes the forces, but is mysterious. Tease us, make us wonder who this new Batman is before giving us his origin story. Have him assist the other heroes in their solo movies and allow us to salivate.

Batman making constant appearances in an Aquaman film, the Wonder Woman, the flash, and the like would have been the best way to handle his (to this point) over-saturated character.

The entire Avengers team was compiled of "B" characters.....or what were B characters AT THE TIME.    Iron Man was known but wasnt widely known to casual fans.   Captain America was basically The Avengers version of Aquaman....a character most saw as cheesy and lame until the new movies redefined him.   Thor...was a C character.   

Point is, Marvel had no choice but to start with a B character to create the Avengers, especially since, at the time, they didnt have movie rights to Spiderman or the XMen.

If they rebooted with Batman, they dont need to tell an origin story.  It could be a few years into his career and before the Justice League is formed.     

If DC rebooted....which Im not even saying they definitely should....they could absolutely reboot with Batman, and if its good, it would be a great launching point if done right.    Could they do another character?   Sure, but Batman is the smartest choice, by far.  

[MacReady]

DC doesn't care about the connected universe anymore.  They've already confirmed this. 

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16387706/wonder-woman-batman-dc-expanded-cinematic-universe-warner-bros-standalone

Or maybe they're just waiting for what would be an epic twist in Flashpoint, which would reveal that all of these movies are alternate realities. 

That would essentially make The Flash the first movie, but one that takes place across multiple realities, the end of which would take place several years after what would be the first chronological movie in a new extended universe. 

So you'd have...

1.The Flash: Flashpoint chronological starting point (in which The Flash goes back in time X amount of years)
2 - X. Other origin movies
The Flash: Flashpoint ending point. 

This route is the ONLY POSSIBLE WAY I AM INTERESTED IN THE DCEU.

Even though I prefer DC's heroes and villains (especially the villains), I have lost all interest in non-connected superhero films.  Marvel ruined it for me.  Completely and irrevocably.  I have zero interest in the dying X-Men series.  Haven't even watched Logan because it's really not connected to anything.  Haven't even seen Deadpool from start to finish.  Haven't watched Justice League (not only because I think I'll hate it, but because I just have no interest in it).  I have zero interest in anything DC until/unless they get some semblance of positive connectivity.  Only movie they might be able to get me to watch would be Batman, and that's just because I love Batman. 

As far as origin stories, I agree, we do NOT need a Batman origin story.  I think his origin should be hinted at in other movies. 

This is how I'd do it:

1. Keep Wonder Woman as is.  It had its faults, but it was solid, it was well-received, and it takes place far back enough that The Flash likely would not have messed with the events therein.  Also keep Wonder Woman 2 as is, since I BELIEVE it is set to take place in the 80's (hopefully far enough away from The Flash's influence). 
2. The Flash: Flashpoint goes back to a point after Wonder Woman, but before our other heroes got their start. 
3. Superman origin story.  During Superman's adolescence, something on TV mentions the death of Bruce's parents.  Superman would obviously grow up and have himself his own origin villain story.
4. Martian Manhunter movie.  I am NOT a comic afficianado, but I watched a cartoon once that showed MM as having disguised himself on Earth for a long time.  It could show his origin story while continuing to tease other Justice League heroes, especially Batman.  The post-credits scene could tease a vigilante in Gotham.
5. Batman.  No origin story.  We all know it, and those who don't know it would pick it up in the other movies.  It should start in the first year of Batman being Batman BEFORE he has gone up against ANYONE in his Rogues Gallery.  Huge complaint of mine is how they COMPLETELY glossed over YEARS of fighting with The Joker. 
6. The Flash 2.  This one would be the JL tease.  The Flash has to go and contact all the heroes.  An opportunity to replace Cyborg and Aquaman (I think Aquaman is gonna bomb and should thus be recast). 
7. Wonder Woman 3, just because it will have been a while since she's been around in this new continuity. 
8. Justice League.
9. Cosmic movie.  Green Lantern, I don't know. 

If I win the lottery, then win the lottery 17 more times, I'm going to buy Warner Brothers and do it this way.  No, if I win the lottery and then the lottery 17 more times, I'd do it differently.  This is just my best plan for damage control since WB surely doesn't want to start over completely. 

[diamondbull424]

 

10 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said:

The entire Avengers team was compiled of "B" characters.....or what were B characters AT THE TIME.    Iron Man was known but wasnt widely known to casual fans.   Captain America was basically The Avengers version of Aquaman....a character most saw as cheesy and lame until the new movies redefined him.   Thor...was a C character.   

Point is, Marvel had no choice but to start with a B character to create the Avengers, especially since, at the time, they didnt have movie rights to Spiderman or the XMen.

If they rebooted with Batman, they dont need to tell an origin story.  It could be a few years into his career and before the Justice League is formed.     

If DC rebooted....which Im not even saying they definitely should....they could absolutely reboot with Batman, and if its good, it would be a great launching point if done right.    Could they do another character?   Sure, but Batman is the smartest choice, by far.  

He definitely isn’t the smartest choice though. The problem with Batman and Superman is that everyone has so many opinions on WHO these characters are that you can’t build a universe around them. Everyone has all these ideas on “what they should do” vs just appreciating what the movies were able to do. People were seriously upset that they tried to take a “dark” approach to this Superman... only because they know who Superman is to them.

FTMP no one cares enough about Aquaman and Wonder Woman to be upset if they tweak their back story or make them a little darker. You have more creative license to use these characters to establish the type of universe that you want to build. You want the universe to be light, you make these characters more comedic. You want it to be dark, you make these characters more gritty.

You make Batman crack too many jokes and people are upset. Superman chooses to disarm a bomb over the Atlantic and not the one on land (to save civilians) and people are looking to fight.

You can’t build a universe when everyone is telling you what to build. The Avengers succeeded because no one cared how it was built or what stones were used to build it, just that there was a lot of hype that it was built strong and that it was a great finished product.

Characters like Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Nightwing, Shazam, etc are much better universe builders at this point. They all have a name brand to them that people will recognize, but aren’t saturated enough for us to have our “favorite versions” of them.

People don’t mind bad news, but they hate surprises. If we are “shocked” to see a funny Batman we’ll hate it. But if Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Green Lantern, all had movies and Batman did a cameo in them where he was “funny” we could accept a funny Batman. Same with a darker Superman after it’s established that the DCEU is a much darker take on Superheroes.

Will everyone flock to see these B characters at first, nope. But the same was true of Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor. The Avengers was the global phenomenon that truly got the hype train rolling. It was the culmination of these individually hyped films into a successful team up. That built their universe. If DC is smart, they would leave Batman and Superman out of they’re universe for as long as possible.

Batman and Superman are like KFC and McDonald’s, opening up a few new locations will make you money, but won’t elevate the brand. The other top characters in in the DCEU are like Fuddruckers, Five Guys, and In&Out Burger. They have a name to them that makes them relevant but they’re not everywhere. Having success can only elevate the brand to new heights. Which is what the Avengers did and what would be the smartest way for DCEU to do it.

[43M]

6 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

He definitely isn’t the smartest choice though. The problem with Batman and Superman is that everyone has so many opinions on WHO these characters are that you can’t build a universe around them. Everyone has all these ideas on “what they should do” vs just appreciating what the movies were able to do. People were seriously upset that they tried to take a “dark” approach to this Superman... only because they know who Superman is to them.

Superman I agree with, but more because he simply isnt that popular anymore among the general public.   IMO, they should treat Superman like Marvel treated Thor in that they need to build up his popularity and make people care about him.

Batman...most people dont really disagree about Batman.    Most believe he should absolutely be a darker character in a movie with a darker tone....most believe he shouldnt kill at all....so I dont see where people disagree on him.

 

6 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

FTMP no one cares enough about Aquaman and Wonder Woman to be upset if they tweak their back story or make them a little darker. You have more creative license to use these characters to establish the type of universe that you want to build. You want the universe to be light, you make these characters more comedic. You want it to be dark, you make these characters more gritty.

You cant really change Wonder Woman much.

Aquaman...yes, but mainly because his image for a long time was kind of a joke.    Most casual fans viewed him as a very lame character.

6 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

You make Batman crack too many jokes and people are upset. Superman chooses to disarm a bomb over the Atlantic and not the one on land (to save civilians) and people are looking to fight.

Those are petty little things that fanboys will always bicker about.   Cant be avoided.

Batman shouldnt crack too many jokes....and the vast majority of people would agree with that.    A timely, subtle one here and there are okay (like we saw with TDK trilogy), but he shouldnt be doing it much.

 

6 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

You can’t build a universe when everyone is telling you what to build. The Avengers succeeded because no one cared how it was built or what stones were used to build it, just that there was a lot of hype that it was built strong and that it was a great finished product.

I completely disagree.

Avengers succeeded because it was done incredibly well.

Look to the DC cartoons of the 90s and early 2000s.    They are widely considered masterpiece portrayals of the characters....and despite being cartoons, the characters personalites arent cartoonish....so they could be translated to live action.    If they did that and did it well, they would see similar success to the current MCU.   No doubt in my mind.

6 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

Characters like Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Nightwing, Shazam, etc are much better universe builders at this point. They all have a name brand to them that people will recognize, but aren’t saturated enough for us to have our “favorite versions” of them.

People don’t mind bad news, but they hate surprises. If we are “shocked” to see a funny Batman we’ll hate it. But if Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Green Lantern, all had movies and Batman did a cameo in them where he was “funny” we could accept a funny Batman. Same with a darker Superman after it’s established that the DCEU is a much darker take on Superheroes.

Will everyone flock to see these B characters at first, nope. But the same was true of Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor. The Avengers was the global phenomenon that truly got the hype train rolling. It was the culmination of these individually hyped films into a successful team up. That built their universe. If DC is smart, they would leave Batman and Superman out of they’re universe for as long as possible.

Batman and Superman are like KFC and McDonald’s, opening up a few new locations will make you money, but won’t elevate the brand. The other top characters in in the DCEU are like Fuddruckers, Five Guys, and In&Out Burger. They have a name to them that makes them relevant but they’re not everywhere. Having success can only elevate the brand to new heights.

I supposed we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

The issues with the DCEU has absolutely nothing to do with them using Superman and Batman to build their universe....its HOW its been done.

If the MCU started off like the current DCEU has started, it wouldnt be where it is today.

Had very little to do with the characters they used.

MCU, from the get go, had a clear vision, perfect casting, and they never forgot what they were supposed to be....fun, superhero movies.

With a character like Batman, you can ground it in reality more.

With Superman, you cant do that for obvious reasons....and that was a problem with Man of Steel and the DCEU's version of Superman.   They focused way too much on a realistic look at how the world react to an alien living on earth and less on the fun, superhero element of it.

You can make a somewhat darker Superman movie if done well, but you shouldnt change the essence of the characters.   You cant take, say...Batman's tone and apply it to Superman.     With better dialogue and a few tweaks here and there, Man of Steel couldve reached a much broader audience.    

 

6 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

Which is what the Avengers did and what would be the smartest way for DCEU to do it.

Again, no, Avengers was simply done much better.    DCEU was not.  

And, once again, Avengers had NO CHOICE but to build with lesser known characters....but that isnt even close to the biggest reason they succeeded.

Bottom line....I respect your stance, but you could absolutely build a great DCEU starting off with Batman.    Superman needs to be built back up, but if done well, it can most certainly be done.

[holt_bruce81]

Just saw this movie over the weekend, and it wasn’t good. Would of liked to of seen these characters have their own films before this movie came out...like it’s been talked about. And all the Characters are just to damn boring    

Disagree with a lot of the casting. Love JK Simmons but he just doesn’t do it for me as Commissioner Gordon. And I know he wasn’t really in this movie, but I hate Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. 

[43M]

1 hour ago, holt_bruce81 said:

Just saw this movie over the weekend, and it wasn’t good. Would of liked to of seen these characters have their own films before this movie came out...like it’s been talked about. And all the Characters are just to damn boring    

Disagree with a lot of the casting. Love JK Simmons but he just doesn’t do it for me as Commissioner Gordon. And I know he wasn’t really in this movie, but I hate Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. 

Simmons barely got to do anything as Gordon, so its hard to really judge him.     I wouldve preferred Bryan Cranston, but I thought Simmons was fine with what he showed.

Not sure what youre "disagreeing" with in terms of Eisenberg as Lex.    He is almost universally disliked in the role.

[holt_bruce81]

16 minutes ago, FourThreeMafia said:

Simmons barely got to do anything as Gordon, so its hard to really judge him.     I wouldve preferred Bryan Cranston, but I thought Simmons was fine with what he showed.

Not sure what youre "disagreeing" with in terms of Eisenberg as Lex.    He is almost universally disliked in the role.

Just Disagreeing with them picking Eisenberg in general.