Current Events > Do you want DCEU movies to succeed?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Tyranthraxus posted...

Batman isn't really being rebooted. They're just pretending that BvS and JL didn't happen.

It's going to be a Batman that's one year into his career. Unless they set it in like the 90s and pretend he's young Affleck it's a reboot.

---

BLAKUboy posted...

I don't know why people keep telling this lie.

Shazam was good. Aquaman was the one that puzzled me when people said it was good. It was CROWDPLEASING, but it wasn't really good.

---

They need to start over. Like 9/10 of DCEUs movies have been utter trash.

If you want to build a monument, you cant make the foundation out of pig shit.

Im honestly shocked people like Birds of Prey. I thought it was hot garbage.

Darmik posted...

It's going to be a Batman that's one year into his career. Unless they set it in like the 90s and pretend he's young Affleck it's a reboot.

Soft reboot. Using the Flashpoint movie that's still happening as far as I can tell..... if the movie is a success they can easily edit the continuity and replace the old batman for the new.

Similar to what they did in the animated universe.


---

Darmik posted...

It's going to be a Batman that's one year into his career. Unless they set it in like the 90s and pretend he's young Affleck it's a reboot.

It'd be hilarious if it was an ultra-dark and realistic Batman set in 1997.

---

FortuneCookie posted...

It'd be hilarious if it was an ultra-dark and realistic Batman set in 1997.

Where he fights Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy and Bane.

And there's a subplot about Alfred contracting an incurable disease.

---

tommybel89 posted...

Shazam was good. Aquaman was the one that puzzled me when people said it was good. It was CROWDPLEASING, but it wasn't really good.

I wanted to like Shazam, I really did. I loved Zach Levi in Chuck. I just dont get the love for that film. I thought it was terrible.

Aquaman was about as good as I expected it to be, which is to say mediocre. Covering Aquaman in tats and muscles is like putting lipstick on a pig.

---

Prismsblade posted...

Soft reboot. Using the Flashpoint movie that's still happening as far as I can tell..... if the movie is a success they can easily edit the continuity and replace the old batman for the new.

Similar to what they did in the animated universe.

The Flash movie will have nothing to do with the comics Flashpoint Paradox at all so no one really knows what's going on with that story wise. It's probably a mistake to call it Flashpoint in the first place but WB gonna WB.

Darmik posted...

It's going to be a Batman that's one year into his career. Unless they set it in like the 90s and pretend he's young Affleck it's a reboot.

I think that is exactly what happening.


---

Shazam/Captain Marvel has always been one of the campiest mainstream comic book IPs, which is a heck of an achievement, so it would have been a challenge for a modern film made for modern audiences, where "cheesy" is the absolutely worst possible criticism. So naturally, there was no way it was gonna clear everyone's checklist.

I thought it was great, myself, with my only real complaint being that Billy was supposed to be 14 years old but the story is written more like he's half that age or even younger. No 14-year-old is gonna try the mattress thing, nor is any 14-year-old gonna get moved to a different foster home instead of juvie for that stunt he pulled at the beginning of the movie.

---

Yeah a couple of the DC characters are inherently more hard (compared to Marvel) to do justice on film. Shazam is an old concept but the movie used the modern interpretation from the 2010s by Geoff Johns and Gary Frank. If they went full 1940's, it would have been wack.

Funny thing, Captain Marvel aka Shazam was a bigger comic book property in the 1940's at his peak than Superman was. Then when Fawcett Comics got sued and taken to court, he got put on the shelf. The writer who did a lot of that early Captain Marvel work then went on to do Superman at DC and applied a lot of those same concepts to him. The superpets, other people with similar powers, etc.

---

It's weird how little respect Captain Marvel/Shazam gets. When given a chance, he's been consistently better than Superman. His comics were more popular than Superman's. His film serial was better than Superman's. His one and only live action movie has been better than any live action Superman movie. (In my opinion, anyway.)

It's like having a boxer who's better than Muhammad Ali, but never gets talked about.

---

I still think Superman 1 and 2 are great but I would agree that Shazam smokes any Superman movie for the last nearly 40 years.

---

tommybel89 posted...

Yeah a couple of the DC characters are inherently more hard (compared to Marvel) to do justice on film. Shazam is an old concept but the movie used the modern interpretation from the 2010s by Geoff Johns and Gary Frank. If they went full 1940's, it would have been wack.

Funny thing, Captain Marvel aka Shazam was a bigger comic book property in the 1940's at his peak than Superman was. Then when Fawcett Comics got sued and taken to court, he got put on the shelf. The writer who did a lot of that early Captain Marvel work then went on to do Superman at DC and applied a lot of those same concepts to him. The superpets, other people with similar powers, etc.

Not very familiar with Shazam (saw the movie and his appearances in JLU), what's the difference between 2010 and 1940s version?

@Ruvan22 I'm not a big expert, but I've read the 75th Anniversary hardcover. The 40's stuff is just more kid-friendly and it fits that era and the audience they were going for (mostly kids). It had a distinct kiddy art style that fit the material and the stories. The 2010's version is more modern and dark and contemporary. The art is more realistic (Gary Frank is an awesome artist). Similar to how Man of Steel was a modern update of Superman. In the comics, I think the books Birthright and Superman Earth One influenced the MoS tone. It's typical of the dark tone in comics that started somewhere in the late 80's.

If you want to look visually, just Google "CC Beck Captain Marvel" and "Gary Frank Shazam" to see what the stuff looks like in comparison.

---

tommybel89 posted...

@Ruvan22 I'm not a big expert, but I've read the 75th Anniversary hardcover. The 40's stuff is just more kid-friendly and it fits that era and the audience they were going for (mostly kids). It had a distinct kiddy art style that fit the material and the stories. The 2010's version is more modern and dark and contemporary. The art is more realistic (Gary Frank is an awesome artist). Similar to how Man of Steel was a modern update of Superman. In the comics, I think the books Birthright and Superman Earth One influenced the MoS tone. It's typical of the dark tone in comics that started somewhere in the late 80's.

If you want to look visually, just Google "CC Beck Captain Marvel" and "Gary Frank Shazam" to see what the stuff looks like in comparison.

Thanks for the summary! I grew up with Timmverse Batman, so my starting point for the DC is definitely flavored by the modern tastes (saw a few episodes of the 60s Batman and could never get into it because of the tone)

No problem. Yeah in general the Bruce Timm cartoons are a good entry point. I think a lot of older people here started on the 90's Batman along with those Burton and Schumacher movies. The younger people liked Justice League Unlimited but I was past cartoons at that point.

---

tommybel89 posted...

No problem. Yeah in general the Bruce Timm cartoons are a good entry point. I think a lot of older people here started on the 90's Batman along with those Burton and Schumacher movies. The younger people liked Justice League Unlimited but I was past cartoons at that point.

Initially I wasn't a fan of JLU after the longer episodes of JL, but JLU really handled the Camdus arc well - the final episodes of both it (with The Flash) and of the second Apokolips invasion were tear jerkers. I'd recommend watching through if you haven't!