*** DC Extended Universe ***
827,345 Views |
7643 Replies |
Last: 10 mo ago by TCTTS
veryfuller said:
tHeY hAvE nO pLaN!
Gunn's lack of communication on his grand plan is really frustrating. It would help answer so many questions. Makes me think he doesn't have one, but surely he presented one to get the job?
his plan does not kick off on screen until 2025.Quad Dog said:
Gunn's lack of communication on his grand plan is really frustrating. It would help answer so many questions. Makes me think he doesn't have one, but surely he presented one to get the job?
why should he be tipping the plan at this point? let it unfold.
C@LAg said:his plan does not kick off on screen until 2025.Quad Dog said:
Gunn's lack of communication on his grand plan is really frustrating. It would help answer so many questions. Makes me think he doesn't have one, but surely he presented one to get the job?
why should he be tipping the plan at this point? let it unfold.
We obviously don't need to hear the entire plan, but WB/DC had a big, online event months ago, where Gunn introduced the first six or seven projects for the new DCU, touting it as major reboot. But it was an event that left everyone more confused than ever, because in addition to all of the new titles/characters announced, two of the projects announced were Peacemaker season two, along with an Amanda Waller series starring Viola Davis, both of course holdover titles/characters from the DCEU, neither of which were announced as part of the "Elseworlds" banner that Gunn specifically ascribed to projects like The Batman and Joker, that don't take place in the DCU. Since then, Gunn has also been wishy washy about Momoa continuing as Aquaman and Gadot continuing as Wonder Woman.
So all we want to know is the basic nature of this "reboot" and how these old DCEU characters will be a part of it, which doesn't seem like too much of an ask at this stage. If there's going to be a season two of Peacemaker, how will it take place in the same universe as Corenswet's Superman? Or if Mamoa and Gadot return as their respective characters, how will it be explained that they're interacting with a completely different Batman, one who now suddenly has a Robin by his side? The actors themselves don't even know the answer, yet Gunn seems hellbent on avoiding the question like the plague for some reason, which is further muddying the waters for not only the DCU, but things like The Flash, Blue Beetle, and Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom, all of which still need to make money for WB, before they presumably shove some (?) or all (?) of them aside for this new universe.
assumung Gunn has a plan, maybe he actually wants it to unspool in a surprising way without spoonfeeding the fans all of the backstory almost two years in advance.
DC lives on the whole multiverse concept, where everything has its place and can exist at the same time as everything else. that is litearlly how they have operated for decades.
this strategy is no different. they can have content from all over the place.
it is why there are going to be multiple batmans and supermen, when no one asked for any of that. we do not need prime superman and black superman. we do not need reeves stand-alone batman while also (presumed) mainstream batman. but we are getting all of that anyways. those can occur, as can elseworlds, etc.
as for avoiding answers... that as been Gunn's MO for a long time. See how he dealt with the run-up to the release of GOTG in how he answered questions and addressed rumors.
I am sure as he starts the marketing for Superman, he will be more open with details on how things will be spooling out . But for now, it is way too early, esepcially with the delays that the strikes are going to add to everything.
DC lives on the whole multiverse concept, where everything has its place and can exist at the same time as everything else. that is litearlly how they have operated for decades.
this strategy is no different. they can have content from all over the place.
it is why there are going to be multiple batmans and supermen, when no one asked for any of that. we do not need prime superman and black superman. we do not need reeves stand-alone batman while also (presumed) mainstream batman. but we are getting all of that anyways. those can occur, as can elseworlds, etc.
as for avoiding answers... that as been Gunn's MO for a long time. See how he dealt with the run-up to the release of GOTG in how he answered questions and addressed rumors.
I am sure as he starts the marketing for Superman, he will be more open with details on how things will be spooling out . But for now, it is way too early, esepcially with the delays that the strikes are going to add to everything.
Again, Gunn already did exact what you're saying...
- He specifically said that the non-prime, non-DCU "bucket" is going to be called "Esleworlds," and that anything that's not part of the DCU will be labeled/considered as such. This is basically where the "multiverse" idea comes into play, though none of these characters will interact with each other, nor with the DCU.
- He then said that new projects X, Y, Z, etc will all part of the newly rebooted DCU, and that will be his primary concentration.
- All of this while confusingly saying that Peacemaker season two and the Amanda Waller are part of the latter, not the former, without any explanation whatsoever.
- All of this while "firing" most actors from the DCEU, yet for some reason leaving other actors in limbo.
It would be fine if the non-fired actors were in on the plan, but when they're left just as confused as everyone else, it's objectively not a good look. It would also be fine if Gunn caveated the hard reboot sell with how these "legacy" characters will cross over, in a teasing/winking fashion, saying something along the lines of "And I can't wait for you to see how these legacy characters fit into this new world."
But he's doing none of that, which goes way beyond simply wanting to surprise the audience, into confusion the hell out of them, in a way that's actively hurting the box office and causing PR nightmares.
- He specifically said that the non-prime, non-DCU "bucket" is going to be called "Esleworlds," and that anything that's not part of the DCU will be labeled/considered as such. This is basically where the "multiverse" idea comes into play, though none of these characters will interact with each other, nor with the DCU.
- He then said that new projects X, Y, Z, etc will all part of the newly rebooted DCU, and that will be his primary concentration.
- All of this while confusingly saying that Peacemaker season two and the Amanda Waller are part of the latter, not the former, without any explanation whatsoever.
- All of this while "firing" most actors from the DCEU, yet for some reason leaving other actors in limbo.
It would be fine if the non-fired actors were in on the plan, but when they're left just as confused as everyone else, it's objectively not a good look. It would also be fine if Gunn caveated the hard reboot sell with how these "legacy" characters will cross over, in a teasing/winking fashion, saying something along the lines of "And I can't wait for you to see how these legacy characters fit into this new world."
But he's doing none of that, which goes way beyond simply wanting to surprise the audience, into confusion the hell out of them, in a way that's actively hurting the box office and causing PR nightmares.
I am not sure that many people care about the DCU at the moment to have it be any more of a pr disaster than having Blue Beatle, and Aquaman 2 all tank miserably at the box office.
Honestly, WB thinking about how to bridge content to 2025 makes more sense than some of their other actions. I wonder if they could get a WW3 end of DCU movie or Max TV show done before 2025?
Honestly, WB thinking about how to bridge content to 2025 makes more sense than some of their other actions. I wonder if they could get a WW3 end of DCU movie or Max TV show done before 2025?
Is it simplistic to say that ***** always wins, in regards to Peacemaker? I don't know how it would fit into the overall universe to keep Peacemaker, but I also don't think it's crazy to think that he'd try to fit the show his wife stars in into that universe.
I'm old enough to remember first reactions posted on these boards of both The Flash and Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (that were positive, perhaps overly so, and then by and large were disappointing movies).Brian Earl Spilner said:
*Although I did like both of those.
He doesn't need to spoon-feed us the whole plan, but he's already created an expectation that there is no plan. For perspective, we've just lived through an era where we all experienced the following:
The common thread above is that knowing where you are going is the base criteria of success (as with any business or venture), and so far, there is no indication he knows where to take this or is being hindered behind the scenes.
I say that because all we have to go on are his disjointed announcements alongside other confusing and contradictory statements by actors and executives involved with the new DCU. We have a series of own goals by the studio and him from a comms perspective.
Now couple that with the following headwinds and my confidence in this endeavor is currently low:
- Star Wars Sequel Trilogy - A trilogy from the most popular, rabidly followed property of all time that famously and stupidly had no overarching plot which is now hated by most in the worst case and generates mixed emotions best case.
- Marvel Infinity War Arc - A twenty-filmish odyssey with a beginning, middle, and satisfying end that was executed relatively perfectly with A+ casting.
- Marvel Multiverse - A mish mash of releases post Infinity War Arc that sometimes have easter eggs and loose connections back to characters in IWA or with other mish mash characters airing in parallel all of which is now floundering because no one has any idea where we are going with 5(?) movies and 5-6(?) series into it. And the reason it is floundering is because of the very concept that Gunn has announced for the DCU - the multiverse.
- DCEU - a rushed and poorly executed DC version of MIWA that was prematurely killed because it had no real vision other than to try and mimic MIWA's financial success.
The common thread above is that knowing where you are going is the base criteria of success (as with any business or venture), and so far, there is no indication he knows where to take this or is being hindered behind the scenes.
I say that because all we have to go on are his disjointed announcements alongside other confusing and contradictory statements by actors and executives involved with the new DCU. We have a series of own goals by the studio and him from a comms perspective.
Now couple that with the following headwinds and my confidence in this endeavor is currently low:
- A public who already has superhero fatigue.
- A backdrop (the multiverse) that lends itself to scope creep, confusion, and complexity that gives most everyone tired head right out of the gate.
Don't forget the Sony Spidey-less villainsverse and the Fox X-Men universe!
Creature Commandos and The Authority exist solely on the goodwill of James Gunn's name, not any kind of audience demand. For his sake I hope that goodwill still exists - and is still worth more than the DC brand - by the time those shows/movies come out.
Creature Commandos and The Authority exist solely on the goodwill of James Gunn's name, not any kind of audience demand. For his sake I hope that goodwill still exists - and is still worth more than the DC brand - by the time those shows/movies come out.
We know James Gunn can make good movies, but we don't know he can oversee a cinematic universe. Even his GotG movies largely existed on their own, insulated from the rest of the MCU by the vacuum of space. His one attempt to play into a larger universe, introducing Adam Warlock into GotG 3, felt forced and fell flat.
He might be able to put a great DCU plan together, but he hasn't shown a mastery of that kind of storytelling yet,
A comparison would be the Russo brothers, who showed in Winter Soldier, Civil War, Infinity War, and End Game that they are expert at weaving together larger narratives with movies that both stand alone as compelling stories and support larger arcs for all of the characters they draw in.
He might be able to put a great DCU plan together, but he hasn't shown a mastery of that kind of storytelling yet,
A comparison would be the Russo brothers, who showed in Winter Soldier, Civil War, Infinity War, and End Game that they are expert at weaving together larger narratives with movies that both stand alone as compelling stories and support larger arcs for all of the characters they draw in.
Thanks and gig'em
Blue Beetle, the character *in* the movie, along with the actor playing him - NOT the movie itself, seeing as Blue Beetle the movie is part of the DCEU - will be the first character/actor in the newly-formed DCU, one who, in-movie (the DCEU's Blue Beetle), will reference events from the DCEU's Man of Steel, but will then go on to be part of a universe where David Corenswet is Superman, not Henry Cavill. Nope, not confusing at all...
#BlueBeetle will include references to #ManOfSteel pic.twitter.com/9aggal1L2T
— Culture Crave 🍿 (@CultureCrave) August 14, 2023
Oh, and with Barbie's massive success for Warner Bros, word is that Margot Robbie will now return as Harley Quinn yet again for the studio... but in the DCU this time... after having been directed by James Gunn in the DCEU, playing the same character, for the same James Gunn who now runs the DCU, which is totally different from the DCEU...
TCTTS said:
Blue Beetle, the character *in* the movie, along with the actor playing him - NOT the movie itself, seeing as Blue Beetle the movie is part of the DCEU - will be the first character/actor in the newly-formed DCU, one who, in-movie (the DCEU's Blue Beetle), will reference events from the DCEU's Man of Steel, but will then go on to be part of a universe where David Corenswet is Superman, not Henry Cavill. Nope, not confusing at all...#BlueBeetle will include references to #ManOfSteel pic.twitter.com/9aggal1L2T
— Culture Crave 🍿 (@CultureCrave) August 14, 2023
I'm sorry but Gunn is a dumbass for doing this. I'm assuming the studio is still meddling because surely he's not this dumb.
So unnecessary. Just rip the bandaid off.
I agree, but not for keeping BB, for keeping the MoS reference.
I love that movie as everyone knows, but it just adds confusion.
I love that movie as everyone knows, but it just adds confusion.
The thing that blows my mind is, you JUST had a Flashpoint movie where you created an endless number of multiverses.
Why not use THAT as the jumping-off point for your new cinematic universe? That way you can keep everything you want (Peacemaker, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman), but also get a clean break in your new universe where nothing ever has to tie back into the old DCEU.
I guess I understand not wanting to do two universes simulateneously, but if you're gonna cherry pick, just keep doing one-offs all you want in the old DCEU and maybe keep those on streaming while you let the new cinematic universe do its thing in theaters. Win win.
But this half-measure where apparently Peacemaker and Harley Quinn still exist in the new DCU somehow, makes absolutely zero sense.
Why not use THAT as the jumping-off point for your new cinematic universe? That way you can keep everything you want (Peacemaker, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman), but also get a clean break in your new universe where nothing ever has to tie back into the old DCEU.
I guess I understand not wanting to do two universes simulateneously, but if you're gonna cherry pick, just keep doing one-offs all you want in the old DCEU and maybe keep those on streaming while you let the new cinematic universe do its thing in theaters. Win win.
But this half-measure where apparently Peacemaker and Harley Quinn still exist in the new DCU somehow, makes absolutely zero sense.
This is disappointing. I was hoping that Gunn, with his proven track record in this genre, would be able to build a quality cinematic universe. This news does not necessarily indicate that his universe will be a disaster (I didn't think the DCEU was as bad as many do, although it could have been far better), but one thing it does remind me of is the overall disaster than many DC movies seem to have been, going all the way back to the 80s. Seems to me, just my opinion with nothing to link to, that Warners just loves to meddle in these movies. Superman: The Movie and (at the time of release) Superman II were fantastic, then along comes 1983 and 1987 and we get two more Superman movies of decreasing quality. In fact, I'd call The Quest for Peace to be one of the 3 worst movies I have ever seen - and there is another DC/WB movie on that list. Oh, and in 1984 they released Supergirl, which even though Helen Slater was smoking hot in that costume, the movie itself sucked ass.
Batman 1989 was great. Batman Returns was decent, at least until penguins started shooting rockets from their backs. Then enter Joel Schumacher, who promptly tried to mix Burton's Batman with the goofy TV series, and you get two movies of decreasing quality, with Batman & Robin the second movie in the list I mentioned above.
Superman Returns was a good movie overall, although there were some things in that one that didn't resonate with me, a lifelong Superman fan (most notably Superman having knocked up Lois Lane in Superman II and now there's this Superkid).
Chris Nolan's Batman trilogy seemed impervious to anything WB might have attempted, as that was as solid a set of movies as one could ever have hoped for.
Green Lantern was a mess, but I did rewatch it a year or so ago and it wasn't as terrible as I remembered it to be. Still wasn't good, though.
Of course, this was all during the time that Marvel was clearly building something impressive, so when Man of Steel came out in 2013, I thought we were going to get something of similar quality but with characters that I was more familiar with (having grown up a big fan of both Superman and Batman, and even the old Wonder Woman TV series). Man of Steel was a great start, and while I did truly enjoy Batman v Superman, that was not the right direction to go. It was clear Warners was more interested in "catching up" to Marvel. BvS could still have been a part of what they were doing, but only after a proper foundation had been laid through individual character movies such as Marvel had done with Thor and Captain America to follow Iron Man's first two movies. Warners eschewed that approach for BvS, which was subtitled "The Dawn of Justice" - it was clear they were going for the big Avengers-like teamup in only their third (or was it 4th, following the solo Wonder Woman, yeah, I think it was) movie in the DCEU.
Now with Blue Beetle being considered both part of the DCEU and Gunn's new universe, and with everything else already mentioned, this looks like more meddling on WB's part and not just allowing the talented Gunn to exercise a proper vision.
Batman 1989 was great. Batman Returns was decent, at least until penguins started shooting rockets from their backs. Then enter Joel Schumacher, who promptly tried to mix Burton's Batman with the goofy TV series, and you get two movies of decreasing quality, with Batman & Robin the second movie in the list I mentioned above.
Superman Returns was a good movie overall, although there were some things in that one that didn't resonate with me, a lifelong Superman fan (most notably Superman having knocked up Lois Lane in Superman II and now there's this Superkid).
Chris Nolan's Batman trilogy seemed impervious to anything WB might have attempted, as that was as solid a set of movies as one could ever have hoped for.
Green Lantern was a mess, but I did rewatch it a year or so ago and it wasn't as terrible as I remembered it to be. Still wasn't good, though.
Of course, this was all during the time that Marvel was clearly building something impressive, so when Man of Steel came out in 2013, I thought we were going to get something of similar quality but with characters that I was more familiar with (having grown up a big fan of both Superman and Batman, and even the old Wonder Woman TV series). Man of Steel was a great start, and while I did truly enjoy Batman v Superman, that was not the right direction to go. It was clear Warners was more interested in "catching up" to Marvel. BvS could still have been a part of what they were doing, but only after a proper foundation had been laid through individual character movies such as Marvel had done with Thor and Captain America to follow Iron Man's first two movies. Warners eschewed that approach for BvS, which was subtitled "The Dawn of Justice" - it was clear they were going for the big Avengers-like teamup in only their third (or was it 4th, following the solo Wonder Woman, yeah, I think it was) movie in the DCEU.
Now with Blue Beetle being considered both part of the DCEU and Gunn's new universe, and with everything else already mentioned, this looks like more meddling on WB's part and not just allowing the talented Gunn to exercise a proper vision.
Will it really matter much how a film does or doesn't fit into the universe/canon as long as it's good?
If I'm hiring James Gunn, I'm saying: Make the best damn movies you can. If you can tie them all together, great. But don't sacrifice quality or casting choices for the sake of a continuity that only gets more convoluted and difficult to abide by over time.
Quality movies trump all else.
If I'm hiring James Gunn, I'm saying: Make the best damn movies you can. If you can tie them all together, great. But don't sacrifice quality or casting choices for the sake of a continuity that only gets more convoluted and difficult to abide by over time.
Quality movies trump all else.
Absolutely loved Blue Beetle. Super fun movie. I really loved the family dynamic, it's definitely the thing that sets this apart from other superhero movies.
And the Mexican / Latino references were on point. Got a ton of laughs and applause throughout the movie at my theater.
It's not the most unique superhero, but damn if that wasn't a fun time. Personally I think it's easily DC's best since ZSJL.
And the Mexican / Latino references were on point. Got a ton of laughs and applause throughout the movie at my theater.
It's not the most unique superhero, but damn if that wasn't a fun time. Personally I think it's easily DC's best since ZSJL.
that's funny...i finally got around to watching The Flash and oh my...
i think i have a pretty high tolerance for "bad" movies and i can generally enjoy myself in even the worst films...but that was just awful. they somehow made a movie about a super fast guy drudge on forever
i think i have a pretty high tolerance for "bad" movies and i can generally enjoy myself in even the worst films...but that was just awful. they somehow made a movie about a super fast guy drudge on forever
I HATE the way he runs. Always have. It's dumb as ****.
When he first did it in Justice League, it was like he'd never seen someone run before. But they're doing it again in that intro!
When he first did it in Justice League, it was like he'd never seen someone run before. But they're doing it again in that intro!
I'm more bothered by the cadence, the way he's at like normal speed cycles but also traveling insanely fast is just...odd.
Counterpoint: when I watched the Matrix for the first time and Trinity is sprinting over the angled rooftops in the opening scene I was like dang they COACHED this girl because her form is perfect.
Counterpoint: when I watched the Matrix for the first time and Trinity is sprinting over the angled rooftops in the opening scene I was like dang they COACHED this girl because her form is perfect.
They brought in Lisa Kudrow to serve as running consultant.
double aught said:
Will it really matter much how a film does or doesn't fit into the universe/canon as long as it's good?
If I'm hiring James Gunn, I'm saying: Make the best damn movies you can. If you can tie them all together, great. But don't sacrifice quality or casting choices for the sake of a continuity that only gets more convoluted and difficult to abide by over time.
Quality movies trump all else.
I 100% agree. Just make good movies. For those that just can't get over obsessing over these timeline arguments I suggest listening to William Shatner…
Don’t miss the full trailer this Thursday. #Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom - Only in theaters December 20. pic.twitter.com/Cwk1ElJ8lN
— Warner Bros. Pictures (@wbpictures) September 11, 2023
How bad of a bomb do we think that will be.
I forgot it is even coming to be honest, and I don't see anyone really caring about the DC universe again (outside of The Batman) unless the reboot universe really knocks it out of the park.
I forgot it is even coming to be honest, and I don't see anyone really caring about the DC universe again (outside of The Batman) unless the reboot universe really knocks it out of the park.
Not a single image or trailer for this thing has been released until today, a mere three months before the release of the movie itself. I can't remember the last time, if ever, that's happened for a blockbuster of this scale. Which probably tells us how much Warner Bros cares about it, or rather how little faith they have.
It'll probably do better than The Flash, but that's obviously not saying much, and will still almost assuredly lose money. Either way, I can't believe this is our big Christmas blockbuster this year. So depressing….
It'll probably do better than The Flash, but that's obviously not saying much, and will still almost assuredly lose money. Either way, I can't believe this is our big Christmas blockbuster this year. So depressing….
I've basically forgotten this movie is coming. Not excited about it at all. And I generally enjoyed the first one.
Just kinda meh about comic book movies these days.
Just kinda meh about comic book movies these days.
ok, so has DC just decided they aren't investing any more money into CGI/digital effects for these films? i thought the effects in The Flash were distractingly bad. i guess we'll see when the full trailer drops, but this little teaser looks like more of the same.TCTTS said:Don’t miss the full trailer this Thursday. #Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom - Only in theaters December 20. pic.twitter.com/Cwk1ElJ8lN
— Warner Bros. Pictures (@wbpictures) September 11, 2023
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:
I've basically forgotten this movie is coming. Not excited about it at all. And I generally enjoyed the first one.
Just kinda meh about comic book movies these days.
That is appropriate considering how meh they have all been lately.
Really hoping the Superman movie in 2025 turns things around
Featured Stories
See All
The TexAgs Tailgate: No. 15 Texas A&M vs. New Mexico State
by Richard Zane
19:50
1d ago
5.5k
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United
A&M's approach remains the same with NMSU coming to Aggieland
by Olin Buchanan
27:22
17h ago
4.4k
8:23
3h ago
761
TexAgs' The Night Before: No. 15 Texas A&M vs. New Mexico State
by Luke Evangelist