Superhero Cinematic Civil War - Part 57

[DlAMONDZ]

Apparently according to Jeremy Conrad(who’s pretty hit-or-miss) Warners is working on yet another JL live action movie that will be separate from the Snyder-Verse. Take it with a grain of salt for now.

Will they cast an actual blonde for Aquaman and Flash this time?

 

[Fincher]

What would be the point of using Keaton to revamp the Snyderverse only to make an unrelated Justice League film? Well, unless this is the backup plan they were talking about.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I say maintaining multiple live action versions of the same character in live action at the same time is a bad idea, in part, because it invites negative comparison. Cavill's Superman and Miller's Flash were both subject to criticism because many fans preferred their WB counterparts. It also leads to fans asking why the powers that be can't just move the guy or gal we already like onto the big screen, and it can create bad feelings when a role is recast. And I think fans would be less likely to watch, say, a Flash movie if they are sitting on dozens of Flash episodes in their Netflix queue.

Both Marvel and DC have a sufficiently large stable of characters. Both should be able to avoid putting dueling versions of the same character onscreen.

I mostly agree. I will make an exception though for someone like Keaton who is clearly playing an older version of the character. For the most part though I don't think it works for the same reasons you suggest.

 

[The Batman]

I disagree. I’m actually find this fascinating, and it makes DC stand out more from Marvel. DC comics never seemed to be as cohesive a universe as Marvel, and DC has always played around with the multiverse way more than Marvel has.

I agree.

All this feels like proper DC Comics to me, compared to them just copying the MCU like a lot of people essentially want.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Embrace the multiverse.

 

[flickchick85]

Anything that doesn't leave DC fans stuck with the Snyderverse as their flagship franchise for the next several years will have my full support. So yes, embrace that multiverse, WB!

 

[Roose Bolton]

I mean it’s DC. The Multiverse and Elseworlds are an inherent and integral part of that brand.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Nah, the sequels had plenty of issues but were still miles better than the prequels to me.

I would love to believe that there’s a non-Snyder Justice League in the pipeline, but at this point, I just can’t.

In my search for inner peace, I have come to love all the Star Wars movies for what they are, outside of one truly unfortunate kiss. That said, I'd take the ST easily over the PT, but I watch them and love them all anyways.

When it comes to JL, I honestly don't know if I want to see it right now. I think I'd probably prefer the fun of the spin off, smaller groups, where they seem to have more in common. I want to see a Bat family film, the Flash family or my personal dream flick, a modern Bombshell style film.

 

[jmc]

WB has been kinda into this thing of having multiple heroes playing the same role for some reason.

Remember back in the day, they had JL: Mortal which would've caused for 2 versions of Batman (Armie Hammer and Christian Bale). And while JLM was going, they still were developing solos with separate actors than the JLM cast for various heroes like Flash, GL, etc.

I guess in theory it shoudn't be a problem. I don't think the audiences really care. I just don't see why do it, but that's just me

The bigger problem would be over saturation.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I like multiverse stuff, but that said I don't want every superhero to have 10-15 superheroes and such. But on occasion, it is fun.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Embrace the multiverse.

So yes, embrace that multiverse, WB!

I mean it’s DC. The Multiverse and Elseworlds are an inherent and integral part of that brand.

I like multiverse stuff, but that said I don't want every superhero to have 10-15 superheroes and such. But on occasion, it is fun.

We discuss multiverse when the Multiverse of Madness is near us, but nobody is talking about Doctor Stephen Strange.

 

[Marvel united]

I would be more excited for a BW related movie if it took place after Infinity War during the five year time skip so we could see more of Widow’s life in a post-snap world. Making it a prequel that largely takes place between Civil War and Infinity War doesn’t do much for me. Does anyone here really care to know what Natasha was doing after Civil War? Now that doesn’t mean the movie will be bad or anything, but I can’t say I’m that enthused about the timeline this movie takes in.

I'm glad the MCU is embracing the legacy characters. These characters are symbols.

Anyone can wear the mask

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I would be more excited for a BW related movie if it took place after Infinity War during the five year time skip so we could see more of Widow’s life in a post-snap world. Making it a prequel that largely takes place between Civil War and Infinity War doesn’t do much for me. Does anyone here really care to know what Natasha was doing after Civil War? Now that doesn’t mean the movie will be bad or anything, but I can’t say I’m that enthused about the timeline this movie takes in.

Oh, thank the maker. I am excited to see Pugh have a nice, long run!

 

[chamber-music]

If we were gonna get a Constantine movie I'd rather it be more comic accurate instead of bringing Keanu back who is nothing like John Constantine.

The Keanu movie was enjoyable as it's own thing but as a John Constantine Hellblazer adaptation it wasn't that great.

I would rather see a more faithful adaptation. Hopefully they keep him a chain smoking, ex-punk musician, con-man anti-hero English magician who relies more on guile and knowledge of magic than flashy spells. I hope they don't do all the magical shotgun and shooting lightning bolts from his hands type stuff from previous adaptations.

Newcastle is Constantine's version of the eclipse from Berseker and it would be cool to see it done right. The TV version and animated movie watered the Newcastle incident down because it isn't PG friendly.

I still think Joe Anderson would make awesome comic accurate John Constantine.

 

[fan4stic]

I'm glad the MCU is embracing the legacy characters. These characters are symbols.

Anyone can wear the mask

Black Widow doesn't wear a mask...

I don't have a lot of interest in symbols. I've connected with the characters.

 

[fan4stic]

Nah, the sequels had plenty of issues but were still miles better than the prequels to me.

I think, to me, the prequels have a, for the most part, more interesting, different story and characters, and in spite of what I think may be what, I think, to me, may be more technical improvements, I think it lacks those things.

 

[jmc]

I say fork multiverses. But that's just me.

 

[Zarex]

I say **** multiverses. But that's just me.

Me as well. You shouldn't use the multiverse as a Get Out Of Jail Free Card for poor character management. Which also is jumping back into a JL film without prior establishment of your All Star lineup. But I am looking forward to seeing Keaton as Batman again.

I'm glad Marvel Studios is embracing legacies with Black Widow and Cap. I prefer that method for refreshing your superhero lineup.

 

[jmc]

The problem with things like multiverses and legacy characters and whatnot is it's not actually all that creative, you're more often than not just doing the same thing only in a slightly different way. Some characters lend themselves ok to that sort of thing, Green Lantern is the obvious one because even if Hal Jordon might be the most prominent member, he's one of many Green Lanterns. The other thing is if you've got a multiverse going then it really starts to dilute things. There's value in scarcity because it can build anticipation. If we were to get Batman movies each year then it's never going to feel like an event. It's less work to repaint than build from scratch. If I were to ever have a successful comic character I would have it written in stone - no multiverses, lol.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The problem with things like multiverses and legacy characters and whatnot is it's not actually all that creative, you're more often than not just doing the same thing only in a slightly different way. Some characters lend themselves ok to that sort of thing, Green Lantern is the obvious one because even if Hal Jordon might be the most prominent member, he's one of many Green Lanterns. The other thing is if you've got a multiverse going then it really starts to dilute things. There's value in scarcity because it can build anticipation. If we were to get Batman movies each year then it's never going to feel like an event. It's less work to repaint than build from scratch. If I were to ever have a successful comic character I would have it written in stone - no multiverses, lol.

There is a place for it with the right character (ex. Flash, Dr. Strange), but my fear is that they will overuse it as an excuse to get Batman in every film which will overshadow the actual protagonist. We don't need Batman in everything. Just like with Marvel we never needed Wolverine in everything. Eventually it just becomes harmful to storytelling and building new characters.

Legacy characters are something I largely really don't like. Again it takes away creativeness and uniqueness of characters. Take The Avengers. Iron Man and Captain America are gone now, so let's see them replaced by characters like Black Panther and Captain Marvel. Different characters that can stand on their own. I don't have a lot of interest in seeing them replaced by Budget Iron Man and Captain America.

 

[jmc]

The thing about most characters who take over a legacy mantle as well is that it’s kinda rare for the new guy/girl to even equal the predecessor, so the new person is always in the predecessors shadow. The problem is it’s very hard for a company to let go of a character once it becomes popular. I don’t doubt for a second had Chris Nolan not earned a truck load of money for WB with his first two Batman films and Inception that Warner would have continued on with the series without him and eventually integrated it with MoS and the wider DC universe. I get why companies would look to multiverses as a way to have their cake and eat it too, but I also think they lose sight as to why you have to continuously evolve. The MCU might be the biggest franchise in the world at the moment, but let’s not forget most of the characters were created 50 years ago. The last major evolution in superheroes probably happened in the early 90’s with the likes of Spawn. We’ve yet to really have anything different emerge from the genre/medium in quite some time, the problem is I can’t see that big change happening because of those legacy characters.

 

[Web-Head]

I still enjoyed Ant-Man and the Wasp enough, but not nearly enough as I enjoyed the first. Hopefully the third one can bounce back

Paul Rudd's Ant-Man 3 Will Reportedly Start Production Next Year

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

Multiverses and time travel laws like the one in Endgame inevitably confuses the hell out of me.

What happened to just killing off a character and then resurrecting them in a convoluted yet convenient way?

It worked for Jean Grey for years.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Multiverses and time travel laws like the one in Endgame inevitably confuses the hell out of me.

What happened to just killing off a character and then resurrecting them in a convoluted yet convenient way?

It worked for Jean Grey for years.

Or, you know, killing them and letting them die. That'd be even better.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

Or, you know, killing them and letting them die. That'd be even better.

Or why even kill them in the first place? Superheroes are a different breed, and with a franchise like Marvel for example, with this big open world and with fans wanting to see more crossovers, they should’ve relaxed on killing people off.

They could write them out in a plethora of different ways.