Do You Have Faith In James Gunn’s New DCU?

[kguillou]

It's Snyder's fault that the DCEU started with such a bad foundation... and it's everyone else's fault that they continued to build from that foundation.

But did they though.? Because i look at movies like Shazam 1 and 2, WW 84, The Suicide Squad and The Flash and i see films that strayed VERY far from the Snyder template and were very much of their directors’ own creative visions.

 

[FunkMiller]

But did they though.? Because i look at movies like Shazam 1 and 2, WW 84, The Suicide Squad and The Flash and i see films that strayed VERY far from the Snyder template and were very much of their directors’ own creative visions.

Shazam 1 was full of obvious references to Snyder's characters. Multiple times. It was firmly sold as a movie within the same DCEU universe that Snyder created. Wonder Woman 84 is set in the DCEU. The Suicide Squad is set in the DCEU. The Flash is DCEU, with multiple DCEU characters.

Like it or not, a huge part of Snyder's legacy is the people he cast in those movies, and the narrative he laid out that's been built out from. Yes, subsequent film makers put their spin on that universe, but it's still his universe.

If Snyder's movies had been huge successes both critically and commercially I could agree that the current failures are nothing to do with him... but they weren't. They were divisive, underperforming films that started things off on a bad foot. It's testament to WB's stupidity that they still tried to build out from them.

 

[kguillou]

Very respectfully, I just dont agree with that. I dont think you can lay the every film since Aquaman’s failure on him. WW84 for example, what about Snyder led to that movie’s very tepid reception? ESPECIALLY since the FIRST movie was so well received? (On the back of BvS no less?) Patty screwed that one up all by herself. WW84 could have easily been another huge success with a different script and direction. The same with Shazam. People LIKED the first one, what happened with the second is on Sandberg, HE dropped the ball.

I 100% agree with you all that snyder started things off rocky but we have empirical evidence that audiences were willing to get onboard with subsequent dceu films so long as they were good and appealing. The subsequent filmmakers failed to make appealing films; plain and simple.

 

[TheScarecrow]

Its the exact same strategy. At its core, the DCEU’s biggest fallacy was crafting their movies around niche audiences and not general mass audiences. Am I PERSONALLY excited for a Mangold Swamp Thing movie and a Supergirl movie? Yes, definitely. Are those the right ones to focus on NOW? Along with The Authority of all things? Ehhhhhh i really dont think so.

This is what the DCEU did, they greenlit these eclectic, offbeat movies like both Suicide Squad movies and Birds of Prey and Shazam and Black Adam and…this Flash(point) movie. And audiences rejected them because they didnt lay the groundwork for people to care about these characters. You gotta get the big names right first and then you can start introducing B and C list characters later once your brand and world building is established and the GA is onboard. This is what Marvel did.

The Avengers ALLOWED Gunn to introduce the Guardians and the GA gave it the benefit of doubt because it was linked to that universe they’re invested in .Without the The Avengers, Guardians would have flopped no matter how good a movie it was.

It’s fine to do niche movies, so long as the budget reflects that.

 

[kguillou]

It’s fine to do niche movies, so long as the budget reflects that.

That i absolutely agree with.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Gunn took the ultimate niche IP, characters literally NO ONE cared about and made them all movie stars.

Snyder took the most ICONIC heroes and made them all completely dull and boring.

Again, faith needs to be earned but Gunn deserves the benefit of the doubt.

 

[samsnee]

The last two movie attempts at Superman had them as dour joyless characters. Superman Returns made him a deadbeat dad. Man of Steel pretended to be about hope but it was anything but that.

No one needs it to be Reeves 2.0 but it doesn’t need to be a 180 either.

 

[Vlyse]

I think Gunn makes crowd-pleasing films and seeing GOTG Vol. 3 reinforced that belief for me, but his DCU slate announcement didn't do much for me.

I don't think it was a good idea to announce so many projects and I believe they should focus first on the Trinity and Aquaman, who all got call-outs as individual franchises by Zaslav at that WBD earnings call last August.

Those 4 should not just have live-action movies but other things as well. I still don't see WW/Aquaman getting the kind of love Supes/Bats get, even though their movies were the biggest and most profitable successes out of the DCEU.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Gunn's overwhelming praise for Flash definitely gives me pause.

I'm not a huge fan of his movies, as I don't really vibe with the undercurrent of ugliness or vulgarity he employs (Even in Guardians, I just find too much of it to be unpleasant. Taser Face and the fleshy planet are not really what I like to subject my eyes to).

Now I never expected him to bring that to Superman, but the fact that he apparently thinks a Flash movie with babies in microwaves, teeth falling out, an annoying character with spaghetti sauce and other food constantly being shoved down his throat, charred bodies, etc etc, and doesn't find any of that stuff to be out of place or cringy, so much so that he's bringing Muschieti back, definitely makes me think he might let that kinda stuff fly in his universe, in the wrong properties.

(Now, Brave and the Bold, given the Morisson comic's influence, might ironically be a property where that bizarro comedy/vulgarity might work, but still. It's alarming).

 

[FunkMiller]

(Now, Brave and the Bold, given the Morisson comic's influence, might ironically be a property where that bizarro comedy/vulgarity might work, but still. It's alarming).

I love Morrison's work, but it very much is best suited to the comic book page, rather than up on the screen. There are many other Batman writers and artists I'd be looking to adapt before him.

 

[B]

Gunn took the ultimate niche IP, characters literally NO ONE cared about and made them all movie stars.

Snyder took the most ICONIC heroes and made them all completely dull and boring.

Again, faith needs to be earned but Gunn deserves the benefit of the doubt.

There's a stark difference between working with lesser known characters that no one cared about & working with more iconic characters. You've a lot less creative freedom for a start, or I should rephrase that, you need to be a hell of a lot more cautious with just how creative you are because even something that you might consider inconsequential a creative decision will undoubtedly upset some people.

He's obviously done a fantastic job with GoTG franchise overall & deserves his chance he's got with Superman & DC, but it's important for perspective, the original GoTG was reportedly a near $200m movie so it wasn't some small picture, it had a stellar cast with some recognisable names beforehand, and, most importantly, was widely advertised as being part of the MCU coming at a time when it was peaking in terms of popularity, all of which unquestionably contributed to garnering initial interest in the characters/film contributing to it's success that it probably wouldn't have enjoyed had it been a side project outside of the MCU.

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

There's a stark difference between working with lesser known characters that no one cared about & working with more iconic characters. You've a lot less creative freedom for a start, or I should rephrase that, you need to be a hell of a lot more cautious with just how creative you are because even something that you might consider inconsequential a creative decision will undoubtedly upset some people.

Spot-on. The difference between the Guardians and Superman is that no one had expectations going into the Guardians of the Galaxy. Audiences were a blank slate with that property. I imagine so were some comic readers. By contrast, everyone and their mother has an opinion on Superman and even the slightest change will irk someone. That's different with characters that even the most diehard comic readers know little about. At least with Batman, for the most part, people are open to different takes on the character and his world. But Superman?

The trunks, the music, the curl in his hair, his power set- even if you're a casual fan of Superman, you have an opinion on how you'd want to see him portrayed. I think that might be why few, if any, directors want to touch a Superman property, because no matter what they do, someone will be displeased. Even Superman and Lois, as much as I adore that show and love Hoechlin's take on the character, has its share of detractors. They may be few compared to other iterations, but they exist.

 

[kguillou]

Here's the thing with GotG though, in an alternate reality if Guardians of the Galaxy were released as a standalone movie out of nowhere, no MCU ties, just a one-off thing...is it nearly as successful? i think GoTG needed the MCU boost to get butts in seats to give it the benefit of the doubt.

 

[B]

Here's the thing with GotG though, in an alternate reality if Guardians of the Galaxy were released as a standalone movie out of nowhere, no MCU ties, just a one-off thing...is it nearly as successful? i think GoTG needed the MCU boost to get butts in seats to give it the benefit of the doubt.

This is the point I was making. It's hard to say with certainty, however I don't believe it would have been anywhere near as successful. Even if the film still had good critical/general audience reviews, good word of mouth, I don't think it would have had the sheer volume of people seeing it to make a sizeable difference.

The only reason I bring it up is it's a bit of a myth that Gunn plucked these characters from a pile, crushed them with his hands & turned them into diamonds, pun intended, all by himself. There were other favourable factors that gave his GoTG an initial helping hand.

Not intending to diminish what Gunn achieved as even with this, he still actually had to make good, enjoyable, entertaining films.. but I think working with characters like Superman is a completely different animal altogether, particularly now as the character & DC's stock is in the crapper after the last DCEU iteration that had left the general audience & the fanbase tepid.

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

I put the blame on Warner Bros. more than any one person. Otherwise, other directors are equally responsible for seemingly "tarnishing" the brand. This is the studio that's been meddling with DC films and creators as far back as Superman II.

Does that absolve every creator? Of course not, and while I'll happily admit enjoying the likes of Man of Steel, BvS and so on, despite them not being four quadrant crowd-pleasers, the studio deserves equal blame for pivoting any time there's some negative feedback.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

What if Snyder made GOTG?

Would it have been the same fun, enjoyable, four quadrant crowd pleaser that Gunn made, or would it have been just as morose, dull and pretentious as his DC films and struck out with the general audience? I think we all know the answer to that.

The MCU rub helps but it'll only get you so far. Look at Eternals. A standalone MCU movie made by an Oscar winner. How well did that do?

Snyder doesn't know how to make crowd pleasers. His films appeal to a very niche crowd. Let's stop blaming the characters and the audience and start placing the blame on the person responsible for ruining the brand.

 

[Asr]

David Corenswet To Play Superman In ‘Superman: Legacy’; Rachel Brosnahan Is Lois Lane – Deadline

 

[Primal Slayer]

The casting doesnt change my hopes one way or another. It's a nice starting point but Superman castings are the easiest to get right for anyone not trying to be "different".

I need to see the other projects,WW related content, and how they handle the Supergirl/Superman dynamic.

 

[Babillygunn]

I love Morrison's work, but it very much is best suited to the comic book page, rather than up on the screen. There are many other Batman writers and artists I'd be looking to adapt before him.

Personally, I hate Morrison’s work (All-Star Superman aside) and I agree that his stuff isn’t what I want to see adapted. The aesthetic that he portrays in his writing makes my stomach churn.

 

[Gerardfan2]

I don't think Gunn is the right person to be co-head of DC Studios. His Phase 1 schedule is too big and too made up of what seems to be his favs but probably won't appeal to general audiences. Does he read the room? Does Zaslav? The heyday of superhero films is over and yet they seem oblivious to that. His recent remarks about a world map for the characters is like re-arranging chairs on the Titanic. It's irrelevant. Many of these projects may never come to fruition. Focus first on launching the DCU with a few great projects - then he can worry about his map.

The fact that Superman Legacy seems to be morphing from a standalone Superman film into an ensemble film is a red flag. Fans want a Superman film but it's as if Gunn is oblivious to this. Or Zaslav - some reports suggest Zaslav is forcing the overstuffing of Superman Legacy but either way it's going to backfire. Look what happened when Snyder added all those characters to BvS. How many lines did Cavill's Superman get in that film? At least with Snyder we got a proper standalone Superman film before things went off the rail.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

I don't think Gunn is the right person to be co-head of DC Studios. His Phase 1 schedule is too big and too made up of what seems to be his favs but probably won't appeal to general audiences. Does he read the room? Does Zaslav? The heyday of superhero films is over and yet they seem oblivious to that. His recent remarks about a world map for the characters is like re-arranging chairs on the Titanic. It's irrelevant. Many of these projects may never come to fruition. Focus first on launching the DCU with a few great projects - then he can worry about his map.

The fact that Superman Legacy seems to be morphing from a standalone Superman film into an ensemble film is a red flag. Fans want a Superman film but it's as if Gunn is oblivious to this. Or Zaslav - some reports suggest Zaslav is forcing the overstuffing of Superman Legacy but either way it's going to backfire. Look what happened when Snyder added all those characters to BvS. How many lines did Cavill's Superman get in that film? At least with Snyder we got a proper standalone Superman film before things went off the rail.

I am sure Zaslav is the one demanding that Superman: Legacy feature a supporting cast of B-List DC heroes and not the director known for his love of B-List comic characters.

 

[Gerardfan2]

I am sure Zaslav is the one demanding that Superman: Legacy feature a supporting cast of B-List DC heroes and not the director known for his love of B-List comic characters.

I am sure Zaslav is the one demanding that Superman: Legacy feature a supporting cast of B-List DC heroes and not the director known for his love of B-List comic characters.

I am sure Zaslav is the one demanding that Superman: Legacy feature a supporting cast of B-List DC heroes and not the director known for his love of B-List comic characters.

Yeah. it's more likely Gunn. A few years back Gunn said he wouldn't do a Superman film as he didn't know a way in. I guess he's found that way in - cast a bunch of additional non-Superman characters and make an ensemble film.

From the Hollywood Reporter today regarding the loss of fans facing Gunn and DC Studios.

"The future of the DCU relies on Warners’ awareness that much of this particular fan base is less interested in cinematic universes and cameos, and more invested in filmmakers with distinct, sometimes even controversial, visions."

That sounds like a dig at Gunn and his Legacy which is going to have a lot of cameos which are presumably there to launch other films. Rather than tell a good Superman tale.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Yeah. it's more likely Gunn. A few years back Gunn said he wouldn't do a Superman film as he didn't know a way in. I guess he's found that way in - cast a bunch of additional non-Superman characters and make an ensemble film.

From the Hollywood Reporter today regarding the loss of fans facing Gunn and DC Studios.

"The future of the DCU relies on Warners’ awareness that much of this particular fan base is less interested in cinematic universes and cameos, and more invested in filmmakers with distinct, sometimes even controversial, visions."

That sounds like a dig at Gunn and his Legacy which is going to have a lot of cameos which are presumably there to launch other films. Rather than tell a good Superman tale.

Does a single human being think he is trying to launchpad a Metamorpho movie? It is so incredibly easy to see what Gunn is actually going with those characters if you look at Gunn's style of filmmaking and storytelling. It ain't Wonder Woman and Batman who are in the supporting cast of this movie, it is a bunch of B and C list dorks.

Gunn's CBMs have big casts. It is part of his style.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

I don't think Gunn is the right person to be co-head of DC Studios. His Phase 1 schedule is too big and too made up of what seems to be his favs but probably won't appeal to general audiences. Does he read the room? Does Zaslav? The heyday of superhero films is over and yet they seem oblivious to that. His recent remarks about a world map for the characters is like re-arranging chairs on the Titanic. It's irrelevant. Many of these projects may never come to fruition. Focus first on launching the DCU with a few great projects - then he can worry about his map.

The fact that Superman Legacy seems to be morphing from a standalone Superman film into an ensemble film is a red flag. Fans want a Superman film but it's as if Gunn is oblivious to this. Or Zaslav - some reports suggest Zaslav is forcing the overstuffing of Superman Legacy but either way it's going to backfire. Look what happened when Snyder added all those characters to BvS. How many lines did Cavill's Superman get in that film? At least with Snyder we got a proper standalone Superman film before things went off the rail.

Alright, so, Marvel united. Buddy, pal, amigo, old sport. I have a very important question for you: are you a sicko? You come back here time and again spouting the same dull, repetitive diatribes about James Gunn's stubborn refusal to not step down from his position and let you, the most brilliant scribe of our time as your previously mentioned experience of taking a screenwriting class attests, write your own glorious and perfect vision of what the movie ought to be. Always the same tone, always the same structure of posts, not even a basic effort to hide yourself all of which leads me to believe you get some deeply odd pleasure from one of us rolling our eyes, hitting the ban button and then forgetting you exist until you emerge from your bog or wherever it is you live to start the whole shebang over again as though you are stuck in some sort of banal, dorky Groundhog's Day loop.

Anyway. Bye. I hope you find a less deeply sad use of your time.

 

[Frodo]

We'll have to see what capacity these characters will be featured in the film , but have no doubt ,we'll see them again in other projects.

He ain't casting all these actors for a one shot appearance in SL .

I also doubt they'll just be cameos , which is the other train of thought in fandom.

While they may not have as big a roles as Superman regular supporting cast, I highly doubt they'll just be one in scene of the movie.

But the idea that they're all getting solo spin off films is a stretch.

So I don't think their appearances will fall into either extreme of fan theories.

The film won't be setting up solo spin off films, nor will they just be cameos in SL.

That's my speculation , without seeing a script , at least.