Big reshuffle in little DCEU

[Clertar]

Things are getting complex at the DCEU household, and it's only getting started. I thought it could be good to have a thread to discuss the ongoing and the upcoming changes in the DCEU.

As of the creation of this first post, the latest developments are:

Henry Cavill is out as Superman
DC and WB announce an upcoming Supergirl film
Michael B Jordan is rumored to be in talks to replace Cavill as the cinematic Superman
Affleck is out as Batman


As it is now, Justice League was probably the first and last film that we'll ever get with the lineup that we see below. If they replace Cavill and Affleck, are they going to not recast also the Flash and Cyborg? Gal Gadot might be the only actor playing the same role the next time we see the Justice League in the silver screen. Exciting times.

https://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/t134wuojkpksj98dfdt6.jpg

[Callos_DeTerran]

Things are getting complex at the DCEU household, and it's only getting started. I thought it could be good to have a thread to discuss the ongoing and the upcoming changes in the DCEU.

As of the creation of this first post, the latest developments are:

Henry Cavill is out as Superman
DC and WB announce an upcoming Supergirl film
Michael B Jordan is rumored to be in talks to replace Cavill as the cinematic Superman
Affleck is out as Batman


As it is now, Justice League was probably the first and last film that we'll ever get with the lineup that we see below. If they replace Cavill and Affleck, are they going to not recast also the Flash and Cyborg? Gal Gadot might be the only actor playing the same role the next time we see the Justice League in the silver screen. Exciting times.

That's...not exciting at all. :smallfrown: That's down right depressing actually.

[Wraith]

As of the creation of this first post, the latest developments are:
Henry Cavill is out as Superman

I'm curious, please; where has this been confirmed?

I've seen it go back and forth for most of this week; the most recent headline I could find is that he was supposed to have a cameo in Shazam! but he actually doesn't due to a disagreement over pay.
As of Wednesday, Warner Brothers and Cavill's manager both tweeted as much; "the cape is still in [Henry's] closet" to paraphrase, so it's not necessarily the case that he isn't going to be Superman ever again, but that they don't have any specific movies lined up for him.

Not a hugely reassuring statement, given how quickly Hollywood can change when it wants to, but for the time being I think it's still him under contract and there's no immediate plans for ANY Superman movie, with Cavill in it or otherwise?

[factotum]

If they replace Cavill and Affleck, are they going to not recast also the Flash and Cyborg?

Um, even assuming the Cavill thing is true--and there are major doubts about it, as Wraith points out--I don't see how the logic follows here? In fact, I'd say they'd be *more* likely to keep the other actors unchanged so they're not swapping out everyone all at once.

[Devonix]

I'm curious, please; where has this been confirmed?

I've seen it go back and forth for most of this week; the most recent headline I could find is that he was supposed to have a cameo in Shazam! but he actually doesn't due to a disagreement over pay.
As of Wednesday, Warner Brothers and Cavill's manager both tweeted as much; "the cape is still in [Henry's] closet" to paraphrase, so it's not necessarily the case that he isn't going to be Superman ever again, but that they don't have any specific movies lined up for him.

Not a hugely reassuring statement, given how quickly Hollywood can change when it wants to, but for the time being I think it's still him under contract and there's no immediate plans for ANY Superman movie, with Cavill in it or otherwise?

Yeah I'd posted it before but it's looking more now like just rumors. Likely rumors but nothing concrete.

[Dienekes]

Pity about Cavill. When the script got out of his way so he could act, I thought he did a decent job. The moment when he first learns to fly and he’s just happy and enjoying himself was good. And the only time I thought “wow look at that it’s Superman!” Was the bit where he’s laughing and joking with the other members of the JL at the very end of the last movie.

Oh well. May his next venture have a better script.

[Callos_DeTerran]

I'm curious, please; where has this been confirmed?

I've seen it go back and forth for most of this week; the most recent headline I could find is that he was supposed to have a cameo in Shazam! but he actually doesn't due to a disagreement over pay.
As of Wednesday, Warner Brothers and Cavill's manager both tweeted as much; "the cape is still in [Henry's] closet" to paraphrase, so it's not necessarily the case that he isn't going to be Superman ever again, but that they don't have any specific movies lined up for him.

Not a hugely reassuring statement, given how quickly Hollywood can change when it wants to, but for the time being I think it's still him under contract and there's no immediate plans for ANY Superman movie, with Cavill in it or otherwise?

My own cursory research into the matter is that he was supposed to have a cameo in Shazam! that can't happen because of scheduling conflicts but there was later negotiations about pay that fell through. This is not to say anything else.

Then there is WB/DC talking about the belief that they feel like Superman is similar to Bond in that who is Superman should keep changing every bunch of movies or period of time. That's something else.

Then there's all but confirmation that WB/DC does not have any movie appearances lined up for Cavill in the near future...like...at all and instead they want to focus on a Supergirl movie/origin story and Superman being part of it wouldn't make sense (since he'd apparently be a toddler at the time it's taking place?). That is its own thing.

Then there's Cavill's agent (and Cavill himself?) talking about how the cape is still in his closet and how Cavill would love to play Superman some more because he feels there is a lot of stories to be told with Superman but it comes in a way that suggests he'd want the right director to do the movie and the vague hint that he's done with the character for the moment. Not entirely by his own choice, but that he is.

Roll all that together and you can easily paint the picture that Cavill is being replaced as Superman if they even decide to do another standalone Superman movie but that is the matter that seems to be in doubt.

[Celestia]

Michael B Jordan is rumored to be in talks to replace Cavill as the cinematic Superman
If that turns out to be true, I can only imagine the ****storms it will unleash.

I really hope it turns out to be true.

[Callos_DeTerran]

If that turns out to be true, I can only imagine the ****storms it will unleash.

I really hope it turns out to be true.

I don't. Michael B Jordan hasn't really impressed in any role I've seen him in...which is admittedly just Creed and Black Panther.

[Celestia]

I don't. Michael B Jordan hasn't really impressed in any role I've seen him in...which is admittedly just Creed and Black Panther.
I thought he was great in Black Panther.

[The Jack]

A black superman isn't a white Luke Cage, but it's still way too out there. Superman's all about old fashioned farmboy values and I'd rather see a solid take on superman than a crazy new retake. I recently watched a video discussing why Robbin hood and King arthur stories keep bombing, and it's because they all go for 'fresh new takes' when we haven't seen the standard, conventional tellings in 50 odd years. It could be the same for superman that way. Give me a John Stewart, a Vixen, maybe even an aqualad somewhere down the line, The martian manhunter can pose as whatever race you like, or develop Cyborg some, but Superman would ideally be white, perhaps racially ambiguous, but he needs to look Kansas.

Cavil certainly looks like an excellent superman, but he's a terrible Clark Kent.

I think the fix should be easy.
Use the 5th Dimension.

The omnipotent dudes with the names you can't spell come in and "fix" the DC universe. We get a new Luthor, a new Louis Lane (because working out that Clark Kent is Superman so easily is absolutely terrible, and I don't think the actor's right) and Clark gets a lecture and a fun explanation for everything and how he should be filling his roll as superman. They're from the 5th dimension, they can be as meta as they like. After they leave, we get some Superman-being-superman heroics and some Clark-being-Clark life. Lex Luthor builds death bots or something for him to destroy.

Mister Mxyzptlk of course thinks the council of 5th dimensional beings was too good on Clark, and that he's too high'n mighty now, and of course goes to interfere with Clark's life in the crazy ways he does. Of course, Clark outsmarts him in the end as he does, but I think this'd be the freshest way to save superman there ever could be.

Seriously though, They need to CGI Clark onto Cavil if he can't do a good Kent. The man looks too good.

[Metahuman1]

I thought he was great in Black Panther.

He was great as a genocidal racial supremacists so deep seated in his believes about the intrinsic superiority of his race based on superficial traits that if you flipped skin tones and changed his costume, he'd have made a perfect German SS officer circa early 1940's Germany.




That is NOT what I want from freaking SUPERMAN, one of the most hopeful and optimistic and inspiring people in the multiverse, the big blue boy scout!

Indeed, that's not what anyone who's invested in Superman wants.



Now, look, if they wanted to do some make up on him and make him Martian Manhunter, whom doesn't have that morality baggage, or give him John Stuart, whom is known to struggle abit more (No, seriously, go look at the introductory issue in the Green Lantern/Green Arrow run from the late 60's early 70's.), he could be quite good at that.

But he's not superman. That's not a slight against him. Cavell wasn't superman, Ian McKelline (I just know I have butchard that mans name.) and Patrick Stuart aren't Superman, Gal Gadot, possibly the best actor OR actress the DCEU has, isn't superman. Not everyone, not even all good actors, are superman.





As for the other three announcements, well, the supergirl thing could go either way. I'll wait and see on that one. Frankly though, they need a superman reboot before they even try to bring her in.

And as for the other two. Good. Objectively for the better of the DCEU. They both sucked as those characters and should NEVER have been cast as them. They were completely wrong for it. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Now can we PLEASE have a none removable moratorium on allowing Affleck to be involved in super hero projects? He's screwed it up every time he's done it, it's time to just admit he can't handle it.

[leafman]

That rumor has no basis, it is just people trying to stir stuff up to call the naysayers racist. The only reference to him being considered for the role comes from a Deadline article that doesn't even try to cite a source, anonymous or otherwise. He hasn't hinted that he might be interested either.

As far as Cavill, in or out doesn't matter. If they go forward with the Flashpoint movie, they can recast Batman and Superman and say the change in appearance for the characters were a ripple effect of the Flash messing with the time stream.

[Callos_DeTerran]

I thought he was great in Black Panther.

I thought the character in Black Panther was good, but the performance was...lack luster but I can't pin down exactly why. His lines and mannerisms just felt stilted and unnatural. I liked him in Creed a lot more, I just think he got out-acted.

Doesn't change the fact that nothing he's done has made me think 'he can convincingly be Superman'. Cavill does but that's in part because they down play the Clark Kent side.

[ben-zayb]

I'm cautiously optimistic about the Affleck/Cavill exits. While I agree with WB's stance that Superman (and Batman, actually) can be played by different actors a la Bond, those happened so far because they weren't really part of a single continuity.

I've been hoping for nothing but good things for the DCEU, but it seems like they just can't get it done except for Wonder Woman. Heck I loved the idea of making a Suicide Squad movie and the trailers hyped me up as all hell--but then the movie just turned out to be a mess (not financially, though).

At this point, I'd probably fast track a Flashpoint movie if I want the DCEU audiences to get a Watsonian explanation for these giant shakeup. Maybe have Cavill and/or Affleck either cameo/star in that movie alongside Ezra Miller.

In hindsight, I think this shows one of the less desirable outcomes on the "what if" scenario of building a cinematic universe that MCU riskily took with Iron Man a decade ago. Marvel paid off because of a good team behind the movies, but DC didn't.

[Callos_DeTerran]

I'm cautiously optimistic about the Affleck/Cavill exits. While I agree with WB's stance that Superman (and Batman, actually) can be played by different actors a la Bond, those happened so far because they weren't really part of a single continuity.

I've been hoping for nothing but good things for the DCEU, but it seems like they just can't get it done except for Wonder Woman. Heck I loved the idea of making a Suicide Squad movie and the trailers hyped me up as all hell--but then the movie just turned out to be a mess (not financially, though).

At this point, I'd probably fast track a Flashpoint movie if I want the DCEU audiences to get a Watsonian explanation for these giant shakeup. Maybe have Cavill and/or Affleck either cameo/star in that movie alongside Ezra Miller.

In hindsight, I think this shows one of the less desirable outcomes on the "what if" scenario of building a cinematic universe that MCU riskily took with Iron Man a decade ago. Marvel paid off because of a good team behind the movies, but DC didn't.

I really have to get around to seeing the other DCCU movies cause the two I've seen (Man of Steel and Wonder Woman) I've greatly enjoyed but one of them was very well praised as the best DCCU movie (Wonder Woman) while Man of Steel was...divisive.

[Rogar Demonblud]

My own cursory research into the matter is that he was supposed to have a cameo in Shazam! that can't happen because of scheduling conflicts but there was later negotiations about pay that fell through. This is not to say anything else.

Then there is WB/DC talking about the belief that they feel like Superman is similar to Bond in that who is Superman should keep changing every bunch of movies or period of time. That's something else.

Then there's all but confirmation that WB/DC does not have any movie appearances lined up for Cavill in the near future...like...at all and instead they want to focus on a Supergirl movie/origin story and Superman being part of it wouldn't make sense (since he'd apparently be a toddler at the time it's taking place?). That is its own thing.

Then there's Cavill's agent (and Cavill himself?) talking about how the cape is still in his closet and how Cavill would love to play Superman some more because he feels there is a lot of stories to be told with Superman but it comes in a way that suggests he'd want the right director to do the movie and the vague hint that he's done with the character for the moment. Not entirely by his own choice, but that he is.

Roll all that together and you can easily paint the picture that Cavill is being replaced as Superman if they even decide to do another standalone Superman movie but that is the matter that seems to be in doubt.

There's also the small detail that Cavill just signed a multi-year contract for The Witcher series, which is going to lockout pretty much any major movie roles just because of time commitment issues.

[Celestia]

In hindsight, I think this shows one of the less desirable outcomes on the "what if" scenario of building a cinematic universe that MCU riskily took with Iron Man a decade ago. Marvel paid off because of a good team behind the movies, but DC didn't.
Totally. The people behind the DCEU didn't seem to know what they were doing. They tried to copy the MCU while ignoring everything that made it a success. Not only did the MCU have movies that were individually good and could stand on their own, they created a thread of continuity between them that connected the movies without being obtrusive. In addition, they waited to bring out the Avengers. They made five movies, each one introducing one member of the team, so that when the team up movie came out, there was a minimum of character introduction. In fact, the only character in that movie who didn't have any prior development was Hawkeye. They even reused a villain so that the movie could focus on plot and interactions. The DCEU rushed things along and got sloppy.

If I had been in charge, I would have done things very differently. First, cut out Suicide Squad. That can be bumped to after Justice League because it's irrelevant right now. It adds too many unnecessary complications while trying to establish a foundation. After that, this is the order I'd make:

First, start with a Superman movie (the only thing they got right). He'll be the through line connecting the movies like SHIELD was in the MCU. Don't make it an origin story, though. We all know it already.

Second, a Flash movie. He's already popular from the show, and he's got the charm and charisma to be a good lead in a movie. The first movie may be the start of the franchise, but the second is the real hook that shows that the franchise can survive multiple movies. (It is actually a little surprising that the MCU survived Hulk.) Connect the Flash movie to the Superman movie by having a scene at the end where Flash meets Superman. This will create a bond between them and show that Flash has entered the majors instead of just being a street level hero.

Next, do a Wonder Woman movie. Setting it in the past, as it is now, works as the whole "horrors of war" angle neatly explains why she'd hang up the lasso instead remaining an active hero. However, at the end, show her being inspired by Superman to return to the hero job. Also, the movie begins hinting at the overarching plot by introducing the Mother Boxes and Steppenwolf when the latter attacks Themyscira to obtain the former.

The fourth movie will then be Batman and Robin and, like with the Wonder Woman movie, will be set in the past. Specifically, it will be the story about how Robin dies so as to explain Batman's issues in the modern day. The movie ends with, essentially, what is now the first scene in Superman v. Batman: Bruce Wayne surviving the alien attack from the Superman movie. This will refresh the audience's memory of the movie and set up for the next.

The fifth movie will then be Superman v. Batman, though edited. Cut out Doomsday completely. The movie works better if Batman is the one who kills Superman as that will actually justify the tension between him and the rest of the team. Have appearances by Wonder Woman and Flash at the end to set up this tension early.

After that, do an Aquaman movie. Like the Wonder Woman movie, it will be mostly self contained but will end in Steppenwolf taking the second Mother Box to advance the plot further.

The penultimate movie will be a Cyborg movie and will do much more to explain what the Mother Boxes are and set up the finale with the Justice League. It will also involve Batman figuring everything out in the end and coming up with the idea for a superhero team. Make sure to show the tension between Cyborg and Batman for the whole killing Superman thing.

Finally, do the Justice League movie. It'll start out with Batman trying to recruit the other heroes into his team, but there is, of course, a lot of tension. The main plot will involve Steppenwolf getting the third Mother Box, and Superman coming back to life to lead the team. Except this time, he actually will do something to inspire the others instead of just being a Bigger Gun. He'll be the first one to forgive Batman and bring the team together.

And there you go: one cinematic universe. Just make sure the movies are actually good, and you'll be competing with Marvel in no time.

[Callos_DeTerran]

Totally. The people behind the DCEU didn't seem to know what they were doing. They tried to copy the MCU while ignoring everything that made it a success. Not only did the MCU have movies that were individually good and could stand on their own, they created a thread of continuity between them that connected the movies without being obtrusive. In addition, they waited to bring out the Avengers. They made five movies, each one introducing one member of the team, so that when the team up movie came out, there was a minimum of character introduction. In fact, the only character in that movie who didn't have any prior development was Hawkeye. They even reused a villain so that the movie could focus on plot and interactions. The DCEU rushed things along and got sloppy.

If I had been in charge, I would have done things very differently. First, cut out Suicide Squad. That can be bumped to after Justice League because it's irrelevant right now. It adds too many unnecessary complications while trying to establish a foundation. After that, this is the order I'd make:

First, start with a Superman movie (the only thing they got right). He'll be the through line connecting the movies like SHIELD was in the MCU. Don't make it an origin story, though. We all know it already.

Second, a Flash movie. He's already popular from the show, and he's got the charm and charisma to be a good lead in a movie. The first movie may be the start of the franchise, but the second is the real hook that shows that the franchise can survive multiple movies. (It is actually a little surprising that the MCU survived Hulk.) Connect the Flash movie to the Superman movie by having a scene at the end where Flash meets Superman. This will create a bond between them and show that Flash has entered the majors instead of just being a street level hero.

Next, do a Wonder Woman movie. Setting it in the past, as it is now, works as the whole "horrors of war" angle neatly explains why she'd hang up the lasso instead remaining an active hero. However, at the end, show her being inspired by Superman to return to the hero job. Also, the movie begins hinting at the overarching plot by introducing the Mother Boxes and Steppenwolf when the latter attacks Themyscira to obtain the former.

The fourth movie will then be Batman and Robin and, like with the Wonder Woman movie, will be set in the past. Specifically, it will be the story about how Robin dies so as to explain Batman's issues in the modern day. The movie ends with, essentially, what is now the first scene in Superman v. Batman: Bruce Wayne surviving the alien attack from the Superman movie. This will refresh the audience's memory of the movie and set up for the next.

The fifth movie will then be Superman v. Batman, though edited. Cut out Doomsday completely. The movie works better if Batman is the one who kills Superman as that will actually justify the tension between him and the rest of the team. Have appearances by Wonder Woman and Flash at the end to set up this tension early.

After that, do an Aquaman movie. Like the Wonder Woman movie, it will be mostly self contained but will end in Steppenwolf taking the second Mother Box to advance the plot further.

The penultimate movie will be a Cyborg movie and will do much more to explain what the Mother Boxes are and set up the finale with the Justice League. It will also involve Batman figuring everything out in the end and coming up with the idea for a superhero team. Make sure to show the tension between Cyborg and Batman for the whole killing Superman thing.

Finally, do the Justice League movie. It'll start out with Batman trying to recruit the other heroes into his team, but there is, of course, a lot of tension. The main plot will involve Steppenwolf getting the third Mother Box, and Superman coming back to life to lead the team. Except this time, he actually will do something to inspire the others instead of just being a Bigger Gun. He'll be the first one to forgive Batman and bring the team together.

And there you go: one cinematic universe. Just make sure the movies are actually good, and you'll be competing with Marvel in no time.

Honestly I think a large part of the DCCU's trouble can be boiled down to them trying to play catch-up without covering the basics. That, and this is the big one, it didn't have the tone that a lot of people expected it to have or particularly wanted.

Marvel hinted at a cinematic universe long before they got anywhere close to even thinking about actually doing one, they just made standalone movies that on occasion referenced the other movies or had a running thread between them or hinted at other movies. But just look how many movies there was before Avengers came out!

DCCU took a gamble by hoping their heroes are established enough they didn't need to do movies for each hero, just...the gamble didn't pay off in a big way. Turns out people needed to be introduced to THIS version of the characters and DC, even then, needed to slow the hell down. Take Doomsday out of Batman v Superman for one, build up to the whole Mother Box thing.


....I actually don't object to the Suicide Squad movie or the fact DC wants to move to a de-centralized style of Cinematic Universe...or in other words one their characters share and occasionally meet each other in, but its otherwise a cohesive backdrop for all their different characters which...is a really cool idea. And perfect for one using the Justice League as a binding factor, one of the things I loved about the Justice League cartoon was that you could have multiple different things goin on at the same time in different places with different Leaguers and it was all fine. It made the world feel big and expansive but it still needs a strong core group.

In any case, I did like your framework!

[Jayngfet]

The thing is that if they'd done more generic versions of each hero it would be fine. Happy idealistic Clark Kent who doesn't kill covers all his bases. Batman is fine until you declare this one old and grizzled due to events we never saw. The Flash has a TV show so people know the character but that version is even father than the CW version from the comics. Cyborg was a B-Lister associated with a different team.

Every difference the MCU has is earned since it's in it's own context. The DCU has no such luxury if it wanted to play catch up.

[Clertar]

....I actually don't object to the Suicide Squad movie or the fact DC wants to move to a de-centralized style of Cinematic Universe...or in other words one their characters share and occasionally meet each other in, but its otherwise a cohesive backdrop for all their different characters which...is a really cool idea.


I'm not sure to what extent this is where things are moving towards, but rather an even more de-centralized Cinematic Universe where there isn't one universe that the characters share, but as much as a different universe for each of the movies.

In the upcoming Joker movie with Joaquin Phoenix, we've been told it's an auteur take on the Joker outside of the cinematic Justice League universe. The upcoming Batman movie that Affleck is about to leave anytime now has been rewritten and is going to be set earlier than the DCEU timeline, with a younger Batman. The other standalone Joker movie with Jared Leto is rumored to be the killing joke storyline, and if so the question is how that will fit the main continuity Batman's timeline. The Harley Quinn movie will be a Birds of Prey adaptation, but with Harley replacing Oracle---probably because the main continuity's Batman is so veteran that all of the Robin and Batgirl/Oracle plots have already happened (but see the Leto Joker movie...). The Wonder Woman films also take place outside of chronological continuity. They're making a New Gods film that will pave the way for the DC cosmic series of films, possibly also unrelated to the main DC timeline on Earth. The Justice League Dark project that Del Toro was working on is also independent of the DC heroic universe.

So the cinematic DCEU might be like the cinematic Marvel universe if we also counted the different X-Men timelines, and the Spider-man universes, and the Venom-verse (only all of them will be much leaner, and it's unclear who'll be left in the main timeline).

[Kitten Champion]

What Justice League demonstrated was that people fundamentally weren't engaged with the DCEU as a universe and didn't care about the direction of the meta-narrative. That people who turned out for Wonder Woman were interested in seeing Wonder Woman specifically and not another entry into the DCEU, which is the bane of this whole cross-brand synergy marketing dealie when they don't have real solid expectations that butts'll be in seats for when that DC logo appears in the production credits. Going even farther, that the negative momentum could easily drag down what could be otherwise successful movies -- not only failing to build upon itself but actively dragging itself downward.

Which is why I think Bob Chipman's mantra in his lengthy suggestions for a new DCEU is the best, just make one film at a time. Keep the inter-connective tissue loose if it need be there at all, focus on making a variety of distinct films in tone and sub-genera that work for each character and not obsess over delineating itself from Marvel or building to Justice League 2 -- which probably isn't the cards for a while anyways. Start from Flash in 2020, do the quick reshuffling of the universe to keep the actors who want to be there in their roles, and then start over with a new universe that no one need bother with the old one to watch.

They need to rebuild credibility with the viewers who they turned off, and doing it with an abrupt and fairly broad tonal change in their marquee x-over Justice League was not the way to go about it... apparently.

As for the - albeit technically murky - news of Cavill leaving, I don't care. He's not Robert Downey Jr. and definitely not Christopher Reeve, he didn't put an indelible mark on the Superman character and how people expect him to be characterized in the future with his performance. Inviting Michael B. Jordan to fill the role maybe not the best choice from a marketing perspective given Fan4stic.. and won't that be fun to discuss on the Internet?

I hope Affleck goes back to directing.

[Callos_DeTerran]

The thing is that if they'd done more generic versions of each hero it would be fine. Happy idealistic Clark Kent who doesn't kill covers all his bases. Batman is fine until you declare this one old and grizzled due to events we never saw. The Flash has a TV show so people know the character but that version is even father than the CW version from the comics. Cyborg was a B-Lister associated with a different team.

Every difference the MCU has is earned since it's in it's own context. The DCU has no such luxury if it wanted to play catch up.

The Superman shown in the DCCU I actually didn't mind...or even the different versions in general because it IS its own context, it just needed to take its time and didn't. Heck I liked that Superman, just felt it needed a bit of tweaking. Which apparently happened by Justice League? Dunno. Like I said, not caught up on the DCCU.

[Velaryon]

Clearly there's a lot of uncertainty with the news about the DCCU. Regardless, here's my take:

On Henry Cavill (maybe) leaving the Superman role:
1. I wouldn't blame him if he did,
2. I blame the script and directing for why I don't like these movies MUCH more than I blame Cavill himself, but
3. I won't miss him if he goes.

I did not like Man of Steel at all. I think the tone was wrong, the character of Superman was done a major disservice by the script, I think the film is poorly paced, and several characters either badly miscast (Jor-El) or very forgettable (Lois, Zod, pretty much everyone else except the Kents).

I didn't like Batman v Superman either, for all the above reasons plus Jesse Eisenberg, the weird take on Batman (not Affleck's fault), trying to do too much too fast, and most of all poor directing. At least Wonder Woman was good.

The less said about Suicide Squad the better, but somehow I disliked it less than the aforementioned films. It had a few good ideas, but they were mostly lost among the confused mess that is the rest of the film.

I didn't bother with Justice League and don't see any reason why I should.

If I were at the helm of DC, what I would do at this point is proceed with the next Wonder Woman film and put everything else on hold for now. See how Aquaman does, and whether it gets sorted into the good pile with WW or the junk pile with everything else. Then take a couple years to let the dust settle, recast the parts that went disastrously wrong *cough*Joker*cough*, get writers and directors who haven't proven themselves franchise-killers, and semi-reboot. I normally hate reboots, but the DC Universe so far has stumbled hard out of the gate, and it's better to cut that albatross loose from their necks before they keep trying to chase Marvel.

[Clertar]

Some set photos of Joaquin Phoenix on set for the Joker movie: http://www.justjared.com/2018/09/16/joaquin-phoenix-as-the-joker-first-look-at-standalone-movie/

http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/joaquin-joker/joaquin-phoenix-the-joker-movie-17.jpg

[Eldan]

Some set photos of Joaquin Phoenix on set for the Joker movie: http://www.justjared.com/2018/09/16/joaquin-phoenix-as-the-joker-first-look-at-standalone-movie/

http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/joaquin-joker/joaquin-phoenix-the-joker-movie-17.jpg

That... actually looks like a decent joker.

[The Jack]

They should really stop with the Joker, he's overexposed.

an Old-school penguin would really tap into the current age. No more deformities, just a rich gentleman who commits crimes because it's fun.

[Berserk Mecha]

I think all of the brouhaha about Cavill not wanting to shave his 'stash is a tell-tale indication that he's no longer interested in playing Superman. Whether or not WB is willing to let him go is another matter.

[Psyren]

The Cavill story strikes me as a leak by one side or another to try and get the upper hand in negotiations. That doesn't mean I discount it though; Hollywood Reporter and ScreenRant might not be the New York Times, but they're definitely not random blog posts either.

So with that said, I think Cavill and Affleck being out is more likely than not. Even if they stay, we can conclude WB's non-statement on the matter to be all but a flat-out admission that they have no idea what to do with either character in the wake of JLA's tepid reception. And since you can't realistically have a DCU without those characters (or at least without some kind of tacit acknowledgement of their absence, and said absence being temporary), that puts their entire project in limbo.

[Dr.Samurai]

Based on the fact that I don't like the current DCEU, I am okay with Cavill and Affleck leaving, if that's the case. Start over, as neither iteration of the big two were particularly popular . I don't think Gadot is good enough to try and save either. Wonder Woman is maybe the best of the DCEU movies, but that's not saying much and Gadot isn't stellar enough to avoid a full on reboot (she'd be the only one up for consideration, they should definitely reboot Aquaman, Flash, and Cyborg).

MBJ as Superman can't possibly be a real rumor because it would be such a catastrophic move after the DCEU's failure, so I think that's mostly BS.

A Supergirl movie seems misguided as they should generate interest in their big names before trying out Supergirl and the Joker. Suicide Squad was the same kind of mistake, and also a bad movie in and of itself.

Scrap everything and do it over, this time with a cohesive vision in mind ahead of production.

[Darth Credence]

Re: Michael B. Jordan as a new Superman - no, sorry, the guy has played too many different roles in superhero movies already. If you have to switch to different race, fine, I don't care, but pick a better person. Dayo Okeniyi (Thresh from the Hunger Games) would work.

Re: Penguin instead of Joker - I agree, although I think Batman Returns did some serious damage to Penguin as a brand. He should have been used in Nolan's trilogy, as he is the easiest of Batman's villains to ground in reality - he can simply be a gangster who likes to wear tuxedos, hence is called the Penguin. He needs to be used more, and to have the idea that he is deformed to go away.

Re: DCEU in general - at least time for a soft reboot. The quick and easy way is Flashpoint, and it has the built in advantage of easily allowing for WW to remain in continuity. I'd do that as quickly as possible, before the Joker movie or anything else except Aquaman. If they do Flashpoint right, and show the continuity broken, they can argue that all of the offshoots like the Joker movie are alternate universes that grew out of Flashpoint. Therefore, everything is in continuity, although most will have no effect on anything else. WW doesn't change, because it all happened long enough ago that Flashpoint doesn't make it back that far.

Re: Supregirl - I would certainly enjoy a Supergirl movie, although right now it is hard to imagine them having a Supergirl other than Melissa Benoist going on. Supergirl would also require a reboot to the DCEU if it happens as they are currently thinking. She either has to come after Superman exists, the same way she does in the comics, or they change everything, make her here first, and throw out current continuity. That would actually work well with Flashpoint, so it is possible. But it sounds like they want to do something similar to what Marvel is doing with Captain Marvel or to WW and have it be a prequel that doesn't affect anything. As far as I'm concerned, the way they are doing Captain Marvel is the biggest mistake Marvel has made in a while. Trying to shoehorn someone in as a prequel is not a good idea, especially someone this powerful. When Fury was freaking out about the nuke being sent to NY in the Avengers, why didn't he get out that pager?

[Rogar Demonblud]

I suspect the movie will address that, but "Not on Earth" is often a good assumption where Carol is concerned.

And if they're bringing MBJ into the DCEU, I want them to either reboot Steel or go whole hog and give us Icon.

[Friv]

A black superman isn't a white Luke Cage, but it's still way too out there. Superman's all about old fashioned farmboy values and I'd rather see a solid take on superman than a crazy new retake. I recently watched a video discussing why Robbin hood and King arthur stories keep bombing, and it's because they all go for 'fresh new takes' when we haven't seen the standard, conventional tellings in 50 odd years. It could be the same for superman that way. Give me a John Stewart, a Vixen, maybe even an aqualad somewhere down the line, The martian manhunter can pose as whatever race you like, or develop Cyborg some, but Superman would ideally be white, perhaps racially ambiguous, but he needs to look Kansas.

So, minor disagreement, and without discussing Michael B. Jordan specifically:

Superman isn't at all about being Kansas. Superman is about being a recent immigrant adopted by Americans, who learns American values and then has to be confronted by the fact that while he is American, he is also a refugee from a devastated culture that he barely knows. People hate him because he's an alien, because he's different, even though he really isn't that different at all, and other people hold him up as the perfect ideal of what it means to be American, but at heart he's a guy who's from two worlds and is trying to balance what those worlds are, along with being really good as a person.

When Superman was first introduced, all of the immigrants that people hated on were mainly white. They were Irish, or Italian, or Jewish, and those were the ones that mainstream society was dunking on. These days, those groups are largely integrated. I would say that if you were redoing Superman, it actually makes more sense for him to be either Latino or Middle Eastern in skin tone, adopted by white middle-class Americans and passed off as a refugee. Go with a Krypton that's a bit of a metaphor or parallel for Syria or a similar imploding regime, with authoritarian government preventing people from escaping, dropping people into the Phantom Zone without trial, and refusing to acknowledge impending disaster as the violence builds around them.

(I do think black doesn't leap out at me in the same way, given that black in America doesn't usually have the "recent immigrant" undertones to it, but it could.)

[Dr.Samurai]

I don't think Superman is about being an immigrant either. He was an infant when he came to Earth. The only thing he has from his home planet is his special abilities, which are divorced from his culture. People don't hate him. People love him. His main isolation from other people are his incredible powers, not that he's "an alien" or an immigrant.

There is no need to change his skin tone unless you want to be as on the nose as possible with this immigrant metaphor.

EDIT: Re: Kansas... I think that has a lot to do with his character. Superman is a salt-of-the-earth type character. It's because he grew up in rural America, raised by a couple of "simple folk" that he can be trusted to wield such incredible power. He is uncorruptible, and that's because of where he grew up, and who he was raised by. It's integral to the character. His morals and outlook are shaped by Kansas and the Kents.

[Darth Credence]

I suspect the movie will address that, but "Not on Earth" is often a good assumption where Carol is concerned.

And if they're bringing MBJ into the DCEU, I want them to either reboot Steel or go whole hog and give us Icon.

Not on Earth, sure. But Fury has that pager, and certainly believes that it will reach her wherever she is. Why didn't he break out the pager during the Battle of New York? Clearly, because at the time there were no plans for Captain Marvel to be out there in the galaxy. They are now retconning things, and that doesn't go well IMO.

As to Icon, sure. I would watch it, although I think there would end up being a lot of 'just a black Superman ripoff' talk. I still wouldn't go with MBJ, because he's had enough bites at the superhero apple at this point. Can't we come up with another black man who can do it?

[Kitten Champion]

I suspect the movie will address that, but "Not on Earth" is often a good assumption where Carol is concerned.

Yeah, I think it's a reasonably safe assumption that she's going to be out somewhere in the universe serving as a soldier for the Kree Empire. It's the role she'll be in for her movie - evidently - and there's no reason to believe it won't remain so by its conclusion

Incidently, the Captain Marvel starburst logo we see at the end credit scene isn't just Carol's or Mar'Vell's heroic emblem, it represents the Kree and Hala-- though it might be specific to her military unit in the movies.


Not on Earth, sure. But Fury has that pager, and certainly believes that it will reach her wherever she is. Why didn't he break out the pager during the Battle of New York? Clearly, because at the time there were no plans for Captain Marvel to be out there in the galaxy. They are now retconning things, and that doesn't go well IMO.


Interstellar travel isn't instant teleportation, even barring extraneous justifications the idea that Carol Danvers would magically appear in sufficient time to stop a nuclear missile that was going to reach its destination in minutes is absurd even by comic book standards. That'd be a spinning the Earth backwards and reversing time kind of Dues Ex Machina.

As to why he wouldn't do it otherwise, the Avengers are his A plan and you don't want to have the Kree Empire to intervene for you if you're rational and have any other choice.

Just going by how they're depicted in the MCU thus far, without getting into whatever they'll do in the Kree/Skrull conflict that's central to Captain Marvel.

[Clertar]

Personally I would like something quite close to this version of Superman: http://dresdencodak.tumblr.com/post/10979241054/rebooting-the-justice-league

One minor aspect is the fact that in both DC and DCEU continuity Kryptonians are identical to white Homo sapiens. In today's movies that is less and less plausible to an extent that it verges ridiculous.

[Celestia]

I don't think Superman is about being an immigrant either. He was an infant when he came to Earth. The only thing he has from his home planet is his special abilities, which are divorced from his culture. People don't hate him. People love him. His main isolation from other people are his incredible powers, not that he's "an alien" or an immigrant.

There is no need to change his skin tone unless you want to be as on the nose as possible with this immigrant metaphor.

EDIT: Re: Kansas... I think that has a lot to do with his character. Superman is a salt-of-the-earth type character. It's because he grew up in rural America, raised by a couple of "simple folk" that he can be trusted to wield such incredible power. He is uncorruptible, and that's because of where he grew up, and who he was raised by. It's integral to the character. His morals and outlook are shaped by Kansas and the Kents.
Kansas doesn't only contain white people, and there are plenty of non-white farmers. In fact, I'd bet that most people who work on farms these days are Latino.


Personally I would like something quite close to this version of Superman: http://dresdencodak.tumblr.com/post/10979241054/rebooting-the-justice-league

One minor aspect is the fact that in both DC and DCEU continuity Kryptonians are identical to white Homo sapiens. In today's movies that is less and less plausible to an extent that it verges ridiculous.
Wow. I really like what he did there. I would love to see that Justice League brought to life.

[Friv]

I don't think Superman is about being an immigrant either. He was an infant when he came to Earth. The only thing he has from his home planet is his special abilities, which are divorced from his culture. People don't hate him. People love him. His main isolation from other people are his incredible powers, not that he's "an alien" or an immigrant.

Superman is the Last Son of Krypton. The remnants of his culture form the basis for many of his most notable villains. His Fortress of Solitude contains the lost relics of his people. His cape is the last symbol of his family, found with him as a baby and kept by his parents so that he wouldn't lose all connection to his birthplace. He spends a lot of time dealing with the fact that his home culture has been destroyed, and that he doesn't even know who they were. Even the fragments of his destroyed home are his weakness.

He's almost entirely defined by being an immigrant, and specifically an immigrant who doesn't really remember his home. He's a first-generation refugee baby and that fact shades over every single aspect of his personality.

And people love him... except for the ones who don't. Lex Luthor is his archnemesis, the white industrialist genius railing against the aliens who are coming here and taking our jobs. Amanda Waller traditionally distrusts him because he is an alien and doesn't have humanity's best interests at heart - you can't trust the immigrant to side with the country they have joined. In the Modern Age, Metallo was created as an anti-Kryptonian weapon by a scientist who believed that Superman was the beginning of an invasion of legions of Kryptonians who would conquer the Earth.

Superman is the American Dream - the belief that you can move to the United States and become a hero through hard work and a good heart. He's an immigrant to the bones.

[Dr.Samurai]

Kansas doesn't only contain white people, and there are plenty of non-white farmers. In fact, I'd bet that most people who work on farms these days are Latino.
I didn't say Kansas only contains white people. My edit was in response to the notion that Superman is not about being Kansas, "at all", as it was put.. I think that's ridiculous. I think one of the major themes of Superman is that he can exist as he does precisely because he was raised by some simple farmers in Kansas USA. He has all the power in the world but it doesn't ruin him because he is a good and simple man. It's why he has that line in Man of Steel I grew up in Kansas, general. I'm about as American as it gets. That is very much ingrained into his character. Clark needed an ideal life with warmth and hard work and character so that he could wield the power he has for the sake of other people, and not let it get to his head. Contrast with Superman: Red Son, which looks at the Man of Steel if he had crash-landed in the Soviet Union and had been raised by different people. His racial identity is as important as his powers are, which is to say very important, but the fact that he was raised by the Kents in Kansas is just as important to the character.

@Friv: You can take Superman that way. There are multiple ways to take the character. I don't think Superman's defining theme is that he is an immigrant, and I don't think most people think of him in that way. Yes, it's part of his story and character, but I don't think most people consider him to be the poster child for immigrants. He is very much an earthling and an American, with the exception of his powers.

And just to be clear, yes, the people love him. Except for the few villains that don't. But apart from that, the people love him. Dearly.

[Devonix]

I didn't say Kansas only contains white people. My edit was in response to the notion that Superman is not about being Kansas, "at all", as it was put.. I think that's ridiculous. I think one of the major themes of Superman is that he can exist as he does precisely because he was raised by some simple farmers in Kansas USA. He has all the power in the world but it doesn't ruin him because he is a good and simple man. It's why he has that line in Man of Steel I grew up in Kansas, general. I'm about as American as it gets. That is very much ingrained into his character. Clark needed an ideal life with warmth and hard work and character so that he could wield the power he has for the sake of other people, and not let it get to his head. Contrast with Superman: Red Son, which looks at the Man of Steel if he had crash-landed in the Soviet Union and had been raised by different people. His racial identity is as important as his powers are, which is to say very important, but the fact that he was raised by the Kents in Kansas is just as important to the character.

@Friv: You can take Superman that way. There are multiple ways to take the character. I don't think Superman's defining theme is that he is an immigrant, and I don't think most people think of him in that way. Yes, it's part of his story and character, but I don't think most people consider him to be the poster child for immigrants. He is very much an earthling and an American, with the exception of his powers.

And just to be clear, yes, the people love him. Except for the few villains that don't. But apart from that, the people love him. Dearly.

He's defined as an immigrant. Hell his creators stated as much many many times. And yes they love him as one of their own. That's the point. He's a person from elsewhere welcomed as an American and accepted by people as simply another American. He's how we are supposed to treat Immigrants he's the Immigrant success story. AKA being American.

[The Jack]

Superman typically doesn't even know he's an immigrant till he's mid-late teens. If you're an immigrant and actively looking for the immigrant to identify with (I am and I am not) then you might try to grasp at that, but I don't think anyone else is or is supposed to. Hell, early superman did the whole " X exists and he's AMERICAN" angle; the dude has no memory of krypton and basically everything he's got comes from braniac; only some of what's in the fortress of solitude is kryptonian.

In retrospect, appearing to be a white human, as opposed to any other kind of human, makes sense given the whole red sun thing. Their sun is weaker than ours, they're not going to adopt many melanistic traits.

But if you push the whole immigrant thing and play up superman being "foreign", You diminish the hopefulness that defines the character. You would also detract from both Kryptonians and the minority people Kent takes the appearance of, it would seem incredibly weird to have a Syrian actor pining for Krypton and yet attempting to take up Syrian culture for what could only be appearances... (and, I'll be frank, you'll reduce the characters timelessness by taking something so current. It's tacky)
You also push up against Clark Kent, since his identity would be easier to determine as an ethnic minority. Clark Kent is half the character, and he's self depreciating in behavior. That's not a good thing to do with racial undertones.

I can't see the move being anything other than disingenuous. Immigrants don't form immigrant unions, they don't get along and like all the different kinds of immigrants because they moved to the same place for similar reasons. They don't identify with each-other because of that experience any more than they feel the differences because of different upbringing. It's some weird ivory tower thinking otherwise.
Superman grew up an american. I'm not an american, but it's wrong to think of him as a first generation immigrant; he grew up into the Kent's values. He's had to adjust to krypton, not to earth.

[Devonix]

Superman typically doesn't even know he's an immigrant till he's mid-late teens. If you're an immigrant and actively looking for the immigrant to identify with (I am and I am not) then you might try to grasp at that, but I don't think anyone else is or is supposed to. Hell, early superman did the whole " X exists and he's AMERICAN" angle; the dude has no memory of krypton and basically everything he's got comes from braniac; only some of what's in the fortress of solitude is kryptonian.

In retrospect, appearing to be a white human, as opposed to any other kind of human, makes sense given the whole red sun thing. Their sun is weaker than ours, they're not going to adopt many melanistic traits.

But if you push the whole immigrant thing and play up superman being "foreign", You diminish the hopefulness that defines the character. You would also detract from both Kryptonians and the minority people Kent takes the appearance of, it would seem incredibly weird to have a Syrian actor pining for Krypton and yet attempting to take up Syrian culture for what could only be appearances... (and, I'll be frank, you'll reduce the characters timelessness by taking something so current. It's tacky)
You also push up against Clark Kent, since his identity would be easier to determine as an ethnic minority. Clark Kent is half the character, and he's self depreciating in behavior. That's not a good thing to do with racial undertones.

I can't see the move being anything other than disingenuous. Immigrants don't form immigrant unions, they don't get along and like each different kinds of immigrants because they moved to the same place for similar reasons. They don't identify with each-other because of that experience any more than they feel the differences because of different upbringing. It's some weird ivory tower thinking otherwise.
Superman grew up an american. I'm not an american, but it's wrong to think of him as a first generation immigrant; he grew up into the Kent's values. He's had to adjust to krypton, not to earth.

We aren't pushing the immigrant thing because we're making it up. We're doing it because it's literally the point of the character. It's about someone from a different background joining the melting pot of the character and showing how introducing those new people make us all greater.

The Creators of the character made him this way. That being said, you don't need to make him a different race to change that immigrant aspect because people sometimes forget that White people are immigrants too.

[Dr.Samurai]

He's defined as an immigrant.
Do you mean "refugee"? And who defines him this way? Literally *any* time I talk about Superman with my friends, his (spurious) status as an "immigrant" never comes up. Not a single time.

Hell his creators stated as much many many times.
It is not the point of the character as you and Friv keep saying. You may make a case that he is an immigrant, but it's not the point of the character. His (again, spurious) status as an immigrant is an accident of John Carter from Mars, needing an explanation for Superman's powers, and the fact that their concept of a time-traveling infant from a future doomed Earth kept getting rejected.

And yes they love him as one of their own. That's the point. He's a person from elsewhere welcomed as an American and accepted by people as simply another American. He's how we are supposed to treat Immigrants he's the Immigrant success story. AKA being American.
You and Friv are providing perspectives from your time, which is fine. But it's not a coincidence that Friv wants to completely divorce Superman from his American heritage ("isn't at all about being from Kansas") and you are equating a successful immigrant story as being American. The former is just flat out wrong. The latter, your point, is not wrong, but it's also not the only way to be American. The Kents and their way of life and the culture that brought up Clark in Kansas is also "AKA being American", and I am arguing that that is a much larger part of Clark's identity than the fact that he is from another planet.

As The Jack mentions, Clark doesn't know anything about Krypton growing up. He is as much an immigrant as if my parents told me today "Oh, by the way, you are not American, you were actually born somewhere else and were left here in the States as an infant". I wouldn't suddenly develop an "immigrant" identity. Clark's life experiences do not mesh with most immigrants. Friv wants to paint a picture of an unwanted immigrant shunned and being told to leave. That isn't Clark Kent's experience, and that isn't Superman's experience. Even if Superman were looked at as an immigrant, he would be more akin to Einstein, where we actually offer him permanent residency and a pathway to citizenship and embrace him with open arms because he is an asset that we want to have.

@The Jack: Agreed on the "weird ivory tower thinking" lol.

[The Jack]

Superman's about "Truth, Justice and the American Way"
Which I find questionable, since "the american way" is up for interpretation; Luthor always struck me as more american than his adversary (that's where the truth and justice part comes in I guess) and Batman is also more in line with my personal beliefs on what's the american way; (But hey, I think of superheroes as an incredibly American idea, Europeans aren't likely to have their most powerful people to dress up in tights and charitably fight the symptom of little to no welfare state. But I get superheroes, I like many of them as an ideal and I like their stories. )

Seeing a radically progressive superman is going to do more harm than good. Very few people are going to go "oh look, superman is Pakistani Immigrant now, I can identify with him more/the world is a more balanced because our fiction is more diverse" and more people are going to be thinking "Why did they take superman from us/this is a stunt/ the PC people are taking over and now is the time to fight back/ **** why did he have to be Pakistani when I'm an Indian and I don't like those people*? You feed the alt-right when you mindlessly try to do something "left". It's just a bad idea.
Louis lane, in later renditions at least, is a strong, smart woman, but not working out that CK is Superman doesn't undermine that; superman is great and even Luthor, the smartest dude ever, isn't supposed to work it out. While I don't think the Snyder trilogy has her work it out as a feminist move (Luthor knows it before meeting the guy, it's all some post-modern not-understanding-superman-****e) it leaves out stuff like this


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfAvN6rXdkM
Honestly, this cartoon is my main source for superman, it's great. Go watch it. It near-perfectly encapsulates the guy, although he's less powerful than other incarnations and needs to wear a spacesuit, it's a surefire gateway for more Superman.

The core of superman, to me, isn't quite "Truth, Justice and the American way". It's a man with all the power trying to do the right thing by people, by the individuals around him. Superman is a man of usually flat story arcs, because he's not trying to change himself, he's trying to change the world. He doesn't need to try hard to adapt to the world; He is a man capable of embracing the iconic hero and the humblest of people. He saves himself by saving others. If you were to do story arcs where he struggles as an Alien in a world not his own, beyond teenage years at least, you've lost superman, because the man is supposed to connect with everyone, not some specific sociolect. If You put Clark Kent into ethnic difficulty, you put superman into ethnic difficulty, and you're going to get a film far less fun than even the Snyder films (though Man of Steel is alright if you're not into superman already)

If you want an immigrant character, good writers should make new ones, not cannibalize the ones already there.

[Darth Credence]

Interstellar travel isn't instant teleportation, even barring extraneous justifications the idea that Carol Danvers would magically appear in sufficient time to stop a nuclear missile that was going to reach its destination in minutes is absurd even by comic book standards. That'd be a spinning the Earth backwards and reversing time kind of Dues Ex Machina.

As to why he wouldn't do it otherwise, the Avengers are his A plan and you don't want to have the Kree Empire to intervene for you if you're rational and have any other choice.

Just going by how they're depicted in the MCU thus far, without getting into whatever they'll do in the Kree/Skrull conflict that's central to Captain Marvel.

Then what did he expect the pager to do when he suddenly saw people turning to ash all around him? He had a heck of a lot more time to push that pager button when Earth was under attack in Avengers than he has to react in Infinity War. He has absolutely no way of knowing this is only killing half of all people, he is just seeing a wave of people turning to ash. But he scrambles to get to the button so that Captain Marvel can help - therefore, he must believe that she will be able to respond quickly enough to impact whatever is indiscriminately killing people right now.
This is clearly a retcon. You can try to hand wave it away, but that doesn't change that they never planned for her to exist during the events of the previous movies. Changing it now just brings up problems - the most obvious by far being asking why she wasn't available previously, but there will be more and more issues.

[Kitten Champion]

Then what did he expect the pager to do when he suddenly saw people turning to ash all around him? He had a heck of a lot more time to push that pager button when Earth was under attack in Avengers than he has to react in Infinity War. He has absolutely no way of knowing this is only killing half of all people, he is just seeing a wave of people turning to ash.

Or that the Avengers had failed, that he was going to die, and the proverbial last resort was in his trunk.



But he scrambles to get to the button so that Captain Marvel can help - therefore, he must believe that she will be able to respond quickly enough to impact whatever is indiscriminately killing people right now.


Or that the Avengers had failed, that he was going to die pretty much on the spot, and the proverbial last resort was in his trunk.

He wasn't trying to save himself and Captain Marvel wasn't going to swoop from the sky to save everyone there, he was playing his last of last cards because it was all he could do.

In Avengers he had options. He had the goddamned Avengers, that was the point of the whole movie.



This is clearly a retcon. You can try to hand wave it away, but that doesn't change that they never planned for her to exist during the events of the previous movies. Changing it now just brings up problems - the most obvious by far being asking why she wasn't available previously, but there will be more and more issues.

Or you could assume the worst from total ignorance, I guess.

[Darth Credence]

Or that the Avengers had failed, that he was going to die, and the proverbial last resort was in his trunk.




Or that the Avengers had failed, that he was going to die pretty much on the spot, and the proverbial last resort was in his trunk.

He wasn't trying to save himself and Captain Marvel wasn't going to swoop from the sky to save everyone there, he was playing his last of last cards because it was all he could do.

In Avengers he had options. He had the goddamned Avengers, that was the point of the whole movie.



Or you could assume the worst from total ignorance, I guess.

Why build a team that you aren't sure of, when you have a pager for the most powerful hero right there? Why bother with Stark in the first place, when you already have a pager for the most powerful hero? Oh, wait - it's because they never had any intention of her being out there, and are currently retconning. It is what they do.
And the idea that he wasn't trying to save anything when he paged her is just dumb.

[Clertar]

Why build a team that you aren't sure of, when you have a pager for the most powerful hero right there? Why bother with Stark in the first place, when you already have a pager for the most powerful hero? Oh, wait - it's because they never had any intention of her being out there, and are currently retconning. It is what they do.
And the idea that he wasn't trying to save anything when he paged her is just dumb.

It will be explained properly in Captain Marvel, that's the point of placing it between the two Avengers movies. For example: wherever Captain Marvel had gone it's months or years of travel for her to get to Earth.

[Kitten Champion]

Why build a team that you aren't sure of, when you have a pager for the most powerful hero right there? Why bother with Stark in the first place, when you already have a pager for the most powerful hero?

Seems like a bunch of baseless assumptions Re: Carol's current status, and that their relationship is some version of Commissioner Gordon lights the Bat-signal and Batman appears from the ether. The Avengers are there on planet Earth full time, they're hugely effective, and they're pretty cost-free at the end of the day. Chances are Carol is not.



Oh, wait - it's because they never had any intention of her being out there, and are currently retconning. It is what they do.
And the idea that he wasn't trying to save anything when he paged her is just dumb.

No, he was trying to save what was left. Armageddon just happened - is happening - whatever the consequences for summoning Carol or the Starforce, is less than the current circumstances.

[Kantaki]

Why build a team that you aren't sure of, when you have a pager for the most powerful hero right there? Why bother with Stark in the first place, when you already have a pager for the most powerful hero? Oh, wait - it's because they never had any intention of her being out there, and are currently retconning. It is what they do.
And the idea that he wasn't trying to save anything when he paged her is just dumb.

Because Captain Marvel isn't around.
She's off having adventures somewhere that isn't the primitive, utterly unimportant backwater of known space.

And even if she wasn't, the Avengers are volunteers.
Even ignoring that having backup never hurts- and that having something smaller than a nuke is generally a good idea -what is Fury supposed to do?
Arrest them for helping during a disaster?
One they're uniquely suited to deal with no less?
Doesn't seem like a good idea even in a scenario where Captain Marvel does hang out on Earth.
I mean what would you do if she's dealing with some other problem at the time?
Let Loki run wild until she's done?

And since she is hanging around in some more interesting part of the universe letting the B-Team deal with problems before interrupting whatever important thimgs she's doing.
So, only using the pager as a last resort is reasonable.

[Dr.Samurai]

I mean... they're definitely retconning.

But it's easy enough to say that Fury *did* try to reach Captain Marvel during the events of The Avengers, and explain why she couldn't be reached or make it to Earth.

[Kantaki]

I mean... they're definitely retconning.

I don't think anyone's really denying that.
The point is unless they seriously mess up the whole story still makes sense.

[Dr.Samurai]

It looks like Darth Credence is arguing that this is a retcon.

That said, I know young Nick Fury is in the Captain Marvel movie, but do we even know that he has a pager during The Avengers? Maybe it's a new development.

[Kitten Champion]

I don't think anyone's really denying that.
The point is unless they seriously mess up the whole story still makes sense.

It's a retcon in the same way that Thor having an evil older sister is a retcon. Although, given that there was an off-the-books SHIELD facility with Kree corpses held in storage that only Nick Fury knew about in Agents of SHIELD's first season, (which is what revived Coulson for that show) they likely had some general plans to do this story since 2013 at least.

[Kantaki]

It looks like Darth Credence is arguing that this is a retcon.

Sure, and I at least am not denying that it most likely is one*.
The disagreement seems to be wether or not the story still makes sense after this retcon.


That said, I know young Nick Fury is in the Captain Marvel movie, but do we even know that he has a pager during The Avengers? Maybe it's a new development.

We'll have to wait and see.
Also looking at the trailer I'm not convinced Captain Marvel- this version anyway -could have solved the Chitauri invasion alone as Darth Credence seems to think.
She would however been a great help.
And doubly so against Thanos.

*At the very least they didn't plan from the very beginning how they would include her.

[Psyren]

Wait I'm confused. Isn't this the DCEU thread? How'd we get to Captain Marvel?

Anyway, handwaving her absence for the other events is very easy; it's not like she has to be somewhere on Earth, or even somewhere in this dimension. And there are always Bigger Fish too, like whatever the Ancient One was dealing with while Earth was under attack the other times.

[Kantaki]

Wait I'm confused. Isn't this the DCEU thread? How'd we get to Captain Marvel?

You ask as if this sort of thing isn't the norm in the Playground.:smalltongue:


Personally I would like something quite close to this version of Superman: http://dresdencodak.tumblr.com/post/10979241054/rebooting-the-justice-league

One minor aspect is the fact that in both DC and DCEU continuity Kryptonians are identical to white Homo sapiens. In today's movies that is less and less plausible to an extent that it verges ridiculous.


Wow. I really like what he did there. I would love to see that Justice League brought to life.

Agreed. Those versions of the various heroes and villains are pretty cool.:smallcool:

[Kitten Champion]

Wait I'm confused. Isn't this the DCEU thread? How'd we get to Captain Marvel?


Someone was being wrong on the Internet.

Seriously though, there's really nothing new that can be said about the DCEU at this point. Cavill being - probably - out is just inspiring another round of hot takes by Youtubers and Hollywood/Nerd Media gossip/opinion pieces. Things haven't changed that much really, changes were going to come after Justice League's abysmal performance in some form and they were going to take a while.

I also think MBJ's name being floated around is just publicity head-games, maybe to feel out what people want while they can still act like things are fine. Like, I wouldn't be shocked if Sony green-lit their Miles Morales' Into the Spider-Verse movie in part because a lot people on social media expressed some deep interest in Miles during the lead up to the Spider-Man recasting after Amazing went kaput and they signed the deal with Marvel. This nascent recasting speculation costs them nothing, and they can just brush it off if the mood turns too sour.

At least it raises Jordan's profile a bit before the Creed movie -- which is WB too I think.

[Jayngfet]

If Cavill isn't shaving he could play Nolan in the upcoming Invincible movie. That sounds like exactly the kind of stupid Meta Joke that Seth Rogan would go for.

[Lleban]

Well its kinda sad we probably won't get a JL movie ever again. Um yeah the DCEU doesn't have much going on aside from aquaman and shazam.

[lowfyr01]

As far as I'm concerned, the way they are doing Captain Marvel is the biggest mistake Marvel has made in a while. Trying to shoehorn someone in as a prequel is not a good idea, especially someone this powerful. When Fury was freaking out about the nuke being sent to NY in the Avengers, why didn't he get out that pager?

First after they announced Guardians a lot of people were saying the same thing. And they proved them wrong. Even Black Panther was getting flack for possibly not making enough money. And we know how that played out:smallwink:

So i would wait before getting into mistake or flop mode.

Fury not using the pager before could simply be that there was not enough time. I mean the whole first Avengers movie was during a few days at most. And the difference now is he has no information what is happening and the status of the avengers is unknown too. And seeing people simply fading away is not a sign for them winning. So calling her is his really last option in this situation and that was before he was dying.

And since it looks like it will explain how Fury got his start in knowledge about people with powers and the whole Kree stuff shown in Agents. So that is a big plus most other so called prequels do not have.

And regarding Captain Marvel. She is one of his secrets, perhaps the biggest. And we all know how he likes secrets.

And if she has not been on earth for some time now and even if she did stuff on earth it was likely buried very deep.


But we should perhaps wait until we get more information or even wait till we watch the movie before saying the sky is falling. And if the sucess of the MCU should have shown something is that even B or C List Heroes like the Guardians can prove a lot of people wrong about their success.


And to get back to the thread theme: I do not think Cavill was the mistake. It started in my opinion with them trying to do a Watchmen inspired movie only now with Superman. His Father making him afraid of saving people to hide his secret is something that should not happen with superman. Him killing Zod would work in this scenario, because if facing that choice him making the though one is what makes a hero.

And that dark theme followed to the next movies and was stopped with Wonder Woman and perhaps after that was sucessful they should have tried to make Justice League more friendly. But having two directors did not help in that.

[Knaight]

I didn't say Kansas only contains white people. My edit was in response to the notion that Superman is not about being Kansas, "at all", as it was put.. I think that's ridiculous. I think one of the major themes of Superman is that he can exist as he does precisely because he was raised by some simple farmers in Kansas USA. He has all the power in the world but it doesn't ruin him because he is a good and simple man. It's why he has that line in Man of Steel I grew up in Kansas, general. I'm about as American as it gets. That is very much ingrained into his character. Clark needed an ideal life with warmth and hard work and character so that he could wield the power he has for the sake of other people, and not let it get to his head. Contrast with Superman: Red Son, which looks at the Man of Steel if he had crash-landed in the Soviet Union and had been raised by different people. His racial identity is as important as his powers are, which is to say very important, but the fact that he was raised by the Kents in Kansas is just as important to the character.
Note that he crash landed in the Soviet Union, not elsewhere in the U.S. Yes, him being in the self proclaimed heartland matters, but Red Son is a very different case than a hypothetical Superman that lands in a major metropolitan area.


Do you mean "refugee"? And who defines him this way? Literally *any* time I talk about Superman with my friends, his (spurious) status as an "immigrant" never comes up. Not a single time.

It is not the point of the character as you and Friv keep saying. You may make a case that he is an immigrant, but it's not the point of the character. His (again, spurious) status as an immigrant is an accident of John Carter from Mars, needing an explanation for Superman's powers, and the fact that their concept of a time-traveling infant from a future doomed Earth kept getting rejected.
That might say more about what your friends focus on than anything - some random friend group's internal discussions mean approximately nothing to the point of a character. As for Superman's immigrant status being irrelevant, look at how the early Superman stories were overtly based on specific stories from a particular Jewish tradition, as told by Jews (which is also where some of the early punching Hitler in the face stuff came from, before 1945 happened and basically any pulp hero could do that).

He's an immigrant, an outside, always aware of his differences (as manifested through extreme strength and the lot), and partially because of that a guardian of his people.

[Psyren]

You ask as if this sort of thing isn't the norm in the Playground.:smalltongue:


Someone was being wrong on the Internet.

I mean sure, but I found it amusing that there's a Captain Marvel thread right on the front page and people are still bringing it in here.

@DCEU topic:

*sees Henry Cavill made an Instagram post!*
*watches*
*more confused than before*

[Dr.Samurai]

Note that he crash landed in the Soviet Union, not elsewhere in the U.S.
There is more than one way to be "American". He may land somewhere else in the US and still espouse American virtues and be informed by American culture. It just so happens he landed in Smallville and is informed by that particular American culture and those particular virtues.

But to say that he isn't about being from Kansas at all is simply not true.

Yes, him being in the self proclaimed heartland matters,
Agreed. Note, this is a separate point from his status or non-status as an immigrant. I am saying that being from the heartland *does* matter, in opposition to Friv's first point.

Additionally, I am arguing against the notion that "the point" of Superman is that he is an immigrant.

That might say more about what your friends focus on than anything - some random friend group's internal discussions mean approximately nothing to the point of a character.
This can be said about any observation. But I don't think it's quite as easy to dismiss as you seem to think it is. I'd wager that *most* people that talk about Superman as fans *do not* focus on his (supposed) status as an immigrant, or, to make the point as clear as possible, think that the point of Superman is that he represents American ideals by virtue of being an accepted immigrant.

He's an immigrant...
In the loosest sense of the word, sure. He did not come here willingly. He did not grow up having to assimilate. He did not grow up knowing about his previous "culture", in fact the only culture he knows is that of Smallville USA. He isn't shunned, he doesn't look different, he doesn't have different values. As far as he knows, for most of his life, and as far as everyone else knows, Clark Kent is American. His experiences are totally different to that of any immigrant population you can point to in any country, except those that were raised since infancy by citizens of the country they emigrated to.

Which is not to say that you can't make him an allegory for immigrants. But to say that is the point of the character is to overstate the case by quite a measure.

an outsider
Yes, absolutely. Many people are outsiders. This is not synonymous with being an immigrant. Most superheroes are outsiders in one way or another.

There is a difference between saying "Superman can be seen as an allegory for immigration" and "the point of Superman is that he is an immigrant". The former is a fine statement to make. The latter is simply not true.

[The Jack]

That might say more about what your friends focus on than anything - some random friend group's internal discussions mean approximately nothing to the point of a character. As for Superman's immigrant status being irrelevant, look at how the early Superman stories were overtly based on specific stories from a particular Jewish tradition, as told by Jews (which is also where some of the early punching Hitler in the face stuff came from, before 1945 happened and basically any pulp hero could do that).

He's an immigrant, an outside, always aware of his differences (as manifested through extreme strength and the lot), and partially because of that a guardian of his people.

Some random friend? No, but if I were to conduct a meta-study on people's studies on what they think of superman, immigration isn't going to be on many, if at all, minds. It may be on your mind, but you're a blatant outlier. Now my next things to say:Have you actually read these specific stories? Are you sure they copied them because they wanted a Jewish message, because I'd copy a little known story if it were a good one and I was feeling lazy. Anti fascist propaganda began well before the end of the second world war and it wasn't just a Jewish thing. They were doing it when Mussolini was in his early days, they were organizing internationally from around 1928. A lot of people were against fascists, and we're not just talking about communists.

you're cherry picking. You're willfully ignoring information to your contrary (most of it) and trying hard to find anything that could potentially support your argument. I get it, I really do, but you'll want a different DC character to be your Immigrant.

I for one really want to see a Shining Knight movie, Hell I want to write and direct it. A Knight from the 7th century, with historically accurate 7th century values, trying to adapt his roll as knight to the modern world modern world. He'd Learn English through Shakespeare because his tutor had a sense of humour, and would provide historians questionable historical narratives involving wizards and king arthur.

[Jayngfet]

Well its kinda sad we probably won't get a JL movie ever again. Um yeah the DCEU doesn't have much going on aside from aquaman and shazam.

Wonder Woman was well received and is getting a sequel. Really it's only Batman and Superman that are the problem. It's entirely possible for DC to make a new Justice League movie after those three now that they've found their footing and have it be good.

If it were me I'd make Grayson the new Batman and have Cavill take on a minor role as Superman that only requires him to be on set for a few days to a week. Do some multiverse BS to have Grant Gustin and Stephen Amell on the big screen instead of the versions they want to go with.

It's not that DC doesn't have successful properties. It's that the two or three projects they need as their lynchpin are the only ones that are failing.

[tomandtish]

I didn't say Kansas only contains white people. My edit was in response to the notion that Superman is not about being Kansas, "at all", as it was put.. I think that's ridiculous. I think one of the major themes of Superman is that he can exist as he does precisely because he was raised by some simple farmers in Kansas USA. He has all the power in the world but it doesn't ruin him because he is a good and simple man. It's why he has that line in Man of Steel I grew up in Kansas, general. I'm about as American as it gets. That is very much ingrained into his character. Clark needed an ideal life with warmth and hard work and character so that he could wield the power he has for the sake of other people, and not let it get to his head. Contrast with Superman: Red Son, which looks at the Man of Steel if he had crash-landed in the Soviet Union and had been raised by different people. His racial identity is as important as his powers are, which is to say very important, but the fact that he was raised by the Kents in Kansas is just as important to the character.

@Friv: You can take Superman that way. There are multiple ways to take the character. I don't think Superman's defining theme is that he is an immigrant, and I don't think most people think of him in that way. Yes, it's part of his story and character, but I don't think most people consider him to be the poster child for immigrants. He is very much an earthling and an American, with the exception of his powers.

And just to be clear, yes, the people love him. Except for the few villains that don't. But apart from that, the people love him. Dearly.


He's defined as an immigrant. Hell his creators stated as much many many times. And yes they love him as one of their own. That's the point. He's a person from elsewhere welcomed as an American and accepted by people as simply another American. He's how we are supposed to treat Immigrants he's the Immigrant success story. AKA being American.

An important thing to note in the immigration issue: There are big differences between Superman being considered an immigrant, and CLARK being considered an immigrant.

When it comes to that, the normal version of superman has an identity that everyone* thinks is good ole American farmboy. For the vast majority of his life, and the vast majority of his interactions, he's never been seen as an immigrant.

OTOH, look at Justice League: Gods and Monsters. There...

He's actually raised by a Hispanic family in Arizona. While his DNA is also different, he raised in an area seeing the darker side of humanity. He's also told early on that he's not human, and grows up thinking of himself as not really part of earth. The result? You end up with a much darker Superman that actually makes sense given the background.

* I know there are people who know he's superman, but to the vast majority of people he's just Clark Kent.

[Clertar]

That... actually looks like a decent joker.

Uh hold one, we got a makeup image :smalleek:

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/72hZ3RAuQ9BejQWcNapRlEBeIjk=/0x0:1200x748/1200x800/filters:focal(489x203:681x395)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/61494283/joaquin_joker.0.png

[Kitten Champion]

Uh hold one, we got a makeup image :smalleek:

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/72hZ3RAuQ9BejQWcNapRlEBeIjk=/0x0:1200x748/1200x800/filters:focal(489x203:681x395)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/61494283/joaquin_joker.0.png

Really? I mean, he looks like a scary clown certainly, but with the red nose and the blue diamonds on the eyes I wouldn't recognize him as the Joker. More of a Pennywise.

[The Jack]

The most "immigrant" Clark gets is the city folk ripping on him for being the country bumpkin from small-vile.

[Otomodachi]

The most "immigrant" Clark gets is the city folk ripping on him for being the country bumpkin from small-vile.

...there's a REASON Superman's most iconic arch-enemy makes a point to refer to him as "The Alien".

There's a REASON Lex Luthor's big gripe is that Superman weakens the human species, corroding their values and diminishing them.

The parallel IS there.

[Dr.Samurai]

...there's a REASON Superman's most iconic arch-enemy makes a point to refer to him as "The Alien".

There's a REASON Lex Luthor's big gripe is that Superman weakens the human species, corroding their values and diminishing them.

The parallel IS there.
He calls him an alien because he is an alien from space.

You can "other" someone without them being immigrants. We do it all the time.

It's there if you squint at it. It's certainly not the point of the character. I mean... people make the same case that Superman stands for gay people, or that Superman is a Jesus metaphor.

It's like... you can see him as various things if you want. You can't claim that it's the entire point of the character's existence. Unless of course, you have proof of this somewhere. Then I'd love to see it.

[The Jack]

...there's a REASON Superman's most iconic arch-enemy makes a point to refer to him as "The Alien".

There's a REASON Lex Luthor's big gripe is that Superman weakens the human species, corroding their values and diminishing them.

The parallel IS there.

He only does so to emphasize that superman's got godlike power. While your argument here seems reasonable, in context, it's not compelling. "the Alien" is a small part of his rhetoric, and I'd argue it's a pragmatic choice which he changes when he's putting down others. The man puts a lot of people down with words, and it ain't just superman.

can you find a book where he says they weaken the human species, corrodes their values and diminishes them? Because his 'big gripe' which everyone seems to pick up on is that he's angry that there's a person greater than him, the greatest mind/man on earth. It's not an immigrant problem.

Even still, while lex luthor tries to single out luthor for being an alien; superman is usually above it, and Clark is entirely immune to it. What's more, as a man with two faces, Clark experiences the best and worst of both worlds and still choses to be exactly who he is, he's comfortable as either person.

You or I might have issues with X,Y or Z, but CK goes out of his way to struggle, he makes life more challenging for himself. he's got thick skin, The luxury of being able to create his own struggles sets him above some of the real struggles.

Also the dude's really intelligent and at little to no risk of physical danger... he's going to have a different way of viewing things than you do.

[Callos_DeTerran]

OTOH, look at Justice League: Gods and Monsters. There...

He's actually raised by a Hispanic family in Arizona. While his DNA is also different, he raised in an area seeing the darker side of humanity. He's also told early on that he's not human, and grows up thinking of himself as not really part of earth. The result? You end up with a much darker Superman that actually makes sense given the background.

I've only seen the clips for that movie, but its one I really want to see just based off the clips...well...except for the Batman one, but the Wonder Woman and Superman ones were fascinating. I really want to see more of that Superman, both animated and possibly live action but that one is a very very long shot.

That said, this news still makes me sad. I liked Zack Synder's take on Superman and I generally really enjoy his movies as well. It wasn't the traditional take on Superman, which I know a lot of people weren't fans of, but Man of Steel is (despite its flaws) one of my favorite super hero movies.

[Metahuman1]

I've only seen the clips for that movie, but its one I really want to see just based off the clips...well...except for the Batman one, but the Wonder Woman and Superman ones were fascinating. I really want to see more of that Superman, both animated and possibly live action but that one is a very very long shot.



If I remember right, the Graphic Novel it's based on is a Neil Gaiman work. The man does NOT do low quality writing.


And the movie was quite good for what it was. I liked it. Even the weird stuff with Batman.

[Celestia]

If I remember right, the Graphic Novel it's based on is a Neil Gaiman work. The man does NOT do low quality writing.


And the movie was quite good for what it was. I liked it. Even the weird stuff with Batman.
Pretty sure Gods and Monsters was an original movie and not based on anything.

[Callos_DeTerran]

And the movie was quite good for what it was. I liked it. Even the weird stuff with Batman.

Its not so much that I'm opposed to the stuff going on with Batman in that movie, more just that I didn't think his short was particularly good whereas the other two did a lot in a short amount of time.

[Metahuman1]

Pretty sure Gods and Monsters was an original movie and not based on anything.

*Checks.* Huh. It would seem I am incorrect. Could of sworn it was a Gaiman work though.


It FEELS like the sort of thing he'd cook up given the chance, doesn't it?