Reply to Topic
Proof cancel culture is a myth. Or rather, they can't cancel you if you're really fast?
I'm excited.
Last edited by John W Constantine; 04-26-23 at 09:31 PM.
The Flash Movie
I think I'll skip this one. I'm not a Flash fan to begin with, and the last few movies with the Flash in them, to put it mildly, have not been good.
__________________
Boldly going.
Boldly going.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Not gonna watch! My hopes of Keaton saying one of his old lines was already ruined by those horrible NBA tie-ins.
Imagine explaining to someone, “So, they take a highlight and stylize it and then cut to a scene from the movie and they are going to show it to you at every commercial break.”
The first trailer looks good. In light of the baggage, Ezra Miller really seems good in the role. The Supergirl stuff actually looks cool. There’s gonna be another cameo (Adrien Grenier?) we don’t know about. And it seems like it’s actually gonna have a little charm.
Imagine explaining to someone, “So, they take a highlight and stylize it and then cut to a scene from the movie and they are going to show it to you at every commercial break.”
The first trailer looks good. In light of the baggage, Ezra Miller really seems good in the role. The Supergirl stuff actually looks cool. There’s gonna be another cameo (Adrien Grenier?) we don’t know about. And it seems like it’s actually gonna have a little charm.
X
User Lists
It seems to be doing well, review-wise. Nothing special or groundbreaking, unwieldy 3rd act (like many movies) and plenty of nostalgia fuel (which of course was a calculated measure to increase the draw of all the people of a certain ilk 
).
I bought the tickets today. This and Oppenheimer will satisfy my IMAX lust for the year.
Wish I could say that I was as excited about Asteroid City as I am about the Barry Allen story.
).I bought the tickets today. This and Oppenheimer will satisfy my IMAX lust for the year.
Wish I could say that I was as excited about Asteroid City as I am about the Barry Allen story.
X
User Lists
Just a quick observation regarding presenting comic book multiverses as motion pictures.
I don't like the idea.
The entire concept is based on real-life publishing history that was done to either re-introduce old characters or simplify continuities due to overcomplications that arose from the former attempt of re-introducing old characters.
After WWII, super-hero comics mostly died out & were replaced by other genres. This was referred to as the end of the Golden Age. In the late 1950's super-heroes made a comeback in DC comics with updated versions of old characters - with new identities & new costumes (this was called the Silver Age of comics).
At some point, someone thought it was a shame that the then-current generation was relatively unaware of the heroes that came before and upon which the new heroes were based... so they started introducing multiple earths (existing in multiverses) to re-introduce older heroes to newer generations, but within a couple decades (and after acquiring more & more properties) DC comics became overrun with earths filled with characters with the same names (some of whom were completely different from their then-modern counterparts but others who were just older, Golden Aged versions, living on a different Earth).
If it sounds confusing... it was. So the solution was to retcon everything (create a "retro-active continuity" using a huge intra-company crossover story) to create a single DC continuity on just one Earth, and saying the heroes of the 40's lived during the 40's (and they'd have to concoct a reason if they're still around today without being elderly).
This happened in 1985, it was called the "Crisis on Infinite Earths" and it restored DC's continuity to a single one (at least for a couple more decades).
Okay... enough for the recap. My question is: why would anyone think these kind of publication strategies (as well-intended yet ill-advised as they were) brought on by the reality of decades of publishing characters with the same names would make for good movie plots for characters that have only been on the big screen (within the continuity of a cinematic universe) - not for decades - but for a relative couple or few years?
I don't like the idea.
The entire concept is based on real-life publishing history that was done to either re-introduce old characters or simplify continuities due to overcomplications that arose from the former attempt of re-introducing old characters.
After WWII, super-hero comics mostly died out & were replaced by other genres. This was referred to as the end of the Golden Age. In the late 1950's super-heroes made a comeback in DC comics with updated versions of old characters - with new identities & new costumes (this was called the Silver Age of comics).
At some point, someone thought it was a shame that the then-current generation was relatively unaware of the heroes that came before and upon which the new heroes were based... so they started introducing multiple earths (existing in multiverses) to re-introduce older heroes to newer generations, but within a couple decades (and after acquiring more & more properties) DC comics became overrun with earths filled with characters with the same names (some of whom were completely different from their then-modern counterparts but others who were just older, Golden Aged versions, living on a different Earth).
If it sounds confusing... it was. So the solution was to retcon everything (create a "retro-active continuity" using a huge intra-company crossover story) to create a single DC continuity on just one Earth, and saying the heroes of the 40's lived during the 40's (and they'd have to concoct a reason if they're still around today without being elderly).
This happened in 1985, it was called the "Crisis on Infinite Earths" and it restored DC's continuity to a single one (at least for a couple more decades).
Okay... enough for the recap. My question is: why would anyone think these kind of publication strategies (as well-intended yet ill-advised as they were) brought on by the reality of decades of publishing characters with the same names would make for good movie plots for characters that have only been on the big screen (within the continuity of a cinematic universe) - not for decades - but for a relative couple or few years?
X
Favorite Movies
Quite a mess it is. You can sense all the interesting and fun ways this could have played out but alas they picked the other choice. Love that cameo though.
X
Favorite Movies
Just a quick observation regarding presenting comic book multiverses as motion pictures.
I don't like the idea.
The entire concept is based on real-life publishing history that was done to either re-introduce old characters or simplify continuities due to overcomplications that arose from the former attempt of re-introducing old characters.
After WWII, super-hero comics mostly died out & were replaced by other genres. This was referred to as the end of the Golden Age. In the late 1950's super-heroes made a comeback in DC comics with updated versions of old characters - with new identities & new costumes (this was called the Silver Age of comics).
At some point, someone thought it was a shame that the then-current generation was relatively unaware of the heroes that came before and upon which the new heroes were based... so they started introducing multiple earths (existing in multiverses) to re-introduce older heroes to newer generations, but within a couple decades (and after acquiring more & more properties) DC comics became overrun with earths filled with characters with the same names (some of whom were completely different from their then-modern counterparts but others who were just older, Golden Aged versions, living on a different Earth).
If it sounds confusing... it was. So the solution was to retcon everything (create a "retro-active continuity" using a huge intra-company crossover story) to create a single DC continuity on just one Earth, and saying the heroes of the 40's lived during the 40's (and they'd have to concoct a reason if they're still around today without being elderly).
This happened in 1985, it was called the "Crisis on Infinite Earths" and it restored DC's continuity to a single one (at least for a couple more decades).
Okay... enough for the recap. My question is: why would anyone think these kind of publication strategies (as well-intended yet ill-advised as they were) brought on by the reality of decades of publishing characters with the same names would make for good movie plots for characters that have only been on the big screen (within the continuity of a cinematic universe) - not for decades - but for a relative couple or few years?
I don't like the idea.
The entire concept is based on real-life publishing history that was done to either re-introduce old characters or simplify continuities due to overcomplications that arose from the former attempt of re-introducing old characters.
After WWII, super-hero comics mostly died out & were replaced by other genres. This was referred to as the end of the Golden Age. In the late 1950's super-heroes made a comeback in DC comics with updated versions of old characters - with new identities & new costumes (this was called the Silver Age of comics).
At some point, someone thought it was a shame that the then-current generation was relatively unaware of the heroes that came before and upon which the new heroes were based... so they started introducing multiple earths (existing in multiverses) to re-introduce older heroes to newer generations, but within a couple decades (and after acquiring more & more properties) DC comics became overrun with earths filled with characters with the same names (some of whom were completely different from their then-modern counterparts but others who were just older, Golden Aged versions, living on a different Earth).
If it sounds confusing... it was. So the solution was to retcon everything (create a "retro-active continuity" using a huge intra-company crossover story) to create a single DC continuity on just one Earth, and saying the heroes of the 40's lived during the 40's (and they'd have to concoct a reason if they're still around today without being elderly).
This happened in 1985, it was called the "Crisis on Infinite Earths" and it restored DC's continuity to a single one (at least for a couple more decades).
Okay... enough for the recap. My question is: why would anyone think these kind of publication strategies (as well-intended yet ill-advised as they were) brought on by the reality of decades of publishing characters with the same names would make for good movie plots for characters that have only been on the big screen (within the continuity of a cinematic universe) - not for decades - but for a relative couple or few years?
X
Favorite Movies
Quite a mess it is. You can sense all the interesting and fun ways this could have played out but alas they picked the other choice. Love that cameo though.
Disappointing, but at least DC is consistent...
Studios seem to be 50/50 on this. Almost like they don't trust an audience to know enough comic lore and be winking at comic book fans by not over explaining things.
Unless a scholar of comic book history, no lay-person could be expected to understand all the real-life reasons behind multiverses as pertaining to comic characters.
As far as the sci-fi explanation goes (and using it as a plot for a movie)... it's too soon. The non-comic-book public barely knows characters like the Flash (no less his infinite multiverse counterparts). There are almost a century-worth of stories (that don't involve string-theory and counter-continuity-multiple-concurrent-counterparts) to tell before getting into multiverses (just as there was in the comics).
This reminds me of what Abrams did to Star Trek. They had a standard continuity & history that fans knew & loved, but Abrams threw it all out the window and jumped right into a similar concept as DC's infinite earths, with "splinter-realities" and counter-but-concordant-continuities which destroyed the concept of canon and one-of-a-kind characters.
(Geez, I'm starting to write with the alliteration of Stan Lee!)
X
Favorite Movies
I was listening to the news and they said The FLASH made 8.9 Million for Thursday Previews and around 75 Million for the weekend = BOMB.. No other way around it, unless of course you bring the Worldwide Number into it, in which case, the movie's still not going to do well.. For some reason, I feel like ever since Nolan did BATMAN, that any other DC movie just pales in comparison and the thing of it is, is that Nolan's "The DARK KNIGHT" really comes off more as a crime drama than a traditional superhero movie that just happens to involve people running around in costumes.
Oh yea who doubt the power of nostalgia. Let’s call this what it is. An excuse to go see Michael Keaton. Then add in the DC brass giving Muschietti the keys to a Batman movie coinciding with the release of this movie.
I think it stands a chance to make its money back or more. All for a film that reportedly had over 40 rewrites.
I think it stands a chance to make its money back or more. All for a film that reportedly had over 40 rewrites.
X
User Lists
Oh yea who doubt the power of nostalgia. Let’s call this what it is. An excuse to go see Michael Keaton. Then add in the DC brass giving Muschietti the keys to a Batman movie coinciding with the release of this movie.
I think it stands a chance to make its money back or more. All for a film that reportedly had over 40 rewrites.
I think it stands a chance to make its money back or more. All for a film that reportedly had over 40 rewrites.
DoFP was much better than this movie and I'm pretty sure I have only watched it once in theaters.
X
Favorite Movies
i saw it yesterday i didnt like it at all. only thing i liked about it is michael keaton and loved michael keaton on marvel and 1989 batman movie and i told everyone in the cinema that marvel is better
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
DoFP was much better than this movie and I'm pretty sure I have only watched it once in theaters.
Wow, seriously? I ended up hating DoFP. I wonder if it's just CBM burnout. Marvel has been flailing around as well. I'm wondering if Gunn will get the time and money to trot out his vision for a new DCEU.
X
Favorite Movies
|
|