Oooooo, I like the cape.
DC Movies Thread - Shazam saves the day
-
Oooooo, I like the cape.
-
Doesn't look too bad
-
Gives off more of a "The Velveteer" vibe, but I do like it.
Now we'll probably be disappointed by the actual thing.
-
I though Noel was the batsuit with the plate mail.
-
As long as it doesn't have bat-nipples I think everybody is cool.
-
As long as it doesn't have bat-nipples I think everybody is cool.
-
^Oh god .
-
@Rogues':
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100920130515/batman/images/d/d3/GothCard.jpg
Don't do that to me.
But that's not a costume thing, thankfully.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
http://batman-news.com/2014/01/22/gal-gadot-signed-3-movie-deal-wonder-woman-video/
Gal Gadot has signed a three-movie deal as Wonder Woman . . . . . .
On the one hand, it's Gal Gadot, whom we have admittedly have not seen so we have no idea what she's going to be like, but we're frankly not impressed yet. On the other hand, it's three movies, so maybe there's a glimmer of hope for a Wonder Woman stand alone? On the other other hand, it might just mean more Superman/Justice League sequels. Bleh.
-
They'll announce a Wonder Woman movie, then pull it from the schedule a couple months later, because "they need to get things just right with this character." Just like that Amazon show. Because suddenly The CW starts doing quality control??? Yeah, no.
-
They'll announce a Wonder Woman movie, then pull it from the schedule a couple months later, because "they need to get things just right with this character." Just like that Amazon show. Because suddenly The CW starts doing quality control??? Yeah, no.
Since Arrow became successful, I imagine they would start wanting quality. That and the onset of The Flash spin off, I suppose they want to establish their world.
-
@Rogues':
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100920130515/batman/images/d/d3/GothCard.jpg
How the hell do they even verify that without any documentation. And where do they send the monthly recap to ? Does Batman have to pay for someone calling him to tell him what his balance is ?
So many questions left unanswered !
-
@No:
How the hell do they even verify that without any documentation. And where do they send the monthly recap to ? Does Batman have to pay for someone calling him to tell him what his balance is ?
So many questions left unanswered !
Trick questions, riddler, obviously it's verified to "Batman," sent to a proxy bat-P.O. Box, and is paid using his bat-bank account.
Easy as pie
-
Since Arrow became successful, I imagine they would start wanting quality. That and the onset of The Flash spin off, I suppose they want to establish their world.
But Flash didn't have to go through quality control or anything. They had DC's top dog write two Arrow episodes to introduce him and they already have his show planned out. And then with with Wonder Woman it's suddenly not doable? Allan Heinberg is a popular writer and even did a run on Wonder Woman's comic. But he was quickly kicked out the door just like Joss Whedon before him.
-
But Flash didn't have to go through quality control or anything. They had DC's top dog write two Arrow episodes to introduce him and they already have his show planned out. And then with with Wonder Woman it's suddenly not doable? Allan Heinberg is a popular writer and even did a run on Wonder Woman's comic. But he was quickly kicked out the door just like Joss Whedon before him.
Well we also thought Batman vs Superman was doable and well…
-
Variety saying the 3 picture deal is for Superman Vs Batman, Justice League and a stand alone Wonder Woman film.
-
Soooo basically it'll be at the very minimum 2018 before we see Wonder Woman get her own film if and only if WB thinks audiences like WW?
loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
-
What he said.
Basically she has to play with the boys before she's allowed to stand out. Because god forbid a pillar of the Justice League have her story cemented before the Justice League movie.
-
thought this was amusing
-
question: Marvel always seems to keep the general attitude of their shared universes similar, never to dark, always a few jokes thrown in to break tension and add a few laughs, a general good feel attitude
Do you think DC will try to be different? they obviously made superman dark, and I imagine they'll make Batman dark as well, but would a darker style flash or green lantern film really seem like the characters there representing. i always took Flash and green Lantern to be much more upbeat then batman, then again I thought the same of superman
So I guess what I'm asking is are they going for a similar tone, dark all around, or will each movie be it's own thing?
hope I phrased that well
-
question: Marvel always seems to keep the general attitude of their shared universes similar, never to dark, always a few jokes thrown in to break tension and add a few laughs, a general good feel attitude
Do you think DC will try to be different? they obviously made superman dark, and I imagine they'll make Batman dark as well, but would a darker style flash or green lantern film really seem like the characters there representing. i always took Flash and green Lantern to be much more upbeat then batman, then again I thought the same of superman
So I guess what I'm asking is are they going for a similar tone, dark all around, or will each movie be it's own thing?
hope I phrased that well
Pretty much yeah. DC/WB is definitely going for the more gritty, "realistic", dark tone set by the Nolan movies. You can see it in how Injustice: Gods Among Us came out. Likely, they did not expect to need to integrate too many heroes into this because the Green Lantern movie obviously does not carry the same tone, and Nolan intended his stuff to be isolated from the big scheme of things.
And then the Avengers came out and made a ton of cash, and WB realized that you can actually make a lot of money with a superhero teamup movie, even though there were so many things that could have gone wrong with the Avengers. I don't know if Man of Steel was supposed to springboard the DC universe, although I doubt it, but it's definitely now what WB is using as a foothold to launch a Justice League movie, which they announced would be in production at some point before establishing a whole bunch of characters. And then now MoS2 is gonna be bats vs supes. Anywhoo, because they've essentially locked themselves into this sort of tone which can be a bit problematic, but they've been rolling with it basically such as the TV show "Arrow" production.
tl;dr they're definitely going for gritty for the most part
-
@Purple:
Pretty much yeah. DC/WB is definitely going for the more gritty, "realistic", dark tone set by the Nolan movies. You can see it in how Injustice: Gods Among Us came out. Likely, they did not expect to need to integrate too many heroes into this because the Green Lantern movie obviously does not carry the same tone, and Nolan intended his stuff to be isolated from the big scheme of things.
And then the Avengers came out and made a ton of cash, and WB realized that you can actually make a lot of money with a superhero teamup movie, even though there were so many things that could have gone wrong with the Avengers. I don't know if Man of Steel was supposed to springboard the DC universe, although I doubt it, but it's definitely now what WB is using as a foothold to launch a Justice League movie, which they announced would be in production at some point before establishing a whole bunch of characters. And then now MoS2 is gonna be bats vs supes. Anywhoo, because they've essentially locked themselves into this sort of tone which can be a bit problematic, but they've been rolling with it basically such as the TV show "Arrow" production.
tl;dr they're definitely going for gritty for the most part
I wonder how that's gonna turn out, I mean I see how they made superman dark… but I can't really imagine a dark Flash or dark Green Lantern.... or Wonder Woman
there characters just seem opposite, maybe I just haven't read enough about them
I really hope whatever they do, they decide to switch Wonder Woman storyline back to greek mythology and not this bullshit about her being a kryptonian
seriously Disney worked it out with Thor in Marvel who was far less known and made it a marketable franchise,
and Warner Bros has the most famous female superhero character of all time and they won't even attempt it because it's a little riskier
meanwhile on Disney side we got Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man and Doctor Strange movies coming.... when did Disney take WB balls
-
But at the same time, it's really difficult to pull this sort of thing off.
The Marvel movies took off because of Iron Man. But Iron Man took off because it had the charisma of Robert Downey Jr. That got butts into theater seats. Then Iron Man 2 happened, and they started saying, "Hey! We're thinking about doing an Avengers movie… Maybe you should also go see this Thor and Captain America movie we made? Might be a good idea." And both of those movies, people enjoyed for the most part. And then it lead right into Avengers.
And I feel like that's kind of DC's problem. They are so god damn scared of their movies bombing, and they won't make any attempt to REALLY allude to the possibility of a Justice League movie outside of mentioning it in the media. Going from 'Man of Steel' to 'SUPERMAN VS BATMAN, GUEST STARRING WONDER WOMAN I GUESS: THE QUEST FOR MORE MONEY AND A POSSIBLE JUSTICE LEAGUE MOVIE' is way too much of a jump.
Right now, they're 'Iron Man' is 'Man of Steel', meaning 'Man of Steel' is their first movie to set up 'Justice League'. And for those of us who didn't like 'Man of Steel', that's a nightmare of a realization. Since Batman won't be Nolan's, we won't have a set up for Batman unless they do another Batman movie from scratch. Obviously we can't have a Wonder Woman movie because [bullshit]. Only thing I can assume that they're going to do is a Man of Steel 2.
I don't think this set up is going to happen. Being that the movie is being pushed back to 2018, I don't think half the people working on this project are going to keep interest unless they start making movies of the heroes. I feel like half of these actors are going to be gone from this project before it even begins, either because they were dropped or because they left. I mean, 4 years of no movies?
-
And they won't do a Flash movie for a set up either because they don't have the balls to do even that. God forbid we even try Hawkman or gasp Martian Manhunter.
-
meanwhile on Disney side we got Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man and Doctor Strange movies coming…. when did Disney take WB balls
To be fair none of Marvel's gamble's have gone bust…yet so that's part of the reason. Warner Bros has a number of bad movies based off their IP's
How soon one forgets abominations like Catwoman or Green Lantern.
And they won't do a Flash movie for a set up either because they don't have the balls to do even that. God forbid we even try Hawkman or gasp Martian Manhunter.
I'd rather they go for Hawkgirl so Wonder Woman isn't the token female on the team like Widow was in Avengers. Hell even Black Canary or Zatanna.
-
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=50634
ahahahahahahaha
-
A jew playing an evil rich megalomaniac….sounds legit.
But unintentional stereotyping aside don't know how to feel about this.
-
I'm happily one of the 3% of the world that loves Jesse Eisenberg, but…
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY...
-
This is a good casting. Eisenberg is known for playing a theatrical interpretation of a kid who built a modern empire out of his dorm room. Going with a young computer revolutionist for the Luthor character gives the film a modern lean that will wind up being interesting to study in the future.
-
@Yuugi's:
This is a good casting. Eisenberg is known for playing a theatrical interpretation of a kid who built a modern empire out of his dorm room. Going with a young computer revolutionist for the Luthor character gives the film a modern lean that will wind up being interesting to study in the future.
Summed it up nicely. That's how I feel. But I still can't bring myself to take this seriously after Man of Steel. Don't know what it's gonna take for DC and WB to convince me.
-
I can't be the only one who went "hey, they mispelled Heisen- Oh."
Well, I guess he needed to be young for Maximum Story Parralel and Fisticuffs potential.
Also, casting Jeremy irons in a decidedly low key role is just no fun at all.
-
I'm sick and tired of all these modern updates of old, hard-boiled criminal masterminds to young computer hacker prodigies. It's gotten cliche at this point. You had a perfectly good actor who would have been perfect for the role and you cast the pasty kid from Social Network instead? Ugh.
-
I really can't imagine that guy with a bald head.
-
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=50634
ahahahahahahaha
Okaaaaaaaaayyyyy . . . . . . . . . . . .
I'm fine with Jeremy Irons as Alfred but seriously?
-
@Cyan:
I really can't imagine that guy with a bald head.
Zack said after Man of Steel if they do Lex would be like a cross between Richard Branson and Brad Pitt.
Don't really know what he means by that combination though seeing I really don't know much about either.
And I pretty sure Luthor will have hair in this. Even though he's more known for being bald it's not like he hasn't had hair in some points in the comics or even in earlier Superman Movies.
-
Michael Cera for Robin please.
! This casting choice could go both ways. I have my doubts, but I'm in the extreme zone of "cautiously optimistic".
-
@Cyan:
I really can't imagine that guy with a bald head.
Failure to accept early onset male pattern baldness will be Luthors tragic character arc.
Maybe the baldness will be caused by kryptonite exposure? Or maybe Superman burns it off by accident? The plot thickens.
-
@Cyan:
I really can't imagine that guy with a bald head.
Well Lex wasn't originally bald to begin with. Which is presumably how Gene Hackman got away with having hair in the earlier Superman movies. Which I always used to think was unusual.
-
@The:
Failure to accept early onset male pattern baldness will be Luthors tragic character arc.
Maybe the baldness will be caused by kryptonite exposure? Or maybe Superman burns it off by accident? The plot thickens.
In order to surpass Superman, Lex Luthor begins a training regimen to build up his strength. 100 push ups, 100 sit-ups, 100 squats, and 10 km running every day for three years, achieving a multibillion dollar corporation and charisma in exchange for hair.
wait…
-
Okaaaaaaaaayyyyy . . . . . . . . . . . .
I'm fine with Jeremy Irons as Alfred but seriously?
His voice is too sinister to be a kindly old butler. And after learning he's apparantly a raging homophobe I have trouble imagining him as a kindly old butler.
-
@Purple:
In order to surpass Superman, Lex Luthor begins a training regimen to build up his strength. 100 push ups, 100 sit-ups, 100 squats, and 10 km running every day for three years, achieving a multibillion dollar corporation and charisma in exchange for hair.
wait…
-
Well this actually opened my eyes to the good news that Jesse Eisenberg will (probably) never play Saitama.
-
-
@Yuugi's:
This is a good casting. Eisenberg is known for playing a theatrical interpretation of a kid who built a modern empire out of his dorm room. Going with a young computer revolutionist for the Luthor character gives the film a modern lean that will wind up being interesting to study in the future.
It really does seem that this was the reason behind the decision for the casting but really did Lex need a revision for the modern whatever. Plus Lex doesn't really work as some awkward geeky guy. He's more of a powerful and smart man. Someone who can become president due to his natural charisma, build technology stuff and run a business empire. Bryan Cranston would have been great in this role but nope lets cast the geeky guy..they're in nowadays.
DC you've lost this fight to Marvel.
-
It really does seem that this was the reason behind the decision for the casting but really did Lex need a revision for the modern whatever. Plus Lex doesn't really work as some awkward geeky guy. He's more of a powerful and smart man. Someone who can become president due to his natural charisma, build technology stuff and run a business empire. Bryan Cranston would have been great in this role but nope lets cast the geeky guy..they're in nowadays.
DC you've lost this fight to Marvel.
I sort of copy this from someone else but whatever:
Yes, Bryan Cranston is a great actor, he is also your typical typecasted fan favorite that would not have been inspired at all and contrary to people thinking he could pull off Luthor because of what he did in Breaking Bad, an argument can be made Heisenberg actually makes the case against him being good as Luthor. Heisenberg is a bipolar, rough, and unflattering character that has one side as a beat down loser nerdy dad and the other a nearly insane criminal. Lex Luthor has to have a respectable image about him, must be swave at all times, and even though he does evil, what he does is hardly ever crazy and always has a calm air about it. Lex is a calm storm, Heisenberg is wild. They're antithesis of each other if anything. Just because Cranston made a good Heisenberg does not mean he will make a good Luthor.
-
I sort of copy this from someone else but whatever:
Yes, Bryan Cranston is a great actor, he is also your typical typecasted fan favorite that would not have been inspired at all and contrary to people thinking he could pull off Luthor because of what he did in Breaking Bad, an argument can be made Heisenberg actually makes the case against him being good as Luthor. Heisenberg is a bipolar, rough, and unflattering character that has one side as a beat down loser nerdy dad and the other a nearly insane criminal. Lex Luthor has to have a respectable image about him, must be swave at all times, and even though he does evil, what he does is hardly ever crazy and always has a calm air about it. Lex is a calm storm, Heisenberg is wild. They're antithesis of each other if anything. Just because Cranston made a good Heisenberg does not mean he will make a good Luthor.
My case for Cranston has nothing to do with Heisneberg but more of his acting chops. The man has range and if interviews of some of his co workers are true, is a very hard worker. You're quote is actually assuming that his range is limited to Heisenberg bu I think its not, he can tap into Heisneberg to be intimidating and can also be suave and calm. Plus he has the look down.
-
I sort of copy this from someone else but whatever:
Yes, Bryan Cranston is a great actor, he is also your typical typecasted fan favorite that would not have been inspired at all and contrary to people thinking he could pull off Luthor because of what he did in Breaking Bad, an argument can be made Heisenberg actually makes the case against him being good as Luthor. Heisenberg is a bipolar, rough, and unflattering character that has one side as a beat down loser nerdy dad and the other a nearly insane criminal. Lex Luthor has to have a respectable image about him, must be swave at all times, and even though he does evil, what he does is hardly ever crazy and always has a calm air about it. Lex is a calm storm, Heisenberg is wild. They're antithesis of each other if anything. Just because Cranston made a good Heisenberg does not mean he will make a good Luthor.
This is the guy who played the dad in Malcolm in the Middle. He has a very wide acting range.
-
His voice is too sinister to be a kindly old butler. And after learning he's apparantly a raging homophobe I have trouble imagining him as a kindly old butler.
Yeah, I guess we better be prepared….................
-
Indeed, Bryan Cranston has a very ride range. Vince Gilligan actually needed to convince the producers that he's the only man that could pull off Walter White based off of previous experience in an X-Files episode, and the problem with them seeing it was because Cranston was pretty much seen in the public eye as Malcom's dad.
That said I can kinda see why they'd opt for a younger Luthor. I'm not completely sure that my impression of Eisenberg fits with the charismatic and powerful Luthor though. Who knows though, so in particular for Eisenberg I'll reserve judgment.
Still why are they getting Jeremy Irons for a small role
-
This just in, Reobert DeNiro has been cast to play Jimmy Olsen.
-
@Purple:
Indeed, Bryan Cranston has a very ride range. Vince Gilligan actually needed to convince the producers that he's the only man that could pull off Walter White based off of previous experience in an X-Files episode, and the problem with them seeing it was because Cranston was pretty much seen in the public eye as Malcom's dad.
What, his epic performance as Snizard in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers wasn't enough?
And you think Alfred is a small role?