Hey if Jack Black can play against type in King Kong.
Did he play that role well though? He felt out of place to me.
Hey if Jack Black can play against type in King Kong.
Did he play that role well though? He felt out of place to me.
Did he play that role well though? He felt out of place to me.
I thought he did though given how many people weren't too big on the movie in general it's hard to tell if anyone thought the same.
I've just never seen Kristen as someone serious? At most she's been in dark comedies I think. I can't recall action or drama from her.
She has a part in The Martian, but I haven't seen it to judge her and I don't know how big her role is.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Considering Cheetah is basically the ONLY iconic WW villain that isn't a greek god or tied to them, kind of a no brainer to go with Cheetah.
Well there is Giganta, but there's probably a sizable amount of people who think of her as Apache Chief's archenemy. So yeah, Cheetah does make the most sense.
But can she really carry a whole film?
Eh, wait and see. I didn't think the Vulture would work as a movie villain, but I was impressed with how he was written in Homecoming.
Eh, wait and see. I didn't think the Vulture would work as a movie villain, but I was impressed with how he was written in Homecoming.
The Vulture didn't work as a movie villain. That was Michael Keaton with a flying suit. They downplayed basically everything iconic about the character and replaced him with something else. His entire shitck and scheme was basically a Tinkerer or Shocker story… and he happened to have them as underlings.
Don't get me wrong. He was great and it worked and that was probably the best way to do it... but he was NOT the Vulture. That was waaay closer to Norman Osborn, right down to being the father of one of Peter's friends, running a company, weapon maker, and knowing his secret identity.
Vulture was always a villain who didn't really have compelling origins and characterization, so I was very impressed by the bold changes Homecoming pulled off. Especially by really digging into the vulture motif by making him scavenge super tech and having bomber pilot attire (I always have respect for costumes that try stepping away from the usual spandex route for more clever semiotics). And those helicopter wings looked beautiful. He actually looked intimidating and, well, interesting for once in his existence instead of grouchy old man mad at having his company/work stolen who decides to become a petty robber/token Sinister Six member. I've seen this several times across different interpretations, and it never gets less boring.
Vulture could always become something more than that. I feel he has the potential to become a decent A-lister if a writer really took advantage of the vulture gimmick figuratively like Homecoming did and apply his intelligence to other things besides JUST flying and sometimes having sharp wings. Yet the comics never really try to push him towards newer, higher territory. Aside from that one time there was this other cannibal Vulture and whatever.
But yeah, he does play a very similar role to Norman in Homecoming when you put it like that. Wow, I can't believe I never realized that… Makes me all the more curious as to how they'll handle Gobby by Homecoming 3 or 4. I doubt they'll go back to any villains they've already done in 2. They better do Mysterio though.
Also, Cheetah's voice in Justice League Doom sounds like a deeper pitched English dub Frieza to me lol. Which is a compliment, I guess.
Be hilarious if Cheetah acts like Lola Bunny. I'd see that movie twice.
Wonder Woman better not take her to jail. She'll lift weights and get really muscular. Her voice will get really deep. She'll run the place.
@Count:
They better do Mysterio though.
Get Bruce Campbell to do it and bring Spider-man full circle.
Considering Cheetah is basically the ONLY iconic WW villain that isn't a greek god or tied to them, kind of a no brainer to go with Cheetah. But can she really carry a whole film?
That's one of WW's weaknesses as a series, she doesn't have that great a rogues gallery. If you're not a greek god or Cheetah or Giganta . . . . who is there?
@Count:
Also, Cheetah's voice in Justice League Doom sounds like a deeper pitched English dub Frieza to me lol. Which is a compliment, I guess.
That's Claudia Black for ya.
I was going to say "Circe isn't a goddess" but nope i just looked it up
lesser goddess of magic
That's one of WW's weaknesses as a series, she doesn't have that great a rogues gallery.
Honestly, how many superheroes can say they have a great rogues gallery? Probably just Batman and Spiderman (maybe Superman).
Wonder Woman in particular stands out when it comes to having a weak rogues gallery. The Lynda Carter show didn't actually use any of her supervillains, Super Friends paired her with Cheetah and that's it, and she didn't get the lines of movies and cartoons that Superman and Batman did to highlight her villains.
Honestly, how many superheroes can say they have a great rogues gallery? Probably just Batman and Spiderman (maybe Superman).
The Flash has a pretty good one.
Honestly, how many superheroes can say they have a great rogues gallery? Probably just Batman and Spiderman (maybe Superman).
Flash actually has a really good gallery, but they tend to be overshadowed by Reverse-Flash.
And he's never really gotten his own cartoon series to really showcase the lot. Current live tv show but thats not quite the same.
I was going to say "Circe isn't a goddess" but nope i just looked it up
lesser goddess of magic
Haha, they sometimes just call her a Sorceress, but yes, she is a goddess.
But I would seriously love for her to be the villain in a third Wonder Woman movie.
@Cyan:
Wonder Woman in particular stands out when it comes to having a weak rogues gallery. The Lynda Carter show didn't actually use any of her supervillains, Super Friends paired her with Cheetah and that's it, and she didn't get the lines of movies and cartoons that Superman and Batman did to highlight her villains.
Lynda Carter seriously didn't use Cheetah or any of the greek gods? Horrors.
Flash actually has a really good gallery, but they tend to be overshadowed by Reverse-Flash.
And he's never really gotten his own cartoon series to really showcase the lot. Current live tv show but thats not quite the same.
This is still one of my favorite scenes from Animated DC.
flash got all the best moments in JCA
who can forget such iconic comedy
The Flash has a pretty good one.
Flash actually has a really good gallery, but they tend to be overshadowed by Reverse-Flash.
And he's never really gotten his own cartoon series to really showcase the lot. Current live tv show but thats not quite the same.
The Flash's enemies always seemed like kind of a joke, just by their names alone (Captain Cold, Captain Boomerang, Mirror Master, Weather Wizard, etc.) But, as you said, perhaps they just never got the chance to shine.
Considering Cheetah is basically the ONLY iconic WW villain that isn't a greek god or tied to them, kind of a no brainer to go with Cheetah. But can she really carry a whole film?
I would also include Giganta, who I reckon would be even more risky to base a movie around. She frequently showed up in the Justice League cartoon as a member of the Legion of Doom. Her origin is purely science-based.
The Flash's enemies always seemed like kind of a joke, just by their names alone (Captain Cold, Captain Boomerang, Mirror Master, Weather Wizard, etc.) But, as you said, perhaps they just never got the chance to shine.
They aren't any more silly/gimmicky than most Spider-Man villains having either elemental or animal powers, or each Batman villain cranking up a random obsession to 11. All of those names you mentioned from powers that can easily be very deadly. They only suffer from lack of exposure. I mean, hell, Batman manages to make Riddler work as a well known supervillain.
But the CW show has helped remedy that. I think that the average superhero comic book fan nowadays at least knows who Reverse-Flash and Captain Cold are. and they're showing up more in other mediums like Injustice and animated films like Flashpoint. There's still a road to go, but Flash's villains were practically nonexistent to the public eye prior to 2010's before the Flashpoint comic event and New 52.
Isn't Grod originally a Flash villain?
Isn't Grod originally a Flash villain?
Yes, but he's also one of those sorts of villains that sometimes becomes so threatening that he's a Justice League villain. But he has beef with Flash more than anyone.
Isn't Grod originally a Flash villain?
Yep, he is. The top three major Flash villains are Reverse-Flash, Captain Cold, and Gorilla Grodd. And Grodd has gotten decent showings in the Justice League cartoon and the occasional CW show appearance (although he deserves to be a main season villain, but budget issues might be present).
But I don't know if the average person would associate him with the Flash since he often becomes an overall DCU/Justice League villain and isn't the type of antagonist you would expect for a costumed human superhero. And they probably will not take him seriously as a villain because of the talking gorilla shtick. Which is a big mistake because Grodd is one of the most morbidly terrifying villains out there despite how goofy his "I want to create and rule a world of apes" motivation is. He once took over Central City and had D-list villains questioning his authority get their decapitated heads put on top of pikes.
It's really funny, because we see monkeys and gorillas in such a positive light. And we should for most animals.
But then we also forget stories like that woman who called 911 because their chimpanzee tore her friend's face off, and we remember that even monkeys can be fucking terrifying. Amplify that by a thousand with a gorilla. Gorilla Grodd has that strength and ruthlessness, and to make it worse, telepathic superpowers and insane intellect.
@Count:
Yep, he is. The top three major Flash villains are Reverse-Flash, Captain Boomerang, and Gorilla Grodd. And Grodd has gotten decent showings in the Justice League cartoon and the occasional CW show appearance (although he deserves to be a main season villain, but budget issues might be present).
Fixed it.:ninja:
The Flash's enemies always seemed like kind of a joke, just by their names alone (Captain Cold, Captain Boomerang, Mirror Master, Weather Wizard, etc.) But, as you said, perhaps they just never got the chance to shine.
Their names come from decades ago when the conventions were different. But it's no worse than Joker, Two-Face, Penguin, Killer Croc, Catwoman, Scarecrow, Riddler, Man-Bat…. or Venom, Lizard, Hobgoblin, Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Rhino, Sandman.... you've just had a long time to get used to those as credible names with lots of media exposure. you grew up on the absurdity of them and put a name to a face and power set.
(Heck, can say the same for "Spiderman, Black Cat, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Batman, WOnder Woman, Superman, Green Lantern.... they're all silly names when there's no context.)
If you hear them for the first time as an adult... then yeah its silly.. But if you'd started on a cartoon when you were young it'd be fine. But even they're aware that Captain Boomerang is a dumb name, hence why his costume has gone from a bright thing covered in boomerangs in the 60's to just sort of.. a guy wearing black. Same approach they take with Hawkeye in the Marvel films.
Heck, Spiderman has "Stilt Man" in his rogues gallery and Batman has "Doctor Double X".
There's not much excusing Rainbow Raider however. (An artist tries to cure his color blindness... and creates an energy weapon instead so then turns to art crimes.) But then, even he was rebranded as "Chroma" so....
It's really funny, because we see monkeys and gorillas in such a positive light. And we should for most animals.
But then we also forget stories like that woman who called 911 because their chimpanzee tore her friend's face off, and we remember that even monkeys can be fucking terrifying. Amplify that by a thousand with a gorilla. Gorilla Grodd has that strength and ruthlessness, and to make it worse, telepathic superpowers and insane intellect.
In that chimpanzees' defense…They aren't pets, they get big, and they shouldn't be given Xanax :ninja:.
Hey, they made Sportsmaster fairly dangerous in Young Justice, didn't they?
@Count:
Yep, he is. The top three major Flash villains are Reverse-Flash, Captain Cold, and Gorilla Grodd. And Grodd has gotten decent showings in the Justice League cartoon and the occasional CW show appearance (although he deserves to be a main season villain, but budget issues might be present).
Yeah, with a tv budget it would be kind of hard to get the motion-cap or the muppetry/costuming for it.
It's really funny, because we see monkeys and gorillas in such a positive light. And we should for most animals.
But then we also forget stories like that woman who called 911 because their chimpanzee tore her friend's face off, and we remember that even monkeys can be fucking terrifying. Amplify that by a thousand with a gorilla. Gorilla Grodd has that strength and ruthlessness, and to make it worse, telepathic superpowers and insane intellect.
You would think after all the recent Planet of the Apes movies people would have gotten the "dangerous monkeys" idea well enough.
Hell, with how popular modern Planet of the Apes has been this SHOULD be a good time to use Grod.
@Count:
mean, hell, Batman manages to make Riddler work as a well known supervillain.
Well Riddler has a bit more more going for him than the Condiment King or the Terrible Trio.
@Count:
Which is a big mistake because Grodd is one of the most morbidly terrifying villains out there despite how goofy his "I want to create and rule a world of apes" motivation is. He once took over Central City and had D-list villains questioning his authority get their decapitated heads put on top of pikes.
Surprised he didn't hollow out their skulls (eating their brains in the process) and use them as mugs.
Well Riddler has a bit more more going for him than the Condiment King or the Terrible Trio.
So do guys who have weapons that manipulate dangerous elements and lighthearted version of Joker. Yet people will still judge them based on cheesy names.
Thinking back, Batman: TAS actually did a pretty good job with the Clock King.
@Count:
So do guys who have weapons that manipulate dangerous elements and lighthearted version of Joker. Yet people will still judge them based on cheesy names.
Hey coming up with good supervillain names is hard…...or too easy.
The worst when their actual starting original names are already bad puns that just mean they're destined to be a villain.
E. Nygma being the Riddler. Victor Fries becoming Freeze. Roy G. Bivolo becoming Rainbow Raider. Doctor Doom (it's his actual damn name!) Doctor Strange. John Henry Irons becomes Steel. And so on.
Some people were just born to become costumed weirdos.
E.Nygma could have been a detective.
We've already got Vic Sage as The Question as the resident detective.
Not all villains have weird names. I never considered Lex Luthor or Harvey Dent as particularly silly.
I thought the original name was Edward Nashton and he changed it to E. Nygma later on? But that's probably a retcon.
E.Nygma could have been a detective.
That's actually how the comics tried running him for a while a few years back. He reformed and went through as a detective… and it was a way to play up Batman's detective skills. He and Riddler would get in on the same case, and Riddler would make the wrong deduction while Bats would get the real answer.
It worked pretty well to have him be a conceited antagonist rather than a straight up villain with a reeeeeally tedious gimmick.
That was before the New 52 so that was two reboots ago, I have no idea what he's doing now.
Nicolas Cage will apparently voice Superman in the Teen Titans Go! To the Movies.
That's actually how the comics tried running him for a while a few years back. He reformed and went through as a detective… and it was a way to play up Batman's detective skills. He and Riddler would get in on the same case, and Riddler would make the wrong deduction while Bats would get the real answer.
It worked pretty well to have him be a conceited antagonist rather than a straight up villain with a reeeeeally tedious gimmick.
That was before the New 52 so that was two reboots ago, I have no idea what he's doing now.
He's back to regular villain status. Had a crime war against Joker a few months ago. Although that was technically a flashback arc about Batman feeling needlessly guilty for considering to kill or something silly like that.
I think a few Batman villains would be better if they occupied more different niches than all of them being gimmicky criminal psychos. Riddler being a conceited detective trying to one up Batman, but not straight up evil sounds a LOT more refreshing than his usual shtick. Supervillain Riddler is always either ridiculously goofy or Jigsaw with riddles. It gets old after the first couple times, let alone decades. Some sort of detective or hacktivist gig to rival Batman would do wonders.
This also reminds me of why Two-Face is problematic to me. He is the type of villain that only works for one or two stories, and a second story only works if it focuses on whether or not redemption is possible. He is memorable for his tragedy, but loses sympathy or any new ground to tread after completing his villain metamorphosis. He also becomes one of several crime bosses where his only gimmick is obsessing overs twos and flipping a coin for "fair" decisions, which almost never works in a compelling way if both choices are corrupt or one is doing nothing. He also feels really petty in how he starts out as a district attorney and, out of all the interesting roles to twist that type of justice perspective towards, ends up becoming a gang boss bank robber. The best iteration of Two-Face I've seen is Telltale's interpretation where he becomes a totalitarian mayor of Gotham.
Don't even get me started on Poison Ivy. I never cared for the "plants>humans" mentality, that's the one Batman villain gimmick I find neither interesting nor memorably goofy, just boring. And she has a constant identity crisis between being a villain, ally, on/off girlfriend, hating humans, being cured, etc. The most interesting role she ever has is being a powerhouse for villain alliances, which makes her more of a plot device than a character.
And Scarecrow… I don't even know. I like the fear gas gimmick. I like his look. But one thing I never really got for this guy is... what is his goal? Aside from money, which is trivial. Yes, I know he likes making people scared out of a deranged psychological analysis curiosity. But THEN what? What does he do after making Gotham perpetually frightened? What does this accomplish? The only way this character makes sense for me is if he's may be trying to find some sort of "cure for fear" but in a more selfish messed up way than Mr. Freeze saving his wife or being an anti-hero/neutral/anti-villain vigilante version of Batman. I wonder why that has never been attempted when he uses fear like Batman.
Killer Croc and Clayface only really work as minions or character studies if they have a good writer rather than actual compelling solo villains.
I think the only Batman villains that can engage me without being a greedy one-note gimmick are Joker (although he is WAY too hackneyed), Penguin (he has a lot of potential that isn't tapped into that often as a somewhat sane morally shifty crime boss, like taking over Wayne Enterprises in the Telltale game), Mr. Freeze, Ra's al Ghul, Harley Quinn, Bane (when he's not written as a mindless junkie brute), Hugo Strange, and maybe Catwoman (I don't care for repetitive on/off-again femme fatale romances, but she's had interesting roles and character interactions).
But even they get old. I love and hate Batman, primarily because of his stagnant status-quo aside from bloating up the Bat-Family more and more over the years. Spider-Man's rogues gallery engages me more because of how they can actually evolve their roles and characterizations over time.
Scarecrow should've stayed a Yellow Lantern because holy shit that's a good idea.
@Count:
But even they get old. I love and hate Batman, primarily because of his stagnant status-quo aside from bloating up the Bat-Family more and more over the years. Spider-Man's rogues gallery engages me more because of how they can actually evolve their roles and characterizations over time.
I guess it must be the fact that the majority of Spider-Man villains are born from a failed experiment.
I guess it must be the fact that the majority of Spider-Man villains are born from a failed experiment.
!
That's actually how the comics tried running him for a while a few years back. He reformed and went through as a detective… and it was a way to play up Batman's detective skills. He and Riddler would get in on the same case, and Riddler would make the wrong deduction while Bats would get the real answer.
It worked pretty well to have him be a conceited antagonist rather than a straight up villain with a reeeeeally tedious gimmick.
That was before the New 52 so that was two reboots ago, I have no idea what he's doing now.
That seems to fit him so much more.
If there ever was a solid "ultimate" Batman/DCU universe of continuity(You know, like if Batman: Earth One continued), I'd love to see the Riddler tied into Bruce Wayne's training years overseas, with him traveling to Gotham specifically to test the Batman's intellect.
I get why certain villains are going to always be tied in origin and motives to Gotham, but I think Edward Nygma would work much better as pretty much the brainy equivalent to
Kraven the hunter for Spidey. Maybe him and Bruce could have a shared origin in their studies that led them to develop such unique minds.
Think a rival/antagonistic take on Bruce's origin with Zatanna in TAS.
@Count:
Don't even get me started on Poison Ivy. I never cared for the "plants>humans" mentality, that's the one Batman villain gimmick I find neither interesting nor memorably goofy, just boring. And she has a constant identity crisis between being a villain, ally, on/off girlfriend, hating humans, being cured, etc. The most interesting role she ever has is being a powerhouse for villain alliances, which makes her more of a plot device than a character.
And Scarecrow… I don't even know. I like the fear gas gimmick. I like his look. But one thing I never really got for this guy is... what is his goal? Aside from money, which is trivial. Yes, I know he likes making people scared out of a deranged psychological analysis curiosity. But THEN what? What does he do after making Gotham perpetually frightened? What does this accomplish? The only way this character makes sense for me is if he's may be trying to find some sort of "cure for fear" but in a more selfish messed up way than Mr. Freeze saving his wife or being an anti-hero/neutral/anti-villain vigilante version of Batman. I wonder why that has never been attempted when he uses fear like Batman.
I like Ivy and Catwoman partly because they are strong female characters. A little too sexualized, but strong nonetheless. That and I always like "Mother Nature" characters. Don't fuck with Mother Nature.
As for Scarecrow, I always figured that part of his goal was to take down Batman for screwing up his profession and driving him underground. And given that he's psycho at the core like so many others, what from I saw he didn't care about giving his findings to the Peer Review or anything, he just found studying fear fascinating and likes to keep doing it. Like a kid with his favorite toy.
@Count:
He's back to regular villain status. Had a crime war against Joker a few months ago. Although that was technically a flashback arc about Batmsn feeling needlessly guilty for considering to kill or something silly like that.
Hey now, the real "villain" that shined through in the War on Jokes and Riddles arc was Kite Man (hell yeah).
My ideal Scarecrow is the Arkham Knight design voiced by Robert Englund.
@Cyan:
My ideal Scarecrow is the Arkham Knight design voiced by Robert Englund.
the fact that it took until Injustice 2 for Scarecrow to be voiced by Englund is an injustice in its own right
As for Scarecrow, I always figured that part of his goal was to take down Batman for screwing up his profession and driving him underground. And given that he's psycho at the core like so many others, what from I saw he didn't care about giving his findings to the Peer Review or anything, he just found studying fear fascinating and likes to keep doing it. Like a kid with his favorite toy.
Joker does the Batman obsession thing in spades without it becoming boring, primarily because it dives a lot into psychological conflict that goes in a lot more directions than "I feel scared or guilty of so and so". Joker's insanity can be used as escapism running away from memories about his tragic life, he could reveal how flawed ethics/justice are to "help" other people become insane, he can pull silly gags and troll people for kicks, he could put the justice system's capital punishment consideration in for a loop because of being so dangerous yet certifiably insane, etc. And I can see Joker having other aspirations that stay in-character purely because he embodies anarchy and wants the world to abandon its morals. It's a simple motivation, but can go in so many directions to keep feeling interesting. Aside from the occasional story that tries to claim the Joker would get bored/depressed if Batman wasn't around, which is fine in its own right too.
My thoughts on Scarecrow:
! Scarecrow wanting revenge feels very petty in comparison, especially since he (not any Batman villain) will EVER affect Bruce's life on Joker's level. And solely focusing on destroying one man still feels like a waste for all of the character/plot potential somebody with fear gas could accomplish. He has a cool design by looking like a creepy scarecrow and sometimes having Freddy Krueger needle gloves, but that is the most I can actually praise him for.
! Also, the fear gas itself is a one trick pony. Having a hero be tested against their phobias and self-doubt is always awesome, especially if it becomes a literal manifestation warping their perception of reality. But after Batman overcomes his fears once, that's it. Fear gas isn't taken seriously as a threat anymore. Sure, you can change up what type of illusion it is, but it still has the same basic narrative solution of endurance and courageously embracing what makes you afraid. It can't be as versatile for story conflicts as Joker's variety of deluded shenanigans or Riddler testing Batman's intellect, although both of those things can get old when the status-quo keeps going right back to normal after almost every arc or a couple years of apparent change. So it can only be kept interesting by having other people with different fears and internal conflicts affected with fear gas, and who could actually lose to Scarecrow's fear toxins in contrast to Batman. And fully taking advantage of that requires giving Scarecrow something to do that's more than vengeance solely against Batman.
Villains constantly fixated on revenge more often than not end up repetitive after a while if they can't fit into any other niche or plot purpose. Like Venom. But he changed in the 90's to become an anti-hero and so on.
I like Ivy and Catwoman partly because they are strong female characters. A little too sexualized, but strong nonetheless. That and I always like "Mother Nature" characters. Don't fuck with Mother Nature.
Poison Ivy has the exact opposite problem for me that Scarecrow has. Her nature preservation/expansion obsession provides a motivation does "make sense" as a goal granting satisfaction and purpose, and can be versatile in the types of story roles she can have. Hence the identity crisis I mentioned.
My thoughts on Poison Ivy:
! However, unlike how Scarecrow's design and abilities are appealing to me on the surface level, I find her nature lover gimmick lackluster. Controlling plants in and of itself does not really fascinate as a unique ability unless it gets REALLY researched beyond common knowledge. So that type of power is more about execution drawing me in. Although that is obviously my subjective perspective, not a fact. I respect thinking that mother nature is kickass. I love lightning powers, especially when they incorporate tricks like electromagnetism. But it only makes her stand out as one of the few super powered villains in Gotham. And while I am always game for female characters being strong in the physical sense, they also need to be strong or interesting personality/background-wise too.
! And no matter how important it is to prevent pollution, rainforest destruction, and global warming, I can never get fully invested in "I think plants matter more than people who can talk and visibly feel pain". It is really hard for me to be fascinated with that because it always goes for that trite "mankind is the REAL monster" message I always roll my eyes at since it's so obvious and doesn't speak for every human being's integrity. We've seen that a million times in animated children's movies and PSAs, it's nothing new.
! Almost every other Batman has a peculiar philosophy that could possibly be explored as sympathetic or insightful about the flawed human psyche. Looking into what we're afraid of and why can be interesting. Analyzing how we might want to ditch our morals to embrace madness can be interesting. Dissecting the flaws in our justice system and how we can rely on "objective" chance/fate over rationality can be interesting. Evaluating how far we can go to save somebody we care about and possibly be in denial about their death can be interesting. Investigating the effects of immortality and far you are willing to go in potentially saving humanity through underhanded means can be interesting.
! But what am I supposed to find interesting about REALLY liking plants? I say this as somebody who loves to observe nature and hear about gardening or favorite plants when I talk to my friends. Maybe I can feel sorry for Ivy if she looks to plants for comfort and can't rely on humans in some tragic backstory or way of life. But I can't actually feel bad for plants in a very profound way that's more than "damn, that kind of sucks". I can feel terrible for animal mistreatment, but nature abuse is tricky. So when Poison Ivy is the one of the very "selfless" Batman villains trying to save plant life, it is difficult for me to be fascinated with her schemes and mentality. At best, I can pity her as a tragic figure, but not find her morals interesting.
She might be a little too sexualized, but at least she is one of the few female comic book characters where being scantily clad and looking as artificial as a porn star makes sense since she's a seductress manipulating others for her goals.
https://deadline.com/2018/03/ava-duvernay-new-gods-movie-warner-bros-dc-jack-kirby-1202338680/
damn it all, i might actually have to see this one
I'm a damn sucker for Mister Miracle and Big Barda
They're legally obligated to cast Ed Asner as Granny Goodness.
Is Ed Asner too old at this point? For voice, sure easy enough, but is he okay for doing all the on-set acting?