fujishig

This was an Elseworlds but did you ever read James Robinson's Golden Age (which I think came out the same year as Mystery Theater)? They basically used that as the unofficial history of Johns and Robinson's JSA (and Robinson's Starman, which is also excellent).

dex14

devilshalo

If this was pro wrestling... I'd want all of this to be a work.

fujishig

That would be an awesome reveal... like just have Black Adam show up in one of the new movies and go "psyche!" But like modern wrestling, there are too many people involved to pull off such a surprise.

dex14

RocShemp

Glad Elseworlds is on the table. Hopefully not just for stuff like Joker and The Batman (both of which I loved), but for more out there projects (like, say, an adaptation of Dark Knights of Steel).

stingermck

Yeah you ain't coming back Rock. That's just lip service so they can sell some digital BA right now.

Giantrobo

At this point im not sure anyone but Gunn can say what is and is not going to happen. It seeeems...Gunn is open to lots of ideas...BUT...down the line and as long as they don't fuck with his current outlines.

But thats just my speculation....

RocShemp

You're doing it wrong. You need to make a random, hyperbolic speculation, and present it as if irrefutable. You're being far too reasonable and will never make it as a scooper.

PhantomStranger

This is exactly correct. WB doesn't want to burn any bridges with one of the biggest box office stars in Hollywood and this is their way of allowing Dwayne to save a little face from this fiasco.

Don't hold your breath for Black Adam's return.

RocShemp

For those of us that would like a proper sendoff to the DCEU before the DCU wipes the slate clean, the best we can hope for is Project Justice League on the the 25th of this month.

​​​​​​

Although, I wish Jim Lee and Zack Snyder would collaborate on a comic book conclusion, since a feature length animated movie would be a pipe dream.

devilshalo

Just because you can turn coal into a diamond does not mean you can do the same to a turd.

RocShemp

They could have course corrected instead of rebooting. Just think of the previous movies as the messy first season of a TV series that hit its stride in season 2. But restarting is easier. So, although I don't like it, I can't fault Gunn for taking the path of least (creative) resistance.

PhantomStranger

I'm guessing Gunn pitched a much cheaper Superman project with young (read cheap) leads. Bringing Henry back would have by necessity turned the next Superman film into a huge project (read expensive). Would not surprise me one bit if the new Discovery bosses liked the idea of a cheap Superman film, lowering the risk of another huge bomb.

Runaway

I'm a fan of the Snyderverse I liked all of his contributions to it. I liked the first Wonder Woman and Shazam, thought Aquaman was entertaining and I think they nailed the casting. I even think Black Adam was better than every MCU movie since Endgame, except No Way Home. But I do think we have to face the music. The Snyderverse failed, trying to make it better actually made it worse in some cases, financially only Aquaman and Wonder Woman were hits, some movies bombed hard and while it's certainly not everything due to the creatives, since there were some stupid management decisions made, the fans of the Snyderverse have to accept, that there weren't enough of us.

I wouldn't say Gunn is taking the course of least creative resistance, he's taking the course of reason. He's developing his own vision instead of repairing someone elses.

RocShemp

I agree with you and most of the points you made. My statement wasn't meant to imply laziness on Gunn's part. My point is that righting the ship is doable. However, a simpler approach (or, as you put it, "the course of reason") is to start fresh with a new unified vision.

Runaway

Then we are on the same page. It wouldn't be impossible to work with the carcass of the DCEU and perhaps they are still keeping some parts, for example Shazam isn't really connected to anything, but a clean start brings no baggage and I'm kind of glad, if I don't have to hear the crying about Superman killing Zod anymore.
I guess they'll start with a new Superman and go from there and while there is no plan to bring back Cavill or Johnson, it's no said, they won't return at some point.
There was no plan to bring back Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield or Michael Keaton either.

RocShemp

I always assumed that the people who got hung up on that never read the John Byrne era of the character, which was a big influence on Man Of Steel. Although in those comics Superman outright executed Zod (as well as Zaora and Quex-Ul).




Here's a whole article about it that would have come in handy back in 2013: https://screenrant.com/superman-kill...tal-dc-comics/

DJariya

Gunn says the plan for DC is 8-10 years. He doesn't really answer the question about the Ezra Miller blurb that's been circulating.

Twitter

fujishig

The big difference was that act had huge repercussions on Superman, whereas the MoS version basically screamed a little then went back to normal.

Like if you're going to have Superman kill in his first outing, sure, that's a choice you make, but I much prefer Byrne's way where it changes him and he pretty much vows never to do it again.

RocShemp

I will agree with you there. Especially since the very next scene was the cutesy bit with the drone and Captain Farris saying "he's kinda hot". Two good scenes on their own, but like oil and water when paired together.

But then again BVS was all about everyone debating whether or not Supes should be feared. However, I feel that we should have had Aquaman ​​​​​​(Orm would have ideas the oceanic devastation caused by the World Engine as an act of war from the surface, The Flash (with Barry inspired to use his powers openly because of Superman), and Man of Steel 2 (or Man of Tomorrow, where Clark faces the ramifications of the events of MoS as he balances his life as a reporter and his drive to help others as Superman) before we got Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice.

That way we'd be able to delve into the consequences (good and bad) and even see Superman decide upon his no killing code. Heck, with such a code gradually and firmly established, there'd be a greater juxtaposition between a non-lethal, hopeful Superman (whose actions are misunderstood) and an jaded, burnt out Batman (whose newfound lust for violence is wrongly lauded by many in his city). Basically making the versus conflict a philosophical one, which I believe was the intent. Unfortunately it was all muddled due to the rush to catch up to the competition.

IBJoel

I actually think all of that COULD have been Batman V Superman, you'd just have to cut out the Luthor/Doomsday aspects. Batman and other Leaguers coming together (or each approaching him in their own way) to deal with Superman would have been an interesting twist on the origin. Of course, this posits a film in which Superman does not commit an extrajudicial killing of a human warlord and at least attempts to save some people when the bomb goes off in Congress. And also posits a world in which Zack Snyder does not have insane, nonsensical thoughts about characters that act as role models for many children.

fujishig

Like many, it seems like he took the wrong message from works like Watchmen and TDKR (ironic since he basically adapted both of them to film) and applied it to these characters.

Apologies for another Snyder derail, but has he ever talked about whether or not BvS was his vision when he wrote MoS? Because it seemed like an about face after the backlash from the public to MoS, like Superman wasn't presented as any kind of threat at the end of MoS to the people in universe, then all of a sudden we see the destruction from the ground level from humans who aren't able to outrun collapsing skyscrapers and everything changes. It's hard for me to believe the original plan was to introduce Superman then have him face off against Batman and get killed in the span of two movies, then resurrected in a third and having Bruce longing for him and wanting a team of super powered beings.

RocShemp

From what I once read, MoS2 was meant to follow MoS immediately (or SS was supposed to go between the two in order to introduce Batman, I forget). But then MoS2 was altered to become BVS, followed by the enclosed picture as the announced DCEU slate. Then everything changed again (multiple times), presumably because Walter Hamada was having a pissing contest with Zack Snyder.

RocShemp

Personally, I think all of that would have been too much for one movie, unless you aim for a 4 to 5 hour runtime. It would be far more reasonable (and palatable) to tell all those stories as separate movies that also introduce the pertinent characters. Although I do very much like your idea of the League initially coming together as an anti-Superman force.

The warlord death annoyed me because Clark simply brushes it off when Lois tries to have conversation with him about it, and it's never thrown in his face that he's later being a hypocrite regarding the current MO of the Batman. It's like "oo, Batman's branding criminals. That's naughty." Dude, you're sacking people through walls. Pot, meet Kettle. It's funny cos I still like BVS overall.