Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 14, 2022 19:03:55 GMT -5
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 16, 2022 18:27:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 16, 2022 21:35:21 GMT -5
Reeves seems like a nice guy, but very off miscasting for Constantine.... and... allergic to Akiva GOldsman's scripts. Hard pass on the sequel...
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,822 
|
Post by atp on Sept 17, 2022 2:37:37 GMT -5
Reeves seems like a nice guy, but very off miscasting for Constantine.... and... allergic to Akiva GOldsman's scripts. Hard pass on the sequel... He was only cast because of the Reeves Only People |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 19, 2022 17:00:11 GMT -5
Reeves seems like a nice guy, but very off miscasting for Constantine.... and... allergic to Akiva GOldsman's scripts. Hard pass on the sequel... I agree. The first film had a good look thanks to Francis Lawrence but Reeves was wrong for the role and only got it because WB wanted some of his star power fresh off The Matrix trilogy. Akiva Goldsman is a creative cancer. JJ Abrams only makes it all even worse. This all seems like desperation move by WB more driven by money and risk aversion than a good idea. They’re going backwards by reviving a dead franchise starter when they should be going forward |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 19, 2022 22:28:05 GMT -5
Reeves seems like a nice guy, but very off miscasting for Constantine.... and... allergic to Akiva GOldsman's scripts. Hard pass on the sequel... I agree. The first film had a good look thanks to Francis Lawrence but Reeves was wrong for the role and only got it because WB wanted some of his star power fresh off The Matrix trilogy. Akiva Goldsman is a creative cancer. JJ Abrams only makes it all even worse. This all seems like desperation move by WB more driven by money and risk aversion than a good idea. They’re going backwards by reviving a dead franchise starter when they should be going forward I have a hard time envisioning WB/DC ever 'cleansing' themselves of the taint... at the same time- the tv/Berliantiverse gave spots of gold like in the Crisis event (something like I was hoping Multiverse of Madness was going to be)- and some very good episodes and versions of some of the DC characters on their own. So, if it's tainted, at the same time, there's stuff that was nice- but I can't see it getting to the point of whole redemption to where it gets as respected as the MCU. I hope I'm wrong, though... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 20, 2022 13:15:04 GMT -5
I agree. The first film had a good look thanks to Francis Lawrence but Reeves was wrong for the role and only got it because WB wanted some of his star power fresh off The Matrix trilogy. Akiva Goldsman is a creative cancer. JJ Abrams only makes it all even worse. This all seems like desperation move by WB more driven by money and risk aversion than a good idea. They’re going backwards by reviving a dead franchise starter when they should be going forward I have a hard time envisioning WB/DC ever 'cleansing' themselves of the taint... at the same time- the tv/Berliantiverse gave spots of gold like in the Crisis event (something like I was hoping Multiverse of Madness was going to be)- and some very good episodes and versions of some of the DC characters on their own. So, if it's tainted, at the same time, there's stuff that was nice- but I can't see it getting to the point of whole redemption to where it gets as respected as the MCU. I hope I'm wrong, though... I think they’ll be on the level they’ve been on for a while. A mix of good and bad and mediocre. They’ll never be starting with a clean slate with their universe or their franchises. What we’re seeing now is more of a course correction instead of a new ship launching for a new journey and that’s part of the problem they’ll never be able to overcome. Even if they could start fresh WB still has a history good and bad and the reputation of their past releases won’t be easy for people to forget. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 21, 2022 22:05:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 22, 2022 1:13:40 GMT -5
I have a hard time envisioning WB/DC ever 'cleansing' themselves of the taint... at the same time- the tv/Berliantiverse gave spots of gold like in the Crisis event (something like I was hoping Multiverse of Madness was going to be)- and some very good episodes and versions of some of the DC characters on their own. So, if it's tainted, at the same time, there's stuff that was nice- but I can't see it getting to the point of whole redemption to where it gets as respected as the MCU. I hope I'm wrong, though... I think they’ll be on the level they’ve been on for a while. A mix of good and bad and mediocre. They’ll never be starting with a clean slate with their universe or their franchises. What we’re seeing now is more of a course correction instead of a new ship launching for a new journey and that’s part of the problem they’ll never be able to overcome. Even if they could start fresh WB still has a history good and bad and the reputation of their past releases won’t be easy for people to forget. Well said. I think what it boils down to is this: If Marvel didn't trailblaze and have such a high success rate in the first few phases.... if Marvel didn't EXIST- then, the scattershot approach and the failures might not seem that bad. But with WB/DC so late in catching up--- then mostly failing when they DID (sort of) catch up-- it's hard not to compare when (in theory) they should have had the lead (in a way) by seeing the right way to do it and more/less follow the good and not copy the mistakes.... but easier said than done... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 22, 2022 8:54:25 GMT -5
I think they’ll be on the level they’ve been on for a while. A mix of good and bad and mediocre. They’ll never be starting with a clean slate with their universe or their franchises. What we’re seeing now is more of a course correction instead of a new ship launching for a new journey and that’s part of the problem they’ll never be able to overcome. Even if they could start fresh WB still has a history good and bad and the reputation of their past releases won’t be easy for people to forget. Well said. I think what it boils down to is this: If Marvel didn't trailblaze and have such a high success rate in the first few phases.... if Marvel didn't EXIST- then, the scattershot approach and the failures might not seem that bad. But with WB/DC so late in catching up--- then mostly failing when they DID (sort of) catch up-- it's hard not to compare when (in theory) they should have had the lead (in a way) by seeing the right way to do it and more/less follow the good and not copy the mistakes.... but easier said than done... Yeah exactly. The comparisons will always be there. It’s not fair but it’s unavoidable. It’s human nature. Even David Zaslav himself has compared their ten year plan to what Disney and Marvel did and specifically mentioned Kevin Feige. They’ve tried to follow Marvel Studios blueprint in the past without looking like they were. Now they’re being more open about it. WB and DC are always going to look like they’re playing catch-up. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 22, 2022 14:03:00 GMT -5
Well said. I think what it boils down to is this: If Marvel didn't trailblaze and have such a high success rate in the first few phases.... if Marvel didn't EXIST- then, the scattershot approach and the failures might not seem that bad. But with WB/DC so late in catching up--- then mostly failing when they DID (sort of) catch up-- it's hard not to compare when (in theory) they should have had the lead (in a way) by seeing the right way to do it and more/less follow the good and not copy the mistakes.... but easier said than done... Yeah exactly. The comparisons will always be there. It’s not fair but it’s unavoidable. It’s human nature. Even David Zaslav himself has compared their ten year plan to what Disney and Marvel did and specifically mentioned Kevin Feige. They’ve tried to follow Marvel Studios blueprint in the past without looking like they were. Now they’re being more open about it. WB and DC are always going to look like they’re playing catch-up. I'm open to seeing great DC films anytime anywhere, but.... boldly announcing a 10-year plan seems a bit... bold, if he doesn't own the studio or has a guarantee he'll be around that long... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 22, 2022 14:35:57 GMT -5
Yeah exactly. The comparisons will always be there. It’s not fair but it’s unavoidable. It’s human nature. Even David Zaslav himself has compared their ten year plan to what Disney and Marvel did and specifically mentioned Kevin Feige. They’ve tried to follow Marvel Studios blueprint in the past without looking like they were. Now they’re being more open about it. WB and DC are always going to look like they’re playing catch-up. I'm open to seeing great DC films anytime anywhere, but.... boldly announcing a 10-year plan seems a bit... bold, if he doesn't own the studio or has a guarantee he'll be around that long... Nothing wrong with having a plan or even announcing a plan. He’s in charge. He’s the boss so it’s his prerogative. How long he will be around who knows but they do need a lot term plan. The problem is announcing this bold new initiative before they’ve even got the plan locked down or have someone to implement it as the head of DC films. That’s when things can blow up in one’s face if they don’t work out. The “plan” is all but worthless if they can’t even get it off the ground and no one wants the job. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 22, 2022 14:48:20 GMT -5
I'm open to seeing great DC films anytime anywhere, but.... boldly announcing a 10-year plan seems a bit... bold, if he doesn't own the studio or has a guarantee he'll be around that long... Nothing wrong with having a plan or even announcing a plan. He’s in charge. He’s the boss so it’s his prerogative. How long he will be around who knows but they do need a lot term plan. The problem is announcing this bold new initiative before they’ve even got the plan locked down or have someone to implement it as the head of DC films. That’s when things can blow up in one’s face if they don’t work out. The “plan” is all but worthless if they can’t even get it off the ground and no one wants the job. I agree completely .... maybe in context it was fine, but on the surface, at a distance, it raises an eyebrow or a mild chuckle if there's been no track record yet. If Feige said it, it's one thing... but a new guy? Why not say, my '100 year plan for WB is...'  |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 22, 2022 15:27:28 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with having a plan or even announcing a plan. He’s in charge. He’s the boss so it’s his prerogative. How long he will be around who knows but they do need a lot term plan. The problem is announcing this bold new initiative before they’ve even got the plan locked down or have someone to implement it as the head of DC films. That’s when things can blow up in one’s face if they don’t work out. The “plan” is all but worthless if they can’t even get it off the ground and no one wants the job. I agree completely .... maybe in context it was fine, but on the surface, at a distance, it raises an eyebrow or a mild chuckle if there's been no track record yet. If Feige said it, it's one thing... but a new guy? Why not say, my '100 year plan for WB is...' I think Zaslav is saying what he needs to say to build confidence in DC and WB at a time when they really need it. A more accurate comparison would be to Bob Iger after Disney bought Marvel and if he’d said something similar. The difference is DC has years of mixed results and Zaslav is saying what he is without his “Feige” even in place. That’s assuming he even finds someone like that who is the best, right choice. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 22, 2022 17:29:18 GMT -5
I agree completely .... maybe in context it was fine, but on the surface, at a distance, it raises an eyebrow or a mild chuckle if there's been no track record yet. If Feige said it, it's one thing... but a new guy? Why not say, my '100 year plan for WB is...' I think Zaslav is saying what he needs to say to build confidence in DC and WB at a time when they really need it. A more accurate comparison would be to Bob Iger after Disney bought Marvel and if he’d said something similar. The difference is DC has years of mixed results and Zaslav is saying what he is without his “Feige” even in place. That’s assuming he even finds someone like that who is the best, right choice. The funny thing is.... (well, funny in a sad sense)... if they had chosen the right filmmaker to plant the center of the MCU- and let them go, things might have been okay enough. But--- it's a mess. But- I have to remember that X-men was a mess that I thought could NEVER be undone after X3--- and then, amazingly, Singer & X-men: First Class & then DOFP put in back in place.... only to- unfortunately- take a giant fall with Apocalypse. I always wonder--- if more time had been given between DOFP and Apocalypse, if that would have saved the ship with more time to fine tune the script? There are great parts to Apocalypse that I love- but the final act really unwinds all the major growth and consequences to the film. (To me, the flip by Magneto after all he had done seemed pretty sudden and everyone's response to him and Storm being 'ok, all is forgiven even though you assisted killing all the innocents in that city'--- was a major faux pas in the film.) But-I digress. I hope there's some miracle turnaround for DC. Not rooting for it to be a creative disaster. But mediocre supehero films in what's becoming a larger line of mediocre superhero films doesn't help anyone. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Sept 22, 2022 20:42:18 GMT -5
I think Zaslav is saying what he needs to say to build confidence in DC and WB at a time when they really need it. A more accurate comparison would be to Bob Iger after Disney bought Marvel and if he’d said something similar. The difference is DC has years of mixed results and Zaslav is saying what he is without his “Feige” even in place. That’s assuming he even finds someone like that who is the best, right choice. The funny thing is.... (well, funny in a sad sense)... if they had chosen the right filmmaker to plant the center of the MCU- and let them go, things might have been okay enough. But--- it's a mess. But- I have to remember that X-men was a mess that I thought could NEVER be undone after X3--- and then, amazingly, Singer & X-men: First Class & then DOFP put in back in place.... only to- unfortunately- take a giant fall with Apocalypse. I always wonder--- if more time had been given between DOFP and Apocalypse, if that would have saved the ship with more time to fine tune the script? There are great parts to Apocalypse that I love- but the final act really unwinds all the major growth and consequences to the film. (To me, the flip by Magneto after all he had done seemed pretty sudden and everyone's response to him and Storm being 'ok, all is forgiven even though you assisted killing all the innocents in that city'--- was a major faux pas in the film.) But-I digress. I hope there's some miracle turnaround for DC. Not rooting for it to be a creative disaster. But mediocre supehero films in what's becoming a larger line of mediocre superhero films doesn't help anyone. You mean the center of the DCU right? A better filmmaker with a better film to build on would have helped tremendously but they still needed a good producer in charge to guide the overall shared universe. It’s not the kind of job for a director unless they also have experience producing and they’re willing to step back and do that instead. X-men: Apocalypse was too rushed with too much going on because too much was crammed into it. DOFP had a single focus as a film. That story. It felt like it had been properly set up and it was earned. Apocalypse didn’t. They started with the wrong mindset (go bigger, compete with Marvel Studios) instead of having a good idea and working from that, and they had lesser talent involved at the top with Simon Kinberg and a few others. I also think Singer mostly said what he wanted to with the previous four films he was involved with either as director or producer and was tapped out. I would have taken longer and properly built up to Apocalypse and another go at The Phoenix. Instead they cranked them both out in two short years. 2015/2016 was Fox trying to dive into the deep end of kickstarting a shared universe to compete with everyone else trying it and it all very quickly collapsed like a house of cards. We got Logan and the Deadpools after that but everything else was either varying levels or disappointing or outright bad ideas that never got off the launchpad. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Sept 23, 2022 2:34:55 GMT -5
The funny thing is.... (well, funny in a sad sense)... if they had chosen the right filmmaker to plant the center of the MCU- and let them go, things might have been okay enough. But--- it's a mess. But- I have to remember that X-men was a mess that I thought could NEVER be undone after X3--- and then, amazingly, Singer & X-men: First Class & then DOFP put in back in place.... only to- unfortunately- take a giant fall with Apocalypse. I always wonder--- if more time had been given between DOFP and Apocalypse, if that would have saved the ship with more time to fine tune the script? There are great parts to Apocalypse that I love- but the final act really unwinds all the major growth and consequences to the film. (To me, the flip by Magneto after all he had done seemed pretty sudden and everyone's response to him and Storm being 'ok, all is forgiven even though you assisted killing all the innocents in that city'--- was a major faux pas in the film.) But-I digress. I hope there's some miracle turnaround for DC. Not rooting for it to be a creative disaster. But mediocre supehero films in what's becoming a larger line of mediocre superhero films doesn't help anyone. You mean the center of the DCU right? A better filmmaker with a better film to build on would have helped tremendously but they still needed a good producer in charge to guide the overall shared universe. It’s not the kind of job for a director unless they also have experience producing and they’re willing to step back and do that instead. X-men: Apocalypse was too rushed with too much going on because too much was crammed into it. DOFP had a single focus as a film. That story. It felt like it had been properly set up and it was earned. Apocalypse didn’t. They started with the wrong mindset (go bigger, compete with Marvel Studios) instead of having a good idea and working from that, and they had lesser talent involved at the top with Simon Kinberg and a few others. I also think Singer mostly said what he wanted to with the previous four films he was involved with either as director or producer and was tapped out. I would have taken longer and properly built up to Apocalypse and another go at The Phoenix. Instead they cranked them both out in two short years. 2015/2016 was Fox trying to dive into the deep end of kickstarting a shared universe to compete with everyone else trying it and it all very quickly collapsed like a house of cards. We got Logan and the Deadpools after that but everything else was either varying levels or disappointing or outright bad ideas that never got off the launchpad. I absolutely agree. X-men Apocalypse had good stuff- but too rushed and too much crammed in.... much like Spiderman 3's case! If they postponed it, and maybe spread some of the material out to two movies, it could have been MUCH better. Even the idea of just mutants forced into pitfights could have been smaller but interesting enough in itself to be a movie, if focusing on the ensemble and the characters. Much like the problems with Spiderman 3--- too many good concepts crammed into one, and shortchanging all of it so that none of the elements really matter. Pity. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 25, 2022 10:45:15 GMT -5
Yeah. I would have pushed the film back to 2017 and removed some of that they tried to do. Or I would have kept the 2016 date but streamlined the film. A lot of its material could have been cut and carried over to another movie in 2018 and then I would have thought about a Dark Phoenix film. It’s like you said it was like Spider-Man 3. That could have been split into two films too.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 25, 2022 16:48:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 25, 2022 21:20:48 GMT -5
Yeah. I would have pushed the film back to 2017 and removed some of that they tried to do. Or I would have kept the 2016 date but streamlined the film. A lot of its material could have been cut and carried over to another movie in 2018 and then I would have thought about a Dark Phoenix film. It’s like you said it was like Spider-Man 3. That could have been split into two films too. Again, some great stuff in Apocalypse, but definitely it was a Spiderman 3-ish scenario.... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 25, 2022 22:55:01 GMT -5
Yeah. I would have pushed the film back to 2017 and removed some of that they tried to do. Or I would have kept the 2016 date but streamlined the film. A lot of its material could have been cut and carried over to another movie in 2018 and then I would have thought about a Dark Phoenix film. It’s like you said it was like Spider-Man 3. That could have been split into two films too. Again, some great stuff in Apocalypse, but definitely it was a Spiderman 3-ish scenario.... With Apocalypse the main story was fine (though I would have waited). The secondary stuff could have been put off. With Spider-Man 3 they had two stories competing for attention and one of them needed to be split. The Harry/Peter story had to be resolved in 3 and Sandman could have worked well enough. Brock’s turn into Venom should have been saved for a Spider-Man 4. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 25, 2022 23:49:08 GMT -5
Again, some great stuff in Apocalypse, but definitely it was a Spiderman 3-ish scenario.... With Apocalypse the main story was fine (though I would have waited). The secondary stuff could have been put off. With Spider-Man 3 they had two stories competing for attention and one of them needed to be split. The Harry/Peter story had to be resolved in 3 and Sandman could have worked well enough. Brock’s turn into Venom should have been saved for a Spider-Man 4. In the 'making of' book it was supposed to be split into 2 movies- and it really should have. Unfortunately, too many other things seemed to be happening to work against it--- one big part being Howard's unexpected pregnancy, forcing another rewrite to get her out and bring MJ back into the story. Really a bit of a disaster- but it's so nice that Spiderman: No Way Home- gave a nice ending note for Tobey/Raimi's Spiderman despite that... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 26, 2022 12:39:47 GMT -5
With Apocalypse the main story was fine (though I would have waited). The secondary stuff could have been put off. With Spider-Man 3 they had two stories competing for attention and one of them needed to be split. The Harry/Peter story had to be resolved in 3 and Sandman could have worked well enough. Brock’s turn into Venom should have been saved for a Spider-Man 4. In the 'making of' book it was supposed to be split into 2 movies- and it really should have. Unfortunately, too many other things seemed to be happening to work against it--- one big part being Howard's unexpected pregnancy, forcing another rewrite to get her out and bring MJ back into the story. Really a bit of a disaster- but it's so nice that Spiderman: No Way Home- gave a nice ending note for Tobey/Raimi's Spiderman despite that... It’s nice to think that might have happened but I think Avi Arad and the studio execs were always going to push for the movie we got out of pure greed. One of those “get the most bang for your buck” kind of things because they may have been worried they wouldn’t get a chance at another sequel. It ended up being kind of true since the Spider-Man 4 we almost got did fall apart and never got made. Mostly because of Sony and their incompetence. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,069
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 26, 2022 13:01:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 27, 2022 2:26:11 GMT -5
In the 'making of' book it was supposed to be split into 2 movies- and it really should have. Unfortunately, too many other things seemed to be happening to work against it--- one big part being Howard's unexpected pregnancy, forcing another rewrite to get her out and bring MJ back into the story. Really a bit of a disaster- but it's so nice that Spiderman: No Way Home- gave a nice ending note for Tobey/Raimi's Spiderman despite that... It’s nice to think that might have happened but I think Avi Arad and the studio execs were always going to push for the movie we got out of pure greed. One of those “get the most bang for your buck” kind of things because they may have been worried they wouldn’t get a chance at another sequel. It ended up being kind of true since the Spider-Man 4 we almost got did fall apart and never got made. Mostly because of Sony and their incompetence. One special fx guy at a local comicon shared that the real reason Raimi's Spiderman 4 fell apart was the success of Avatar & Sony's greed to insist on Spiderman 4 being 3d - and that Raimi felt that there was no way that a decent conversion could be done on time to film and meet the deadline, so he bowed out. Could be.... but in any case, sad sad sad especially with word that Raimi wanted to make up for the disappointment on how Spiderman 3 turned out. |
|
