DC Films news: new Robin film “Dynamic Duo” announced

[crazy_asian_man]

Mar 4, 2019 14:32:17 GMT -5 Metallo said:

www.joblo.com/movie-news/ben-affleck-talks-giving-up-the-cape-and-cowl-as-dcs-batman

BEN AFFLECK TALKS GIVING UP THE CAPE AND COWL AS DC'S BATMAN

36 minutes ago by: Steve Seigh

Not long ago, but after waffling more than a truck stop waitress, Ben Affleck officially retired as Batman for the DCEU. For a time, Affleck was expected to write and direct a solo Batman film, though that torch has since been passed to WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES helmer Matt Reeves. With the search for a new Dark Knight now underway, some Batfleck fans have remained perplexed as to why the JUSTICE LEAGUE actor finally called it quits.

According to a special live round table interview for TRIPLE FRONTIER with IGN's Max Scoville, Affleck admits that much of his decision to leave was based on his not being satisfied with the film's script. He told Scoville as much when he said, "That was part of the problem," Affleck confessed. "We worked on the script, I was trying to figure out how to crack it, and I was never happy enough with it where I thought it was worth going out and making it because I just didn't want to do a version that I wasn't really excited by, so I still don't know."

To be honest, I don't know a single person who would want Affleck to contribute to a project that he isn't 100% excited for, so perhaps him retiring as the World's Greatest Detective is for the best? After all, Affleck's indecision about continuing on as the character had been going on for quite sometime. In fact, he'd been sketchy about the whole thing all the way back to June of last year when he'd said, "I don’t have a script that’s ready yet. My timetable is I’m not going to make a movie until there’s a script that I think is good because I’ve been on the end of the things when you make movies when you have a script that’s not good yet and it doesn’t pan out." He then continued, "I have a script, we’re still working on it, and I’m not happy enough with it yet to actually go out there and make a Batman movie, for which I have the highest of standards, I would say. That’s something that would have to pass a very high bar for me. It’s not just like, 'Yeah, that might be fun, let’s go try this out.'"

I for one am looking forward to a new actor emerging as DC's Big Bad Bat, though I understand that not everyone shares my enthusiasm. Reports have indicated that Reeves is still on the hunt for his Bruce Wayne/Batman, with the goal of welcoming a younger actor into the role. For a hot minute, CALL ME BY YOUR NAME actor Armie Hammer was reportedly cast for the part, though in time that rumor turned out to be nothing more than a steaming pile of bat guano.

Meanwhile, Affleck is set to star alongside Oscar Isaac, Pedro Pascal, Garrett Hedlund and Charlie Hunnam in director J.C. Chandor's TRIPLE FRONTIER. The upcoming film revolves around five former Special Forces operatives who reunite to plan a heist in a sparsely populated multi-border zone of South America. For the first time in their prestigious careers these unsung heroes undertake this dangerous mission for self instead of country. But when events take an unexpected turn and threaten to spiral out of control, their skills, their loyalties and their morals are pushed to a breaking point in an epic battle for survival. The film will make its Netflix premiere on March 13th.

Who do you think should don the cape and cowl in Reeves' THE BATMAN? Are you still upset that Affleck is retiring the role? Let us know in the comments section below.

In other words WB wanted something else he didn’t want and the two sides couldn’t agree. Respect Affleck for being a professional about it and not airing the dirty laundry but I remember before the rumors of him leaving came out he was saying he was happy with the progress of the script. Didn’t he even tweet that test footage of Deadshot?

I do believe what he’s saying about time and taking the time to make it right. But the thing is...they’ve given Reeves more than enough time. He came on board The Batman two years ago and it’s still years away. WB probably would have given Affleck time (to a point) if both sides had been thrilled with what was being done. It wasn’t just the pressure of a rush job there was some kind of creative fracture behind the scenes.

There are a few thoughts that came up on reading this:

#1: Affleck may have felt that after the BvS and JL criticism may have jolted his confidence if he (as he says) did feel very confident about the final result of BvS... maybe the Batman script was 'good' but not 'spectacular'... possible?

#2: Could be- as you mentioned, just too big a divide on what WB wanted versus what Affleck wanted.

#3: In regards to time... I wonder- how much of the development process is the studio putting a project on 'pause' over and over again? Look at the s-l-o-w movement on the Superman Returns sequel.
It might have been Singer sitting on his hands, but what if it was WB sitting on its hands during different stages of development? Could it be the same with Affleck's Batman? Who knows?...

[Metallo]

I think all three points you raised played a factor. All big budget big studio filmmakers are under a time crunch more now than they were in decades past. That’s been the undoing of so many blockbusters. I do think Affleck’s excitement was deflated to the response to BvS but this was his chance to do what he wanted mostly free from Snyder and he’s a better writer than Snyder and he know it. Everything was being changed after BvS. JLs performance shifted everything that wasn’t already in the pipeline.

[crazy_asian_man]

Mar 5, 2019 8:04:47 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I think all three points you raised played a factor. All big budget big studio filmmakers are under a time crunch more now than they were in decades past. That’s been the undoing of so many blockbusters. I do think Affleck’s excitement was deflated to the response to BvS but this was his chance to do what he wanted mostly free from Snyder and he’s a better writer than Snyder and he know it. Everything was being changed after BvS. JLs performance shifted everything that wasn’t already in the pipeline.

Here's the thing though:

With Kevin Feige in charge--- blockbusters under Marvel have all mainly stayed on track, with little disturbance, with two films a year & a master plan that's been working...

Another seemingly successful time was with New Line and Peter Jackson's trilogy year after year for Lord of the Rings (though with Hobbit not so much, but that might not be his fault with Del toro backing out)

So...
I do wonder how many things we're not privvy to that WB might have said, "ok, EVERY thing you decide on needs our approval on the checklist- and we may take forever on this/that so you're in 'pause' every few months until we clear it."---

On the flip side- in cases where it looks like the studio clears the runway for the director- "the Dark Knight Rises" felt too rushed out- but then again- Nolan said he never planned on really doing a trilogy, but one at a time. So maybe that failure was on Nolan that time not the studio?

(Perhaps X-men: Apocalypse suffered the same fate? Hard to tell if that was the case or just bad judgement)

Similar cases- "Spiderman 3"- with the studio half-fighting Raimi and a locked-in due date.

With "Spiderman 4" one of the fx guys locally said in a convention that it was pretty much all ready to go and would have made up for Spiderman 3- but "Avatar" ruined it by forcing Raimi to have to include 3d- but the 3d conversion was going to be crap, according to the fx guy and so Raimi was half-telling the truth saying that things weren't ready by the time Sony wanted. (such a pity)

Anyhow--- the good/bad is that Kevin Feige is showing an example that things CAN get done smoothly, so it's mainly up to the studios to get their act together, it seems.

[Metallo]

Lots of stuff really plays a role in these things. Batman was just one part of Nolan career. He’s a director who happened to make some Batman movies. Making Marvel comics movies IS Feiges career. He’s concentrating on one thing he’s good at. He’s not trying to make every kind of movie under the sun. He’s staying in his wheelhouse and sticking to his strengths. He and Marvel studios have learned from every movie and marvel movies is all they do. Nolan’s track record is still better than most because like Feige I think he has his priorities straight as a filmmaker and he’s got the clout to get a certain level of control and freedom.

Another difference is Disney mostly leaves them alone. The other studios that make these franchise movies are run by pure businessmen and even if a director is given freedom like Raimi sometimes they have the wrong take. Marvel is a well oiled machine with lots of people collaborating but one guy guiding it. I think Feige knows to listen to other points of view. He’s not Lucas who was surrounded by yes men. Feige is isn’t a director but a producer and it’s his job to coordinate in a way a directors doesn’t have time for because he’s doing a directors job.

Feige knows just enough about all bits of the process to understand the specific needs of every area. He’s not perfect and doesn’t always get it right but he’s still got a better track record than most. You can only really compare them to companies Lucasfilm or EON or Hammer back in the day as far as creating a specific kind of film product but unlike Feige Broccoli and Kennedy might not have that instinct for every part of the process.

To me producers like them lean more into the business side and the deal making side more than the creative side. Feige seems to have a good grasp on both. Maybe because he was a fan who got hands on on the job experience for over a decade before Iron Man. Brocolli has been doing this for far longer but can we really say she’s a fangirl AND a business woman AND has natural creative instincts? You you’ve got lots of people in Hollywood that might have one or two but few have all three. The Feige factor isn’t one that can easily be duplicated.

[Metallo]

www.darkhorizons.com/elba-replaces-smith-in-suicide-squad-2/

Elba Replaces Smith In “Suicide Squad 2”

By Garth Franklin Wednesday, March 6th 2019 3:25 pm

Idris Elba has been revealed as Will Smith’s replacement in the role of Deadshot in the “Suicide Squad” sequel at Warner Bros. Pictures.

Smith had to depart the project due to scheduling conflicts, and the studio moved fast to secure another A-lister to replace him before filming begins in September and Elba is currently in serious talks.

It’s expected Margot Robbie will return as Harley Quinn in the film, but that’s not certain yet. Otherwise the movie, which James Gun has been set to write and direct, will mostly feature a new group of characters.

The release date of the project is currently set for August 6th 2021. Elba will be seen this Summer in “Fast and Furious Presents: Hobbs and Shaw” and later this year in the “Cats” movie.

Source: Variety

Was wondering if they’d recast or just replace Deadshot with a different character. Guess it shows how much they feel they need Smith if they think they can just outright replace him. As far as I’m concerned Elba is an upgrade. Smith was obviously not the type that would be that dedicated to something this long term and as fun as he was he was doing his usual shtick. The character is one more tie to the previous film though.

[Metallo]

[Metallo]

www.darkhorizons.com/gunns-suicide-squad-is-a-total-reboot/

Gunn’s “Suicide Squad” Is A ‘Total Reboot’

By Garth Franklin Saturday, March 16th 2019 6:05 pm

In the wake of yesterday’s major news that James Gunn has been rehired by Disney Pictures and Marvel Studios to helm a third film in the “Guardians of the Galaxy” franchise, one immediate question that quickly came to mind was what it would mean for his involvement in “The Suicide Squad” at Warner Bros. Pictures and DC Films.

Gunn became attached to that project earlier this year, initially as writer and then director of a whole new take on the material that would use a bunch of new characters along with the return of Deadshot whom has been recast with Idris Elba in the role.

Quickly it emerged that Gunn would be doing both projects, making him the first director in cinematic history to direct films for Marvel and DC. The plan is the ‘Squad’ film comes first with intent to film it later this year, Gunn will then segue into the third “Guardians” for Disney.

DC Films producer Peter Safran is working on the ‘Squad’ film along with the soon to release “Shazam” movie. Speaking with JoBlo about the news today, he says there’s been no complications or pressures with the announcement and fans should cool it on the Marvel/DC rivalry front:

“It was all handled incredibly elegantly and everybody knows on both sides that Suicide Squad is the priority today and he’ll finish that movie and then everybody knows that his next film will be Guardians. It’s the best of all possible both worlds, I think, for fans and for James Gunn himself.

And you know what I love about James directing for both Marvel and DC is he has always espoused the view that that which unites comic book and superhero lovers is much greater than that which divides us. Because, there’s always been this Marvel/DC rivalry, which he has said, and I agree, is absurd.

There’s room for everybody and certainly that which unites us all is far greater than that which divides us, so hopefully they’ll see that you can be both a Marvel and a DC fan and the world won’t spin off its axis.”

Safran then surprisingly revealed that the new film won’t be a sequel to the 2016 David Ayer-directed film, but rather a full on reboot:

“First of all, we don’t call it Suicide Squad 2 ’cause it’s a total reboot, so it’s The Suicide Squad and I think people should be extremely excited about it. It’s everything you would hope from a James Gunn script and I think that says a lot and that promises a lot and I know that we will deliver a lot.”

“The Suicide Squad” is slated to hit cinemas on August 6th 2021.

[Kamdan]

Mar 14, 2019 11:32:10 GMT -5 Metallo said:

A little too Deadpool for me. It’s interesting how they’re attempting to show how heavily merchandised superheroes are in this world. Makes them come off more silly than they should be. Also, the idea of a sequel to this isn’t that appealing as they’ll add more members of the Marvel family. Plus, it’s weird to hear Eminem being used to promote a film like this.

[Metallo]

I think this is the best trailer yet but my problem with it is it comes off as kind of hokey and it’s trying too hard to be tendy. I think Captain Marvel Shazam should be cheesy in a more timeless way but I get why they’re selling it this way to appeal to a younger generation. It is a kid appeal character and concept so I think that’s the right thing to do. They have to get them in the theaters. WB should have done everything they could to raise the characters public profile in the last few years though.

Problem with the property is it hasn’t been kept relevant in the last 40 years. Before the last five years we barely saw Captain Marvel Shazam on screen in anything. I think WB knows this and that’s why they’re trying to keep the risk low by spending so little on the movie...and it shows. Levi seems perfect for it (besides the over padded suit) but everything else around the actors is iffy imo.

[crazy_asian_man]

Mar 17, 2019 10:38:56 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I think this is the best trailer yet but my problem with it is it comes off as kind of hokey and it’s trying too hard to be tendy. I think Captain Marvel Shazam should be cheesy in a more timeless way but I get why they’re selling it this way to appeal to a younger generation. It is a kid appeal character and concept so I think that’s the right thing to do. They have to get them in the theaters. WB should have done everything they could to raise the characters public profile in the last few years though.

Problem with the property is it hasn’t been kept relevant in the last 40 years. Before the last five years we barely saw Captain Marvel Shazam on screen in anything. I think WB knows this and that’s why they’re trying to keep the risk low by spending so little on the movie...and it shows. Levi seems perfect for it (besides the over padded suit) but everything else around the actors is iffy imo.

I have a bad feeling that it's going to be 'okay' in an "Ant-man and the Wasp" okay--- rather than something that could be special in its own way.

With Guardians of the Galaxy and Iron Man 1- those actually felt like personal films to a degree, despite the huge Marvel backing.

Still- this looks like it's conceptually more on target than many of the DCEU films so far. Will be interesting to see the mainstream reaction soon....

[Metallo]

Yeah that’s what I think too. Then again it’s getting very good prerelease social media reviews from press screenings. The box office is more up in the air to me. It’ll do ok but it’s hard to believe it’ll do outstanding box office. It doesn’t need to to make its money back but it just doesn’t feel like there’s a huge buzz around the film. I hope it’s good though. The cast looks good.

[crazy_asian_man]

Mar 19, 2019 16:40:06 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Yeah that’s what I think too. Then again it’s getting very good prerelease social media reviews from press screenings. The box office is more up in the air to me. It’ll do ok but it’s hard to believe it’ll do outstanding box office. It doesn’t need to to make its money back but it just doesn’t feel like there’s a huge buzz around the film. I hope it’s good though. The cast looks good.

The trailers make it feel like a TV movie, with few surprises.

With Aquaman and Capt Marvel, you got to see another world in the ocean and in space.... maybe that's the reason for the big box office.

With Shazam!- hard to tell. There has to be a huge following that grew up with the tv show if not the comics, so it's really hard to tell what's going to happen.

[Metallo]

It’s because the budget is so low. It’s under 90 million. I think the Shazam show and the comics and cartoon aren’t going to sway the public at large. They were 40 years ago. Captain marvel last got exposure as the lead in that stuff 40 years ago. Anyone under 30 probably hasn’t even seen any of that much less heard of it.

Even in other big dc cartoons like superfriends we never even saw Shazam/captain marvel. He was in one episode of JLU. Even Aquaman had that exposure and most of Shazam’s cartoons weren’t nearly as popular as superfriends. It just hasn’t been a property that’s been kept relevant in popular culture. Fans know of it but the average Joe isn’t very familiar with the character. I think Shazam is a movie that’s going to live or die on its own merits.

[crazy_asian_man]

Mar 20, 2019 9:07:56 GMT -5 Metallo said:

It’s because the budget is so low. It’s under 90 million. I think the Shazam show and the comics and cartoon aren’t going to sway the public at large. They were 40 years ago. Captain marvel last got exposure as the lead in that stuff 40 years ago. Anyone under 30 probably hasn’t even seen any of that much less heard of it.

Even in other big dc cartoons like superfriends we never even saw Shazam/captain marvel. He was in one episode of JLU. Even Aquaman had that exposure and most of Shazam’s cartoons weren’t nearly as popular as superfriends. It just hasn’t been a property that’s been kept relevant in popular culture. Fans know of it but the average Joe isn’t very familiar with the character. I think Shazam is a movie that’s going to live or die on its own merits.

Perhaps the underwhelming exposure might have been the thing to save Shazam from being 'dark' and 'edgy' like the unfortunate comics reboots. If it goes more to the fun and fanciful aspects (the talking tiger and the talking worm) then it'll take a delicate touch I think to have it not be too ridiculous but have just the right amount of seriousness and comedy (i.e. James Gunn's approach to Rocket Racoon).

[Metallo]

Under Goyer and Snyder this movie wouldn’t be happening the way it is. If their dceu has been a hit everything would be different. Goyer was trying to figure out how to make Shazam fit their gritty realistic world and thats absurd. I could have seen it done as a totally separate thing away from the dceu but that’s if WB was interested. The best thing this movie has going for it is the DCEUs change in direction. Aquaman has primed people for something fun.

[crazy_asian_man]

It's hard to blame Goyer and Snyder completely- in the comics I was already annoyed that Shazam had gone through a makeover not long after C.C. Beck quit--- and more recenlty with Geoff Johns' and Gary Franks' redesign with the annoying hoodie. So, glad it looks closer in tone to its roots as fun and whimsical.... and glad that there may(if it doens't get cancelled) hardback reprint of the 70's.

[Metallo]

[Metallo]

[Kamdan]

Heavy shades of Taxi Driver going on here. Much like how The Dark Knight owes a lot to Heat.

[Metallo]

I immediately thought Taxi Driver meets King of Comedy. With both those examples casting DeNiro in Joker can’t be a coincidence.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 3, 2019 8:35:14 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Looks good....but.... how this ends is the most interesting to me. Does it just absolve Joker as a psychopathic killer because of his background?

I'm very curious about this- if it is deep, then it could be incredibly moving. If it's superficial, then it might just feel artificial and a bit pointless if the trailer is as deep as it gets. (though, again, it's a nice trailer).

[Metallo]

Depending on what he does...I don’t think so. Not morally anyway. Even this movies take is *basically* nothing new. Sometimes it’s being abused that creates him, sometimes it’s a dead wife, sometimes it’s being forced into crime by the mob. This is yet another example of the “one bad day” reason for the jokers existence that we often see.

If it’s something really bad there’s no excuse for what he did it just explains why he did it. He’s usually crazy anyway and is often shown to be driven insane by a hard life or some tragedy when his origin is covered. His background is usually seen as the cause but with the exception of legality there’s no morally absolving him of the things he does. But again...that’s business as usual.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 7, 2019 14:14:33 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Depending on what he does...I don’t think so. Not morally anyway. Even this movies take is *basically* nothing new. Sometimes it’s being abused that creates him, sometimes it’s a dead wife, sometimes it’s being forced into crime by the mob. This is yet another example of the “one bad day” reason for the jokers existence that we often see.

If it’s something really bad there’s no excuse for what he did it just explains why he did it. He’s usually crazy anyway and is often shown to be driven insane by a hard life or some tragedy when his origin is covered. His background is usually seen as the cause but with the exception of legality there’s no morally absolving him of the things he does. But again...that’s business as usual.

I hope there's a rabbit pulled out of a hat for this film.

Critics seemed to love "Henry- portrait of a serial killer" (I think that was the name)- but I thought it rather pointless and depressing. The movie made you feel like it was really happening, and that it was a real character- but to what end?

With "Killing Joke", the comic does have Joker's sob story-but the point is more the scene at the end when Batman gives Joker a chance to change his path, and the Joker actually acknowledges Batman's offer for a moment- but seems resigned that he has to be the way he is, though not necessarily with any joy.

If the framing is the same for this movie and is kept under wraps, I could see that making it work.... but I guess there's no way to know right now how they can not glorify a serial killer in the movie.... much like Suicide Squad 1.

[Metallo]

I think Killing Joke is overrated but parts of it were great. That was a great moment of clarity that showed the path those two characters were on. I think this movie could be great but it’s not only got to do its own thing but do it well. If it’s just a rehash or other better movies only with the Joker that’s going to be a disappointment to me.

I don’t think they’ll glorify Joker but they will try to explain him and maybe even make him somewhat sympathetic. I think you can do one without doing the other. Scorsese was really good at that. I think some fans more than anyone have glorified certain characters like Ledgers Joker or Jordan’s Killmonger by taking way the wrong things from those movies.

[crazy_asian_man]

Apr 7, 2019 14:44:28 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I think Killing Joke is overrated but parts of it were great. That was a great moment of clarity that showed the path those two characters were on. I think this movie could be great but it’s not only got to do its own thing but do it well. If it’s just a rehash or other better movies only with the Joker that’s going to be a disappointment to me.

I don’t think they’ll glorify Joker but they will try to explain him and maybe even make him somewhat sympathetic. I think you can do one without doing the other. Scorsese was really good at that. I think some fans more than anyone have glorified certain characters like Ledgers Joker or Jordan’s Killmonger by taking way the wrong things from those movies.

I think compared to Arkam Asylum- KIlling Joke is/was brilliant.... I admire that Brian Bolland has said that he spent SO much time on the art that it didn't really seem to make financial sense at the time. (There was no way to know there would be so many reprints at the time). I would have liked a follow up by Moore and Bolland to try to explain why Moore would feel Batman would be forgiving enough of Joker even after what Joker did to Barbara Gordon.

As far as the animated adaptation--- ugh. Brian Auzzerello got roasted (and justifiable) for expanding it to an unnecessary relationship between Gordon and Batman. I find most of the time the animated versions expand in the wrong way.