• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Upcoming DC Comics Adaptations

Watched the Snyder Cut last night - I really enjoyed it. It did feel like binging a mini series though (it's split into chapters).

The expanded back stories make a huge difference, and Cyborg gets much better deal.

The Epilogue is...err....unusual. Worth it for the F-bomb alone though. I'm saying nothing else.
 
Watched the Snyder Cut last night - I really enjoyed it. It did feel like binging a mini series though (it's split into chapters).

The expanded back stories make a huge difference, and Cyborg gets much better deal.

The Epilogue is...err....unusual. Worth it for the F-bomb alone though. I'm saying nothing else.

Say a wee bit more, I'd be interested to know if you liked the Whedon version? It's being used as a stick to beat him with now he's persona non grata, but I didn't mind it, it wasn't brilliant, but it was about as good as it could have been in the circumstances. I'm guessing there's no jokes in the Snyder cut? Or not as many?
 
Say a wee bit more, I'd be interested to know if you liked the Whedon version? It's being used as a stick to beat him with now he's persona non grata, but I didn't mind it, it wasn't brilliant, but it was about as good as it could have been in the circumstances. I'm guessing there's no jokes in the Snyder cut? Or not as many?

I laughed out loud a few times (for the right reasons), but it's a much, much darker film that the Whedon version. I agree with you on that movie - it entertained me but didn't blow me away.

I highly recommend watching the Snyder version. There's more Themiscyra, more Amazons, more Cyborg, more Barry Allen...it's a rare achievement that a four-hour movie leaves you wanting more.

I do say this as a massive DC fan though.
 
Thanks for that - I know it's not fashionable to be Team DC instead of Team Marvel, and I don't mind either really, but I do gravitate more towards DC's characters. Was never totally convinced by Snyder's take on them, mind you. If I get the chance, I'll give his JL a go.
 
I punched the air when listening to Mark Kermode's review of Zach Snyder's Justice League when he took down the toxic fandom around it. The fact people - critics - are getting death threats because they didn't like a film is outrageous. Mark said they didn't deserve cinema. He also said the film was better than the Whedon, but a bit boring.

I also saw Wonder Woman 1984 and thought it was fab, like a dark Disney fantasy with a princess, magic wishes, and the apocalypse. Gal Gadot may not be a great actress, but she's a great Wonder Woman.

I have no idea how many Zack Snyder/DC cultists there are, enough to cause some bruhaha undoubtedly. Death threats to critics in those circles go back at least as far as The Dark Knight where one critic had the audacity to give it a negative review and take it from 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. I don't think most movie fans, let alone general audiences had even heard of RT at that time. I certainly hadn't.
 
I have no idea how many Zack Snyder/DC cultists there are, enough to cause some bruhaha undoubtedly. Death threats to critics in those circles go back at least as far as The Dark Knight where one critic had the audacity to give it a negative review and take it from 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. I don't think most movie fans, let alone general audiences had even heard of RT at that time. I certainly hadn't.

Rotten Tomatoes is the worst thing to happen to film criticism and appraisal in the last 20 years. Everything has to be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever, either/or, no room for nuance, for films or TV to be just fine, everything in opinions are utterly polarised, because that site cannot distinguish anything in between Fresh or Rotten.
 
I read elsewhere that not counting credits and such, this new Justice League movie is 10% slow motion. Even Baywatch didn't manage that.
 
Rotten Tomatoes is the worst thing to happen to film criticism and appraisal in the last 20 years. Everything has to be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever, either/or, no room for nuance, for films or TV to be just fine, everything in opinions are utterly polarised, because that site cannot distinguish anything in between Fresh or Rotten.

Partially true, there's a big difference between "66% Fresh" and "96% Fresh" for example. "Fresh" arbitrarily begins at 60%, which I suppose is analogous to 3/5 or 6/10, which is where "good" begins on those rating schemes. It's ultimately far too simple and reductive, I agree.

Ladybird had 100% positive scores and one of the later critics to submit a review had his entered as negative, despite being mostly positive - it's the critic who decides, not the site. He did this because "no film deserves 100%" which is a bit twatty, even if I broadly agree.

No one threatened to kill him as far as I'm aware...
 
Partially true, there's a big difference between "66% Fresh" and "96% Fresh" for example. "Fresh" arbitrarily begins at 60%, which I suppose is analogous to 3/5 or 6/10, which is where "good" begins on those rating schemes. It's ultimately far too simple and reductive, I agree.

Ladybird had 100% positive scores and one of the later critics to submit a review had his entered as negative, despite being mostly positive - it's the critic who decides, not the site. He did this because "no film deserves 100%" which is a bit twatty, even if I broadly agree.

No one threatened to kill him as far as I'm aware...

Those Greta Gerwig fans can be monsters! Nevertheless, it's the perception of films and TV as only good or bad that visitors take away, leaving genuinely interesting work floundering because they have "Rotten" grades. If I want to find out someone's opinion on a film, I read or listen to what they said, the star ratings don't tell you much at all.

Anyway, Warners have come out today to attack the rabid fans of Snyder, so good for them. These "fans" spoil stuff for the rest of us, again, interesting stuff that people are turned off because of the fanaticism around them.
 
Those Greta Gerwig fans can be monsters! Nevertheless, it's the perception of films and TV as only good or bad that visitors take away, leaving genuinely interesting work floundering because they have "Rotten" grades. If I want to find out someone's opinion on a film, I read or listen to what they said, the star ratings don't tell you much at all.

Anyway, Warners have come out today to attack the rabid fans of Snyder, so good for them. These "fans" spoil stuff for the rest of us, again, interesting stuff that people are turned off because of the fanaticism around them.

There's been much discussion of weather or not a "rotten" score negatively impacts a film's performance. The success of the Transformers films and BvS and Suicide Squad and many other movies, strongly suggest it does not. There are plenty of "Indie darling" type films with 90%+ that do anywhere from very to very poorly for those types of films.

I agree that the ratings tell you little to nothing.
 
There's been much discussion of weather or not a "rotten" score negatively impacts a film's performance. The success of the Transformers films and BvS and Suicide Squad and many other movies, strongly suggest it does not. There are plenty of "Indie darling" type films with 90%+ that do anywhere from very to very poorly for those types of films.

I agree that the ratings tell you little to nothing.
Sometimes, people just have to ignore the critics. There are plenty of films that have been panned but have still gone on to make a lot of money.
 
Sometimes, people just have to ignore the critics. There are plenty of films that have been panned but have still gone on to make a lot of money.

The evidence seems to be that people largely, if not overwhelmingly, "ignore the critics". Once again, look at the success of Transformers et al. I think it's more profound than that, Joe average is probably not even aware of critical consensus and I don't know that they would give much of a shit even if they did, not that they should.

Many critically panned films do well, does doing well mean that they aren't shit? Does being panned mean that they are? Something like Fantastic Four (2015) bombed and was panned, is this definitively shit? No doubt some people liked it. Many critically lauded films are ignored by the public, does this mean the films are shit?

I recall a film podcast I listen to discussing this and a listener who worked in a multiplex wrote in to say that at the cinema when the public asked about advice on films, virtually all wanted to know what the most popular film was and most would watch that. The presumption was something like "this must the best one."
 
I like to read and hear the critics, because they make me think about the films, it starts a discussion even if it's just in my mind. Not every critic is great at their job, of course, but enough of them are to prove talking about film is better than just sitting there as a passive consumer. Engage, as Sir Patrick Stewart said a few times.
 
The trailer for the new Suicide Squad sequel is out. I didn't much care for the first one, this is not looking better.
 
From the Hollywood Reporter, rumors say Warner Media wants to sell D C to Disney.

Does Disney own the world ?
 
The Suicide Squad currently sits at 98% on RT from 63 reviews, this is will drop as more come in but will definitely remain high - 85%+

I'm cautiously optimistic due to Gunn's involvement and the approach - super cartoony, OTT and violent, the trailer didn't do a huge amount for me but this will be the first DC film I've seen since The Dark Knight Rises.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_suicide_squad
 
The Suicide Squad: best to think of this as a reboot rather than a sequel, Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) is back, and Bloodsport (Idris Elba) replaces Deadshot, along with a host of other meta-human jailbirds they are offered ten years off their sentences if the volunteer for a suicide mission. Col. Flag (Joel Kinnaman) returns as their leader. This film goes far beyond the usual comic book level violence. People are eaten alive by King Shark (voice - Sylvester Stallone), heads crushed, enemies set on fire, boomerangs cut off brain pans. Harley carries out mass slaughter on an industrial scale and she also becomes the love interest of a Dictator whose island the Squad invades. But there is the human side to things, especially with Ratcatcher (Daniela Melchior) who controls rats, plays beauty to King Shark's beast and tries to help Bloodsport to overcome his rat-phobia, there is also a touching flashback to her creation story. Less humane is the way that her hordes of rats swarm over humans and eat them alive. Throw in a mad scientist experimenting on a giant Alien Starfish which spawns to create human zombies and you have another action vector. There are quite a few plot twists from early on in the film, to reveal any would be to spoil the fun. And fun there is along with adult level slaughter. Writer/Director James Gunn delivers a cracking good adventure which blurs the lines between good/evil meta-humans. 8.5/10.

Edit to correct error re Deadshot/Bloodsport mix up.
 
Last edited:
Things are going the other way now. There is a comic on the way, about the Burton version of the Penguin. Interestingly it will be written by Danny DeVito.
 
There's a trilogy of Aquaman cartoons coming to HBO. Looks to be quite a new direction to the movies.
 
Ooh, just late night trailer watching, now you can tooooooo...

The Batman, versus as many villains as they could cram in. Weirdly, the Riddler seems to be the big bad, a bit second division but they're leaning into the detective angle, it appears. Colin Farrell as the Penguin needs an umbrella, I'd say. Zoe Kravitz a neat bit of casting as Catwoman. Loved Matt Reeves' War of the Planet of the Apes, so guardedly high hopes for this. But please stop going bwammp in trailers, Hollywood.
 
If that's not enough Bats for you, he's in the new trailer for The Flash too:

Cool costume, very Tron.
 
She's a gay superheroine, so they have Ruby Rose to play her, because she's gay. And she's an actress. But she's better known for screen beat 'em ups than her thespian skills, hence mass scepticism about her casting. She has a bit of a mountain to climb by taking this one on, I'd say. Mind you, if she can throw a convincing punch, what's the big deal?

I liked Ruby Rose as Batwoman, now there are conflicting nrratives as to why she left the show.

Warner Bros has hit back at Ruby Rose's claims that there were poor working conditions on the set of Batwoman.

The actress left the show, which began on the CW network in 2019 and airs on E4 in the UK, after just one series.

Writing on her Instagram story on Wednesday, Rose posted a string of allegations of abuse, negligence and poor working conditions.

Warner Bros said it did not hire Rose for a second season after receiving complaints about her behaviour. The company described Rose's account as "revisionist history... aimed at the producers, the cast and crew, the network, and the studio. The truth is that Warner Bros Television had decided not to exercise its option to engage Ruby for season two of Batwoman based on multiple complaints about workplace behaviour that were extensively reviewed and handled privately out of respect for all concerned," a spokesperson told BBC News.

Rose previously indicated she left the series due to a combination of being injured on set and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on production. However, Rose has now posted multiple allegations about the working conditions of Batwoman in a 10-page Instagram story, accusing several senior figures of poor or abusive behaviour.

She asked fans to "stop asking" if she would return to that "awful show", adding: "I wouldn't return for any amount of money... nor did I quit.
"They ruined [the character] Kate Kane and they destroyed Batwoman, not me. I followed orders, and if I wanted to stay I was going to have to sign my rights away."

She alleged several people working on the production had sustained serious injuries, including herself, a personal assistant, and a crew member who sustained third-degree burns.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-58993125
 
Saw The Batman, good and gritty with the Noir flavour that Joker possessed, with a touch of Blade Runner. Perhaps a tad too long, while it didn't really drag some of the scenes could have been edited. Pattinson makes a good, tormented, conflicted caped crusader but as someone pointed out to me his acting style doesn't differ between the roles of Wayne and Batman. I'd give it 8/10.
 
275245677_10160386444155260_9216213038875945649_n.jpg
 
The Batman: Good and gritty with the Noir flavour that Joker possessed, plus a touch of Blade Runner in the way the big screens on buildings in Gotham Square contrasted with derelict/decaying properties elsewhere in the city. Even the film (digital?) stock has a friable feel/look to it. Robert Pattinson makes a good, tormented, conflicted caped crusader but his acting style doesn't differ between the roles of Wayne and Batman. Colin Farrel is the Penguin, not a super-villain, just a nasty gang leader intent on rising to the top tier, makes him all the more believable, maybe a better joker than DeVito. Zoe Kravitz as Catwoman is no villain but she is prepared to deal with the devil to exist, a Noirish Femme Fatale for Batman but also an avenging Angel in her own right. The Riddler (Paul Dano) is indeed an enigma as he kills those who lie. Truth it's very nature and the many lies which underlie perceptions of reality are crucial to the development of the film;s narrative and an understanding of his character. The brutal nature of the murders he commits are spawned from the founding myths that Gotham City and it;s leading families are based on. Perhaps a tad too long, while it didn't really drag some of the scenes could have been edited. Might have been a better film at 150 rather than 176 minutes. Directed & Co_written by Matt Reeves. 8/10.
 
Back
Top