Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Shazam has no connection to the other films, since the Supes cameo was faceless. Blue Beetle could have anything done with it to keep it apart from the other current stuff. Flash was already a dead end given the problem with the actor. There’s no reason they have to launch it off the back of Superman.

I just want a Superman deserving of the John Williams theme. Not a mopey Supes directed by an edgelord.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Sucks for Cavill as his acting was never the problem. But I guess a blank sheet is now needed. And hey, we might see a Crisis type tale in the end, where we get a No Way Home style swan song for his Supes.

On that last point, I thought it was notable that Gunn gave some Hollywood line about potentially working with Cavill in the future in his SM message, and Cavill's SM post was basically "I'm done". Of course he won't come back and isn't wanted back...that's Gunn trying to do a little damage control. I'll have to pour one out for the guy...he really wanted to do a good Superman film and was classy and never the problem with all that nonsense around him.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AduroT wrote:
Shazam has no connection to the other films, since the Supes cameo was faceless. Blue Beetle could have anything done with it to keep it apart from the other current stuff. Flash was already a dead end given the problem with the actor. There’s no reason they have to launch it off the back of Superman.

Shazam 2 spoiler:



Possible that Shazam continues on despite DCEU baggage because it's one of Safran's babies. Other creators apparently aren't going to get that privilege.

 AduroT wrote:
He killed it AS Batman. His Bruce Wayne could use some work though.

This is kind of the point of the film though. In a lot of ways, it's an origin story for the Bruce Wayne persona.

 Skinnereal wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
At this point the only thing I want them to keep is Batman. Patterson killed it.

"Patterson killed Batman", or "Patterson killed it AS Batman"? I haven't seen it yet or read the reviews, so could be either.

Killed it AS Batman.

It's a early Year 2 story. So he has established his relationship with Gordon, but is still piecing together his war. The movie is kind of about him and his realization that just being Vengeful Brutal Batman isn't enough. He can't just strike fear into crime. He has to also save people and inspire hope.

In particular (without spoilers) you see him enter a place 3 times in the movie. And each time he comes back he either comes to a realization about his approach or has fully learned and adapted his approach. And by the end you start seeing more of the Batman we all know and love. Also, the best Batmobile. It's terrifying.


In terms of the overall DC Universe discussion, this makes Matt Reeves The Batman a great starting point. We see an early days but getting established Batman. We can get this new early days Superman to pair with him. And the universe can build from there. Just an all around great foundation.

Just saw a headline on Facebook that Gunn was looking at keeping Patterson around.

 Lance845 wrote:

In terms of the overall DC Universe discussion, this makes Matt Reeves The Batman a great starting point. We see an early days but getting established Batman. We can get this new early days Superman to pair with him. And the universe can build from there. Just an all around great foundation.

Nope.

Both Gunn and Reeves shot down on social media the other day the rumor that Battinson was joining the new DCU. So they're still going to need another Batman for the DCU. I know some people are saying maybe it happens after Reeves finishes his trilogy, but by that point Pattinson will be mid-40s and the DCU will probably be too far down the road. I agree it's a stupid situation where they have a great, popular new Batman that they can't leverage for their universe, but it is what it is.

https://twitter.com/mattreevesla/status/1603080376725000195

It's crazy how much damage BvS did to that studio, the film universe, careers, etc. And it's still impacting things because it was Affleck's departure that made Reeves push for creative control and to wall off his Batman.

Apparently they're going with the new Superman movie being from an earlier point in Superman's life than Cavill could have portrayed. 'Cos what the DCEU really needs is yet another goddamn reboot/origin story.

The whole thing just feels so cynical, and the new boss's haven't changed that feeling for me. The MCU worked well because it was designed from the very start as a coherent project and they stuck with that regardless of any small missteps along the way. They also didn't go straight in with the most recognisable characters immediately, and had a blank slate to start with instead of this weird situation with first Batman, then Superman.

It also doesn't help that they seem incapable of consistently making good, or even entertaining, movies in their sort-of Extended Universe. Most of the good ones have been outside of that setting.

Yeah, I really thought what we were going to see was a soft reboot for now, letting the existing actors and creators continue on for the next 5-7 years in a loosely shared universe. Mostly easter eggs and post-credit ties as per phase 1 MCU. Don't break the things that are working and patch up the things that aren't. Then end of this decade you have a 'Crisis' event film that ends this run and starts a fresh new universe with stronger interconnectedness if that's what's desired.

This definitely isn't that. Seems like the new boss said 'give me what Marvel has' and so they're hurrying to get there. *shrug*

They will get it just in time for Superhero movies to be over with.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
DC/Warner are fools for letting them get away.

Yeah but, isn't that basically the entire saga here?

Two steps forward two steps back from start to finish.

Has Gadot actually been scrapped? I've seen reports that the treatment for WW3 by Jenkins has been rejected, which if it was following the trajectory of WW84 then that's a relief and not surprising, but rejecting the ideas for the third film isn't the same as Cavil actually coming out and saying he's not in the role anymore.

They've not said anything about Gal Gadot. In fact, they've not said anything about anyone besides Cavill.

Nothing’s official, but people are reading between the lines. Jenkins has since come out and said there was nothing she could do to move WW3 forward at the studio. Looks like it’s just not happening. Which doesn’t suggest a future for Gadot at DC either.

People are also doing a lot of Chicken Little-ing, so I'd rather wait for official statements.

Given what they've done with Cavill I can believe it, equally I can believe "Gal is our Diana, but the last film sucked and your ideas for the next one are worse, we'll take her character in a different direction."

I dunno. All these actors have been sitting around waiting at this point.

It's not like the Marvel slate where after their first movie their next appearance was already planned.

Gal Gadot isn't planned to be in anything at this point. They are another 2-3 years away from their first project in the DCU let alone one that features WW again which could be 5 years away.

These actors are aging out of being the start of a new universe. They need to cast younger just to have it go forward at all.

I think Gadot is due to make $20 mil or something like that for her next WW film. Cavill probably wasn't going to sign for less. Think Momoa is making $15 mil for Aquaman 2...there's probably a raise if he makes a third. I don't think this is too hard to figure out. It'd probably cost them $100 mil just to bring the actors together for another JL movie. Which they probably WANT to do...just not at that price. So they'll reboot with younger actors who'll take a lot less and can be signed for years to come. I'm increasingly confident the economics are driving most of this. The risk of course is that the next 'unknowns' are more Brandon Rouths instead of Henry Cavills.

In other news, Gunn said he met with Affleck about the possibility of directing...something...at some point. "Just have to find the right project." This feels as Hollywood as his statement about the possibilities of working with Cavill down the road. And again, probably some damage control spin seeing as none of this seems to be going over well with the general public. There's no other reason to dangle something in front of fans that's completely vapor at this point. "See folks, we're still engaged with some your favorite DCEU personalities!"

 gorgon wrote:
This feels as Hollywood as his statement about the possibilities of working with Cavill down the road.

Maybe if he'd issued that in a press statement, but they actually met with Affleck.

It's one thing to go "Oh sure, we'd love to work with him in the future. Just need the right fit!", and it's another to say "Yes, we had a meeting. We both want this to happen.".

Per The Wrap (so treat this as you will), Cavill made $250K for each of his cameos in Black Adam and The Flash. I don't think that's an outrageous sum within that industry for that kind of thing, but obviously it's a lot of money to the rest of us.

Which is why it feels a lot like a deliberate leak. "Let's not have too much sympathy for Henry Cavill, he scored $500K." This tactic is one of the first things you see in certain types of labor disagreements to try to turn public sentiment. "Wait, they're making how much?!"

It was also interesting that Cavill specifically said in his statement that the studio told him he could announce his return to DC. That's a direct rebuttal of some of the stuff floating around that made it seem as though he and the Rock went off the reservation with that announcement. But of course you don't put Cavill in a stinger if you aren't planning to use him ever again. Unless you're WB/DC, I guess.

I dunno, I just always find it amusing how polite and friendly things are publicly -- especially in Hollywood -- when it's clear there's ruthless BUSINESS going on behind the facade. "We had a great discussion about working together somehow on something at some point down the road!" Even as you fire them. Lots of handshakes and smiles with gritted teeth.

It's an insane sum for his blip of an appearance at the end of Black Adam. I doubt that was more than a day's work and if it was, they have serious logistic issues.

I believe Gadot was going to make $20 mil for WW3, and if you figure on a 100-day shoot, that's $200,000 a day. Stars make a lot of money.

trexmeyer wrote:
It's an insane sum for his blip of an appearance at the end of Black Adam. I doubt that was more than a day's work and if it was, they have serious logistic issues.

They might not have even been filming it together or in the same location. The JL cameo at the end of Peacemaker was filmed in like three different locations iirc?