[Snupes]

I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

What poster? I didn't think DC released one yet.

Also, some fan color-graded the first official image of the film in Zack Snyder's style for fun, and...well, his paraSnydes basically had an orgasm.

[Rama Set]

I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

Dwayne Johnson as Black Adam tells you everything you need to know.

I quite like him as an actor, he could definitely pull off a decent role, but he's both not in the Shazam movie and not responsible for the god-awful poster that screams unfunny comedy.

I like Dwayne Johnson as an all-American action hero but I wouldn’t trust him to pull off something with more depth. The article I read said he was in Shazam, but I guess he is getting a solo movie.

[honk]

I was actually looking forward to Shazam. And then the poster came out and I lost all hope for DC's future in movies.

What poster? I didn't think DC released one yet.

I think he's just talking about the official picture released. I didn't think it was great either, but it seems like a stretch to assume it's representative of the movie's quality. My own issue with the movie is that I don't like how they've made Billy Batson a teenager. I feel like him being a kid is the key to the innocence at the heart of the character. On the bright side, though, Mark Strong as Dr. Sivana sounds pretty sweet.

On the notion of Dwayne Johnson. I think he'll be fine as Black Adam, but I'm not sure WB knows where to put him. I'm not keen on the idea of a Black Adam movie, and there's a rumor floating around that the plan is for the sequel to Suicide Squad to focus on the discovery of his tomb or something like that, which is an idea so bad it makes me want to choke. The worst thing WB could do with a SS sequel is give it another standard save-the-world capeshit plot, and the worst thing they could do with one of the biggest stars in the world is waste him on a franchise that's most likely tainted beyond repair because of its horrendous first installment. I'll never understand how SS was such a commercial hit. It would be one thing if it just had a front-loaded first weekend and then fizzled due to negative word-of-mouth, but it had staying power. People were watching it, liking it, and recommending it. Did they really enjoy the awful one-liners? Feel invested in the idiot plot? Find Jared Leto compelling?

[Snupes]

I still occasionally argue with coworkers who insist that the Joker was the highlight of that film and want him to have his own movie.

[honk]

2edgy4me

No, but seriously, I just about lost it at "Fuck Batman." Also, in what should be non-news to any reasonable person:

http://collider.com/justice-league-snyder-cut-zack-snyder/

[Crudblud]

At least a Snyder cut would be uniquely terrible instead of the blandiose mess Whedon cobbled together.

[honk]

Yes, the work of a misguided auteur will always be more interesting than mediocre corporate pap. I'm just baffled by people who are this ignorant of the filmmaking process despite having such an interest in it. There's so much more to making a movie that has to happen after filming wraps.

In other capeshit news, a couple of trailers came out today:



I like this, for the most part. James Wan is a proven talent, they've got some great actors here, and I love how wacky they're willing to go with the setting. I've seen some people grumbling about how they shouldn't have included the silly giant animals because humans would logically have noticed them and blah blah blah, and I just wonder how anyone could be so dull as to nitpick about something like that for a movie like this. I am a little bit concerned if Jason Momoa really has the gravitas to be an effective lead, though. He can't carry the movie entirely on his goofiness.



This one looks decent, too. Like I said earlier, though, I don't like that they've aged Billy up, and even less so that they've made him troubled and rebellious in such a generic way. And the outfit looks like a foam muscle suit.

[Rama Set]

Aqua man looks like fun, but already has two villains which is not encouraging.

Why are you assuming Billy is generic from the first trailer. You go off on plebs not understanding how the filmmaking process works and then say things like that.

Also, filmed in my city and I didn’t get an audition

[honk]

I didn't say the movie was generic; I think that this portrayal of Billy as a troubled, rebellious teenager is generic. And you not getting a audition is outrageous. They must have not have seen your masterful, Emmy-nominated performance in that Kiefer show.

[Rushy]

I watched Justice League again to see if a second viewing allows me to appreciate Snyder's true artistic genius.

It didn't.

[Rama Set]

I didn't say the movie was generic;

I didn’t say you said the movie is generic.

I think that this portrayal of Billy as a troubled, rebellious teenager is generic.

What would have been better?  It’s tough to get away from hat cliche because it is super relevant to the age group and provides a lot of authentic material. Perhaps you should hold off on judging it until you actually know anything about the movie other than a 2 minute preview?

And you not getting a audition is outrageous. They must have not have seen your masterful, Emmy-nominated performance in that Kiefer show.

Fuck off Saddam.

[Snupes]

James Wan is a proven talent

You keep saying this, but he hasn't made a single "good" movie. Even if we look at critics, his absolute best score is a 68/100. They go all the way down to 34/100. Right within the range of quality of the Worlds of DC so far. Is his batting average better than Snyder's? Sure, slightly. But that's a far cry from a "proven talent", it's just "not cancerous".

Also I was excited for the Aquaman trailer since my friend said it actually looked good, but I thought it looked pretty awful. The writing was *really* bad cliché ("redheads...gotta love 'em hurhurhur"), the CGI looked like it would have been great a decade ago (why are sharks rubber?), the directing itself looks bland from what we can see; the only real plus I've gotten from it is there's more color and that one sea side shot looks really cool.

Shazam! on the other hand does look pretty fun. So hopefully that's good.

[Rama Set]

Shazam looks like DCs opportunity to do something like GotG, which is a good thing.

[Crudblud]

Shazam! looks like it could be okay. Aquaman looks like some bullshit.

[honk]

You keep saying this, but he hasn't made a single "good" movie. Even if we look at critics, his absolute best score is a 68/100. They go all the way down to 34/100. Right within the range of quality of the Worlds of DC so far. Is his batting average better than Snyder's? Sure, slightly. But that's a far cry from a "proven talent", it's just "not cancerous".

Metacritic is a really weird choice of website for analyzing critical consensus. It draws on a relatively small pool of reviewers (it counted 35 reviews for The Conjuring, compared to RT counting over 200), its system of assigning a numerical score to every review is arbitrary and confusing, and in general it seems like most movies will get a score that's either bad or only middling there. Over half of the MCU has a score under seventy, and only one of them managed to get into the eighties. RT's binary system isn't perfect, but the simpler system and broader scope are exactly why it's the more popular and more commonly cited aggregate.

That being said, it's true that Wan's filmography is a little slimmer than what I was imagining. Maybe I mixed him up with someone else? From the articles I've read and things I've heard about him, the guy seems to have a lot more artistic clout than he's, well, really earned.

Also I was excited for the Aquaman trailer since my friend said it actually looked good, but I thought it looked pretty awful. The writing was *really* bad cliché ("redheads...gotta love 'em hurhurhur"), the CGI looked like it would have been great a decade ago (why are sharks rubber?), the directing itself looks bland from what we can see; the only real plus I've gotten from it is there's more color and that one sea side shot looks really cool.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the CGI and directing (I'll definitely concede that the banter here is weak), as I'm not sure how to have a productive debate on something so subjective. The one thing I will say in defense of the CGI is that it looks like the movie is so far managing to avoid what I feel are the DCEU's two biggest weaknesses there - hideously ugly designs that become an eyesore whenever they're on-screen and poor compositing between the live-action elements and digital effects.

What would have been better?  It’s tough to get away from hat cliche because it is super relevant to the age group and provides a lot of authentic material. Perhaps you should hold off on judging it until you actually know anything about the movie other than a 2 minute preview?

What would have been better is having him be a kid, like in the source material. There's a world of difference between having a kid turn into an adult and a teenager turn into an adult. And yes, of course it's early right now. I'm just saying I don't think it's off to a good start with the premise.

Shazam looks like DCs opportunity to do something like GotG, which is a good thing.

I'm not trying to turn this into the honk vs. Rama thread, I promise, but, uh, what does this mean?

I watched Justice League again to see if a second viewing allows me to appreciate Snyder's true artistic genius.

It didn't.

I was far too generous to JL when I first saw it. It's not better than BvS. That movie was garbage, but at least it was trying to do something. All that shit about Lolita, Excalibur, Jesus, Icarus, Dick Cheney, and whatever else was crammed in there was laughably stupid, but it indicated a deeper motivation behind all the derring-do of capeshit. Everybody involved really wanted to make this grand, ambitious, and powerful film that artfully deconstructed Batman and Superman, honored their roots, and revealed deep truths to the audience. A small part of me admires them for that, even if they fell flat on their faces in the attempt and dethroned Batman and Robin as the most notorious "what not to do" case study in capeshit history.

[Crudblud]

James Wan has never been good. He made a name for himself with Saw, which sucked ass but was vaguely novel at the time it came out, so everyone tripped over their genius-boners in their race to suck him off. Then he made The Conjuring or what the fuck ever, and that's just about the shittiest mainstream horror series ever. Right, so what if, right, guys, we use Tiny Tim in the soundtrack, but it's playing over some shitty CGI demon that crawls around and goes "boo!", what an ebinly T W I Z T E D use of SOUNDTRACK DISSONANCE (this troper loves eating shit in all its forms) huhuhuhuhuh. I'm James Wan please clap.

brb killing myself because i live on the same planet as james wan

p.s.: aquaman still looks like some bullshit

[Dr David Thork]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44915149

I think DC have lost the plot.

https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/ryan-reynolds-deadpool-will-be-the-first-queer-superhero-film/

Why is every superhero either black, gay or transsexual as of late?

Why can't they be superheroes doing super things, without needing to also tick PC boxes?

[Rama Set]

Quote from: Rama Set on July 24, 2018, 09:00:20 PM
Shazam looks like DCs opportunity to do something like GotG, which is a good thing.

I'm not trying to turn this into the honk vs. Rama thread, I promise, but, uh, what does this mean?

That they are trying to mesh a super hero story with a lighter comedic tone. What did you think i meant?

Fwiw, I am not sure how old Billy Batson is usually portrayed in the comics, but he doesn’t really seem like a teenager to me and more of a pre-teen.

[Snupes]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the CGI and directing (I'll definitely concede that the banter here is weak), as I'm not sure how to have a productive debate on something so subjective. The one thing I will say in defense of the CGI is that it looks like the movie is so far managing to avoid what I feel are the DCEU's two biggest weaknesses there - hideously ugly designs that become an eyesore whenever they're on-screen and poor compositing between the live-action elements and digital effects.

I implore you to go watch that trailer again and really look at the CGI. Look at this rubber shark that is entirely consistent with the rubber fish family from the poster. When the poster came out I thought "oh it's just a poster, the lighting and texturization won't be that bad in the film" but I was wrong, Sadman.

Why is every superhero either black, gay or transsexual as of late?

Why can't they be superheroes doing super things, without needing to also tick PC boxes?

Uhhhhh probably because Deadpool has been pansexual in the comics for a long-ass time?

Also out of all the most recent superheroes, not many of them are black, gay or transsexual.

[Dr David Thork]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the CGI and directing (I'll definitely concede that the banter here is weak), as I'm not sure how to have a productive debate on something so subjective. The one thing I will say in defense of the CGI is that it looks like the movie is so far managing to avoid what I feel are the DCEU's two biggest weaknesses there - hideously ugly designs that become an eyesore whenever they're on-screen and poor compositing between the live-action elements and digital effects.

I implore you to go watch that trailer again and really look at the CGI. Look at this rubber shark that is entirely consistent with the rubber fish family from the poster. When the poster came out I thought "oh it's just a poster, the lighting and texturization won't be that bad in the film" but I was wrong, Sadman.

Why is every superhero either black, gay or transsexual as of late?

Why can't they be superheroes doing super things, without needing to also tick PC boxes?

Uhhhhh probably because Deadpool has been pansexual in the comics for a long-ass time?

Also out of all the most recent superheroes, not many of them are black, gay or transsexual.

No, Deadpool was declared pansexual in 2013 ... when raging leftists were already at full voice about 'inclusion' which includes everybody accept the vast majority of people.

Then we had the mess that was Wakanda, now Supergirl has a teeny-weeny, Captain America woke up black one morning, Thor is now a woman and have you noticed it is always the hero that has to be gay or ethnic? Never the villain? Like gay people and black people can't be bad? Nope, the bad guy is always a straight white guy.

Its making characters terrible. You used to have writers create a new character by starting with ... what special power should they have? Let's allow him to climb walls a bit like a spider ... hey we'll call him spiderman. Let's make a guy who has x-ray vision, can fly and is super strong ... lets call him superman.

Now its ... lets make a black character. His super power is being black. Oh, and he has to be good. Good and black. Lets call him Goodblackman. No wait ... ok he needs more stuff. Lets make him gay. No, black people aren't gay, we only do that to white characters. Let's just give him a cape, some undescribed powers we can make up as we go along and call him something noble sounding ... erm how about Nightmare ... you know alluding to the fact he's dark. Cool.


No one is interested in this apart from people who don't even read or watch comic films/book, that just want the 'message' conveyed. People need to carry on voting with their wallets and boycotting this brainscrubbing trash.