|
Post by The Heartbreak TWERK on Nov 14, 2017 10:18:28 GMT -5
What if Flashpoint happens, everything's different and in a bit of poetic cinematic justice, JGL is cast as the new Batman?? ...I know, I know, I can dream. That sounds like the biggest nightmare ever. Not just no. Super no.
|
|
|
Post by OGBoardPoster2005 on Nov 14, 2017 11:26:51 GMT -5
What if Flashpoint happens, everything's different and in a bit of poetic cinematic justice, JGL is cast as the new Batman?? ...I know, I know, I can dream. That sounds like the biggest nightmare ever. Not just no. Super no. "I like your real name better, Bruce."
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 14, 2017 11:57:54 GMT -5
I still think the Burn Notice lead (blanking on his name) could be a good Batman.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Nov 14, 2017 12:00:04 GMT -5
I still think the Burn Notice lead (blanking on his name) could be a good Batman. Bruce Campbell... well he was the lead in my heart! >_> <_< Jeffrey Donovan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 12:15:12 GMT -5
I still think the Burn Notice lead (blanking on his name) could be a good Batman. Bruce Campbell... well he was the lead in my heart! >_> <_< Jeffrey Donovan. I love Donovan, but he's older than Affleck. He'd be a better villain for the DC world I think. If he can do a good American accent, I think Joe Cole (John Shelby on Peaky Blinders) could be a younger Batman - he's got that intensity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 19:05:22 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 19:13:23 GMT -5
eh - people have been saying that RT % have no effect on ticket sales for a while now. Also, revealing it Thursday isn't exactly the best way to make an impact on ticket sales even if it did. It seems more like RT is just trying to drive traffic to their new and probably really really hokey "see it/skip it" show To me it just seems like RT is trying to up its cache in the business by making their coveted percentage seem like a big deal, which really its just a poorly conceived aggregate.
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 15, 2017 8:41:20 GMT -5
Eh, I've enjoyed my fair share of films that have gotten rotten RT scores. If there are flaws I'll gladly point them out, I'm not so beholden to franchises to where I can't do that. But I'm still pumped.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 15, 2017 10:37:00 GMT -5
What's going to be tough with this one is that it'll feel weird to "get to the fireworks factory", meaning a full-blown team up movie with huge action sets and less character development, without having "earned it" first. I'm not the world's biggest MCU fan (don't hate it, don't love it), but by doing things the way they did it meant Avengers worked not only as a solid movie in its own right but also as a huge payoff for anyone who saw at least a couple of the movies leading up to it. That gave it the extra "oomph" it might have needed for some audience members who might've not been quite as into the proceedings. DCEU, though, isn't really going to have that given how rocky most of the movies have been; Wonder Woman was definitely fun as hell, but this isn't going to feel like a payoff to much, because not much has been built up.
That doesn't mean it will be a bad movie; frankly, I wish these franchises would put their chief focus on making good standalone movies before worrying a bit about connected universe world building, and if Justice League does that I'll be happy. But it still fundamentally alters one of the main factors that made the first Avengers movie work, and given that WB rushed to this point specifically to catch up with where Avengers was it's something that's worth considering.
Still, hope there's some decent news about it when reviews come out today.
|
|
|
Post by Natural Born Farmer on Nov 15, 2017 10:52:27 GMT -5
Eh, I've enjoyed my fair share of films that have gotten rotten RT scores. If there are flaws I'll gladly point them out, I'm not so beholden to franchises to where I can't do that. But I'm still pumped. . I have as well. But there's usually some positive reviews amidst the bad ones, and perhaps more importantly the producers were willing to let those reviews be available to consumers. For a franchise already struggling so hard for credibility this is a very bad look, worse than "meh" reviews could have done.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2017 10:58:58 GMT -5
oh myyyy. I got my ticket bought but that doesn't bode well. They must be hoping the wave of success from WW will carry this thing
|
|
|
Post by The Heartbreak TWERK on Nov 15, 2017 11:28:30 GMT -5
General consensus I'm getting from reviews is "Eh, s'okay."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2017 11:43:30 GMT -5
oh myyyy. I got my ticket bought but that doesn't bode well. They must be hoping the wave of success from WW will carry this thing Like I said above - this doesn't appear to be DC trying to hide a bad RT score, but more RT trying to drive traffic to their Seeit/skipit facebook show. They did the same thing with BadMoms2. They're trying to make the reveal an "event."
|
|
|
Post by The Summer of Muskrat XVII on Nov 15, 2017 11:43:59 GMT -5
General consensus I'm getting from reviews is "Eh, s'okay." Same. Characters good, story weak.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Nov 15, 2017 11:54:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 15, 2017 12:45:23 GMT -5
To be fair, you don't necessarily have to build like Marvel did. It worked gangbusters for them, but you don't HAVE to do a team that way. X-men didn't.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 15, 2017 12:50:26 GMT -5
To be fair, you don't necessarily have to build like Marvel did. It worked gangbusters for them, but you don't HAVE to do a team that way. X-men didn't. Oh, definitely, of course you don't; there's a number of ways to build things up if you want to do the shared universe idea. Issue is more that WB clearly wanted to ape the Marvel style (hence rushing into a Batman/Superman movie AND cramming Wonder Woman and others in there for good measure), and all depictions of this flick indicate it's one of those "don't worry about the story, just enjoy the big action pieces" types, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself but feels more like what should be made if you're paying off multiple movies' worth of build. First things I'm hearing lean toward "Not great, not bad", which seems to indicate they wanted to play things safe this time around. One review basically said it can't be as bad as Batman v Superman because BvS was actively trying to be something grand and just failed at it, while this one doesn't really have much pretension at anything bigger than "here are the characters you heard about doing some cool stuff". I'll likely still give it a shot and hope it strikes me a bit better, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2017 12:53:17 GMT -5
To be fair, you don't necessarily have to build like Marvel did. It worked gangbusters for them, but you don't HAVE to do a team that way. X-men didn't. Marvel is the outlier tbh. Most every other ensemble piece in film history didn't build it out like Marvel did and it works just fine. I agree - you don't have to do it. the idea that every character needs a solo movie before a team-up is a VERY specific thing that marvel did but in terms of their ensemble films that they executed smartly. But it DEFINITELY should not be seen as necessary at all for any franchise or ensemble film.
|
|
|
Post by The Heartbreak TWERK on Nov 15, 2017 12:54:27 GMT -5
To be fair, you don't necessarily have to build like Marvel did. It worked gangbusters for them, but you don't HAVE to do a team that way. X-men didn't. Executive: B-b-b-but then we can't make even more monies.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Nov 15, 2017 13:00:09 GMT -5
To be fair, you don't necessarily have to build like Marvel did. It worked gangbusters for them, but you don't HAVE to do a team that way. X-men didn't. Oh, definitely, of course you don't; there's a number of ways to build things up if you want to do the shared universe idea. Issue is more that WB clearly wanted to ape the Marvel style (hence rushing into a Batman/Superman movie AND cramming Wonder Woman and others in there for good measure), and all depictions of this flick indicate it's one of those "don't worry about the story, just enjoy the big action pieces" types, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself but feels more like what should be made if you're paying off multiple movies' worth of build. First things I'm hearing lean toward "Not great, not bad", which seems to indicate they wanted to play things safe this time around. One review basically said it can't be as bad as Batman v Superman because BvS was actively trying to be something grand and just failed at it, while this one doesn't really have much pretension at anything bigger than "here are the characters you heard about doing some cool stuff". I'll likely still give it a shot and hope it strikes me a bit better, though. And i'm fine with the moving just being look at these superheroes catch some bodies and watch shit blow up in the background. WB/DC shouldn't keep trying to make something bigger than it is like BvS where it falls on its ass and everyone is looking around like what the f*** is this If this is a fun 2 hour plus movie than that's all you can ask for and the money should come in to make it a success. They really don't need to think 10 steps ahead, just one step at a time and if things need to be fixed than you can do so instead of trying to fit a square into a circle. The biggest problem coming out is what do you do with Affleck since he seems to be falling back off the Batman role but they haven't crossed that bridge yet
|
|