Gotham City Sirens DCEU movie confirmed.

[Mechamorph]

I have to admit, I have a soft spot in my heart for the Gotham City Sirens and the Flash Rogues. Villains being people as well as being super criminals appeal to me. Harley getting therapy from her girlfriends (ironic because its Harleen who is the psychiatrist; Pamela is a botanist and Selina is a professional thief), them bonding as a dysfunctional and damaged bunch of friends.

This gets me as excited as I could ever be about a DC movie and I will cling on to that faint glimmer of hope. I only reserve actual joy and dancing for when they get someone really, really drunk and greenlight a Nextwave movie.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

The thing I hated about Leto, and still do, is he never acts. Not really. Sure he does weird 'edgy' shit off camera, but here check this video out:

If anything about the Joker is iconic it's his laugh. And Jared didn't change anything for it. That goofy laugh is just his laugh. He wasn't really trying. He just showed up, put on Hot Topic press on tattoos, then laughed.
He doesn't really act. He just kinda shows up, does his lines, and leaves and everyone thinks he's acting because he's such a jackass off set, he must be method acting!

 

[sageoftruth]

Oh my fucking god yes!

Please Reformed Riddler! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE AS FUCK, GIVE ME REFORMED RIDDLER!!!

Oh yeah. He was just great. Like Batman without the martial arts but ten times the smug attitude. "Of course my explanation doesn't make sense to you. That's simply because I'm smarter than you."

 

[Kyrian007]

That is one of the things that surprised me, Zack Snyder is supposed to be the Slo-mo guy, why is there shaky cam in Man of Steel?

Right. And it wasn't so much that it was there, it has its uses. It sets the point-of-view as a character in found-footage, its ok for making an action sequence (generally it covers little visual problems in action/stunt scenes well although I'd prefer them to have a steadier look.) It was just the ever presence of it in MoS. I'm pretty sure it never stopped. But Snyder isn't the only one with a shaky problem. I like the marvel movies, but I'm really hoping the Russos tone the shaky-cam down before Infinity War as it really took away from some good action scenes in Winter Soldier and Civil War.

 

[Sonmi]

Awful, simply.

Today's soulless industrially manufactured super-hero drivel will never stop me from growing more cynical about the state of the movie industry.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies were magical, the Donner Superman movies are timeless classics. What happened to putting work in your craft? Nowadays it's just quip, quip, quip, quip, setpiece, quip, action scene (with several quips), quip, shoehorned romance, quip, action scene, climax, post-credit scene. Add cringe-worthy edginess if it's DC. Fuck this shit.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Awful, simply.

Today's soulless industrially manufactured super-hero drivel will never stop me from growing more cynical about the state of the movie industry.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies were magical, the Donner Superman movies are timeless classics. What happened to putting work in your craft? Nowadays it's just quip, quip, quip, quip, setpiece, quip, action scene (with several quips), quip, shoehorned romance, quip, action scene, climax, post-credit scene. Add cringe-worthy edginess if it's DC. Fuck this shit.

Someone is suffering from Franchise fatigue.

And I argue only Spiderman 1 was magical, 2 has its....problems.

 

[Sonmi]

Awful, simply.

Today's soulless industrially manufactured super-hero drivel will never stop me from growing more cynical about the state of the movie industry.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies were magical, the Donner Superman movies are timeless classics. What happened to putting work in your craft? Nowadays it's just quip, quip, quip, quip, setpiece, quip, action scene (with several quips), quip, shoehorned romance, quip, action scene, climax, post-credit scene. Add cringe-worthy edginess if it's DC. Fuck this shit.

Someone is suffering from Franchise fatigue.

And I argue only Spiderman 1 was magical, 2 has its....problems.

Mate, Spider-Man 2 was even better than the first!

Better character development, better antagonist, better action scenes, just all around more memorable.

If you said 3 had its problems, I would have agreed with you, even though it still oozes a charm that modern superhero flicks lack, but SM2 is absolutely without reproach.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Awful, simply.

Today's soulless industrially manufactured super-hero drivel will never stop me from growing more cynical about the state of the movie industry.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies were magical, the Donner Superman movies are timeless classics. What happened to putting work in your craft? Nowadays it's just quip, quip, quip, quip, setpiece, quip, action scene (with several quips), quip, shoehorned romance, quip, action scene, climax, post-credit scene. Add cringe-worthy edginess if it's DC. Fuck this shit.

Someone is suffering from Franchise fatigue.

And I argue only Spiderman 1 was magical, 2 has its....problems.

Mate, Spider-Man 2 was even better than the first!

Better character development, better antagonist, better action scenes, just all around more memorable.

If you said 3 had its problems, I would have agreed with you, even though it still oozes a charm that modern superhero flicks lack, but SM2 is absolutely without reproach.

I just hate Mary Jane the indicisive whore. Dumped her bethroed for Peter DURING the wedding.

Also Doctor Octopus in this movie was not as good as William Defoe Green Goblin. And even more hammy. And like these stand alone story Superhero movies they waste the villains in the same movie. Like these Comic Book Villains have more than one story arc to develop them with so why Kill them in their first movie?

And the never explained aspect of Peter losing his powers. I often assumed God himself took away Peter's powers.

 

[Kenbo Slice]

Awful, simply.

Today's soulless industrially manufactured super-hero drivel will never stop me from growing more cynical about the state of the movie industry.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies were magical, the Donner Superman movies are timeless classics. What happened to putting work in your craft? Nowadays it's just quip, quip, quip, quip, setpiece, quip, action scene (with several quips), quip, shoehorned romance, quip, action scene, climax, post-credit scene. Add cringe-worthy edginess if it's DC. Fuck this shit.

Someone is suffering from Franchise fatigue.

And I argue only Spiderman 1 was magical, 2 has its....problems.

Mate, Spider-Man 2 was even better than the first!

Better character development, better antagonist, better action scenes, just all around more memorable.

If you said 3 had its problems, I would have agreed with you, even though it still oozes a charm that modern superhero flicks lack, but SM2 is absolutely without reproach.

I just hate Mary Jane the indicisive whore. Dumped her bethroed for Peter DURING the wedding.

Also Doctor Octopus in this movie was not as good as William Defoe Green Goblin. And even more hammy. And like these stand alone story Superhero movies they waste the villains in the same movie. Like these Comic Book Villains have more than one story arc to develop them with so why Kill them in their first movie?

And the never explained aspect of Peter losing his powers. I often assumed God himself took away Peter's powers.

Lmao. Willem Dafoe was way more hammy than Alfred Molina. What were you smoking while watching it? Gobby was hammier than a Power Rangers villain.

And MJ is no whore. She realized what she really wanted and went for it.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Awful, simply.

Today's soulless industrially manufactured super-hero drivel will never stop me from growing more cynical about the state of the movie industry.

Raimi's Spider-Man movies were magical, the Donner Superman movies are timeless classics. What happened to putting work in your craft? Nowadays it's just quip, quip, quip, quip, setpiece, quip, action scene (with several quips), quip, shoehorned romance, quip, action scene, climax, post-credit scene. Add cringe-worthy edginess if it's DC. Fuck this shit.

Someone is suffering from Franchise fatigue.

And I argue only Spiderman 1 was magical, 2 has its....problems.

Mate, Spider-Man 2 was even better than the first!

Better character development, better antagonist, better action scenes, just all around more memorable.

If you said 3 had its problems, I would have agreed with you, even though it still oozes a charm that modern superhero flicks lack, but SM2 is absolutely without reproach.

I just hate Mary Jane the indicisive whore. Dumped her bethroed for Peter DURING the wedding.

Also Doctor Octopus in this movie was not as good as William Defoe Green Goblin. And even more hammy. And like these stand alone story Superhero movies they waste the villains in the same movie. Like these Comic Book Villains have more than one story arc to develop them with so why Kill them in their first movie?

And the never explained aspect of Peter losing his powers. I often assumed God himself took away Peter's powers.

Lmao. Willem Dafoe was way more hammy than Alfred Molina. What were you smoking while watching it? Gobby was hammier than a Power Rangers villain.

And MJ is no whore. She realized what she really wanted and went for it.

A. Mabye that's why I liked William Dafoe, he was a much more intimidating villain to Spiderman than Doc Ock who is too symphathetic. And I find William Dafoe a better actor.



B:

Spoiler: Movie Mary Jane's relationships

1. She was first shown being a complete tease to Peter and than was going out with some jock.

2. Liked "Spider-man"

3. Liked Peter "thinking" he's Spiderman at the end of the first movie.

4. Engaged to some guy, a military guy who we never know his name or chacrter.

5. Love Peter after finding out he really IS Spiderman.

6. Dumped Peter because reasons? (Its been a LONG time since I have seen Spiderman 3)

7. Went to fuckin Harry and kissed him.

8. Finally resettled back to Peter.

MAKE UP YOUR MIND ALREADY!!!

 

[Sonmi]

I just hate Mary Jane the indicisive whore. Dumped her bethroed for Peter DURING the wedding.

Also Doctor Octopus in this movie was not as good as William Defoe Green Goblin. And even more hammy. And like these stand alone story Superhero movies they waste the villains in the same movie. Like these Comic Book Villains have more than one story arc to develop them with so why Kill them in their first movie?

And the never explained aspect of Peter losing his powers. I often assumed God himself took away Peter's powers.

Heh, the eloped bride is a pretty common trope. I don't think Mary Jane is an especially sympathetic character either, but heh.

Doc Ock was absolutely (well, in my mind) better than the GG as far as villains go: better motivations, more sympathetic, better action scenes. Also I'm with Kenbo above, what are you smoking? Defoe is the master of hammy, about on par with Walken there. And while on the topic of hamminess, I'll add that it was part of the charm. They were fun, charming villains that could still be threatening, and not the cardboard cut-out narrative tools that are regurgitated now.

As for villains dying in the movie they're introduced: It's a good thing. It allows for a more contained story instead of setting up a sequel, leaving the view unsatisfied at the end of the movie. The goal of the movie was to tell a story, from the beginning to the end, the arc is already all there, and not simply to set up tie-ins and franchises. The whole MCU/DCU thing is the worst cancer that could have ever happened to those movies.

Peter lost his powers in 2 because he had doubts about wanting to be Spider-Man. The whole of Spider-Man 2 was him dealing with the responsibilities of being a superhero and how it could affect those around him. It was about character growth, it was personal, and it was concise, which is what made it such a great film. Now take a movie like Iron-Man 2, Captain America 3, or whatever new Batman movie came out last, is the characters moving and changing naturally, or are they simply constantly pushing the plot further for no clear reason so that they can lead to the next quip/action scene? What are their character arcs? How is Tony Stark any different from the beginning of Iron Man 2 to the end of Iron Man 3?

EDIT: By the way, Mary Jane's fiance in SM2 is John Jameson.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Yeah but if they keep throwing enough darts at the wall, one of them is bound to be as good as a low-tier Marvel movie.

Are you serious?

I'd feel like a fucking zombie if I was able to chug up Marvel's biannual slog. It's the exact same movie.. Every two years. No matter how bad or good any DC movie is, so long as they keep doing what they're doing, they'll always be obectively higher quality and far more respectable than anything in the MCU.

And the integrity in the production of Suicide Squad didn't really set that bar very high.

I don't outright dislike many things. But the way Marvel treats its audience in terms of the MCU is just outright insulting. Claiming that any of the DCU movies are below that bar is just so wrong on so many levels.

I felt insulted by Star Lord dancing in front of the villain to distract him.

I felt insulted by the character of Ultron in general.

 

[Hawki]

Ooh goody, DCEU vs. MCU! Quick, grab the popcorn!

So just wait till it gets better. The first 2 Abrams Star Trek movies were dislieked, but appereantly it got better by Beyond. I can wait, I am patient.

Yeah...no. I mean, I'm not discounting that lots of people dislike the Abramsverse Star Trek movies, but they tend to be Star Trek fans. By all indications, the movies, as movies, are very well received. Personally, for me it goes Into Darkness>2009>Beyond. But the "wait until it gets better" argument isn't a good one.

Not that the DCEU needs that argument though, as for me, it goes MoS>SS>BvS. That's a bell curve, not a decline.

If we are getting yet another Deadshot who doesn't actually kill (both Batman and Supes have a higher on-screen kill count than him),

Da fuq? He mows down entire waves of incubi.

I'd feel like a fucking zombie if I was able to chug up Marvel's biannual slog. It's the exact same movie.. Every two years. No matter how bad or good any DC movie is, so long as they keep doing what they're doing, they'll always be obectively higher quality and far more respectable than anything in the MCU.

Yeah...can't agree.

Best way I can describe it is that the MCU is predominantly average movies with a few genuinely good ones. I'd put MoS above most of said average movies, but the DCEU, for me, is a case of two average movies and one bad one. Neither of those are particuarly good records, but while I don't have much love for it, I will admit that the MCU does have the better track record.

 

[Kolby Jack]

I feel like for almost every Marvel movie, you can sum up the individual character movies as "basically just Iron Man again" and the ensemble movies as "basically just Avengers again." The only real exceptions so far have been Captain America (who is now being crowded out of his own movies, funnily enough, BY IRON MAN), Thor (who is woefully underappreciated IMO), and Guardians of the Galaxy (because literally nobody gave a crap about that franchise until the movie came out).

I still like the DCEU. It's hardly a paragon of movie excellence, but all of the actors involved have worked for me so far, and all of the pieces for greatness are there... they just need to clean that shit up. I won't even go so far as saying Snyder is a bad choice for director, because honestly the Kryptonian fights in Man of Steel were awesome. Maybe give him a break after Justice League though. He's basically been working non-stop since MoS and I think he's at risk of a burnout. Also, Geoff Johns should suplex any corporate executive who tries to comment on the direction of the films.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Yeah...can't agree.

Best way I can describe it is that the MCU is predominantly average movies with a few genuinely good ones. I'd put MoS above most of said average movies, but the DCEU, for me, is a case of two average movies and one bad one. Neither of those are particuarly good records, but while I don't have much love for it, I will admit that the MCU does have the better track record.

It's not really a matter of agree/disagree.

Marvel has one movie. It's below average in quality, but when the reviewers and merciless Disney advertisements tell people that they should like it, they generally do. When everyone in production is told to stick to Disney's guidelines. The formula just tanks the integrity and quality of the movies.

It's not even as if I hate Marvel in general. I loved Jessica Jones, Deadpool and a good few of the Xmen movies. But watching the MCU is so patronising. I feel embarassed to watch it.

At least all 3 DC movies have been pretty refreshing so far. Even if they've not been the world's greatest. I'm inclined to agree that it has currently consisted of two average movies, but again, they're still far more respectable than anything in the MCU. I stand by my view that Batman Vs Superman was actually pretty well received in the end. Too many people who hated it were parroting reviewer opinions as if it were the 'right' one. Personally, I thought it was really good.

..You find Marvel MCU movies to be patronising, yet you love Deadpool? Who is the KING of Patronising Superhero movies?

 

[Jute88]

Though to be honest, with how so many people misunderstand the "Martha" part of BvS. I can see where they're coming from.

How do people misunderstand it? Their moms have the same name, batfleck realizes that supes has a genuine, human connection to Earth, and is not an alien invader? What else is there to understand?