The short-lived DC Cinematic Universe may be done

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

According to this article (and many more besides), Henry Cavill could be done playing Superman in the DCCU films. Not only that, but Ben Aflek may further be done with Batman. Citing various possible reasons, including "scheduling conflicts", talks breaking down about a Shazam! cameo, future Supergirl movie, role as Geralt in The Witcher TV show, it could well mean that the shambles that was the DCCU could be done, with the Justice League film being the last movie in its current incarnation.

Apparently Shazam!, Wonder Woman 2 and an Aquaman film, the latter two with Gal Gadot and Jason Momoa reprising their roles, are still in the works tho. It's anyone's guess therefore what the future may hold. Personally, I think all the DC movies from Man of Steel on have been awful, with Wonder Woman being the highlight, reaching the lofty heights of a 5/10. It's almost sad to think of it ending, particularly when they did sincerely try. But there was little to salvage in those movies so in a way, a blank slate could be the best thing for Warner Bros.

Who would make a better Superman? Who could play a better Batman? How could they integrate replacing both the "flagship" heroes with Gadot, Miller and Mamoa who are sticking around? Is the potential end of the DCCU in its current form a good thing or bad? If you were a Warner exec in charge of a new DCCU, what would you do with it? I would also like it noted as a matter of record that I went the entire post without even once saying the name Zack Snyder.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Implying is was not already done after seeing the Shazam trailer.

And I hate that now its gonna just be more of the same slop I get from Marvel.

A chance to have different kind of Superhero movies in DC only for them to just make the same goddman thing that Marvel already did.

Now Superman is gonna be a joke. Batman is gonna be a joke. Everyone is gonna be a joke that I cannot take seriously at all for the life of me.

This sucks

I mean I lost faith when I saw what they were trying to do in Suicide Squad and heard that Joss Wheadon took over directing duties for Justice League.

Now this is the death knell. No more dark, adult, and serious superheroes. Its the age of the camp and the corny.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Nothing of value will be lost.

 

[Hawki]

Apparently Shazam!, Wonder Woman 2 and an Aquaman film, the latter two with Gal Gadot and Jason Momoa reprising their roles, are still in the works tho.

They're hardly "still in the works." Aquaman gets released at the end of this year, Shazam and Wonder Woman are releasing next year. Regardless of anything else, we can count on these movies being released.

Who would make a better Superman? Who could play a better Batman? How could they integrate replacing both the "flagship" heroes with Gadot, Miller and Mamoa who are sticking around?

...by recasting them?

That isn't too hard, in theory. Look at James Bond for instance - we had five Bonds before Craig, but one Q. No-one brought it up.

Is the potential end of the DCCU in its current form a good thing or bad?

Dunno. Main difference is that there's a line of sorts between Man of Steel and Justice League, whereas of the various movies that are being made now, there isn't. In theory, I'd say that's better though - compare that to the MCU where you need to watch pretty much all the movies to understand what's going on, even if you aren't interested in them and only interested in certain series. Having a shared universe in the sense of "every movie stands alone, but are still in the same universe and will occassionally reference each other" is a more palatable model for those who aren't interested in the whole package.

If you were a Warner exec in charge of a new DCCU, what would you do with it?

Can't comment too much, but I'd say "slow down, for God's sake."

TBH, if the DCEU ended today, I wouldn't lose too much sleep. I find the hate for it a bit perplexing (similar to the amount of love the MCU gets being equally perplexing), but at the end of the day, the MCU has produced a few, genuinely good films. The DCEU has so far given me four average films and one bad one (you can probably guess which).

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

=

Good. Cast someone better as superman and write him right this time.

I don't need superman debating on whether he should actually help people. He's a boy scout, his moral dilemma should be whether or not he's helping ENOUGH

No one can match Henry Cavill's looks. No one.

Give me a buff, black haired, white dude with chest hair and a cleft chin that can ACT.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Shame. I guess thats what you get when you want to rush into Avengers without ever doing any of the movies beforehand.

 

[Hawki]

Shame. I guess thats what you get when you want to rush into Avengers without ever doing any of the movies beforehand.

Except they did do some of the stories beforehand.

Also, I really dislike the idea that you can't have an ensemble cast in a movie without giving characters in the movie pre-existing movies. Movies prior to the MCU managed it, and even the MCU itself managed it with Guardians of the Galaxy.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Shame. I guess thats what you get when you want to rush into Avengers without ever doing any of the movies beforehand.

Except they did do some of the stories beforehand.

Also, I really dislike the idea that you can't have an ensemble cast in a movie without giving characters in the movie pre-existing movies. Movies prior to the MCU managed it, and even the MCU itself managed it with Guardians of the Galaxy.

They did 1 movie, man of steel, before jumping head first into failure with Batman vs. Superman, they did no lead up movie to the disastrous Suicide Squad, they got a halfway decent movie out of Wonder Woman, then another disaster with Justice League.

I think that proves that yeah, you do have to do build-up movies before the ensemble movie. Guardians jumped into the cast, yes, but it was what, the tenth MCU movie? Hardly an unproven franchise at that point, whereas Batman vs Superman was standing on the somewhat rocky ground that was Man of Steel. Not enough.

Even DC is admitting it came at this ass-backwards.

 

[Hawki]

They did 1 movie, man of steel, before jumping head first into failure with Batman vs. Superman, they did no lead up movie to the disastrous Suicide Squad, they got a halfway decent movie out of Wonder Woman, then another disaster with Justice League.

The quality of the movies in of themselves says nothing about the supposed need for them to exist.

I think that proves that yeah, you do have to do build-up movies before the ensemble movie. Guardians jumped into the cast, yes, but it was what, the tenth MCU movie? Hardly an unproven franchise at that point,

GotG is one of the few MCU movies that can exist without any prior knowledge of the MCU. It can't crib on the MCU to succeed like the others can.

Also, other ensemble movies needed character movies? Right...

-Tell that to Harry Potter

-Tell that to Lord of the Rings

-Tell that to the X-Men film series

-Tell that to the Matrix

-Tell that to Mission: Impossible

-Tell that to Star Wars

Bearing in mind that these are all movies that are successful, and there's many more. But even if I extend that to movies that are considered unsuccessful, they at least had the confidence and dignity to not have to rely on individual character movies. Off the top of my head, take the recent Power Rangers movie. While it was bad, that badness had nothing to do with the weaknesses of its cast. Of the five rangers, every one of them gets a backstory within the film itself.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Meh, whatever. The only DCEU movie I liked was Wonder Woman. Of course I haven't seen Justice League, but almost everything I have seen of it doesn't make me want to see it.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

He?s probably too old now but I always felt Michael Fassbender would have been a good Batman.

 

[09philj]

Hey, this is a perfect opportunity to start a 1940s-50s set JSA series!
Just me?
OK.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Hey, this is a perfect opportunity to start a 1940s-50s set JSA series!
Just me?
OK.

What and alienate the Millenials who can't relate to the era of the Greatest Generation?

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

=

Good. Cast someone better as superman and write him right this time.

I don't need superman debating on whether he should actually help people. He's a boy scout, his moral dilemma should be whether or not he's helping ENOUGH

No one can match Henry Cavill's looks. No one.

Give me a buff, black haired, white dude with chest hair and a cleft chin that can ACT.

If I haven't said this before

Supergirl had the best Superman

Ergh

The costume is hidious. And his eyebrows are too thick. And he is hardly as muscular as Henry.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

They did 1 movie, man of steel, before jumping head first into failure with Batman vs. Superman, they did no lead up movie to the disastrous Suicide Squad, they got a halfway decent movie out of Wonder Woman, then another disaster with Justice League.

The quality of the movies in of themselves says nothing about the supposed need for them to exist.

I think that proves that yeah, you do have to do build-up movies before the ensemble movie. Guardians jumped into the cast, yes, but it was what, the tenth MCU movie? Hardly an unproven franchise at that point,

GotG is one of the few MCU movies that can exist without any prior knowledge of the MCU. It can't crib on the MCU to succeed like the others can.

Also, other ensemble movies needed character movies? Right...

-Tell that to Harry Potter

-Tell that to Lord of the Rings

-Tell that to the X-Men film series

-Tell that to the Matrix

-Tell that to Mission: Impossible

-Tell that to Star Wars

Bearing in mind that these are all movies that are successful, and there's many more. But even if I extend that to movies that are considered unsuccessful, they at least had the confidence and dignity to not have to rely on individual character movies. Off the top of my head, take the recent Power Rangers movie. While it was bad, that badness had nothing to do with the weaknesses of its cast. Of the five rangers, every one of them gets a backstory within the film itself.

Yeah, um at best 2 of those are ensemble casts. Harry Potter is, as is Lord of the Rings. They have equal main characters, each with their own stories and plots, and each with more or less equal screen time.

Mission impossible is Hunt's story. Star Wars is close, but its still Luke's story. Matrix is Neo's story. X-men is borderline, and I can see it going either way with the materiel, unfortunately the only reoccurring Xman has been Wolverine. While entire movies can go with barely a mention of him, his arc is still the central arc the entire franchise is built around.
But you know, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Marvel's Xmen is an ensemble cast.

DC still doesn't have one that works. Ensemble casts need to be more than just a lot of characters. They need to each have equal importance, equal plots.
In Justice League the Flash and Aquaman might as well not even be in the movie. What they add is not enough to be a main character, thus not part of an ensemble.

 

[Hawki]

Adding 12 Angry Men to the list, but anyway:

Star Wars is close, but its still Luke's story.

First film, maybe. After that? No. Look at Empire, which basically has two separate plots going on for the majority of its runtime, or Last Jedi which has three (Force Awakens is similar in being ensemble).

Matrix is Neo's story.

First film? Yes.

Second and third? Dubious. The third, again, has two major plot threads for the majority of its runtime.

X-men is borderline, and I can see it going either way with the materiel, unfortunately the only reoccurring Xman has been Wolverine.

Ah yes, because no other character has been reoccurring.

...yeah, I'd make a list, but that's far too long.

In Justice League the Flash and Aquaman might as well not even be in the movie. What they add is not enough to be a main character, thus not part of an ensemble.

By that standard, Avengers isn't ensemble either.

Go on, try and tell me that characters like Hawkeye and Black Widow are of equal importance to the likes of Iron Man and Cap.

 

[Kenbo Slice]

=

Good. Cast someone better as superman and write him right this time.

I don't need superman debating on whether he should actually help people. He's a boy scout, his moral dilemma should be whether or not he's helping ENOUGH

No one can match Henry Cavill's looks. No one.

Give me a buff, black haired, white dude with chest hair and a cleft chin that can ACT.

It's not whether or not you look the part exactly but whether you can act and Cavill is not that good of an actor. I need someone who can convey emotion.

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Star Wars is close, but its still Luke's story.

First film, maybe. After that? No. Look at Empire, which basically has two separate plots going on for the majority of its runtime, or Last Jedi which has three (Force Awakens is similar in being ensemble).

Matrix is Neo's story.

First film? Yes.

Second and third? Dubious. The third, again, has two major plot threads for the majority of its runtime.

Your argument is that you don't need a lead in film to introduce the characters of an ensemble. By their very nature, sequels are going to have had a lead in film; the one they're a sequel to. You can't really use them to prove your point