|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on Apr 19, 2015 9:54:32 GMT -5
The first official trailer for Batman V Superman has been released online and after watching it, I feel kinda depressed. It's SO serious. I'm glad Warner is doing more, planning more, to bring these classic characters to the big screen but they seem to be missing out on Marvel's formula for film success: a healthy mix of humor, action, and drama. Yet MOS was so serious and dark and it's sequel seems to be following suit.
Which I find strange. DC's characters can be fun, humor can help lighten the tone occasionally without sacrificing the quality and message of the story. But Nolan with his Batman trilogy seems to have set some form of standard for them to follow and I'm not sure that's the right thing to do, especially since you're essentially playing catch-up with Marvel in the film dept.
Do we like or need such serious heroes? Or is it such a crime to see Clark or Bruce crack a smile every so often?
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Apr 19, 2015 10:48:34 GMT -5
The first official trailer for Batman V Superman has been released online and after watching it, I feel kinda depressed. It's SO serious. I'm glad Warner is doing more, planning more, to bring these classic characters to the big screen but they seem to be missing out on Marvel's formula for film success: a healthy mix of humor, action, and drama. Yet MOS was so serious and dark and it's sequel seems to be following suit. Which I find strange. DC's characters can be fun, humor can help lighten the tone occasionally without sacrificing the quality and message of the story. But Nolan with his Batman trilogy seems to have set some form of standard for them to follow and I'm not sure that's the right thing to do, especially since you're essentially playing catch-up with Marvel in the film dept. Do we like or need such serious heroes? Or is it such a crime to see Clark or Bruce crack a smile every so often? Thoughts? Kind of touched on this just yesterday over on Bronze Age Babies, as it happens. The DC-Television Universe (w/ Flash and Arrow and formerly w/ Smallville) seems to totally understand that there has to be some element of lightness in the mix-- Flash particularly gets this. Arrow is darker, and yet doesn't seem to succumb to the flat-out fatalistically grim tone of the DC-Cinematic U-- there is an enviable nugget of almost corny optimism at that show's deepest core. . . and a much-needed occasional sense of humor. I've given up on DC's films. I STILL like Green Lantern better than the two Nolan films I've watched. It was, if nothing else, trying to be a basically well-rounded super-hero film. HB |
|
|
|
Post by starfoxxx on Apr 20, 2015 14:12:04 GMT -5
IMO.....DC MOVIES SUCK! The only "GREAT" DC movie is Superman 2!
Hey DC movie execs, if you want to see how it's done, watch The Avengers, Captain America: Winter Soldier, X2, the Wolverine, or Thor 2!!!!
again, this is just my opinion.......
|
|
|
|
Post by crimson cowl on May 7, 2015 9:44:39 GMT -5
I think the tone needs to suit the characters and the stories they want to tell. The first two Nolan Batman movies are arguably the best superhero films made to date (other contenders in my book would be the first two Spider Man flicks, the first Avengers movie, Iron Man 1&2, X-Men: First Class, The Winter Soldier and I suppose Dredd too if he counts as a superhero). I agree with starfoxx that the old Superman movies were splendid (i'd give thumbs up to the first two) and I think that the Superman Returns reboot gets far more flak than it deserves -I thought it was decent enough without being that great.
I haven't watched The Flash but I watched the first season of Arrow which was dreadful and doesn't inspire me to watch The Flash which looks like more of the same. I thought Smallville was a pretty good idea and well executed although they dragged it out way too long. The recent Daredevil series quite obviously takes a lot from Nolan's Batman and works pretty well -it suits the character. It is hard to overstate just how much it outshines the Affleck film. The SHIELD series is just about watchable but doesn't really work for me although I thought Agent Carter suited the relatively light hearted formula better.
Man of Steel was an utterly empty experience for me and totally missed the character. Its rather inhuman level of destruction made me think of something like Alan Moore's Marvelman rather than Superman. Apart from Batman DC seem to be pretty lost when it comes to their movies and I don't think their TV shows have much appeal beyond kids. Mind you, I haven't seen Gotham which I imagine is rather different.
Marvel managed to give each of the 'title character'Avengers a solid movie that established them prior to the Avengers flick. All of those first films were pretty decent and gave them their own world. Avengers then managed to put them all in one movie tying their individual movie worlds together without it becoming ridiculous in the context of live action cinema. DC have a great Batman franchise but nothing else -the current Superman film franchise sucks and I don't get the impression that they have any idea how to tie them together to make something good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on May 10, 2015 9:51:46 GMT -5
IMHO, the Flash is the best adaption of a comic book on TV so far. It's got heart, drama, rather faithful adaptions of characters, and the level and breadth of effects are quite amazing. Arrow is darker (especially since they've adapted certain Batman mythos elements into the show) but at it's core, the love and emotions of the relationships are what holds the show together.
(Y'see, this is why I can't get into AOS. It's a dry procedural show, either something is stolen that they need to retrieve or they need to steal something themselves. Arrow and Flash are, at their core, soap operas. Some of the characters just happen to dress up as vigilantes)
But DC seems to want to follow Nolan's formula for the rest of their movies: grim, serious explorations of these characters. But if anything, DC's characters have always been about hope and I don't get that impression from these films or their outlines. Watch Christopher Reeves in the original Superman film and then watch Cavill in MOS. Do you get the same feeling of hope and wonder from Cavill's portrayal as you did from Reeves' portrayal? I don't.
What bothers me is that DC has a huge advantage over Marvel in one regard; DC's more prominent characters are more well-known than Marvel's characters. A decade ago, ask any general lay person who Iron Man was and they probably couldn't answer you. But everyone knows who Superman is, who Batman is, who Wonder Woman is, because of various pop culture exposure through the decades, either from films, TV shows, or even cartoons.
Marvel had to build up their characters in solo films first, so that when Avengers did happen, they didn't need to waste time with needless exposition. DC shouldn't have to do that. If you don't know the origin of Superman or even Batman by now, then you've been living under a rock in the middle of Alaska. DC should just put these characters in a dynamic, moving story and GO!
Instead, with every relaunch, we get a new origin, a new take, a new revamp. It's like they want to put themselves in a corner from the very start.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Cowl on May 11, 2015 7:12:45 GMT -5
IMHO, the Flash is the best adaption of a comic book on TV so far. You think it's better than the Daredevil series? I'll give it a go if you think it's that good but it doesn't look promising to me and I thought Arrow was total dreck. The SHIELD series actually should have gone for a more 'Mission:Impossible' style and captured some of the antiseptic cool of 'Person of Interest' IMO. Its soapy aspects are actually what cripple it to my mind. The fact that Skye is such an intolerable Mary Sue, is clearly the focus of the show undermining the ensemble, and is obviously geared towards getting an audience share in China in the most egregious fashion, is all really nauseating. I love the first two Nolan Batmans but as you say that tone is totally inappropriate for Superman or Wonder Woman. I could see that Man of Steel was trying to update Superman for younger audiences, and I don't object to that, but it failed badly. As you say, Reeves IS Superman whilst Cavill is just some guy who happens to have superpowers and I'd be hard pressed to tell you what any of his personality traits are or what he stands for. Without a Superman portrayal of comparable stature to play against Batman I don't see the point of putting them together in a film. They're more likely to harm the Batman franchise than turn Supes into a success. Yes but that is almost entirely due to media exposure as you say and has quite possibly changed for good now. Iron Man, Thor and Cap are quite possibly as well known to the general public as Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider Man and the Hulk nowadays and may well remain so. The same is almost certainly true of Wolverine. I don't agree. I can't see that working. I think you're missing what a great job the Marvel solo films did in establishing the Avengers characters on screen. They didn't just tell the story from the comics but pitched them so they'd be credible with cinema audiences. That was the real trick. Just look at the Daredevil movie to see how badly wrong you can get that. Each of those movies had their own world and tone in order to make them more believable and it was a great achievement of the Avengers movie to be able to bring them all together without the incompatibility of each character's world being exposed. DC is generally less plausible than Marvel anyway and just having the Amazon Princess show up in her spangly outfit or Hawkman swoop in without explanation is just going to be ludicrous. It may fly with the hardcore fanboys but with general cinema audiences it'll be exactly the kind of campy silliness that people always supposed comic book movies would be and why they were long considered a very bad idea. Only because they're doing a bad job of it. Marvel have shown what can be achieved -that doesn't mean its easy (the Spider Man reboot has shown that they can also get it badly wrong though). If TV's Green arrow shows up in a movie he's going to have zero credibility with me and he'll actually undermine my suspension of disbelief (same goes for the characters from AoS other than Coulson) but I'd be very happy to see Daredevil from the TV show in something as he wouldn't seem out of place. |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 11, 2015 11:26:05 GMT -5
But Crimson C, if you just make a blanket statement on a show (Arrow's first season), pronouncing it to be total dreck w/out supporting that judgment, what's that say 'bout all your pals here who unabashedly enjoy it? I quite, quite enjoyed that first season! Very solid, committed cast, lots of twists and turns in the overplot, a General Hospital's-worth of soap-opera storylines, a leading man who--geeze-- totally has a superhero's build (and can do some terrific stunt/fight work of his own), and who wisely makes use of his ability to underplay his scenes, and manages to not come across as wooden while doing it. Is it perfect or always hitting home runs? Nah-- but it's entertaining, engaging, and consistently makes me care about what's gonna happen next with the (zillion) characters.
Flash is definitely a good sister-show to it (albeit a much brighter, lighter, quirky one), and I'm right w/ Marvel Boy in how much I've liked it when I've been able to sit down and watch-- which admittedly hasn't been in several weeks. I'll be curious to see if you'll be able to like Flash if you don't like Arrow-- o'course, I've always loved spaghetti, but never cared much for lasagna. . . so anything's possible, eh?
Touching on pop-cultural superhero presence in society: What has recently anvil-ed me in the head is that EVERYONE wears superhero t-shirts now! When I pick up HBGirl from school, I'm sure I can spot 20 easily within just a couple of minutes (if there are lots of kids milling around). And there's no particular demographic represented at all. Cap's shield is HUGE, as is Superman's chest emblem-- those two are almost universal. It's clearly geek/hipster-cool to wear them at this point, rather than it being a matter of wearing them in spite of any social stigma they might bring with them. . .
HB
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Cowl on May 11, 2015 12:53:03 GMT -5
But Crimson C, if you just make a blanket statement on a show (Arrow's first season), pronouncing it to be total dreck w/out supporting that judgment, what's that say 'bout all your pals here who unabashedly enjoy it? I guess that's for you to decide but I'd prefer to think that some people can like spaghetti and others lasagne without it being personally damning. I haven't written a detailed critique of it as I essentially mentioned it in passing and also because, to be honest, I don't think I should really need to. FWIW the stories are predictable and drawn out ridiculously, the production looks cheap (compare with the atmospheric look of Daredevil), I have zero interest in trashy soap plots (but then that's an established difference I have with all you Engelhart fans out there), its attempts at being 'edgy' and 'dark' (which I held out some hopes for after the first episode) are utterly undermined by its childishness. the only thing in its favour is the leading man who in fairness, as you noted, does a decent job. Arrow could've done with being a lot more like Daredevil. Flash should be something very different but if its more campy soap plots, with yawn inducing love triangles and brutal villains who fail to kill the hero when presented with the chance and proceed to give them every opportunity to escape, I think I'll stick with Adam West. That's how you do camp and silly properly. |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 11, 2015 13:16:17 GMT -5
But Crimson C, if you just make a blanket statement on a show (Arrow's first season), pronouncing it to be total dreck w/out supporting that judgment, what's that say 'bout all your pals here who unabashedly enjoy it? I guess that's for you to decide but I'd prefer to think that some people can like spaghetti and others lasagne without it being personally damning. I haven't written a detailed critique of it as I essentially mentioned it in passing and also because, to be honest, I don't think I should really need to. FWIW the stories are predictable and drawn out ridiculously, the production looks cheap (compare with the atmospheric look of Daredevil), I have zero interest in trashy soap plots (but then that's an established difference I have with all you Engelhart fans out there), its attempts at being 'edgy' and 'dark' (which I held out some hopes for after the first episode) are utterly undermined by its childishness. the only thing in its favour is the leading man who in fairness, as you noted, does a decent job. Arrow could've done with being a lot more like Daredevil. Flash should be something very different but if its more campy soap plots, with yawn inducing love triangles and brutal villains who fail to kill the hero when presented with the chance and proceed to give them every opportunity to escape, I think I'll stick with Adam West. That's how you do camp and silly properly. Ah yes-- then it simply is a matter of different tastes (heh-- for about the bajillionth time!), 'cause the edgy/dark/gritty element that Arrow leans into is honestly what I care for the least about the show-- I'm utterly burnt out on that as a motif for superhero stories across the board. I do wonder if the creators picked up on that as well, since one of the fist changes in season two was to dial Ollie back from being a vigilante who flat-out kills the bad guys and their henchmen? I thought that was a major flaw in the first season, and rather tough to backpedal from later-- but I'm glad they did. Nah-- Flash isn't gonna be your cup o' tea, CC. For full disclosure, I must submit that I've grown to love a good, hearty lasagna as I've advanced in years-- so I suppose one's tastes can indeed still change. But I did once (in my youth) eat spaghetti 32 days in a row. And I had it for lunch today. And yesterday. And Saturday. And for dinner Friday night. . . (I make a very, very good homemade sauce, mind you. Relatives come from as far Texas and Louisiana to have it for dinner. . . ) HB |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong Crosby on May 11, 2015 13:32:05 GMT -5
The best lasagna I ever had (I can still remember clearly the taste, many years later) was a venison lasagna made by an italian lady. The lady in question lived in a small country town in Italy. She was used to cooking from scratch every day. She made the banquet food for the wedding of her son, who mas marrying my cousin. It´s a gastronomical experience I will never forget!
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 11, 2015 15:22:53 GMT -5
The best lasagna I ever had (I can still remember clearly the taste, many years later) was a venison lasagna made by an italian lady. The lady in question lived in a small country town in Italy. She was used to cooking from scratch every day. She made the banquet food for the wedding of her son, who mas marrying my cousin. It´s a gastronomical experience I will never forget! Ha! Who says this isn't the Marvel Age of Tangential Tastebud-Tempting Treats, eh? Not I, not I-! HB |
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on May 11, 2015 15:54:03 GMT -5
. What bothers me is that DC has a huge advantage over Marvel in one regard; DC's more prominent characters are more well-known than Marvel's characters. A decade ago, ask any general lay person who Iron Man was and they probably couldn't answer you. But everyone knows who Superman is, who Batman is, who Wonder Woman is, because of various pop culture exposure through the decades, either from films, TV shows, or even cartoons. I would have to disagree with you about that being an advantage. I think it's the other way around. DC has to deal with the love that so many people have (Myself included) for the Christopher Reeve version of Superman, the Michael Keaton (Or possibly even Adam West) version of Batman, and most definitely the Lynda Carter version of Wonder Woman. I can already tell you that they are going to have a difficult time ever finding anyone who can make me feel more like Wonder Woman has simply stepped off the pages of the book. Marvel, on the other hand, had such an awful track record in the past that the current crop of movies (Since X-Men) are setting the new standard. In the eyes of the audience, Robert Downey Jr. is Ironman, Chris Hemsworth is Thor, Chris Evans is Captain America, and so forth. No one said "I just can't accept Toby Maguire because Nicholas Hammond will always be Spidey for me. They have had to face this with Andrew Garfield but not with any of the other movies. For the record, I loved Garfield in the role. I just didn't think the movies were that great. DC is busy trying to reinvent the wheel while Marvel is introducing most of the audience to its wheels for the first time. I'm sure the same thing will happen in 20 years or so when Marvel tries to sell a new Wolverine and the audience just says "He's no Hugh Jackman." With that said, I will also say that the changes DC has been determined to make have not helped matters a bit. I'm not very excited about Superman v. Batman because Man of Steel was terrible. A good super-hero flick does need to make me gasp but it also needs to make me smile. There was no smiling during Man of Steel. Come to think of it, I didn't gasp much either. I mostly just shook my head. |
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on May 16, 2015 8:23:48 GMT -5
Comparing the Flash to Daredevil is comparing apples to oranges. The most obvious disparity is the constraints of network TV. With the backing of Netflix, of course DD is going to be darker and be able to show more extreme actions than would be allowed on network TV such as the CW.
Second, the tones of each show are completely different. The most accepted genre for DD is noir, so any decent adaptation of it will include darker elements. The Flash's tone is lighter, more in line with the Silver Age, mixed in with some pure wonderment of it all.
I love the DD show, I think the producers did an outstanding job, the casting is spot-on, and the action is intense and violent, as it should be for this genre and character. But I love the Flash more because the show and it's producers have done a great job in adapting/translating more comic elements into the show. Costumes, superpowers, wild tech, campy characters yes, Wentworth Miller as Captain Cold is the campiest character I've seen since the late, great Frank Gorshin and I love it. But that's the Rogues and they're slowly building up a decent adaptation of these zany group of villains. Heck, they just did a Gorilla Grodd episode, an entire episode devoted to a talking gorilla, and it was GREAT!
It does come down to differing tastes but in terms of recreating the fantastic elements of a 'normal' comic, DC's TV shows still beat out Marvel's attempts in my opinion. With the new spinoff show Legends of Tomorrow set to premiere next season, we're watching a burgeoning DC TV universe evolve, one I'm much more interested in seeing than anything I've seen so far on the big screen from them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marvel Boy on May 16, 2015 8:33:05 GMT -5
. What bothers me is that DC has a huge advantage over Marvel in one regard; DC's more prominent characters are more well-known than Marvel's characters. A decade ago, ask any general lay person who Iron Man was and they probably couldn't answer you. But everyone knows who Superman is, who Batman is, who Wonder Woman is, because of various pop culture exposure through the decades, either from films, TV shows, or even cartoons. I would have to disagree with you about that being an advantage. I think it's the other way around. DC has to deal with the love that so many people have (Myself included) for the Christopher Reeve version of Superman, the Michael Keaton (Or possibly even Adam West) version of Batman, and most definitely the Lynda Carter version of Wonder Woman. I can already tell you that they are going to have a difficult time ever finding anyone who can make me feel more like Wonder Woman has simply stepped off the pages of the book. Marvel, on the other hand, had such an awful track record in the past that the current crop of movies (Since X-Men) are setting the new standard. In the eyes of the audience, Robert Downey Jr. is Ironman, Chris Hemsworth is Thor, Chris Evans is Captain America, and so forth. No one said "I just can't accept Toby Maguire because Nicholas Hammond will always be Spidey for me. They have had to face this with Andrew Garfield but not with any of the other movies. For the record, I loved Garfield in the role. I just didn't think the movies were that great. DC is busy trying to reinvent the wheel while Marvel is introducing most of the audience to its wheels for the first time. I'm sure the same thing will happen in 20 years or so when Marvel tries to sell a new Wolverine and the audience just says "He's no Hugh Jackman." With that said, I will also say that the changes DC has been determined to make have not helped matters a bit. I'm not very excited about Superman v. Batman because Man of Steel was terrible. A good super-hero flick does need to make me gasp but it also needs to make me smile. There was no smiling during Man of Steel. Come to think of it, I didn't gasp much either. I mostly just shook my head. That is a valid point, one that I've failed to consider. With each new generation per se, DC feels the need to reinvent the characters but previous portrayals of them have been so memorable, that it does seem like they have a huge hill to overcome in offering up new versions of them. (Myself, I loved Keaton as Batman, in some ways, I think he did a better job with certain character aspects than Bale did) Marvel will face the same problem eventually. Rumors have swirled off-and-on over the years of how long RDJr will continue to play Iron Man. Hugh Jackman has gotten more and more selective over when he will play Logan (the last Wolverine movie was excellent BTW) So when the time comes to perhaps replace the current cast of the Avengers, I wonder how Marvel will handle it (and promote it for that matter) |
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Cowl on Jun 10, 2015 5:31:37 GMT -5
Okay, so after you guys recommendations of The Flash I have now watched the whole series -and it was great. I really enjoyed it. So thanks.
However, comparing it to Daredevil is ridiculous as far as I can see. It's not remotely in the same league. DD smashes it in every department and Flash has some serious flaws that I did find aggravating and ruined some episodes for me.
For one thing I had a big problem with Iris. She has no discernible character to speak of (just like Laurel in the 1st season of Arrow actually). She has no virtues or winning qualities and her only distinction is being the object of the hero's affection. It's this that completely defines her (of course there is a certain irony to this as that's exactly what Iris was like in early Flash comics though I'm not convinced that's a DC Silver Age trait they should be trying to emulate). As a result her character ends up being determined by her actions and her constantly shifting attitudes towards Barry and Eddie.As a result she becomes a catalogue of supposedly feminine vices.
When she starts her new job the hard case veteran who mentors her is critical that she has no qualifications and shouldn't be there -and he's right. Iris never does prove herself in any way or shows any real talent -instead she gets by on her ability to get the inside scoop on the Flash which of course we the audience know is only because the man behind the mask is in love with her and is throwing her bones.
I found her to be a deeply irritating character and would've thoroughly enjoyed something gruesome and terminal happening to her.
The other thing is the silliness. This show provides a rationale for its supervillains and it generally works and the set up is enjoyable. However it does at times resort to Smallville/Arrow silliness, unnecessarily IMO, that undermines the whole dramatic set up. The Captain Cold and his crew is particularly bad. That Cisco is apparently able to knock out super weapons at will is absurd and then Cold's sister wants one that shoots gold so he whips that up in an afternoon (sure I can invent a weapon that's way better than anything that actual weapons designers can make that shoots any ridiculous thing you care to mention off the cuff -and I can do it by tea time). It's impossible to maintain any suspension of disbelief in these circumstances. When its like this its clearly only for children -its embarrassing to watch.
Anyway, in spite of these problems the show is generally very enjoyable and has a good spirit that suits The Flash very well -it's just a shame that they've slipped into customary habits when short of ideas and/or budget. Reverse Flash (despite being one of the least imaginative villains in comics history) and Doctor Wells were great and Grodd, which could've been laughable, was superb and genuinely scary. Most of the other villains were fairly forgettable but served their purpose.
It was quite funny seeing a fair chunk of the casts of Prison Break and The Tomorrow People recycled.
Now, I'm sure you can point to budget constraints and what is allowable on the network to account for the disparity between Flash/Arrow/SHIELD and Daredevil and these would be largely true -but so what. I'm going to judge a show by what's in front of me not by the circumstances under which it was produced. The fact remains that Daredevil is spectacular in every respect. The writing is superb, the performances dazzling, the action stunning, and the production beautifully atmospheric. It captures the claustrophobically intense spirit of DD in its Miller/Nocenti heyday yet remains witty and watchable. Its blown every other superhero TV show out of the water. There's just no comparison.
btw, the second Wolverine film was dreadful MB, it made even less sense than the first one (which I enjoyed more than this). I quite liked the scene on the Bullet train though.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobc on Jul 3, 2015 11:22:03 GMT -5
I honestly tried to get into DC characters for years but they just bore me to tears. That's probably not a fair assessment since I don't know that much about any of them, but I'm just being honest. I'm probably just emotionally invested in the Marvel characters, that's all.
|
|
