DC Films new co-chair to focus on "Hope and Optimism"

www.vulture.com/2016/05/geoff-johns-dc-films.html

It's not official yet, but it seems like a not-well kept secret.

Also, Geoff Johns is writing the new Batman movie with Affleck....(that was older news).

I've come across this from a number of other sources and its a done deal.

Finally we may have a DC Universe worthy of the name. And while Johns does have his detractors, at least he seems to "get" the characters.

"DC’s nascent cinematic universe has so far depicted Superman as an angry god; a violent, alien entity that needs to be kept in check. This morning, Johns offered a vastly different take on the character's archetype. “I think people make a mistake when they say, ‘Superman’s not relatable because he’s so powerful,’” he said. “I’m like, ‘Are you kidding me? He’s a farmboy from Kansas who moves to the city and just wants to do the best he can with what he’s got.’ That’s the most relatable character in the world.""

Look forward to seeing where this goes.

Peace.

/K

Turn on "Sarcasm" mode:

Hope and Optimism?

Why would you do that when DC does Dark, Grim and Gritty so well?

Turn off "Sarcasm" mode.

Honestly, there are people on this forum that like the direction DC took it's movies.
I would like to hear their opinion on this drastic shakeup.

Markiehoe wrote: Honestly, there are people on this forum that like the direction DC took it's movies.
I would like to hear their opinion on this drastic shakeup.

I assume that you are talking about me so I will answer this.

Yes, I loved MOS and BM v SM. BM v SM I consider a masterpiece (Disclaimer: I don't care what other people think. I can think for myself, thank you very much. So please don't bother quoting box office stats or critic reviews. They make no difference in my view of the film).

As for this "drastic shakeup", I think what you missed, and is conspicuously absent from that click bait Vulture article, is that the DC films are still going to be "creator driven". Meaning that each director will still have control over their product (JL 1 in Snyder's case).

Besides, in my view, Snyder is building toward the SM you describe and seem to want. He'll get there, just have a little patience...

I'm assuming that SM turns out to be a heroic man of uncompromising morality, even in the Snyder universe, But only after many trials and mistakes. At least that's my hope.

If so, then the classic SM and the Snyder SM may turn out more or less the same. Except that Snyder's SM earned a lot of emotional scars and left bodies along the way while getting there.

The classic SM learned most of his lessons in Smallville as a boy. He emerged fully formed morally and behaviorally, but he was socially stunted when he went to Metropolis as a farm boy. (A big city newsroom is the most "big city conscious" place in a city, thanks to all the reporters). Clark struggled to socialize, but it wasn't an alien to earthling problem, but a Kansas farm boy to big city thing. Which is a VERY "alien" experience, especially in those days.

So we have very different starting points and trajectories for the two SM. But as long as they converge, I'm OK with that. But if they DON'T end up with the same heroic SM, his morality uncompromising, then that will be a huge deal for me. Sometimes I have doubts Snyder will get there, but I have to believe that he understands the character and his mythos in modern culture well enough to ensure this.

I'm honestly not certain which approach to SM's ultimate maturity is more believable.

My father came from a farming family and lived in several small towns on the great plains in the 1940's. I grew up in a very small town in the Midwest, and then suddenly moved to a big city when I was 18. So the classic origin mythos matches well with my youthful memories. Many people think those were idyllic, moral days and pine for them. But I know that's mostly BS. Living around lots of people with "uncompromising morality" is not fun. I was REALLY glad to escape the rigid, close-minded 1950's in rural America to live in a city and then live abroad.)

But the Snyder origin mythos is likely more realistic of how a man of that power would be shaped, certainly today.

But despite all that, it makes me feel good to believe (at least for a couple of hours) in the myth that a proper upbringing in rural America could create a person like SM. So the Donner movies and comics (up until the 90's) speak to me.

Shadar

Thinking about it a bit more, the appointment of Geoff Johns does indeed pose some interesting questions for WB/DC.

With an almost diametrically opposite interpretation of the Superman character given by Johns, what do they do? Reboot? Soft-reboot? Carry on?

I'm assuming that SM turns out to be a heroic man of uncompromising morality, even in the Snyder universe, But only after many trials and mistakes. At least that's my hope.

Besides, in my view, Snyder is building toward the SM you describe and seem to want. He'll get there, just have a little patience...

My point of view with this is, what is it based on? Is it simply wishful thinking/hoping? If we look at the tone of the character in MoS, we see the grim, self-doubting characterization of Superman introduced. Ok, that is our starting point.

In B Vs S, as an audience, we actually get even less. And at the end he dies. Following the line of thinking, this should have been a building block towards Johns version. But instead it could be argued that it was a regression.

Now, the death of Superman could provide an out for Snyder and DC. Resurrection is often used as a metaphor for change. That could provide a way for them to introduce a Superman more along the lines of what (most) people expect and expected.

However, having said that, the problem then becomes, would he be too jarring within the universe Snyder has created? It can be seen from the recent events and comments that DC seems to want to shift tone with their universe, Superman being the focal point.

One final question this also raises is, would they have got rid of Snyder if he wasn’t so far into production on JL part 1 (I believe they have begun shooting)? With the recent changes at the top, as well as Affleck taking a more active role in JL (executive producer), it seems DC are trying to reign in Snyder a lot more.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Peace.

/K

Here's the main hollywood reporter article: www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ba...allout-warner-895174

The keys bits here are that this is part of a larger WB movement, and isn't centered solely on DC Comics films but that yes, it's one of the motivators. (Those films to bring a lot to WB's bottom line.)

As Jd rocks said the quote is: "But sources also say Warners still wants to remain a filmmaker-driven studio." I honestly thing this is going to be like the real world: a bit of this, and a bit of that. This is more a "movies ahead" change than something that would affect existing movies (at least the ones that haven't started filming).

But if your read this article and don't think that Synder is going to have a sit down with Berg and Johns and an in-depth discussion about what he's doing, then I think you're mistaken (this has probably ALREADY taken place). This was driven by BvS not making "enough" money, so they're hardly NOT going to talk to the director about his next movie(s) and plans. They also mention Suicide Squad in the context that the reshoots were fixing some problem ... and that WB seems to think Johns might have been able to fix that. (I'm curious to find out more about what they did with Suicide Squad.)

In the Marvel stable, you have Edgar Wright quitting Ant-Man, and Whedon complaining about Marvel's changes to AoU. OTH, Gunn seems pretty happy with Marvel on all levels (but he also likely gets much more freedom as he's not tied to the Earth MCU). I don't hear the Russo's crying either, after finishing Captain America: Winter Solider and Avengers: Civil War (it's not really a Captain America movie). We also have Black complaining about changing the story of Iron Man 3 during writing (but I can't see how it affected the movie too much, plus the factors there are gone, Disney/Marvel self-correcting like WB/DC is going here).

There is a balance there. I think Marvel got a bit too grabby, and is dialing it back, and focusing on encouraging cross talk among the stars and directors. DC is now deciding that they really need a guiding hand like Feige who isn't a director of the movies.

The article points out it's not much of a change. Berg was already involved in most of the movies, and Johns was too. (As I said he's co-writing Batman with Afleck.) Another good sign is Affleck is an executive producer on Justice League. This is a good sign as Affleck is a great actor, director, and a comic book fan.

Shadar and jdrock have an interesting point if Synder ends up with the Superman we want to see on screen (eventually).

I took a "wait and see" to see what was done in BvS. Honestly I have nothing else to do for the rest of the DC movies. No one REALLY knows what was done for the re-shoots on Suicide Squad, how Wonder Woman is going to be, or what Synder has planned for the JL movies.

OTH, "getting Superman back alive" and "getting the band together" sounds like a pretty busy/boring movie that could have been avoided,and to me that sort of thing was a weak point in BvS. I wait to be surprised, but I have my doubts. I just listened to some podcasts with Synder and I had to just stop. I don't think he's on a wavelength that I like. This isn't bad, not everyone has to like everything.

Still, I don't HATE BvS. I'm surprised on how "What Color is the Dress", the reaction is. You get both "this is the worst movie ever" and "This is a cinematic achievement, genius manifest, and one of the best comic book movies ever." And it's not just a few people, or comic book fans, or anything. People fall down on both sides.

I find that much more interesting that BvS itself.

And it does seem that people like me an lfan who come down with "it was good and bad, it wasn't the best, nor was it the worst." are a minority. Maybe we're just not all that vocal as we're not running around super-excited or super-mad?

Certainly I can speak for awhile about things I liked in BvS. And a long time about what I think failed. I can do the same for Civil War. The difference is that I don't really want to watch BvS again (not if I can't fast forward). I do want to watch Civil War again.

kikass2014 wrote: Thinking about it a bit more, the appointment of Geoff Johns does indeed pose some interesting questions for WB/DC.

With an almost diametrically opposite interpretation of the Superman character given by Johns, what do they do? Reboot? Soft-reboot? Carry on?

I'm assuming that SM turns out to be a heroic man of uncompromising morality, even in the Snyder universe, But only after many trials and mistakes. At least that's my hope.

Besides, in my view, Snyder is building toward the SM you describe and seem to want. He'll get there, just have a little patience...

My point of view with this is, what is it based on? Is it simply wishful thinking/hoping? If we look at the tone of the character in MoS, we see the grim, self-doubting characterization of Superman introduced. Ok, that is our starting point.

/K

I think its half wishful thinking and half my judgement based on comments Snyder has made. He clearly envisions SM as he was portrayed very early (40's, 50's) when he was a bit of a thug sometimes. But with a heart of gold.

During the American culture war, SM was part of the "establishment" (despite a couple of silly attempts to portray him as "cool", he never was), and that's when DC really amped up on the "Kansas farm boy goodness" angle, which seemed like propaganda to me at the time. I was into the counter-culture. I wanted to see Superman get his butt kicked, and to kick butt when he had to.

But by the time Christopher's Reeve's Superman came along, I was part of the establishment so the Donner story line felt fine. Even if it was silly. Same for the 1984 Supergirl movie. Nobody would ever call those movies gritty or realistic.

So my head kind of goes with Snyder's interpretation goes while my gut goes with Donner. But I have one iron-clad rule that has ruled my life -- if gut and head disagree. always go with the head. Logic trumps emotion. Always. I suppose that comes from being a geek who became an engineer.

So my head kind of goes with Snyder's interpretation goes while my gut goes with Donner. But I have one iron-clad rule that has ruled my life -- if gut and head disagree. always go with the head. Logic trumps emotion. Always. I suppose that comes from being a geek who became an engineer.

Fair enough

Peace.

/K