What the DCEU should have been like. (Take N+1)

[Crazedwraith]

What is says on the tin. A thread to suggest how the DCEU could have been better, where it went wrong. Etc. Etc.

Discuss.

[FaxModem1]

Well, getting someone a bit more cheery or colorful to make a Superman movie would have probably been a good idea. Christopher Nolan has a very restrained color palette, and likes to keep things grounded. Zack Snyder likes his color palette to be very washed out, feeling like there's something wrong with the movie, which can work if the movie's story meshes with that. A story about Superman, a bringer of hope, not so much.

Same with the themes of Superman. Zack Snyder is trying to make a new adaptation of the Fountainhead. That's an advocation for Objectivist philosophy, and he tried to inject a bit of that into Man of Steel, and superheroics and Objectivism don't work well, due to the simple fact that being heroic requires a bit of selflessness, which goes against it. Having a Pa Kent telling his son to let kids die is no way to have a core message of the film unless the film is showing that Pa Kent was full of shit and Superman is showing that he utterly disagrees.

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

[The Romulan Republic]

Two possibilities that I've discussed before:

1. Skip the MCU-style lengthy set-up and just make a fucking Justice League movie. I would contend that both X-men and Guardians of the Galaxy show that it is possible to make a good, and successful, Superhero team movie without extensive set-up. I can't imagine that it would be harder when using characters who are already as well-established in the public consciousness as Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman. Introduce all the cast and world in one film, just like every other new ensemble movie in history prior to the MCU. Especially since Batman and Superman's origins are so well-known that covering them in depth again would be arguably boring and cliché. Individual spin-offs can be done later.

2. Use the Nolan-verse Batman films as a springboard. Start with rebuilding Gotham in the aftermath of Bane, with Lexcorp moving in to take advantage of the situation. Maybe use the nuke going off over the Atlantic Ocean as the trigger for Atlantis to declare war on the surface, bringing in Aquaman and the Greek mythology stuff (providing an opening to bring in Diana as well). Have Bruce stay retired as Batman and with Selina, but be the older mentor character behind the scenes backing the League. Diana, in her role as a diplomat, brings the League together as a way to bring about peace between the surface and the Atlanteans. I might or might not introduce Superman in the first film- it might be too much, and I could just give him a nod in the form of a cameo or subplot of Clark and Lois as reporters investigating Lex's actions. Have a subplot of Robin-Bats clashing with Lex Corps. interests in Gotham.

Subsequent films could bring in Superman, introduce Harley as a Joker copy-cat criminal (if they didn't want to recast Ledger as the Joker), etc. You could also have spin-offs focusing on individual characters or teams.

And whatever you do, avoid endless grimdark wank or trying too hard to be clever or edgy, and for the love of all that is holy, don't hire Zach Snyder.

Edit: We can keep Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn, and Hanz Zimmer for the music, though. Bring back Crane as an eventual member of Lex's villain team. Retcon Talia's death or resurrect her, maybe. Or even Ras.

Pity we couldn't have Affleck as Batman in this version, unless...

Hmm, how about an adaptation of the Justice Lords storyline, with Affleck playing darker alternate-universe Batman?

But yeah, if I somehow became the owner of DC, I'd probably commission an animated Nolan-verse Justice League series, with as many of the original cast as possible hired on as voice actors.

[Elheru Aran]

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

I don't have time to say much right now, but I would like to note that IMO this wasn't a bad thing in terms of the broader cinematic universe-- it helped give some background to the events of BvS, made it clear just how powerful superheroes can be in this universe, and conversely super-villains, thus giving an extra measure of significance to them. In terms of Superman himself, yeah, it wasn't well planned, but in terms of establishing a foundation for the greater cinematic universe, it wasn't a bad move.

I did appreciate as well that it gave a certain historic continuity to the DCCU throughout Justice League-- the Kryptonian spaceship from MoS still being stuck in the middle of Metropolis all the way later in Justice League, for example. It's not a bad plot device, far as those things go.

[FaxModem1]

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

I don't have time to say much right now, but I would like to note that IMO this wasn't a bad thing in terms of the broader cinematic universe-- it helped give some background to the events of BvS, made it clear just how powerful superheroes can be in this universe, and conversely super-villains, thus giving an extra measure of significance to them. In terms of Superman himself, yeah, it wasn't well planned, but in terms of establishing a foundation for the greater cinematic universe, it wasn't a bad move.

I did appreciate as well that it gave a certain historic continuity to the DCCU throughout Justice League-- the Kryptonian spaceship from MoS still being stuck in the middle of Metropolis all the way later in Justice League, for example. It's not a bad plot device, far as those things go.

It's not, but it is odd to go from corpses everywhere, to Superman making quips to the general about how they shouldn't track him. It's tonally jarring. Almost as if those thousands of deaths didn't really matter.

[FaxModem1]

All that said, play to the strengths of the characters. Why is Wonder Woman loved? Because she's iconic. Find that 'No man's land' scene in every character, and try and build your stand alone films around them. Diana's compassion, Bruce's resolve, Barry's friendliness, etc. That's DC's hat, and they should play to it.

[The Romulan Republic]

So what is the core around which each character should be built? There have been many different interpretations of them, after all.

For me, it would be:

Superman-Public Service. That doesn't sound cool or sexy to a lot of people, and I could have said "Hope" or "Power", but this better embodies the complexities of the character to me. Superman has the power to be anything, do anything- and he chooses to dedicate his life to saving others, even though no matter how powerful he is he'll never be able to save them all, because its the right thing to do. One moment in the DCEU that they got exactly right was the moment when Superman shows up to testify before Congress. That's a very powerful moment for me, because what he's saying there is "I could be a god. But I am choosing to be accountable to humans."

Batman-Resolve, yeah. Specifically, resolve to preserve life. To me, for all his dark demeanor, Batman isn't really about the vengeance. If that was all he was looking for, to hurt criminals, he'd just be the Punisher in a different costume. However, he's got the no killing rule, he dedicates himself and his life to fighting crime, not merely to stop criminals, but so that no one else has to suffer what he and his family did. He holds himself and everyone else to an impossible standard, because he does not want anyone to have to go through that again. And he never gives up, no matter how impossible the situation is.

Wonder Woman-She's harder to define, for me, besides being alternately a symbol of female empowerment or female objectification in comics, depending on how you look at it. I admit that I'm not as familiar with the character as with Bruce and Clark. But I think you can have her as the outsider to our world, seeing it (and thus helping the audience to see it) from a new perspective- and then trying to change it for the better.

Personally, I think I'd play up Wonder Woman's role as both an outsider and a diplomat. Someone who is new to our world and struggling to come to terms with it, and understand it from an outsider's perspective. But also someone who builds bridges, and brings people together.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, getting someone a bit more cheery or colorful to make a Superman movie would have probably been a good idea. Christopher Nolan has a very restrained color palette, and likes to keep things grounded. Zack Snyder likes his color palette to be very washed out, feeling like there's something wrong with the movie, which can work if the movie's story meshes with that. A story about Superman, a bringer of hope, not so much.

Same with the themes of Superman. Zack Snyder is trying to make a new adaptation of the Fountainhead. That's an advocation for Objectivist philosophy, and he tried to inject a bit of that into Man of Steel, and superheroics and Objectivism don't work well, due to the simple fact that being heroic requires a bit of selflessness, which goes against it. Having a Pa Kent telling his son to let kids die is no way to have a core message of the film unless the film is showing that Pa Kent was full of shit and Superman is showing that he utterly disagrees.

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

Ugg, Snyder is a fucking Objectivist? That explains so much.

And yeah, I'm not a fan of the washed-out look. Nolan's look I didn't mind so much, though it might not work so well for other characters, but Snyder's is just visually ugly to me, and all his films look the same.

[FaxModem1]

Ugg, Snyder is a fucking Objectivist? That explains so much.

And yeah, I'm not a fan of the washed-out look. Nolan's look I didn't mind so much, though it might not work so well for other characters, but Snyder's is just visually ugly to me, and all his films look the same.

I'm not sure if he's an Objectivist, or if he thought making a new adaptation with his cinematic style would be neat, but the themes are there in his version of Superman.

[The Romulan Republic]

In any case, its idiotic. Superman is pretty much the Anti-Objectivist.

[FaxModem1]

In any case, its idiotic. Superman is pretty much the Anti-Objectivist.

Agreed.

So what is the core around which each character should be built? There have been many different interpretations of them, after all.

Wonder Woman-She's harder to define, for me, besides being alternately a symbol of female empowerment or female objectification in comics, depending on how you look at it. I admit that I'm not as familiar with the character as with Bruce and Clark. But I think you can have her as the outsider to our world, seeing it (and thus helping the audience to see it) from a new perspective- and then trying to change it for the better.

Personally, I think I'd play up Wonder Woman's role as both an outsider and a diplomat. Someone who is new to our world and struggling to come to terms with it, and understand it from an outsider's perspective. But also someone who builds bridges, and brings people together.

Wonder Woman's role has changed as the times have changed, but yes, her being a diplomat and a warrior who is new to our world while also being protective of it. Truth is probably her keyword, due to the lasso and how she fights for it.

I personally have always preferred her Greg Rucka era, in which she was a full on UN ambassador and had the staff to work with her on it. It was superhero meets the West Wing, and it worked rather well.

[The Romulan Republic]

That role as diplomat is basically why in my story outline, I picked Diana, not Bruce or Clark, as the one who founds the League.

[Gandalf]

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

I disagree completely. That scene in Man of Steel, and its revisiting in Batman v Superman were awesome. It shows that while the Superman is a thing, he's far from a perfect protector, coming to humanity at the same moment as superpowered 11/9. God exists, but it turns out that he's not great at his job. It gives him growth as a character so that by the time Justice League rolls around, he'll be closer to the Reeve model which everyone adores.

Also, how would he even be capable of moving the fight elsewhere? If Superman flies away, there's a fair chance that Zod just starts killing the people of Metropolis (Metropolitans?). When they go toe to toe, Zod has him pretty outmatched. Zod's been a combatant his whole life, and Superman's never had to fight a peer before. His one edge is experience with powers, and that doesn't hold out too long.

[FaxModem1]

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

I disagree completely. That scene in Man of Steel, and its revisiting in Batman v Superman were awesome. It shows that while the Superman is a thing, he's far from a perfect protector, coming to humanity at the same moment as superpowered 11/9. God exists, but it turns out that he's not great at his job. It gives him growth as a character so that by the time Justice League rolls around, he'll be closer to the Reeve model which everyone adores.

Because nothing says protector of the people like a man making jokes while there were scores of dead bodies around him.

Also, how would he even be capable of moving the fight elsewhere? If Superman flies away, there's a fair chance that Zod just starts killing the people of Metropolis (Metropolitans?). When they go toe to toe, Zod has him pretty outmatched. Zod's been a combatant his whole life, and Superman's never had to fight a peer before. His one edge is experience with powers, and that doesn't hold out too long.

Maybe, you know, keep the fight somewhere desolate? Like in space, around the Wayne Industries satellite that they were fighting around? Just a thought.

[Gandalf]

Also, having the Battle of Metropolis be 9/11 times a hundred, and showing all the numerous human casualties, was not a good idea. If you want to show that there are real stakes involved, fine, but do it because Superman can't solve everything, not because he doesn't want or doesn't think to move the fight elsewhere.

I disagree completely. That scene in Man of Steel, and its revisiting in Batman v Superman were awesome. It shows that while the Superman is a thing, he's far from a perfect protector, coming to humanity at the same moment as superpowered 11/9. God exists, but it turns out that he's not great at his job. It gives him growth as a character so that by the time Justice League rolls around, he'll be closer to the Reeve model which everyone adores.

Because nothing says protector of the people like a man making jokes while there were scores of dead bodies around him.

I jut pulled up a transcript of the film, to which jokes are you referring?

Also, how would he even be capable of moving the fight elsewhere? If Superman flies away, there's a fair chance that Zod just starts killing the people of Metropolis (Metropolitans?). When they go toe to toe, Zod has him pretty outmatched. Zod's been a combatant his whole life, and Superman's never had to fight a peer before. His one edge is experience with powers, and that doesn't hold out too long.

Maybe, you know, keep the fight somewhere desolate? Like in space, around the Wayne Industries satellite that they were fighting around? Just a thought.

Yeah... how does Superman keep the fight somewhere else? Does he just fly away from the city full of people Zod threatened to kill and hope that Zod follows?

[Crazedwraith]

I disagree completely. That scene in Man of Steel, and its revisiting in Batman v Superman were awesome. It shows that while the Superman is a thing, he's far from a perfect protector, coming to humanity at the same moment as superpowered 11/9. God exists, but it turns out that he's not great at his job. It gives him growth as a character so that by the time Justice League rolls around, he'll be closer to the Reeve model which everyone adores.

That's not a bad point but I have trouble seeing his JL attitude as character development. What little character he shows in BvS is angst and then he dies and is ressurected as a more cheerful person. I like his new personality but it does feel like a logical progression from what's happened to him.

[FaxModem1]

I disagree completely. That scene in Man of Steel, and its revisiting in Batman v Superman were awesome. It shows that while the Superman is a thing, he's far from a perfect protector, coming to humanity at the same moment as superpowered 11/9. God exists, but it turns out that he's not great at his job. It gives him growth as a character so that by the time Justice League rolls around, he'll be closer to the Reeve model which everyone adores.

Because nothing says protector of the people like a man making jokes while there were scores of dead bodies around him.

I jut pulled up a transcript of the film, to which jokes are you referring?

I'm referring to his joking manner to the General at the end of the film. It's a jarring disconnect. I guess snapping necks brings out the joker in Clark.

Also, how would he even be capable of moving the fight elsewhere? If Superman flies away, there's a fair chance that Zod just starts killing the people of Metropolis (Metropolitans?). When they go toe to toe, Zod has him pretty outmatched. Zod's been a combatant his whole life, and Superman's never had to fight a peer before. His one edge is experience with powers, and that doesn't hold out too long.

Maybe, you know, keep the fight somewhere desolate? Like in space, around the Wayne Industries satellite that they were fighting around? Just a thought.

Yeah... how does Superman keep the fight somewhere else? Does he just fly away from the city full of people Zod threatened to kill and hope that Zod follows?

You know, same way he did in Batman vs Superman, before a nuke sucker punched him, keep punching the guy into orbit and out of the way of thousands of people?

[Gandalf]

I'm referring to his joking manner to the General at the end of the film. It's a jarring disconnect. I guess snapping necks brings out the joker in Clark.

You've gone from "making jokes" to "joking manner." How strange. At any rate, I don't get joking manner from that conversation.

You know, same way he did in Batman vs Superman, before a nuke sucker punched him, keep punching the guy into orbit and out of the way of thousands of people?

Watch the final fight again. He punches Zod upwards a few times, to no real benefit. He even grabs him and flies upwards with the same problem. It turns out that the guy with lifelong practice at fighting is good at it. The comparison with Doomsday doesn't work, because unlike Zod, Doomsday didn't fly about and was largely a big dumb animal.

[The Romulan Republic]

Another thing I'd like to see is for Wonder Woman to actually be on par with Superman power-wise. Because while I love Superman, it sends a kind of icky message when the the single most powerful hero in a setting by a mile is a straight white man from the mid-western US. In fact, if it were me I'd have Superman, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern as all being roughly peers (with Martian Manhunter not being as strong in a slug-fest, but arguably more dangerous due to the covert implications of his powers). While Batman is impressive because he has none of those powers, but manages to hold his own through a combination of intelligence, determination, and wealth/technology.

[Tsyroc]

Another thing I'd like to see is for Wonder Woman to actually be on par with Superman power-wise. Because while I love Superman, it sends a kind of icky message when the the single most powerful hero in a setting by a mile is a straight white man from the mid-western US. In fact, if it were me I'd have Superman, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern as all being roughly peers (with Martian Manhunter not being as strong in a slug-fest, but arguably more dangerous due to the covert implications of his powers). While Batman is impressive because he has none of those powers, but manages to hold his own through a combination of intelligence, determination, and wealth/technology.

Agreed! At one time I think DC essentially went with WW being roughly as strong and quick as Superman, and clearly able to fly. I'm kind of annoyed with the films because I think they are holding out on having WW fly because everyone (the general public) remembers the invisible jet from the Super Friends cartoons and Linda Carter show. After DC rebooted itself in the 80s and in the JL and JLU cartoons she flew on her own, and that's better, although it did make the mythology about how she won the right to be WW over the other Amazons kind of wonky. They went a different way in the movie so that's not a problem.

I think they could still go with that if they want to. She was flying when she took down Ares. Maybe she chooses not to fly for the same reasons why she isn't already a well known hero after 100 years in "Man's World"? I also thought the movies suggested that her bracelets suppressed her power as a god somewhat so Ares wouldn't immediately detect her. Ditch those specific ones, and maybe she could be like the JLU WW?

As for what to do with her character. I also really liked Greg Rucka's run on the comic. WW being Themyscira's ambassador to the UN was excellent. She had a wonderful supporting cast and characterization. Having the Amazons interact with the modern world was also good just don't go all the way to Amazons Attack!

[GuppyShark]

On the topic of Christopher Nolan:

The original plan was indeed for Nolan to do Man of Steel, but he was busy directing something else so he only signed on as producer and writer.

IMDB Credits

[The Romulan Republic]

Hmm, I can't imagine he'd have done worse than Zach Snyder.

[Gandalf]

That's not a bad point but I have trouble seeing his JL attitude as character development. What little character he shows in BvS is angst and then he dies and is ressurected as a more cheerful person. I like his new personality but it does feel like a logical progression from what's happened to him.

Yeah, admittedly JL dropped the ball on this. But that film is now a huge massive missed opportunity.

[Crazedwraith]

That's not a bad point but I have trouble seeing his JL attitude as character development. What little character he shows in BvS is angst and then he dies and is ressurected as a more cheerful person. I like his new personality but it does feel like a logical progression from what's happened to him.

Yeah, admittedly JL dropped the ball on this. But that film is now a huge massive missed opportunity.

Judging by the cgi face an awful lot of the supes we see in JL was reshot mayerial. The synder cut if there is such a thing or at least his original intention might have been more in line with the character development you see.

I like JL for its upbeatness and heart it gave the characters and give it a lot of credit for that but trying to look at it more objectively its okay at best and worse as a fall on from MoS/BvS. (But not liking those two myself I don't mind that as much)

[K. A. Pital]

What is says on the tin. A thread to suggest how the DCEU could have been better, where it went wrong. Etc. Etc.

Discuss.

It would have to have been... the MCU. Enough said.

Sorry, the disparity is just too massive.

It is like Thanos coming out of a space rift to crush the pathetic DC „villains“ and their ridiculous gang of cinematic rejects.