Jump to content

DC Cinematic Universe: Let the Blames Begin


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

I meant that theyre  all shit

 

Well, sure... but I would have said "We haven't had a good Superman movie since 1980."

Superman IV was basically Death of Superman before they ever did the comic... but terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man of Steel was almost good, and Routh's turn as everyone's favorite alien reporter was fantastic [even if Returns was derivative]

I honestly don't know if Gunn has a good Superman script in him. If every other character and their dog in Legacy is a fucking clown, going to be a serious tonal miss for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always find it odd people get precious about Superman, the most bland of all the superheroes. That’s why I quite like Man of Steel, it’s a good movie and I don’t give a shit about it being faithful to Superman.. do what you like with the character as far as I’m concerned. 
 

If Gunn is able to make me care about Superman then he’s done an amazing job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I always find it odd people get precious about Superman, the most bland of all the superheroes. That’s why I quite like Man of Steel, it’s a good movie and I don’t give a shit about it being faithful to Superman.. do what you like with the character as far as I’m concerned. 
 

If Gunn is able to make me care about Superman then he’s done an amazing job.

I think I hated that film. Me and my friends love to mock the tornado scene and the fight with Zod, that looks like 9/11. 
 

I think I like Clark when he’s more fun. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I always find it odd people get precious about Superman, the most bland of all the superheroes. That’s why I quite like Man of Steel, it’s a good movie and I don’t give a shit about it being faithful to Superman.. do what you like with the character as far as I’m concerned. 
 

If Gunn is able to make me care about Superman then he’s done an amazing job.

Superman is an important icon to a whole lot of people precisely because he isn't particularly jaded or dark. And honestly, right now having someone who is genuinely caring and compassionate about people is shockingly punk. 

Superman isn't my vibe at all, mind you! But I totally understand why it is for others. I thought Grant Morrison said it really well recently, where basically he shat on all the people who wanted to fuck with Superman and said that as a writer it's important to cherish the character and find out what is great about him - and for Superman, it's that he is the same as all of us - just with larger duties and responsibilities:

Quote

Superman grew up baling hay on a farm. He goes to work, for a boss, in an office. He pines after a hard–working gal. Only when he tears off his shirt does that heroic, ideal inner self come to life. That’s actually a much more adult fantasy than the one Batman’s peddling but it also makes Superman a little harder to sell. He’s much more of a working class superhero.

And this one 8 years later:

https://gizmodo.com/grant-morrisons-as-sick-of-tyrant-superman-as-you-are-1848202158

I like that idea and think that it could be interesting (similar to Jupiter's Legacy) - what happens when Superman's ideals are outdated too, and the next generation of superheroes is not inline with them? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

 

I like that idea and think that it could be interesting (similar to Jupiter's Legacy) - what happens when Superman's ideals are outdated too, and the next generation of superheroes is not inline with them? 

That’s what Kingdom Come was talking about, with gorgeous Alex Ross art. DC absolutely has to adapt that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I always find it odd people get precious about Superman, the most bland of all the superheroes. That’s why I quite like Man of Steel, it’s a good movie and I don’t give a shit about it being faithful to Superman.. do what you like with the character as far as I’m concerned. 
.

Then they should have made their own superhero film instead of using the superman license? Kinda like the shitstorm happening with the Snow White remake right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked some of Man of Steel, I'd put it over a lot of the origin story movies that Marvel has put out.  I think Crowe, Shannon etc are all quite good in it. It's a bit uneven and I think the screenplay is not great in some places.

And the Superman theme by Zimmer is really memorable.

Not sure how I feel about Gunn's DC stuff - I don't find any of the Guardians stuff particularly good or worth watching, so I'll wait and see.

I'm just glad DC are letting Reeves & Pattinson make another Batman

Edited by Raja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Man of Steel's fights between Superman and the other Kryptonians is the most... satisfying feeling fight between individuals that are meant to be on that level which has been done in live action. Not as much the Zod fight, it's the earlier one against the soldiers.

That could have been done just as well in another property borrowing that conceit so it's not a justification for it being Superman but it does have multiple different merits when evaluated without that particular lens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JGP said:

with gorgeous Alex Ross art. DC absolutely has to adapt that. 

I know this won't be a popular opinion, but honestly I think Kingdom Come's art by Alex Ross is just hideous. The closest comparison is any front cover of the Jehovas witness magazine 'Watchtower'. Go look at any issue of that and you'll see these bizarre kitsch lifelike paintings of people that are clearly portraits in a studio, shoved onto a background of Jesus meeting dinosaurs and tigers.

Which is basically the same style Ross uses in Kingdom Come. I hate it. 

I own Kingdom Come and I often look at it to remind myself of what bad comic book illustration can become. Literally the entire book is page after page of static models looking slightly bemused, with lots of underlighting for effect. The urge to create photorealism also means the characters have no dynamism, there is no movement, no power to any of the panels. One of my bugbears with comics is when it's just characters literally just sitting around talking, expressionless... and that is a large portion of that book. 

I could go on forever but I think the art is a travesty there.

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Heartofice said:

The urge to create photorealism also means the characters have no dynamism, there is no movement, no power to any of the panels. One of my bugbears with comics is when it's just characters literally just sitting around talking, expressionless... and that is a large portion of that book. 

Different folks, all that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JGP said:

Different folks, all that. 

Sure, I know a lot of people who are blown away by the art in Kingdom Come, but I've never been much of a fan, and that's seemingly made me an outlier.

I see it as the difference between doing A Level Art at school and actually going on to be an artist. At some point it stops being impressive that you can paint something photorealistic, because that is just a technical skill, not an artistic one. Being able to put emotion and depth into images, to add creativity and uniqueness to something is far more of a skill as far as I'm concerned, than painting something that looks just like a photograph. It's also so dull reading his panels when everyone is essentially a static statue, there is zero movement or dynamism in his work. 

That's why nobody is holding up artists on Watchtower as giants of their craft. They can all do what Ross does.

 

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:



I see it as the difference between doing A Level Art at school and actually going on to be an artist. At some point it stops being impressive that you can paint something photorealistic, because that is just a technical skill, not an artistic one. Being able to put emotion and depth into images, to add creativity and uniqueness to something is far more of a skill as far as I'm concerned, than painting something that looks just like a photograph. 

 

These are good points.

Photorealism does feel kind of counter to the medium itself, but painting in particular adds another set of strictures atop that, the largest being the disincentive to experiment beyond techniques already established because of the possible impacts on workflow, but...

Ross will always hold a place amongst my list of comic art talents for his contributions [Marvels, Kingdom Come] and I'll likely never be able to flip those pages and not be amazed like I was when it a fresh style. 

Edited by JGP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...