While certain characters deserve a darker movie (such as Batman) I think at heart comic book movies should be fun.

Things have been heading in that direction since Watchmen (The Graphic Novel not the cinematic adaptation). I feel the popularity of people like Moore's style of storytelling sort of set that in stone.

@Kingfisher Seriously of all the villains you had to use, you chose the Dollmaker...

WHY DO MY PLANS NEVER PAN OUT!

@Lord WraithWell, Ivy could come ruin things in Gotham. But you get her only after Sep and BlackSam. :o

@Lord Wraith There's like three Dollmakers, Barton has a family who do similar things, and which ever incarnation of the Dollmaker Lynne ran into, he's still alive. He could quite easily just move to Gotham and go back to being creepy, like nothing happened.

@Lord WraithWell, Ivy could come ruin things in Gotham. But you get her only after Sep and BlackSam. :o

I choose to believe in the sliding timescale from this point on.

<Snipped quote>

I don't think I agree nor does WB.

Iron Man 3 got $174,144,585 on the opening weekend alone. That proves that Solo Films can do it on their own, okay sure that was post-Avengers but if we go with IM1 it made $98,618,668 and it started the Cinematic Universe. Which is still more than a lot of the other Marvel Movies. Then add on top of that there's a bigger desire now for comic book movies than there was a couple of years ago, throw DC into the ring who have had barely any movies and you got a lot of money.

I just think it would work better, flow smoother, if they ran up to it. Instead we have Batman V.S. Superman co-starring Flash, Cyborg, Wonder Woman, Doomsday, Lex Luthor, Aquaman (all on screen) and at least a mention of a Robin and/or a Joker. Avengers had these characters all set up, hell I didn't know who Flash was till a couple of years ago and only found out who Doomsday was once I googled him a couple of Months back. New fans are going to have no clue what the fuck is going on, and that's not a good thing. As lets also remember, while Batman doesn't really need an origin, that this is Batmans first cinematic appearance.

---

if I appear ranty it's just how I phrase things. I'm actually enjoying this.

As lets also remember, while Batman doesn't really need an origin, that this is Batmans first cinematic appearance.

How do you figure that? Batman's been on the big screen for years.

<Snipped quote by Sep>
How do you figure that? Batman's been on the big screen for years.

Cinematic appearance in the DC Cinematic Universe.

@SepI'm sorry. Arguing that Batman needs to be set up at this point is like arguing we need to explain how spaceships work in order to have a sci-fi movie.

@SepI'm sorry. Arguing that Batman needs to be set up at this point is like arguing we need to explain how spaceships work in order to have a sci-fi movie.

Ditto with Spider-Man

My problem with the DCEU -- other than the fact that they chose that acronym and not the far more symmetrically pleasing "DCCU" -- is just that it's such a sharp tonal shift from what made DC Comics. They were always the brighter, more colorful, more optimistic of the two. Now, to carve out a unique identity, they've adopted the Snyder/Nolan-esque drab and dreary style where every shot has to be run through a blue filter. It's just hard to swallow. Like the first time you try dark chocolate as a kid. Rather than creamy goodness, it's just bitter.

Honestly, if they lightened things up a bit -- literally -- I would probably be more amenable to the story decisions.

@SepI'm sorry. Arguing that Batman needs to be set up at this point is like arguing we need to explain how spaceships work in order to have a sci-fi movie.

I'm not asking him to be set up, or an origin story or anything like that. He needs introduced to the Cinematic Universe so we know where he stands. Instead of just BAM, BvS.

<Snipped quote by Blue Demon>

Ditto with Spider-Man

Dat. But at least Spider-man is one of two being introduced, and Marvel already has a Cinematic Universe. They aren't just throwing names into a hat.

Honestly, if they lightened things up a bit -- literally -- I would probably be more amenable to the story decisions.

Couldn't agree more. They're clearly looking to carve a niche out for themselves...I just wish it was a more fun niche!

<Snipped quote by Eddie Brock>

Couldn't agree more. They're clearly looking to carve a niche out for themselves...I just wish it was a more fun niche!

Indeed. As I said it works for the likes of Batman, but Superman? Superman shouldn't be dark. C'maaan man.

Yeah because basing the movie off a few moody trailers is what we want to do.

Well, seeing as my assessment is purely based on aesthetics, I feel pretty comfortable saying the trailers have conveyed that.

Yeah, well you actually care about DC. Sep is… Sep.

Honestly, if they lightened things up a bit

Suicide Squad seems pretty light in comparison, if you ask me.

Yeah, well you actually care about DC. Sep is… Sep.

Who says I don't like or care about DC? I fully admit I am new to a lot of it, but that doesn't mean I don't like nor care about it.

Yeah, well you actually care about DC. Sep is… Sep.

<Snipped quote>

Suicide Squad seems pretty light in comparison, if you ask me.

More colorful for sure. And that's really the crux of the problem: that a Suicide Squad movie looks to have a brighter palette overall than one featuring the Trinity in Metropolis.

@Blue Demon I actually noticed the "Rodgers" thing all the way back when I saw your sheet in your character sheet thread. I thought better of mentioning it mainly because outside of the first "Rodgers" is was spelled correctly throughout. Plus I'm not a dick.

@Gowi One of these days you're going to figure out how to disagree with someone without implying they're an idiot.