Greywind Posted May 12, 2017 Report Share Posted May 12, 2017 I thought it was an experimental Russian pilots suit meant to be able to handle high g-force maneuvers and tough enough not to shred due to friction. The force field predates the first Flash series with Shipp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted May 12, 2017 Report Share Posted May 12, 2017 I can remember it mentioned in comics from the late 1960s, at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 For those critical of DC's vs Marvel's with the strategy & approach to filming, should read this. How The DCEU Changed The Marvel Plan & Won http://screenrant.com/dceu-movie-plan-better-worse-marvel/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Couldn't get through the bad writing to find the point in that. What was it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Basically that DC hardly needed to ease in extremely well known characters like Superman and Batman and used the Snyder films, bad as they were, to gradually accrete heroes in order of public familiarity, rather than introducing each character in its own franchise and then mash them all together in a huge Avengers-like event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 So, just a restatement of the obvious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Also, sorry. Screenrant annoys me sometimes and I'm mildly cranky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Also, sorry. Screenrant annoys me sometimes and I'm mildly cranky. Must be because the blood on the side of your face has been there for ages. I'm sure if you cleaned it off you would be less cranky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Must be because the blood on the side of your face has been there for ages. I'm sure if you cleaned it off you would be less cranky. Now you're just confusing me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoloOfEarth Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Don't mind Bazza -- he's just trying to be a Comedian and push your buttons. Just keep smiling. Sociotard, Nolgroth, bigdamnhero and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Basically that DC hardly needed to ease in extremely well known characters like Superman and Batman and used the Snyder films, bad as they were, to gradually accrete heroes in order of public familiarity, rather than introducing each character in its own franchise and then mash them all together in a huge Avengers-like event. I think my counter-argument to that would be that the DCEU (Snyder) depictions of Superman and Batman are completely unfamiliar to general audiences. They run counter to expectations, and the only things that are familiar are the costumes and names. Audiences need to get accustomed to these new, brooding, cold, callous versions before throwing them all together, otherwise the shock of unfamiliarity would make a Justice League movie difficult to watch (moreso than it probably already will be). Thanks to MoS, at least we now know what kind of Superman we're getting going forward, and we realize it is an entirely new take on the character, one that makes past knowledge and assumptions invalid. He might as well be as unknown to us as Iron Man was prior to 2008. I think the same argument could be made for all the DCEU characters. Lex Luthor was not any Lex Luthor I recognized. The Joker was not any Joker I recognized. Aquaman is new and broody and angry. Flash is young and nerdy and awkward (more like Kid Flash, if you ask me). And Wonder Woman isn't Lynda Carter. I mean, these are all so new and contrary to any prior knowledge general audiences have for these characters, that they are effectively unknown (like Cyborg). The Justice League movie will be all the better for having let us experience Wonder Woman in her own film first. Given the degree of "re-imagining" going on here, a solo movie for each hero is certainly called for, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdamnhero Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Even Marvel realizes that the "Avengers Assembly" model isn't the only way to do it; witness Guardians. I think there's no question the DCEU approach could've worked if the individual movies hadn't been so awful (IMO). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 Justice League might still work, depending on how they approach it. Their first move should be to get the post-processing guys to dial it back a bit. I know its fun to play with the lighting and all but this is like when color TV first came out and everything had to be bright and gaudy as hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 I'd like the post-processing guys to dial it up a bit compared to Zack Snyder's previous DC films. Gaudy is one thing, but MoS and BvS were too dark and washed-out for comic-book movies. IMO of course. Matt the Bruins 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Even Marvel realizes that the "Avengers Assembly" model isn't the only way to do it; witness Guardians. Well, I think Marvel's metric for who gets a solo movie is based more on publishing history in the comics than anything else. Each of the super-powered Avengers in the MCU has many decades of history as a solo character headlining his own title (or multiple titles) in the 616. Not so with the Guardians. The Guardians aren't a premiere team the way the Avengers are. I think everything associated with them is going to be more compact and less ambitious by nature. You'll notice Marvel didn't rush out to make a Rockett solo movie, or a Rockett & Groot (flashback) buddy picture immediately after the success of GotG1. And it would have been pretty easy to do so since both characters are entirely CGI. I just don't think the Guardians characters have the necessary Marvel pedigree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Gaudy is one thing, but MoS and BvS were too dark and washed-out for comic-book movies. IMO of course. Sure but their work in post is why they were so dark and washed out. It was a deliberate choice to make things a certain pallet. The film crew didn't shoot things that dark and uniformly brown and gray, it was added later. That works fine for 300 or Sin City where you're trying to create a certain mood or sense, but Superman?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 I get the impression we're saying the same thing, except for some reason we're not? Lawnmower Boy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 And the colossal ineptitude of WB/DC just keeps undoing what little success they manage to achieve. Now Affleck is out as Batman and Reeves is pitching a whole new reboot trilogy for the Caped Crusader. We are back to a rotating roster of actors donning the cowl and different directors delivering different takes on the character. The DCEU continues to be a sh*tshow run by studio execs who can't get out of their own way (and their heads out of their own a$$e$). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdamnhero Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 I thought that was still just rumors. Has it been confirmed? (The Affleck Is Out part, not the DCEU Is A Shitshow part, which was confirmed long ago.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 Yeah, it's all anyone is talking about at Comic Con (sort of). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greywind Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 Comic-Con: Ben Affleck confirms he's staying on as Batman in DC films Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 Upcoming DCEU Movies Officially Announced: Suicide Squad 2, JL Dark, Green Lantern Corps. & More http://screenrant.com/dceu-comic-con-movies-announced-suicide-squad-2-green-lantern/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 Hermit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 Let's wait and see what news spirals out of Warner Brothers in the next few weeks. They wouldn't want news of Affleck's departure as Batman derailing the Comic-Con panel, so if it was true, they would be denying it like crazy. Of course, it could all just be Marvel's agents provocateur stirring the pot in an attempt to undermine the WB presentation. But given the generally poor track record for the DCEU, I am not entirely ready to call the Affleck Out theory debunked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 No lantern, sadly. One of the most powerful of the league. I can't comprehend how they can describe the Superman of those last two films as "a beacon to the world" or that he "didn't just save people, he made them see the best parts of themselves." That's what he was supposed to be, and would have been with better writing and directing, but that's not what we got in those films. Which is why they were such a travesty. Lord Liaden, bigdamnhero, Doc Shadow and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.