New Joker Trailer

13

Comments

  • Snyder and Capullo were the team that introduced Batman’s long-lost, institutionalized brother as a villain! That, to me, was a pretty weird understanding of the Batman mythos. 
  • MurderbearMurderbear Cold Spring, Ky
    ken hale said:
    Snyder and Capullo were the team that introduced Batman’s long-lost, institutionalized brother as a villain! That, to me, was a pretty weird understanding of the Batman mythos. 
    I thought it was done really well. Comic books can be a little soap opera-y sometimes and that's okay. You kinda have to do wacky things occasionally or you're going to keep telling the same stories over and over.

    One of my favorite twistings is in Flashpoint. When Bruce is killed, Thomas becomes Batman and Martha losses her mind and becomes The Joker. It's nuts and I love the messing with those things. 
    ken haleElSkid
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    ken hale said:
    Snyder and Capullo were the team that introduced Batman’s long-lost, institutionalized brother as a villain! That, to me, was a pretty weird understanding of the Batman mythos. 
    I thought it was done really well. Comic books can be a little soap opera-y sometimes and that's okay. You kinda have to do wacky things occasionally or you're going to keep telling the same stories over and over.

    One of my favorite twistings is in Flashpoint. When Bruce is killed, Thomas becomes Batman and Martha losses her mind and becomes The Joker. It's nuts and I love the messing with those things. 
    And that version of Thomas is a villain in the current Tom King run.
    Murderbear
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    ken hale said:
    Snyder and Capullo were the team that introduced Batman’s long-lost, institutionalized brother as a villain! That, to me, was a pretty weird understanding of the Batman mythos. 
    Batman comics are crazy sometimes, I just roll with some of the silly stuff if its a good story.  

    Don't read the Morrison Batman RIP arc if crazy stuff puts you off.  That Zur-En-Arr Batman aspect is about as bonkers 1950's comics as it gets.

    Another example from the 50's is Robin dies at dawn, I mean you have Robin die on an alien peyote planet?  Just crazy stories from back then. 

  • edited August 2019
    ken hale said:
    Snyder and Capullo were the team that introduced Batman’s long-lost, institutionalized brother as a villain! That, to me, was a pretty weird understanding of the Batman mythos. 
    That turned out to be a lie, though.
    ken hale
  • edited August 2019
    Really good review from one of my favorite film critics. I’m still going to see this for Phoenix’s performance, but there’s also a lot in here that seems to confirm some of my fears about this movie. I’m at least a little bit more intrigued. 

    https://www.indiewire.com/2019/08/joker-review-joaquin-phoenix-1202170236/

    “Todd Phillips’ “Joker” is unquestionably the boldest reinvention of “superhero” cinema since “The Dark Knight”; a true original that’s sure to be remembered as one of the most transgressive studio blockbusters of the 21st Century. It’s also a toxic rallying cry for self-pitying incels, and a hyper-familiar origin story so indebted to “Taxi Driver” and “The King of Comedy” that Martin Scorsese probably deserves an executive producer credit. It’s possessed by the kind of provocative spirit that’s seldom found in any sort of mainstream entertainment, but also directed by a glorified edgelord who lacks the discipline or nuance to responsibly handle such hazardous material, and who reliably takes the coward’s way out of the narrative’s most critical moments.

    “Joker” is the human-sized and adult-oriented comic book movie that Marvel critics have been clamoring for — there’s no action, no spandex, no obvious visual effects, and the whole thing is so gritty and serious that DCEU fanboys will feel as if they’ve died and seen the Snyder Cut — but it’s also the worst-case scenario for the rest of the film world, as it points towards a grim future in which the inmates have taken over the asylum, and even the most repulsive of mid-budget character studies can be massive hits (and Oscar contenders) so long as they’re at least tangentially related to some popular intellectual property. The next “Lost in Translation” will be about Black Widow and Howard Stark spending a weekend together at a Sokovia hotel; the next “Carol” will be an achingly beautiful period drama about young Valkyrie falling in love with a blonde woman she meets in an Asgardian department store.”

    “...While “Joker” often plays like a beat-for-beat remake of “The King of Comedy,” that movie was about a talentless man who was convinced that he was special; this movie, by contrast, is about a talented man who swallows the red pill and becomes convinced that nobody is. That perspective allows Phillips to feign an apolitical stance and speak to the people in our world who are predisposed to think of Arthur as a role model: lonely, creatively impotent white men who are drawn to hateful ideologies because of the angry communities that foment around them.”


    awookieeFlukes
  • I feel like I'm missing something with this. People are mean to him and the world is cruel and his mom dies or something so he turns into the Joker, how is that an interesting movie without some other angle? It seems like the whole story is in that trailer.
    I’m particularly peeved about how this seems like it’s trying to make the Joker a sympathetic figure. It’s got a real “well if you didn’t bully that kid maybe he wouldn’t have shot up the school” vibe to it. If that’s how this turns out, they can go fuck themselves. 
    Have to disagree with this stance. While it was cool that The Dark Knight didn’t truly explain the Joker’s origin And had a cool way of keeping his origin a secret I like the idea that the world he lived in shapes who he is. No one is born evil. Just like no one is born racist. I believe we will see a mentally ill character who is pushed over the edge. I don’t think it will be simply “he was bullied so he became evil”. The trailer shows plenty of scenes that elude to the fact that he is fucked up in the head. IE having a psychologist and being a part of Arkham asylum. He’s clearly got issues that go beyond simply being bullied. 
    rhcoopDummy
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    Really good review from one of my favorite film critics. I’m still going to see this for Phoenix’s performance, but there’s also a lot in here that seems to confirm some of my fears about this movie. I’m at least a little bit more intrigued. 

    https://www.indiewire.com/2019/08/joker-review-joaquin-phoenix-1202170236/

    “Todd Phillips’ “Joker” is unquestionably the boldest reinvention of “superhero” cinema since “The Dark Knight”; a true original that’s sure to be remembered as one of the most transgressive studio blockbusters of the 21st Century. It’s also a toxic rallying cry for self-pitying incels, and a hyper-familiar origin story so indebted to “Taxi Driver” and “The King of Comedy” that Martin Scorsese probably deserves an executive producer credit. It’s possessed by the kind of provocative spirit that’s seldom found in any sort of mainstream entertainment, but also directed by a glorified edgelord who lacks the discipline or nuance to responsibly handle such hazardous material, and who reliably takes the coward’s way out of the narrative’s most critical moments.

    “Joker” is the human-sized and adult-oriented comic book movie that Marvel critics have been clamoring for — there’s no action, no spandex, no obvious visual effects, and the whole thing is so gritty and serious that DCEU fanboys will feel as if they’ve died and seen the Snyder Cut — but it’s also the worst-case scenario for the rest of the film world, as it points towards a grim future in which the inmates have taken over the asylum, and even the most repulsive of mid-budget character studies can be massive hits (and Oscar contenders) so long as they’re at least tangentially related to some popular intellectual property. The next “Lost in Translation” will be about Black Widow and Howard Stark spending a weekend together at a Sokovia hotel; the next “Carol” will be an achingly beautiful period drama about young Valkyrie falling in love with a blonde woman she meets in an Asgardian department store.”

    “...While “Joker” often plays like a beat-for-beat remake of “The King of Comedy,” that movie was about a talentless man who was convinced that he was special; this movie, by contrast, is about a talented man who swallows the red pill and becomes convinced that nobody is. That perspective allows Phillips to feign an apolitical stance and speak to the people in our world who are predisposed to think of Arthur as a role model: lonely, creatively impotent white men who are drawn to hateful ideologies because of the angry communities that foment around them.”


    I think this reviewer is being a bit dramatic here and being intentionally hyperbolic to get clicks and views. 

    This movie is getting great reviews and I don't doubt for a second this guy or gal potentially crafted this review to kind of agree with the others so they aren't a dissenter, but is edgy enough to get some buzz and attention for it. 

    I don't really care for the opinions of 90% of movie reviewers as many seem to be lemmings to me, so I'm obviously predisposed to dismiss this type of word salad, but it appears to me the reviewer put about every current political buzz word into this review so it would get more traction on social media.     

    I bet anyone could write a review like this about a lot of different movies if you looked hard enough and if you were determined to push one  political agenda or another for whatever reason.
  • ChinaskiChinaski Santa Cruz, CA
    more reviews starting to pour in. positive for the most part:


  • rhcoop said:
    Really good review from one of my favorite film critics. I’m still going to see this for Phoenix’s performance, but there’s also a lot in here that seems to confirm some of my fears about this movie. I’m at least a little bit more intrigued. 

    https://www.indiewire.com/2019/08/joker-review-joaquin-phoenix-1202170236/

    “Todd Phillips’ “Joker” is unquestionably the boldest reinvention of “superhero” cinema since “The Dark Knight”; a true original that’s sure to be remembered as one of the most transgressive studio blockbusters of the 21st Century. It’s also a toxic rallying cry for self-pitying incels, and a hyper-familiar origin story so indebted to “Taxi Driver” and “The King of Comedy” that Martin Scorsese probably deserves an executive producer credit. It’s possessed by the kind of provocative spirit that’s seldom found in any sort of mainstream entertainment, but also directed by a glorified edgelord who lacks the discipline or nuance to responsibly handle such hazardous material, and who reliably takes the coward’s way out of the narrative’s most critical moments.

    “Joker” is the human-sized and adult-oriented comic book movie that Marvel critics have been clamoring for — there’s no action, no spandex, no obvious visual effects, and the whole thing is so gritty and serious that DCEU fanboys will feel as if they’ve died and seen the Snyder Cut — but it’s also the worst-case scenario for the rest of the film world, as it points towards a grim future in which the inmates have taken over the asylum, and even the most repulsive of mid-budget character studies can be massive hits (and Oscar contenders) so long as they’re at least tangentially related to some popular intellectual property. The next “Lost in Translation” will be about Black Widow and Howard Stark spending a weekend together at a Sokovia hotel; the next “Carol” will be an achingly beautiful period drama about young Valkyrie falling in love with a blonde woman she meets in an Asgardian department store.”

    “...While “Joker” often plays like a beat-for-beat remake of “The King of Comedy,” that movie was about a talentless man who was convinced that he was special; this movie, by contrast, is about a talented man who swallows the red pill and becomes convinced that nobody is. That perspective allows Phillips to feign an apolitical stance and speak to the people in our world who are predisposed to think of Arthur as a role model: lonely, creatively impotent white men who are drawn to hateful ideologies because of the angry communities that foment around them.”


    I think this reviewer is being a bit dramatic here and being intentionally hyperbolic to get clicks and views. 

    This movie is getting great reviews and I don't doubt for a second this guy or gal potentially crafted this review to kind of agree with the others so they aren't a dissenter, but is edgy enough to get some buzz and attention for it. 

    I don't really care for the opinions of 90% of movie reviewers as many seem to be lemmings to me, so I'm obviously predisposed to dismiss this type of word salad, but it appears to me the reviewer put about every current political buzz word into this review so it would get more traction on social media.     

    I bet anyone could write a review like this about a lot of different movies if you looked hard enough and if you were determined to push one  political agenda or another for whatever reason.
    You're being pretty kind; the reviewer obviously is looking for clicks with this weird, faux flimsy SJW stance.
    rhcoop
  • edited September 2019
    Psst, hey guys. It is required of online content creators to get clicks. It’s literally the only way they can maintain their job. 

    I’m not entirely sure what about this review or the words used within makes you think it’s political. He’s obviously discussing social issues but I don’t see much mention of politics.
    DeeBloodyTacorhcoop
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    Psst, hey guys. It is required of online content creators to get clicks. It’s literally the only way they can maintain their job. 

    I’m not entirely sure what about this review or the words used within makes you think it’s political. He’s obviously discussing social issues but I don’t see much mention of politics.
    It looks to me the reviewer thought that if they used all these current political/social justice buzzwords in their review, it would be much more likely to get more traffic on social media as those terms appear to drive traffic because of the way everyone online is. 

    I am skeptical if the reviewer really believes what they wrote based on how hyperbolic and over the top the review was. I just think that is lazy journalism, but it happens more now than it used to happen in the past IMO.   
  • David can be a brilliant critic, but his disdain for comic book movies is well known.  I've read too much analysis and listened to too many of his podcasts to think he's a click-baity hack.  Ultimately, it's just one review from a guy who's better suited for the Criterion Collection than DC Comics.
    RyanReeseman
  • edited September 2019
    GredalBee said:
    David can be a brilliant critic, but his disdain for comic book movies is well known.  I've read too much analysis and listened to too many of his podcasts to think he's a click-baity hack.  Ultimately, it's just one review from a guy who's better suited for the Criterion Collection than DC Comics.
    Definitely agree with this. I pulled the particular quotes from his review that I felt favored my own personal anxieties about this movie, but the full thing is way too well-written and measured for me to ever entertain the idea that he ever does anything “click-baity.” He's also been doing this for far too long for far too many outlets for that to be the case, and while I so often disagree with him, at least he has always come off as genuine. 

    I was truly shocked to see how much he liked Endgame after he shit all over Infinity War and Captain Marvel. 
  • GredalBee said:
    David can be a brilliant critic, but his disdain for comic book movies is well known.  I've read too much analysis and listened to too many of his podcasts to think he's a click-baity hack.  Ultimately, it's just one review from a guy who's better suited for the Criterion Collection than DC Comics.
    At what point will “comic book” movies and characters be accepted as just...movies and characters? As an artistic medium, haven’t comic books proven their staying power and cultural currency yet in this country? I mean, this reviewer makes the argument that “deep” films in the future will feature reimaginations of comic book characters. So fucking what if they do? Same guy probably gets giddy when a director uses some Shakespearean pastiches or puts an introspective tone behind some kind of a dime-novel western story.  If this Joker movie is able to say something meaningful about society (unlikely, because it’s Todd fucking Philips), then take it for its worth. 
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    ken hale said:
    GredalBee said:
    David can be a brilliant critic, but his disdain for comic book movies is well known.  I've read too much analysis and listened to too many of his podcasts to think he's a click-baity hack.  Ultimately, it's just one review from a guy who's better suited for the Criterion Collection than DC Comics.
    At what point will “comic book” movies and characters be accepted as just...movies and characters? As an artistic medium, haven’t comic books proven their staying power and cultural currency yet in this country? I mean, this reviewer makes the argument that “deep” films in the future will feature reimaginations of comic book characters. So fucking what if they do? Same guy probably gets giddy when a director uses some Shakespearean pastiches or puts an introspective tone behind some kind of a dime-novel western story.  If this Joker movie is able to say something meaningful about society (unlikely, because it’s Todd fucking Philips), then take it for its worth. 
    I agree, I was about to type something like this. 

    My point would be, if his own bias is so strong and he can't be a professional and put it aside and judge the movie on its own merits, he shouldn't be writing a review for it.  

    There are a lot of comic characters or writers that I detest, it wouldn't make sense for me to write a review of an issue knowing I've got that built in dislike. 
    ken hale
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    @rhcoop His job is to review movies, not review movies he likes. All critics have bias from Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert on down. If you like comic book movies, I guess you just take with a grain of salt the thoughts of a critic who is known to not like them. 
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    edited September 2019
    Dee said:
    @rhcoop His job is to review movies, not review movies he likes. All critics have bias from Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert on down. If you like comic book movies, I guess you just take with a grain of salt the thoughts of a critic who is known to not like them. 
    I get that, but if you can't do a better job of recognizing your own biases and put that aside, that gig isn't for you.  That's a just a fact.  
    kojiattwood
  • I anybody conflicted about seeing it? Or is anyone definitely not going to see it? I guess probably not in the Joker trailer thread. I’m interested. I also see how the people who came out of Watchmen loving Rorschach could see this as a beacon to disaffected white men who feel society has pushed them to violence and could therefore encourage more of that behavior. I’m also thinking that sounds like the “violent video games are the problem” argument. I am sincerely interested in people’s thought on it. 
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    ElSkid said:
    I anybody conflicted about seeing it? Or is anyone definitely not going to see it? I guess probably not in the Joker trailer thread. I’m interested. I also see how the people who came out of Watchmen loving Rorschach could see this as a beacon to disaffected white men who feel society has pushed them to violence and could therefore encourage more of that behavior. I’m also thinking that sounds like the “violent video games are the problem” argument. I am sincerely interested in people’s thought on it. 
    I think this is a small minority yelling loudly like most people do on social media.

    It looks good to me, but I'm a DC fan.  I wish there was more of a hint that Batman is around or about to emerge, but it does look great on its face. 

    kojiattwoodElSkid
  • edited September 2019
    ElSkid said:
    I anybody conflicted about seeing it? Or is anyone definitely not going to see it? I guess probably not in the Joker trailer thread. I’m interested. I also see how the people who came out of Watchmen loving Rorschach could see this as a beacon to disaffected white men who feel society has pushed them to violence and could therefore encourage more of that behavior. I’m also thinking that sounds like the “violent video games are the problem” argument. I am sincerely interested in people’s thought on it. 
     Nah. I might be trepidatious about its messaging or pre-judging the type of people that are really going to rally behind this movie, but that’s all mostly meaningless because I haven’t seen the film yet. 

    And it just shockingly won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival, so how could you not be excited on some level to see this thing?
    kojiattwoodElSkidrhcoop
  • rhcoop said:
    ElSkid said:
    I anybody conflicted about seeing it? Or is anyone definitely not going to see it? I guess probably not in the Joker trailer thread. I’m interested. I also see how the people who came out of Watchmen loving Rorschach could see this as a beacon to disaffected white men who feel society has pushed them to violence and could therefore encourage more of that behavior. I’m also thinking that sounds like the “violent video games are the problem” argument. I am sincerely interested in people’s thought on it. 
    I think this is a small minority yelling loudly like most people do on social media.

    It looks good to me, but I'm a DC fan.  I wish there was more of a hint that Batman is around or about to emerge, but it does look great on its face. 

    What DC do you like? I read/collect comics. Do you like the DC Universe app? It crashes for me a lot, but it is a lot of access.
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    ElSkid said:
    rhcoop said:
    ElSkid said:
    I anybody conflicted about seeing it? Or is anyone definitely not going to see it? I guess probably not in the Joker trailer thread. I’m interested. I also see how the people who came out of Watchmen loving Rorschach could see this as a beacon to disaffected white men who feel society has pushed them to violence and could therefore encourage more of that behavior. I’m also thinking that sounds like the “violent video games are the problem” argument. I am sincerely interested in people’s thought on it. 
    I think this is a small minority yelling loudly like most people do on social media.

    It looks good to me, but I'm a DC fan.  I wish there was more of a hint that Batman is around or about to emerge, but it does look great on its face. 

    What DC do you like? I read/collect comics. Do you like the DC Universe app? It crashes for me a lot, but it is a lot of access.
    I'd say Batman and Superman are my favorites, but I like all the JLA characters (WW, Flash, GL, Aquaman) and a lot of b listers like Zatanna, Firestorm, Specter and even Amethyst.  I like the old Vertigo line quite a bit too.  Sandman and Fables are 2 of my favorite series.

    I actually read a lot of marvel, image and other independents as well, but I prefer the DC characters over other superheroes maybe with the exception of Cap and Thor. As an aside, that new Immortal Hulk book is a great horror book if you haven't read it yet.  Image also just had some new series start that are interesting, I know everyone likes saga, but I got pretty bored with it quick, but these other new ones have caught my attention. 

    I am enjoying Synder's JLA run and Bendis on Superman, but I'm ready for King to wrap up his Batman run.  He's been spinning his wheels, but the Sean Murphy Batman White Knight mini is worth it just for the art. Doomsday Clock has been good, but damn Johns is taking FOREVER getting that book out.  

    As far as the app, I am really enjoying the Young Justice cartoon and I think that Titans season 2 is showing some promise.  I'm a huge Deathstroke and Krypto fan, so I'm excited.  I need to finish Doom Patrol but I've enjoyed how weird it is and they capture the characters from the comics. I have only watched a few episodes of Swamp Thing, but it looks good.  

    I think the biggest value for that app is if you like the DC cartoon movies they come out with they are free on the app usually a month or so after they come out to buy online or in the stores.  I don't have any issues with it crashing though, it works good for me. 

    What are your main books you follow?
  • Tom King’s Batman run leading up to the wedding was incredible. I was in awe of the fact that DC was allowing their #1 seller to be a wonderful little romance book, and it was unlike anything I’d ever read in a Bat book before. And then it all came crashing down with one of the worst decisions I’ve ever seen in comics. 

    I think I may have read up to #55 before removing it from my list. First time in over a decade that I’ve quit reading Batman.
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    Tom King’s Batman run leading up to the wedding was incredible. I was in awe of the fact that DC was allowing their #1 seller to be a wonderful little romance book, and it was unlike anything I’d ever read in a Bat book before. And then it all came crashing down with one of the worst decisions I’ve ever seen in comics. 

    I think I may have read up to #55 before removing it from my list. First time in over a decade that I’ve quit reading Batman.
    It's finally gotten better now that King has been forced to quit spinning his wheels and wrap his story up.  I like King on minis like the Vision and Mr. Miracle, but his Batman has been hit or miss at best and that Heroes in Crisis story was wrongheaded from the get go.  

    I think it spiraling out of control and being a mess is what forced him to hurry up and end his Batman run so they can get someone else on the book.

    Detective has been pretty good and the Bendis Batman Universe book (this is the collection of the Walmart exclusive stories) has been good.
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    rhcoop said:
    ElSkid said:
    I anybody conflicted about seeing it? Or is anyone definitely not going to see it? I guess probably not in the Joker trailer thread. I’m interested. I also see how the people who came out of Watchmen loving Rorschach could see this as a beacon to disaffected white men who feel society has pushed them to violence and could therefore encourage more of that behavior. I’m also thinking that sounds like the “violent video games are the problem” argument. I am sincerely interested in people’s thought on it. 
    I think this is a small minority yelling loudly like most people do on social media.

    It looks good to me, but I'm a DC fan.  I wish there was more of a hint that Batman is around or about to emerge, but it does look great on its face. 

    It seems they are trying to make this as much a stand-alone as possible. I doubt we will see much outside of the confirmed actor who is playing Thomas Wayne. Of course, anything is possible, but it seems they more want to play with the character without being tied to anything else. Which is probably a smart move based on how DC has been doing with the connected universe thing.

    I kinda like the idea of DC just giving auteur directors free reign to do stand-alone (Elseworlds-esque) movies in their sandbox. How cool would it be if we got a Batman movie where he was trying to hunt down Jack the Ripper or a Superman movie where he was raised in Communist Russia (neither of these are new ideas, but it'd be so interesting to see them done on screen). 

    https://www.slashfilm.com/joker-batman-joaquin-phoenix-robert-pattinson/
    ken hale
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    edited September 2019


    It seems they are trying to make this as much a stand-alone as possible. I doubt we will see much outside of the confirmed actor who is playing Thomas Wayne. Of course, anything is possible, but it seems they more want to play with the character without being tied to anything else. Which is probably a smart move based on how DC has been doing with the connected universe thing.

    I kinda like the idea of DC just giving auteur directors free reign to do stand-alone (Elseworlds-esque) movies in their sandbox. How cool would it be if we got a Batman movie where he was trying to hunt down Jack the Ripper or a Superman movie where he was raised in Communist Russia (neither of these are new ideas, but it'd be so interesting to see them done on screen). 

    https://www.slashfilm.com/joker-batman-joaquin-phoenix-robert-pattinson/
    They do have a Gotham by Gaslight cartoon movie which is pretty good and I think that one of the next cartoon movies on the way is Red Son. 

    If the Matt Reeves Batman movie (s?) does well and Aquaman/WW/Shazam keep making money, I'd do another Superman movie with Caville (he still wants to play the role and hopefully with Braniac as the villain) and then I'd make another JLA movie with the Legion of Doom as the villains. 

    Just have a single line in it that Batman is looking good for his age and just move forward.  
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    rhcoop said:


    It seems they are trying to make this as much a stand-alone as possible. I doubt we will see much outside of the confirmed actor who is playing Thomas Wayne. Of course, anything is possible, but it seems they more want to play with the character without being tied to anything else. Which is probably a smart move based on how DC has been doing with the connected universe thing.

    I kinda like the idea of DC just giving auteur directors free reign to do stand-alone (Elseworlds-esque) movies in their sandbox. How cool would it be if we got a Batman movie where he was trying to hunt down Jack the Ripper or a Superman movie where he was raised in Communist Russia (neither of these are new ideas, but it'd be so interesting to see them done on screen). 

    https://www.slashfilm.com/joker-batman-joaquin-phoenix-robert-pattinson/
    They do have a Gotham by Gaslight cartoon movie which is pretty good and I think that one of the next cartoon movies on the way is Red Son. 

    If the Matt Reeves Batman movie (s?) does well and Aquaman/WW/Shazam keep making money, I'd do another Superman movie with Caville (he still wants to play the role and hopefully with Braniac as the villain) and then I'd make another JLA movie with the Legion of Doom as the villains. 

    Just have a single line in it that Batman is looking good for his age and just move forward.  
    I like Caville. My problem with the DCU movies has never been the actors. It has always been the creative direction. Caville is awesome and Braniac would be an excellent villain. I can't believe that hasn't happened yet. Affleck was great at what they wanted him to do. And I see no reason why Pattinson won't be an excellent Batman. That guy is a hell of an actor. I can't want to see how that thing turns out, since Matt Reeves is a hell of a director also. 
    rhcoop
  • @Garthgou81 Braniac is in Superman 3.  Never forget, lol.
    Chinaski
  • Garthgou81Garthgou81 Placerville, CA
    ken hale said:
    @Garthgou81 Braniac is in Superman 3.  Never forget, lol.
    Oh god. I can’t even consider that as a real Braniac adaptation. Though the climax of that is really frightening, or at least to a third grader it was. Just like watching dark-Superman get drunk. 
Sign In or Register to comment.