Amph Waiting For Superman: Gunnverse DCU/Elseworlds (New Trailer!)

Apparently, people were worried about the lack of an Aquaman trailer. I trust James Wan, so perhaps Aquaman will be the first DC movie I see at the movies since...um, Suicide Squad.

 

I wasn't worried, but I was hoping that Wan/WB would have released the sizzle footage they played at last year's SDCC.

‘Aquaman': Jason Momoa Rocks the SDCC Stage and Reveals First Footage [Updated]

Spoiler: Description of Aquaman footage played at 2017 SDCC

At the Comic Con Panel for Aquaman, Jason Momoa previewed some exclusive new footage from the upcoming superhero flick. Below are bullet point highlights from the footage and panel.

Jason Momoa comes out to heavy rock music, running down the Hall H floor with trident in hand and then starts jamming on his trident like a guitar.

Momoa introduces a special message from director James Wan. Wan says he’s super excited for people to see the film. Reveals it’s an origin story. We see concept art of Atlantis. Looks bright and fun. Wan describes the movie as a “fun adventure and romance on the big screen.”

Wan then intros some brand new footage. We open on a boat – a French fisherman thinks he’s caught a big fish. Of course, he didn’t. The boat is thrust forward, as whatever he’s caught forces the boat to follow. We then see what the fisherman hooked: a ship, part of an underwater militia. Heck, we even see people riding sharks. Clip ends on Aquaman looking forward at an unseen enemy: “I suppose you want to talk about this?” He then unsheathes his sword: “Neither do I.” The footage looks like a lot of fun – Wan seems to have applied his Fast and Furious skills to building up these set pieces. I’m in!

Update: Momoa added that it’s the Ocean’s Master’s army that was previewed in the footage. He also says he’ll be fighting his brother in Aquaman.

 

That's not a contradiction.

False god from a man who was angry because he lost his legs and family, and has been slowly manipulated by Lex.

That's not true. We see Clark in other scenes that had nothing to do with the controversy of his actions in Nairobi. We see the positive scene with Lois in their apartment, his work at the Planet regarding Batman.

That's not the dark side of being a hero. Bruce's vision was the dark side of being a hero, because a lack of good morals would result in something like that. Jonathan's story had a point, which you left out.

CLARK: "Did the nightmares ever stop?"

JONATHAN: "Yeah. When I met your mother. She gave me faith that there is good in this world. She was my world."

The sentiment in that scene is that there are good people in the world and they're worth fighting for and fighting to protect.

There are good things and good people.

Why not? That's just as valid and relevant to these films. Both situations reflect the old trope of the loved ones being used against the hero, thus they need a secret identity and distance from them. Lex knew in both versions that Lois was the key to making Superman submit and Ursa understood as well.

ZOD: "You promised me the son of Jor-El."

LEX: "Yes, your Grace. But...what I've given you is the next best thing. Hold on to that little lady and he'll be along. They have this relationship. She does all his public relations and he gives her every exclusive. They're the best of friends. Know what I mean?"

ZOD: Come! The three of us will crush the son of our jailer."

URSA: "Why not increase his handicap? Since he cares so much for these Earth creatures...let us take his favorite."

I never said otherwise. You just repeated what I said and added a quote about a deleted scene.

I never said that's why she was in Nairobi. I said that she went out to clear Clark's name and she found out it was Lex, but not before it was too late. She found out in time and then was taken before she could tell him.

Which does not mean that he knew about the conversation. I never said that he did. I said Bruce knows that men were still good. He understands that because he sees the good people that Clark had surrounding him and he saw that these people were what kept him grounded and he himself realizes that he was wrong about Clark, but also about everything else.

Okay. But to you still stand by your statement of...

Yes, because whatever story will be told, won't be the same one that was in the prequel comic.

 

All I'm going to say for now, is that Snyder's trilogy leaves a lot of loose ends and was given a proper, or at least, his closure.

 

Snyder was never going to tie up all the loose ends. Even if he hadn't been fired, that was never going to happen.

 

I agree.

The foundation that Snyder laid for the DCFU to build off of has crumbled. Therefore, looking back at his films, alot of the fat could be cut off. I remember posting shortly after Batman v. Superman hit theaters and news of the Ultimate Cut of the film, which like 40 minutes longer, was going to be made available for home release. I thought that wasn't the way to go as I felt the movie should have been trimmed down and get rid of the Batman dream sequences, especially that one in the beginning of the film where kid Bruce is lifted up by a bunch of bats.

 

Well, it's not like we hadn't seen the Waynes murdered enough times. Dude just wanted to add his special "touch" to the proceedings.

TBH, that entire beginning Waynes murder flashback and dream sequence seems wholly unnecessary. Everyone and their grandma knows what made the Batman. The film could've opened exactly at the Battle of Metropolis flashback and proceeded as normal. And right at the end of the scene where Bruce looks up and sees Supes and Zod in their freefall, insert quick cut and the BvS logo. Done.

 

He was adapting a lot of Miller mythos, which is why he did it. That shot of the gun breaking the pearls is straight out of DKR.

 

In the case of the showing the Waynes being murdered, Snyder did draw inspiration from Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, but ultimately, Snyder used the murder of the Waynes for the "Martha resolution" as "Martha" was the dying words of Thomas.

‘Batman v Superman': Zack Snyder on That Martha Moment & Why He Killed The Waynes Again

Synder made his DCFU movies the same way Lucas made the prequels, "It’s like poetry, sort of. They rhyme."

I mean, take Batman v. Superman, it opens with a funeral and ends with one. Justice League appeared to open with a funeral too, until Whedon added that cell phone video of Superman.

 

I see what you're doing there with that DCFU thing. I approve.

And please, don't....don't bring up the Martha Solution again. Just thinking about it kinda makes me throw up a bit. I know that the scene was almost straight out of TDKR but...I dunno, it seems superfluous to me. Especially if it was a set up to the Martha...thing...ugh.

The Superman cell phone video thing isn't bad per se. Well, the bad CG lower half of his head IS bad, but it seemed fine to me in the sense that Supes was kinda perplexed at the kids asking him those questions and it ended with a question we already knew the answer to (and was reinforced shortly after his awkward resurrection and subsequent obligatory hero vs hero fight).

 

Sorry, but I'll always bring up the Martha resolution as it's the turning point in Batman v. Superman. Just imagine, these directors and screenwriters great paid a large amount of money and royalties and that's what they came up with the end the fight between Batman and Superman. I really wanted the Ultimate Cut of the film to have a director's commentary so I could hear Snyder talk about the scene and if there were any alternatives.

I still feel the scene in Batman v. Superman where Clark has a vision of Pa Kent to be an overall downer in regards to be a hero. I mean, Pa Kent mentions how the drowning horses effected him for years. Certainly, having years of nightmares qualifies as the dark side of being a hero. And Pa Kent mentioning that Martha was the good in the world in that plays back to the Martha resolution I suppose, which makes it like poetry.

And I feel Snyder's trilogy didn't provide much emotional attachment between his Superman and the general audience because when Snyder killed him (twice if you count the nuclear missile), the internet didn't explode and no one really said they felt the emotional impact of that scene. The general reaction was Batman v. Superman was really dire, and thus DC/WB went on a campaign like a day after the theatrical release of the film promoting the tonal change that was coming in Justice League. Geoff Johns stated that their characters have to be more hopeful and inspiration, providing an indirect confirmation that the DCFU characters were lacking in this department. Moreover, there were tons of movement and changes at the executive offices at DC/WB as result of Dawn of Justice.

Speaking of which, DC Entertainment President Diane Nelson to Take a Leave of Absence

 

No, the critical consensus was that BvS was dire. User scores on Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, Google Play Movies etc all speak to a reasonably well satisfied audience. They didn't get outside-of-core-market penetration like Marvel films did; but Marvel was trying to dilute and commercialise their IP for appeal. DC weren't.

I liked BvS, and the EE was an even better film.

 

AV Club actually points out one really great scene, and shot, in Justice League which I totally agree with. The Flash realizes Superman can see him is pretty gat-damn amazing.

 

Well if the AV Club says so...

@Diggy

 

It still performed worse (27% / 63%), according to the same metrics, than the Star Wars prequels for the most part. So, man, must be tough for you to hate the Prequels so much. As well as The Dark Knight Rises (which we both agree on), which is rated better than most of the MCU movies...

 

I don’t understand. Did AV club have to point it out, because wasn’t it damn obvious what that scene was showing? Or did they have to point out it was a good moment, which was also damn obvious?

 

The Red Viper of Dorne enters the DCEU:

http://variety.com/2018/film/news/pedro-pascal-wonder-woman-sequel-narcos-1202738657/

 

Eh, it's taken from "Secret Origin" where Clark did the same thing to Barry.

 

Yes, he chose to let a bus of kids die for their own safety. That's quite low.

 

Correction, Brainiac 5 and Brainiac 8 have been on "Supergirl". Both are different characters from Brainiac.

Having a Superman who wants to destroy the world, or refuse to ever help again, because he was tortured and hounded by the government trying to figure out who and what he is, is also low. That's the point. It's to set up why he would wear tights and glasses. The point is to set up the destination and not just reach that end point, like Donner did, without going through the whole process of getting there. It's the same with Spider-Man. Peter Parker had to be a jerk, in order to learn the consequences of power and responsibility with his uncle's death, so that he could become a hero. Clark Kent has to realize that there can be consequences for being Superman and why he goes out of his way to establish a dual identity, so that he can operate freely as Superman and live a normal life as Clark Kent.

 

I've mentioned several times that Zack Snyder has some great concepts and is a visual director, but just can't quite convey the symbolisms in some of his scenes. One of them was that scene where young Bruce Wayne is floating in air via the swarm of bats, after falling down the hole in the ground. It's referred as the "Beautiful lie" scene, which starts at the 4 minute mark of this video.

I didn't think the scene worked and should have been cut from the film.

Very recently, Zack Snyder explained the symbolism in that scene in this ScreenRant article:
Zack Snyder Explains What Batman V Superman’s Opening Scene Means

I'm not sure how Snyder expected anyone to pick up on that symbolism. But in his mind it worked, probably like poetry.

 

If Superman could withstand a bus of kids die and do NOTHING when he could save them, he's not gonna become anything better than that.

That's the WHOLE POINT of his character, and Zack Snyder didn't understand it.

 

And you miss the whole point. Clark got lucky, but luck only goes so far and then it runs out. Jonathan understood that and that is why he sacrificed himself like he did and Clark accepted that, which is why he kept moving on and kept using different names. So that no one would know and go after Martha. And once he found a way to stand before the world and reveal himself, but still have his privacy, then he could be what Jonathan knew that he wanted to be. Again, you fail to understand that there is no JSA in this world. No inspiration for any of them with regards on how to handle Clark's powers and his desire to help. They've heard of Batman, but do not know much about him at that point. They're making this up as they go along, like most parents do.

And one more thing, Superman has to withstand the deaths and injuries to people when he's not able to save everyone. He's not out there 24-7, so someone will die because he's Clark Kent. Or he's elsewhere as Superman. Or when he was dead. Or when he's sleeping. So yes, he has learned to hardened his heart like that.