They keep comparing Lanterns to True Detective and it’s been interpreted to mean a premium quality detective drama, which it may well be.
But I was thinking could it be an anthology series like True Detective? Each series focusing on different Lanterns, a different case in a different sector.
Could be an interesting way of broadening the DC universe.
There are plenty of Batman films and we've has two Wonder Woman and two Aquaman films in the last decade as well as the Flash film 3 years ago. I'm just not in a rush to see these characters included in the DCU yet.
John Stewart is set to appear in MOT, Hawkgirl is established and there are rumours are out there for Martian Manhunter (pls be true)is due to appear. It's just great getting characters that haven't appeared on the big screen recently or even at all.
It took 5 MCU films to get to the Avengers and 5 DCEU films to get to the Justice League. For the DCU I'd like to see a different approach, perhaps each 'chapter' centres on a different member, so after the Superman Saga we get a Batman Saga then a Wonder Woman Saga. A trilogy each for the Trinity whilst establishing other members in more supporting roles and side projects, all of this leading up to big Justice League finale after over a decade over build up
I know he isn't everyone's cup of tea but I was thinking how well suited he is to run DC Studios when you compare it to the often messy past of DC Films.
He can make films that hit around two hour mark and delivers them on time and on budget, Warner Brothers will love that and hopefully not interfere.
He won't green light a script until he is happy with it, which feels obvious but this hasn't been the case in the past.
He wants to let directors create their own vision, that allows for variety in style both in and outside of DCU projects.
He gets superhero comics. He also promotes the books themselves.
He know's when to be silly and when to play it straight.
He is full of surprises. It makes it so much more interesting following the output of DC studios. Krypto, Mr Terrific, Guy Gardiner, Creature Commandos and even a Clayface body horror film. It just isn't predictable, which is fun.
It's hard to think who would be better suited to taking over DC studios.
I've been doing a rewatch of the DCEU and I was thinking it was a strange choice to kill Cavill's Superman in only his second appearance.
I find it strange because the comic "The Death of Superman" starts with the writers, after 50 years of stories, wanting to shake things up and to imagine a world without Superman. Where as the DCEU had barely started, Superman had had only a single full appearance in MOS and in BVS didn't say that much, so it felt a little sudden.
We're then only shown a world without Superman in the first half of ZSJL (I'm ignoring the 2016 version) and he is back. Across three films I can see the arc, but it feel's rushed. Given this is was part of a potential trilogy of Justice League films and a MOS squeal it also feels very premature.
I've assumed it was part of the Jesus theme, but when Jesus was resurrected he shows himself to his followers and moves on, rather than stick around for any sequels (for want of a better term) so the analogy doesn't hold.
I also thought it might be designed to create a sense of jeopardy as he is then seen as vulnerable, but then his return could be argued to reflect that he is basically immortal.
Did the Writers/Director ever explain their choice to do this? Does anyone else have any thoughts on this choice?
Here are five of mine (no particular order) what are yours?
The Batman: visually striking but simple.
Batman (89): even simpler and just iconic.
WW84: the poster was better than the film, looked great when back lit.
Superman (78) just a classic, implies the all the wonder of him flying whilst not actually showing it.
Swamp Thing: Cheesy fun.
