DC doing this level of damage control so far in advance

Oh man, can't wait for a 45 minute origin story before she fights some random schmuck for the last 45 minutes!

Why should a movie set in WW1 be fun?

>snyder basically owns the movies because his wife is lead producer
>can make his movies how ever the fuck he wants for the most part
>gives artistic license to David Ayer as well to make the movie
>marketing losing their shit and trying to spin and alter the face as much as they can, knowing they can't do anything to change the movie to the kind of product they want
>people who like DC's current direction will continue to like it
>people who don't absolutely won't, and people not yet exposed are getting tricked by marketing that doesn't actually reflect the movies

>Raul Julia will never be Doctor Strange

Fuck this timeline.

that murky grey/blue filter on everything sure looks cheerful

>it'll be fun I swear, come on you guys!

>implying it wasn't fun

>dceu movies
>good

>assuring the public that your movie will be "fun"

wut the fug

Well if they try to copy Marvel because the ratings are poor then they will never make a good movie, i agree

>Its a DC hit piece

But there are no quips in it.

this is how media works:
>reporter is interviewing a DC executive
>everything is going well
>reporter asks if he can guarantee it will be fun
>executive: yeah haha, I swear man ;)
this is how you get this headline

>set during WWI
>fun

The one time they'd be right to portray things as dour, and they screw the pooch.

If they actually wanted Wonder Woman to be fun they wouldn't have such a color drained filter, realistic style, and completely unimaginative plot drained of all goofyness and mystical elements. They took Wonder Woman and thought of the most boring and grounded plot possible, with such a silly premise and cast of characters it has to be genuinely hard to accomplish this, but they're doing it. How fucking dull, cant believe people are looking forward to this.

Just add color to this scene. It'll be fun, I swear.

t. DC Executive.

They tried to copy and the ratings are poor, they tried their own thing and the ratings were poor. What point are you trying to make with the ratings??

>Hi what do you do?
>I'm a secretary
>WHERE I COME FROM WE CALL THAT SLAVERY
>An American Eagle lands in the trailer and sheds a single tear

>color drained filter, realistic style,
But user
The marvel movies are the color-drained "realistic" style
The DCEU so far has been hyper-stylized fantasy style

Women are funny get over it

...

...

>are there any Amazons like me?
>like..?
>you know *gestures at her whale sized mass*
>Oh yes, lots of them have red hair

Explain why all the good comedians are men.

Ur just a sexist bigot who hates women.

>positive story
>the final victory is if she remains warm and loving
Wasn't that the same thing Synder said about BvS? I know he said that about Suckerpunch, that it was supposed to be a "positive, empowering story"

Moreover, if the conflict revolves around challenging WW to remain "warm and loving," then it's going to necessarily get dark. Otherwise she cannot "remain" as such if she was never tested.

Im talking about it as a Wonder Woman fan, not comic movies in general. None of the marvel heroes are as magical as WW other than Thor who actually got a colorful and very light hearted movie about family and coming of age. Thor has a red cape, Loki is green, Asgard is golden, there's a rainbow bridge, compare to anything from Wonder Woman's footage, hell compare Thor's cape to Superman's. They're actually both bright red but you wouldn't know that unless you look at MOS set pictures. If you read Wonder Woman comics, they are fucking out there. Compare that to the synopisis for Wonder Woman, the movie, and it is boring beyond belief to a baffling extent given what they have to work with. Im not arguing with you over other movies, the point is this one looks incredibly boring and opposite to what it should be.

>implying
I am a woman you bitter cunt.

Pussie pass ain't gunna work babe

Remember what she says in BvS

>A hundred years ago I walked away from mankind, from a century of horrors
>Men made a world where standing together is impossible

Now she's supposed to "remain warm and loving" and the movie will be FUN

The damage control is realer than real

Wow you're a faggot. No wonder everyone hates Cred Forums

All you needed to point out is that DC has two aliens in the Justice League. Green Lantern deals with aliens. Hawkgirl exists.

You can't strip the aliens and mutants out of the DCverse without gutting the characters. Compare that to the MCU. Thor is an alien only as much as Superman is -- human enough you can forget about it. Everyone else is entirely human, while the same cannot be said of Martian Manhunter and co.

Guardians of the Galaxy is the farthest out the MCU gets, and only comic book nerds know it ties into the MCU.
You throw aliens up front into a superhero movie and people complain about it. See: the Man of Steel opening.

>fun to watch
>looks at that simian face
Nope.

>what it should be
This is the biggest beef I have with critics of the DCEU
There are literally dozens to hundreds of different storylines/imaginings and iterations of pretty much every big name superhero, by hundreds of different writers and artists. But people like you come out and pout "That's not how it should be! It should be exactly this way!" These are films being made by filmmakers with visions of different stories about the characters, and they should be allowed to do it whatever way they want.

This.
Holy shit.

looks like a gross tranny.

>Snyder is responsible for their whole cinematic landscape
>Puts Wonder Woman in WW1 because he has a fetish for WW1 (see Sucker Punch)
>It would be dark and dull and make Wonder Woman quit mankind for 100 years and become cynical and jaded

>BvS is criticized for being too dark
>SS was "fixed" to be more "fun" and was a bigger success than BvS
>Now they want to make Wonder Woman fun but are stuck in the WW1 setting and the character's approach

More reshoots and trailer park editing incoming

I knew this would happen. My only point is clear and completely detached from what you're now talking about. Thats why I specifically said "Im not arguing with you over other movies" because I knew you were just going to latch on to your own unrelated point to try and argue when it doesn't even have anything to do with what im saying. I dont even know what the fuck you're talking about anymore with your fixation on aliens, and I dont care much.

I dont believe I, or anyone else saying "what it should be" is literally saying they cant do it because I said so. Im criticizing their decisions as an adaptation based on pretty consistent (if you actually read them) portrayals in Wonder Woman's core line of comics. How is it not fair to say an adaptation of a comic should not be completely detached on every level? Its not like there's just a random bunch of Wonder Woman stories, all with equal unimportance, to the point that you cant decide what to go with and have to make up something original. There's a few good runs and everything else is generally shit, thats how it is with most characters. And its not like the good is hard to find, everything else just gets buried. So if those good ones are better than their original ideas it is my opinion that they are then doing a shitty job both as an adaptation and original story and I fail to see how thats not valid criticism.

Again, not questioning the legality of them being "allowed" to do things, as you seem so fixated on. The details and context matter, you not paying any attention to that just to make this sweeping statement doesn't mean much and I feel like i'm specific enough that it's not applicable. Its not the same with Wonder Woman as it is with someone like Superman or Suicide Squad because the context is different. Superman has a fuck ton more comics, Suicide Squad has very few runs comparatively so its pretty easy to say what that "should be"

>for the last 45 minutes!

more like last 5 minutes and that being generous

Within the context and the direction the DCEU is going, a stylistic and tonal shift would be horrible. They should stick with what they're doing because in their creative universe it becomes consistent. It makes sense.

Suddenly changing the look and the way the characters act just because a portion of the market demands it is dumb.

This is the style of the DCEU and if it's something you take offense to you might as well not see it.

Or try to think of it as the original story using these characters that for some reason is a negative for you.

It's a comic book movie built to sell merchandise to little kids and entertain teens/young adults with it's story.

This is not high art, how is this hard to comprehend.
It's either going to be one of two things: Entertaining schlock or boring schlock. WB has been shipping the latter recently, despite being in the game way before Marvel.

>It's a comic book movie built to sell merchandise to little kids and entertain teens/young adults with it's story.
That's Disney's version
Not the DCEU
Snyder and his crew of stylistic directors are legitimately trying to create an epic story using the comic books as more of a basic groundwork to work off of. Whether or not they're succeeding in uplifiting the genre is up to personal opinion.

You never explain "what it should be"
at best, you state that "[wonderwoman comics] are fucking out there," whatever that means.

There's also lots of extraneous information in your block of text. Why are we comparing colors? Unless by "boring beyond believe" you mean to talk about the colors of the Wonder Woman movie, but why not just state that you're talking about the colors? In a separated paragraph so your points are more easily distinguished?

Anyone else watching it just for qt Gadot?

no, they are not.

they're made to sell comic books, toys, and whatever stupid crap your kids want.

You should know, you were in that trap yourself.

Who's the big bad?

Aries?

Snyder's hands will be clean of this shitshow

Im not offended or mad, im discussing something im passionate about.

I doubt it was you personally but I find it hilarious that all Cred Forums complains about is superhero movies playing it safe. Endlessly, thats all I see people say over and over again on Cred Forums and off. And the one time I actually want a creative and fun movie someone tells me they need to play it safe to fit in the cinematic universe. A shared universe isn't a new idea, DC has been doing it for decades and itself is wildly inconsistent. But everyone just accepts it because its for the better of each individual story instead of constraining writers to fit a mold.

The post before that I was talking about the plot being unimaginative compared to the source material that goes in crazy directions with vivid art. That seems reasonable to me, and frankly this isn't a high school essay wherein I have to throughly explain this to you until you're satisfied.

I was comparing colors because the person I was replying to just wanted to turn it into an argument over Marvel vs DC, so I brought up the Marvel equivalent of Wonder Woman who did not have a very realistic style or color drained filter as that user said marvel movies do. I was replying to someone, not just randomly saying all that, if that was the case I could see your confusion.

You mean different then when they tried to copy Nolan and failed to make a good movie? They even suck and copying themselves

fun

But they are literally doing the opposite. Had they wanted to just make movies to sell toys and make absolute max returns, they would've done what Marvel has and is doing: they would've hired commercial directors and screenwriters who would adhere to a very specific tried and tested formula with both the narrative and the visual element.

Instead they hired hyper-stylistic and grandiose directors and writers who actively go against the formula.

>And the one time I actually want a creative and fun movie someone tells me they need to play it safe to fit in the cinematic universe.

By being a part of that cinematic purpose they aren't playing it safe. By having that style of visuals they aren't playing it safe. You just want them to do it the way you want instead of the way they currently are executing the DCEU. That is what you're repeating in each post, that you want them to switch to a visual and story that YOU APPROVE OF instead of what they're currently doing.

I know they are backpedalling and are trying to change the movie after the BvS backlash, but it is possible to make a "hopeful, optimistic and fun" WW1 movie

Of course, the horse was more charismatic than Gadot, but still

>grandiose directors and writers who actively go against the formula.

>wherein I have to throughly explain this to you until you're satisfied.
Actually you do, because I can't post anything productive unless I understand your argument. Quality posts beget quality responses.

Anyway, carry on. Your argument has good points, but you do need to work on expressing them better. Passion or not, clarity comes first.

More super hero movies need to take risks. I agree completely. Guardians of the Galaxy did that and was a massive success. As was Deadpool, to an extent. The Tent-pole strategy Disney has is even designed around this idea: a few big films to support smaller, riskier films in the event they flop. But every comic movie attempts to be a tent pole.

Granted, DC's BvS tent pole was not the success they wanted it to be, no matter how profitable it was. I get them playing safe and doing damage control, but all damage control does is stabilize their account balance. They need risky movies to get ahead and break through into the audience the MCU gets every single movie.

Then again, DC has no idea who to hire for a light-hearted movie apparently. Green Lantern is proof of that.

Can someone please tell me why DC hero movies (besides the nolan films) are so bad? It can't be that hard to make a good super hero movie, Marvel can do it.

why make bait this obvious?

...

The DCEU has no idea what it wants to be.
It tried grim and gritty, and we got BvS.
Its afraid of being too much a typical action movie, because that's the MCU.
Whimsy is dead, so that's out.

The only place it could go is space and alien planets like the old Justice League cartoons did, but the execs are scared of that because they think they'll be competing with star wars.

Do they really need to do that though? The three last DC movies were panned by audiences and critics but they made a lot of money.

Yes, different people have different wants and preferences. You're posing that like its a new revolutionary idea that's going to stop me in my tracks. As I explained though, my idea for Wonder Woman is the one that has existed since the 70s and never stopped being a thing. I'm asking for an adaptation to be similar to the thing it's claiming it is by using the name and characters, how dumb of me. What an unreasonable, crazy, and baseless expectation I have. Shared universes are now a proven concept, DC is three movies in and their tone is now also a proven concept. Nothing risky about any of this and nothing wrong with people having different opinions.

>You're posing that like its a new revolutionary idea that's going to stop me in my tracks
But I'm not.
I'm stating that that's the ONLY thing you are doing.

they're forced to with the unrelenting smear campaign they've gotten over the last 2 years

Yes, I am talking about a movie and expressing my opinion on it based on my own interests and views. Something every poster does unless they are stating a fact.

None of them broke 1 Billion, which is the hip and trendy box office figure to hit.
I've acknowledged that they're making money, but so long as nothing makes more than 1 Billion, they're not competitive with the MCU.

Here's the thing: when comic movie fatigue hits, the least profitable franchises will go first. We saw this with the action movies of the 80s, which lasted into the early 2000s. The ones that were the last to go were juggernauts like Terminator. That means Disney can keep the MCU going the longest, and make the most money off the least difficult movies to write -- the appeal of sequels.

Warner Bros wants a piece of that pie, but can't get it. They only way they can get it, and can get their franchise established, is by finding a niche in the comic movie market to stand it. They haven't hit that point with grim and gritty, and the MCU and X-men crowd them out of most other "serious movie" slots.

They either go further into sci-fi than Xmen does, or they remain in the background with only a dominant hold on animated comic movies and TV series.
I could be missing an alternative, mind you, but I'm thinking of the most likely place the DCEU could go. The Justice League cartoon set a precedent for going into space.

DC properties in general always took themselves hyper seriously. This is nothing new.

Is there a reason why the DC movies don't utilize past DC comics music in any way? The old Batman music from the animated series (and by extension, the Burton version) and the classic John Williams Superman theme is something that Marvel has absolutely zero equivalent to.

Why not use those in their new movies? Audiences can differentiate from past movies and the new movies just fine. You don't need to completely avoid classic themes out of fear of "not differentiating itself from past versions". Video games have been doing it for decades, and it doesn't phase anyone.

There a good reason anyone can think of?

>>There a good reason anyone can think of?

Because it's cheap and fucking lazy, like your mom?

>damage control article
>from the biggest DCEU haters right next to Faraci

doesn't make sense

This is actually a good point, although they did have Hans Zimmer doing the score for the Nolan trilogy and at least BvS, off the top of my head.
Don't forget about him.

What makes it a good point is that X-Men and the MCU have an entirely forgettable score. It's somewhere the DCEU can beat out their competitors.

Not like they couldn't do their own take on music. The new Star Treks utilized the classic theme, and put in the modern themes in between and it worked well. Music has a huge impact on audience members, and a well-placed classic Superman theme when Superman is doing something amazing would be big. Zimmerman does good shit, and his new theme was great, but it's not like you couldn't use both depending on the scene.

>damage control article
>about Damage Control Extended Cut Universe

fitting

>yfw she will never tie you on a bed and punch you in the face, looking at you in te eyes saying "you're mine"

seriously, this

>If they actually wanted Wonder Woman to be fun they wouldn't have such a color drained filter, realistic style

Did you not notice how her costume looks brighter against it? Of course not, you're a pleb.

>dark story and setting
>positive character

No contradiction there. She's just affirming that Wonder Woman will not be an edgy anti-hero.

this

Diane Nelson, Deborah Snyder and Patty Jenkins are all saying the TONE OF THE MOVIE is not going to be dark

Diane Nelson even said it will be brighter and more colorful, and Patty Jenkins keep mentioning Donner's Superman as an inspiration for the tone of the movie

what is the context behind this image? reverse search only comes up with True Detective

>Donner's Superman as an inspiration for the tone of the movie

So if she is depicted as capable, upbeat and an unwavering inspiration right out of the box, how will this make DCEU Superman look in comparison?

>it's a bunch of virgins engage in capeshit console war faggotry episode
Glad I'm not a comics "nerd"

This board has some Disney shills, dont try to state facts.

Some people in this board, this ¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨TV¨¨¨¨¨¨¨board, this ¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨FILM¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨board, defends Disney, MOTHERFUCKING Disney, the jewests of the jews, a trademark that vomits the most pathetic and plastic, stealed ideas leaving the little percentage of art a modern movie can have out.