Mind Your Surroundings: Arrow, The Flash, Supergirl, Legends of Tomorrow and Other Superhero Universes

[BkWurm1]

Since in the current DC universe they want Barbara Gordon first and foremost as Batgirl, I would think they would be more than happy to hand off the crown of Oracle which I think then also frees said character from having to be a paraplegic since that only happened to explain why Babs was no longer jumping off roofs. 

[Morrigan2575]

Do I need to watch the first Captain American movie to enjoy the second one? I want to just dive into the second one.

That's a hard one, most of the themes/stories on CA2 are tied directly to CA. I don't think you'll be lost by the plot but the emotional payoff won't have the same impact.

Since in the current DC universe they want Barbara Gordon first and foremost as Batgirl, I would think they would be more than happy to hand off the crown of Oracle which I think then also frees said character from having to be a paraplegic since that only happened to explain why Babs was no longer jumping off roofs.

Picked up my comics today and as usual spent 40 minutes BSing about everything.

It's funny we were talking about the female Thor (stupid idea, Thor is the characters name not title give her the powers, like Beta Billy Rae but don't call her Thor).

No problem with Falcon becoming Capt. America it's a title that can be passed on, although that's not the norm for Marvel (unlike DC).

Then we talked about Felicity as Oracle and I was surprised because they were all Felicity fans but they didn't like the idea. Although the objections centered around DC...basically they didn't like that DC made Babs Batgirl again and feel like making another character (any character) Oracle would be another twist of the knife.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Morrigan2575

[KirkB]

Since so many other people are doing it:

 

1) Avengers

2) Winter Soldier

3) Captain America

4) Iron Man

5) Thor

6) Iron Man 2

7) Thor 2

8) Incredible Hulk (Norton)

9) Iron Man 3

 

Beta Billy Rae, I wanted to thank you for this @Morrigan2575, because I got an image in my head of Beta Ray Bill, with a mullet, singing country music into his hammer and started laughing my head off. Anyway, I don't mind Marvel making the god of thunder a woman, I just don't get the way they're doing it. Like others have said, Thor is his name, not a title. His title is god of thunder. Now if they were turning Thor himself into a woman that would be one thing, but they're making Thor suddenly unworthy to hold Mjölnir and giving it to her, whoever she is. On the other hand, them making Falcon into Captain America is pretty cool, since Sam Wilson is probably the next most deserving person to carry the shield after Bucky, whose already had a turn.

 

Felicity as some variation of Oracle would probably work, because would the name really mean anything to anyone outside the hardcore comics fans?

[Morrigan2575]

Urgh, I always do that. No idea why but it's subconscious at this point. Beta Ray Bill = Beta Billy Ray in my head...stupid country music warped my fragile little mind.

Although, it is an amusing image...can't you picture Beta Ray Bill singing "don't break my heart, my achy breaky heart" to Lady Sif? LOL

Edited August 3, 2014 by Morrigan2575

[tv echo]

I love Sebastian Stan as an actor (he's slightly offbeat) so I would love to see another movie about Bucky Barnes/The Winter Soldier.  I also liked him as Jefferson/The Mad Hatter in Once Upon a Time.

Edited August 3, 2014 by tv echo

[Morrigan2575]

Just watched Guardians of the Galaxy, fantastic movie, I knew Thanos would play a role but I had no idea they were going to introduce The Nova Corp and Kree. Now I'm curious as to who owns the rights to The Shi'ar and Skrull? Are they Marvel Universe or Fox?

Edited August 3, 2014 by Morrigan2575

[JayKay]

I wonder about the Shi'ar, too. I had assumed that Fox bought the Skrulls along with the Fantastic Four, but who knows. I just found this article about who owns what. I read it earlier this year but it looks like it's been updated since then:

Which Studio Owns Which Marvel Characters  (It's also got an adorable and handy little graph now)

 

I'm happy to see that Elektra has reverted back to Marvel, since it would be cool to see her on the Netflix Daredevil series. I wonder if Fox will ever give a shot at starting up their own Cosmic Marvel branch with the Fantastic Four. And I wish that Universal would free Namor already. It's like piloting just the ankle part of a Megazord. What are they gonna do with that?

[Sakura12]

I just saw it again and yep, The Avengers, Winter Solider and Guardians of the Galaxy are my top 3 Marvel movies. 

[Morrigan2575]

Thanks for the link, love how they have Stan Lee on the Power Point...

Yeah the Shi'ar are still confusing but I don't see them listed under FOX. I wonder if that's why X3 had Phoenix be Jean's psycho multiple personality rather than a cosmic entity?

Edited August 4, 2014 by Morrigan2575

[tv echo]

This is pretty cool...

 

Marvel's Phase 1 & 2 - A Look Back
Published on August 1, 2014, by Marvel Entertainment

 

Marvel releases a full recap of Phase 1 & 2, from 'Iron Man' to 'Guardians of the Galaxy
http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/report-marvel-releases-a-full-recap-of-phase-1-2-from-iron-man-to-guardians-of-the-galaxy-2007820

(Warning!  This article contains rumours regarding Tony Stark's future.)

Edited August 4, 2014 by tv echo

[tv echo]

This is kinda interesting...

 

Why Keeping The Arrow / Flash Universe Away from Man Of Steel Universe Isn't a Bad Thing
http://moviepilot.com/posts/2014/08/04/why-keeping-the-arrow-flash-universe-away-from-man-of-steel-universe-isn-t-a-bad-thing-2158790?lt_source=external,manual#!bvkwOX

 

I think SA is better than "okay" as an actor now.  I agree, though, that Arrow and The Flash are still going through their origin stories, which would clash with the DC movie-verse right now.

Edited August 4, 2014 by tv echo

[Sakura12]

I'd love for Tony Stark to meet Rocket the tech Raccoon. It would probably the first time he's speechless. 

[Morrigan2575]

I'd love for Tony Stark to meet Rocket the tech Raccoon. It would probably the first time he's speechless. 

Could you imagine Rocket/Tony being snarky little bastards together?  That would be so entertaining.

[KirkB]

And they'd start a betting pool about whose angry green guy could beat up the other.

[writersblock51]

The 'look back' video is great - very well done.

 

If I had to choose between seeing Sebastian Stan or Anthony Mackie being interviewed, I'd pick Anthony Mackie - I've seen him on a few things and he's contagiously enthusiastic, funny as hell and has a lot to say about his role, what's happening with Captain America and so on.  I adore Sebastian Stan and he's funny in interviews but he also - from the ones I've watched online - doesn't reveal much and he tends to 'um' and 'I don't know' a lot.   Still, he's more than happy to talk about Bucky and Steve, so that's always interesting.

 

As for Black Widow, from comic book resources - http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=54522

 

Specifically

 

How close are we to a Marvel film with a female lead? Because I'm feeling a groundswell of demand in that direction.

 

I think you're right about that, and I think it comes down to timing, which is what I've sort of always said, and it comes down to us being able to tell the right story. I very much believe in doing it. I very much believe that it's unfair to say, "People don't want to see movies with female heroes," then list five movies that were not very good, therefore, people didn't go to the movies because they weren't good movies, versus [because] they were female leads. And they don't mention "Hunger Games," "Frozen," "Divergent." You can go back to "Kill Bill" or "Aliens." These are all female-led movies. It can certainly be done. I hope we do it sooner rather than later. But we find ourselves in the very strange position of managing more franchises than most people have -- which is a very, very good thing and we don't take for granted, but is a challenging thing. You may notice from those release dates, we have three for 2017. And that's because just the timing worked on what was sort of gearing up. But it does mean you have to put one franchise on hold for three or four years in order to introduce a new one? I don't know. Those are the kinds of chess matches we're playing right now.

 

To me, this sounds like there's nothing coming anytime soon for her.  Which stinks.

[JayKay]

I saw GotG and it beats out the Avengers imo. But still behind Cap 2. Fun movie with great characters and it surpassed my expectations by far. I'm all in for more Cosmic Marvel, which is not something that I ever expected to be saying.

Edited August 5, 2014 by JayKay

[Morrigan2575]

Who would have thought GotG would turn out to be actual competition to The Avengers? I remember when it wss first announced most comments were...never heard of them and a talking raccoon...seriously?

[Sakura12]

When the writer was explaining the movie and the characters to me, I was like. Okay, sounds...interesting. She was really excited about it. But it wasn't until the trailer came out that I really wanted to see it. 

[writersblock51]

Just read a nice blurb about how Marvel arranged for a private pre-screening of GotG with one of Rocket's creators, Bill Mantlo (who suffered a major brain injury in 1992):

http://io9.com/marvel-screened-guardians-of-the-galaxy-for-the-co-crea-1615584469

 

Marvel isn't perfect, no studio is, but wow, they are doing a lot of things - big and little - right.

 

Also glad that the movie performed so well this weekend.  I'd read that Dave Bautista had gotten some flack for taking on the role.  Good for him that he did great in it and the movie is off to such a strong start! 

[KirkB]

Chris Pratt, who plays Star Lord, also attended a special screening of GotG for a bunch of kids, and after it was over he stayed to take pictures with everyone one of them. So Marvel isn't just making great movies, they hire great people.

[NumberCruncher]

Also glad that the movie performed so well this weekend.  I'd read that Dave Bautista had gotten some flack for taking on the role.  Good for him that he did great in it and the movie is off to such a strong start!

Dave Bautista was the biggest surprise for me in GOTG. I was one of those naysayers when he took the role but he was fantastic.

You're right that no studio is perfect but Marvel is making all the right moves and it's paying off at the box office. I think a lot of the success of GOTG is due to the reputation that Marvel has built, despite being based on a somewhat no-name comic. People know that when they see a Marvel movie, they'll enjoy it and won't be let down. I don't think DC has quite hit that same stride with their cinematic offerings--I didn't particularly enjoy MoS and therefore couldn't be more disinterested in Batman vs. Superman. On the other hand, where Marvel trumps DC in the movie world, DC has a solid lock on the small screen. I didn't last beyond 3 episodes of AoS, despite being a huge MCU fan. I happened upon Arrow while browsing Netflix, decided to give it a go and the rest is history. I have high hopes that Agent Carter will hold my interest and I can't wait for The Flash.

Chris Pratt, who plays Star Lord, also attended a special screening of GotG for a bunch of kids, and after it was over he stayed to take pictures with everyone one of them. So Marvel isn't just making great movies, they hire great people.

Absolutely. Robert Downey Jr. did a special screening of Cap 2 for a group of kids for his birthday and Tom Hiddleston did the same type of screening that Chris Pratt did when Thor 2 came out. Awesome actors only makes me want to see Marvel movies more.

[writersblock51]

I think Marvel has struck gold, pure gold, when it comes to their casting decisions. 

 

Love hearing how the actors are off screen with their fans and promoting the movies, each other and the whole franchise.  I know they get paid well for that they do, very well.  But there's more to what so many of them seem to be doing.  Makes me more inclined to paying $18 for IMAX, 3D on opening weekend, too.

[Starfish35]

Never mind - stupid question.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Starfish35

[pootlus]

Heh, at the San Antonio Comic Con *everyone* was telling me to go see GotG, it seems to have met with near universal acclaim.

I think Marvel seems to remember that comic book movies have to have a huge sense of fun, whereas DC is trapped in this "we must Nolanise everything and make it look gritty and cool"trope.

[Morrigan2575]

I liked this article, cool post by James Gunn (even if he kind of went off into the OMG Creative Process! territory)

 

http://www.thewrap.com/guardians-of-the-galaxy-director-james-gunn-writes-heartfelt-letter-to-thank-fans-for-record-breaking-debut/

[KirkB]

I think Marvel seems to remember that comic book movies have to have a huge sense of fun, whereas DC is trapped in this "we must Nolanise everything and make it look gritty and cool"trope.

 

I agree. Marvel is willing to embrace the fantastic and the fun. DC could never wrap their heads around a talking raccoon with a gun.

[JayKay]

I think Marvel knows that, too. It's like they don't just want to beat DC's box office, they want to humiliate them as well. DC has its share of goofy characters they could work with or fun team dynamics to explore, but they're so busy going for iconic! rebranding that it seems like the wonder falls by the wayside.

 

I kind of hope that GotG's eccentric charm inadvertently gives Guillermo del Toro's Justice League Dark better prospects of actually getting made. If DC wants weird and fun, they've got it.

[NumberCruncher]

Agreed, @JayKay.  I think the fun/goofy aspect is Marvel's edge.  Parents know that their movies are generally safe for kids with perhaps a few exceptions and any time you can make a movie kid-friendly, your box office take only benefits.  There's nothing wrong with dark and gritty (obviously), but if you're a parent, you would rather your 12 year-old watch a snarky raccoon or Iron Man poking fun at a demi-god than watch Harvey Dent get half of his face blown off.

[KirkB]

Dark, gritty and realistic is fine, but DC seems to think it is the only way to make superhero movies. It works for Batman. It's kind of the point of Batman. But it makes no sense with, say, Superman. And I don't know what the hell they were trying to do with Green Lantern.

[calliope1975]

Dark, gritty and realistic is fine, but DC seems to think it is the only way to make superhero movies. It works for Batman. It's kind of the point of Batman. But it makes no sense with, say, Superman. And I don't know what the hell they were trying to do with Green Lantern.

 

Exactly. Batman is grimdark, but that's Batman. I was so disappointed that Man of Steel was so grey and emo. I don't understand what DC is doing. It should be easier for them because Warner Bros owns all the DC rights whereas Marvel's are spread across several studios. 

 

My problem with Green Lantern (well, one of many) was that I felt like I was watching Ryan Reynolds be GL, not Hal Jordan. (I'm still all for a RR Deadpool, though.)

[Morrigan2575]

Exactly. Batman is grimdark, but that's Batman. I was so disappointed that Man of Steel was so grey and emo. I don't understand what DC is doing. It should be easier for them because Warner Bros owns all the DC rights whereas Marvel's are spread across several studios. 

 

My problem with Green Lantern (well, one of many) was that I felt like I was watching Ryan Reynolds be GL, not Hal Jordan. (I'm still all for a RR Deadpool, though.)

Did you see the leaked Deadpool test footage?

 

http://youtu.be/dVM5tq1ltIw

[calliope1975]

Oh yes, I've seen that footage. I also have the script that leaked and it is amazing. I would love to see it on film.

[Morrigan2575]

FOX needs to make the movie or give the character back to Marvel

[Sakura12]

That was great, they need to make a Deadpool movie.

 

With GofG being as awesome as it was, Marvel is doing it right. Now I'm willing to give Ant-Man a chance. However I still have no desire to see Batman V Superman. 

[wingster55]

MOS was sort of in between I think. Not as dark as the Nolan trilogy, but not super fun like GOTG either.

I'd say it's comparable to Thor in style. 

[writersblock51]

I've watched the Deadpool leaked trailer a half dozen times - it's a shame the movie didn't get made when this was put together.  I hope, as @Morrigan2575, said that they either make it (soon) or give the rights back to Marvel and let them make it.

 

I also thought RR's Deadpool in 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' was the best part of that movie.  And I'm still baffled as to how the studio screwed up "Green Lantern" - the parts were all there, but the product... ugh.

 

I enjoyed MoS more than I expected to.  I could have done with out about 15 minutes of the battle in Metropolis but thought the casting was solid and the special effects were great.  It was less dark - even though it had the material to be as dark as Nolan's Batman, if it wanted to - which I thought it helped the movie flow better. 

 

As much as I enjoyed the Nolan trilogy (and they are among my favorite superhero movies), they are not Family Movie Night fun at this point.  Maybe once my youngest is older but not now.  None of them are the thing I want to watch right before bed, either.   Maybe Family Movie Afternoon?

 

Meanwhile, Marvel's Phase 1 and Phase 2 are buttered popcorn on the couch kind of fun, and we've had Family Movie Night with 3 generations watching at once. 

 

I think that may be the case with many viewers.  Also, I think the Marvel movies have a strong repeat-viewers edge.  I know we've seen them all, since Iron Man, twice in the theater and then get the DVDs as soon as they are available.  And then have a Family Movie Night.   A bit much?  Perhaps, but this is a very fun time to be a fan of comic book superhero movies and TV shows.  So we're enjoying the wealth of riches, as it were.

[Starfish35]

My favorite of the trilogy is Batman Begins, maybe just because that's the only one that really feels hopeful to me. I rewatched that so many times. I can see why people think The Dark Knight is a better film, but it is just depressing to me. I've seen it a couple of times, but it's not the kind of movie I just want to sit down and rewatch. And as far as TDKR, I liked Selina Kyle, but other than her, there's not much about that movie I enjoyed.

I do think most of the MCU movies rate higher on just fun rewatchability. I know I enjoy rewatching most of them anyway. :)

Edited August 6, 2014 by Starfish35

[Morrigan2575]

I realized something last night, I didn't like TDKR...I watched it once in the movie theater, got the DVD for Christmas (2 years back) and haven't even opened it.  The movie is on HBO all the freaking time and I have never watched it.  I just have no desire to see it again, it wasn't worth the repeat viewing.

 

On the other hand I've watched TDK (my personal favorite of the 3) about a dozen times.  I've also watched Batman Begins a hand full of times as well.    I also have no desire to watch MoS...it's on Cable as well and I always opt to bypass the movie in favor of something else.

 

On another subject, ranking the MCU

 

The Avengers/GotG/CA:TWS (Top 3 but need a rewatch of each to determine order)

Iron Man

CA:TFA

Thor

IM2

The Incredible Hulk (Norton movie)

IM3

 

I didn't watch Thor:TDW so I can't rank it.

Edited August 6, 2014 by Morrigan2575

[JayKay]

2D tickets are $3.50 where I live before 6 pm and I still can't find anybody who wants to go see GotG (again). 3D is $7.00. This is ridiculous. They're practically giving tickets away.

[Morrigan2575]

Holy Crap. By me it's 13 for 3D no matter the time, 2D is 7 before 4pm, 10.75 after.

Im actually debating going to see this again and I don't remember the last movie I saw twice in the theater. Maybe Sixth Sense

[calliope1975]

2D tickets are $3.50 where I live before 6 pm and I still can't find anybody who wants to go see GotG (again). 3D is $7.00. This is ridiculous. They're practically giving tickets away.

 

Holy moly! I saw it for the 2nd time last night and enjoyed it just as much as the first time. But man, if I had your prices, I'd go every day.

[pootlus]

Don't come to Australia the ticket prices would make your heads explode!

[Sakura12]

I've seen it three times for free, twice in 2D and once in 3D. 

 

If I had to pay it would've been $14.25 for 3D, $15.75 for IMAX 3D and $10.75 for 2D. Which is why it's great to know someone that works at the theatre.

Edited August 6, 2014 by Sakura12

[writersblock51]

2D tickets are $3.50 where I live before 6 pm and I still can't find anybody who wants to go see GotG (again). 3D is $7.00. This is ridiculous. They're practically giving tickets away.

 

I'll go with you!!!!

 

those prices are crazy good.  We saw it in 3D last Friday - $18 for adults, $13 for kids.  We went to the 4:30 show and it was almost sold out - just a few single seats here & there, plus the first 2 rows in the front pit were empty.

 

If we could see a movie in the nice theater (for us, nice means stadium seating, plenty of leg room, high-back seats) for anything under $10 each, we'd be going a lot more often.

[tv echo]

After the success of GotG, it looks like Warner Bros. had second thoughts and backed down from an upcoming showdown.  Both Batman v. Superman and Captain America 3 were scheduled for the same release date, May 6, 2016.  Now Warner Bros. has moved Batman v. Superman's release date to March 25, 2016.

 

http://time.com/3087764/warner-bros-stands-down-changes-release-date-of-batman-v-superman/

[Morrigan2575]

I knew WB was going to blink, all those DC fanboys on IMDb swearing left, right, and center that SvsB would demolish CA3....LOL

 

However, that's a big swerve, especially since there were other Summer weekends opened...March isn't the place for a Summer Blockbuster....odd.

[dtissagirl]

I think they went with the March date because the WB also announced 11 new dates yesterday [CRAZY!], and apparently they have another movie coming out in August 5, 2016. If they postponed Bats v. Supes, it would overlap with marketing for that one. Plus, Marvel has an Untitled Movie coming out July 8, 2016.

 

Box Office Mojo has a list of all big movies scheduled for 2016 and beyond, including all of the Marvel and WB/DC Untitleds here: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/schedule/?view=bydate&release=theatrical&yr=2016&p=.htm&7

 

Hollywood is insane, man.

[Starfish35]

I wonder when Marvel is going to get around to announcing what movies they have lined up. They have a lot of dates marked out, but beyond Ant-Man and GOTG2, I don't think we have names for any of those movies.

ETA: And Captain America 3 - forgot about that one.

ETA2: Here's a Deadline article with a cool chart showing Marvel and DC release dates out to 2020. http://www.deadline.com/2014/08/upcoming-superhero-movies-marvel-dc-schedule/

It's probably safe to assume a couple of these dates include Thor 3 and Avengers 3, but I don't know about the others.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Starfish35

[Morrigan2575]

I think they went with the March date because the WB also announced 11 new dates yesterday [CRAZY!], and apparently they have another movie coming out in August 5, 2016. If they postponed Bats v. Supes, it would overlap with marketing for that one. Plus, Marvel has an Untitled Movie coming out July 8, 2016.

 

Box Office Mojo has a list of all big movies scheduled for 2016 and beyond, including all of the Marvel and WB/DC Untitleds here: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/schedule/?view=bydate&release=theatrical&yr=2016&p=.htm&7

 

Hollywood is insane, man.

I don't know, this is the movie they want to use to launch Justice League....you don't throw that into March...granted it won't have any competition but there's a stigma there.  Especially since this is the second time they moved the movie and the first move put them in a game of chicken with Marvel/CA3.  Now it looks like DC blinked and even worse they have no faith in their franchise launcher.  

Edited August 7, 2014 by Morrigan2575

[Sakura12]

Are they seriously making another Wolverine movie?