You know it would be a missed opportunity if at the end of the movie they didn't add this. Superman flies over the camera like in Superman the movie above the earth, but this time have Krypto and maybe even Supergirl with him. I like to believe James Gunn thought of that one as well.
The only real "rule" about how Metropolis and Gotham are drawn that I know of is this: even in its slums, Metropolis is bright and sunny. Even in its penthouses and art museums, Gotham is dark and shadowy.
I mean, there is real life parallels. If you go to London, even the nicest parts are gothic and dark. Money can't buy sunshine. However, if you are in San Francisco, everything is super bright and sunny, even with the homeless people camping on the sidewalks. The only part I can't reconcile is that Gotham and Metropolis are supposed to be on opposite sides of the same bay. That's too close. They should be on opposite sides of the country like New York and LA.
@@kenjisparks Yeah, but it's not like that in comics. I hate to compare movies with comics, but that's something I kind of admire about comics. Thanos didn't die at the end of Infinity Gauntlet run, his story ended. He came back for many in many more interesting storylines even after that. In movies, he was killed after being used in just two movies (minus the few ones he was in as a cameo). It's a fitting trope for villains like Killmonger. But the villains like Thanos or Red Skull or Doctor Doom need to be kept alive because they have that feeling of superiority, that they're a never ending threat that's just too big to be destroyed. An unavoidable stalemate for our heroes.
@@kenjisparks Two-Face is the perfect example in The Dark Knight. Such an underused character who didn't even get the chance to develop beyond that film.
@@LittleGalaxyBoywell Nolan said he was only doing three, he wasn’t trying to make two face the 3rd movie villain. Since theirs more bolder options that can raise the stakes (aka bane)
@@LittleGalaxyBoyI could get behind Nolan in that decision.Cuz the Dark Knight films are elseworld films.Also,Two-Face's death served the story of The Dark Knight Rises.
Biggest pet peeve. Superhero movies using comedy as a crutch to undercut emotional moments. Like when a serious emotional moment happens and the one character decides to cut the tension with awkward/cringe moments/jokes. It’s okay if the scene is a little corny, own it with good writing and your characters and the audience will appreciate it.
That was my biggest problem with Thor Love & Thunder, the humor got in the way of the more serious aspects of the story, like Jane's cancer, way too often.
@ guardians of the galaxy 1-3, the last two Thor movies, every Ant-man, the Tom Holland Spider-man movies have a couple of guilty moments, the Captain Marvel movies, literally almost every marvel movie since Endgame (with the exception of Eternals and Wakanda Forever). Deadpool gets a pass cause his stories are always more entertaining than thrilling.
@@44briggs I think underlying it is that companies don't believe in superheroes as a serious subject matter and at some point have to wink at the audience to say they know how silly they think this is. The longer an individual franchise goes on, the more likely it is to become a parody as they run out of ideas. This goes all the way back to Superman III and the Burton Batman series.
What works about it is that it's completely in character for MCU Odin to have a bunch of fake war trophies because he either couldn't or didn't want to grab the real deal. The Nine Realms' balance literally depended on him projecting strength.
And what sucks is Gunn is will probably have similar moments if need be but I don’t think people will be a lenient because one it’s DC and two they don’t have Snyder people bombing every little thing
The short version: Gunn is actually a good writer. He understands when to be strict, and when to be loose. He sells it as almost a character flaw but he's fastidious about internal logic and internal consistency. It's the hallmark of a writer who gets that stories without a solid foundation fall apart. It's not complicated but plenty of people who are in professional screenwriting are not very good writers at all.
A lot of you that are mad about this statement that think he doesn’t care at all about continuity/canon are missing Gunns point. He means getting so stuck up on keeping canon, continuity, and making your movies feel like it’s all in one universe, can take away creative freedom from the creators. That’s the reason a lot of Marvel films feel bland and all the same.
I wouldn't use the word "bland", but I agree. Marvel Studios films do feel feel very much the same. But that is the reason the Avengers and the entire Cinematic Universe worked in the first place.
I think it’s been super clever in the MCU how they did keep it all in the same continuity and the way Markus and McFeely managed to wrap it up so perfectly in Infinity War and Endgame was so satisfying
Exactly. I think his main point is about the visuals. If you look at Marvel movies, they often share a similar color grading, and honestly, it’s quite unappealing. They frequently resemble Amazon commercials visually, especially in scenes that don’t rely heavily on CGI. For example, in No Way Home, the bridge scene looked so grey and lacked both color and depth. Having all directors stick to one color palette or overarching visual style is incredibly limiting and, quite frankly, becoming tiresome. That’s why he referenced Metropolis-to highlight how a city’s look can evolve and change based on a director’s unique vision later down the line. I’m not the biggest fan of the first Joker movie. While I loved it initially, it’s not something I’d rewatch often. However, I will say that the color grading and cinematography in Joker are elements you’d never see in a Marvel film. I really hope we see more unique visual styles like that moving forward with DC.
@@ANDYBARLOTVSo true.Also,if you look at Marvel movies.Besides them lacking color and depth.They don't look realistic.Cuz just look at The Batman.That film immerse you in the film with it's pov shots and dirtying the lens.While a movie like Spiderman NWH is just so clean and bland looking.With no style to it.
Not all heroes are big on rescues. Batman rarely does it. Same goes for Iron man. When they skimp on the saves with Spider-Man and Superman that's a big problem.
@@redrick8900 There's another channel that recently highlighted that in Superman 3. Things are going wrong all around, many people are in danger including a scene with a man walking towards a manhole and phone boxes falling over. Yet Superman stands there calling for them to stop and 'think of the people' or something like that. In the time it takes to say it, he could have saved many with his superspeed.
@@Elwaves2925 Superman can't save people with super speed. If he tries to move them that fast they die. Also, no idea what you are talking about. In Superman 3 he's exposed to Kryptonite and loses his morality. Maybe that's what you are talking about?
@@redrick8900 Sigh. Except that he does it all the time because he can get to them really quickly, move them away really quickly as he doesn't have to move at full speed while moving them. I don't think it's when he loses his morality, if that was the case he wouldn't be saying those things, which was in a genuinely concerned voice. I only have the recently watched clip to go off as I haven't seen the movie itself since the 80's.
@@redrick8900 Okay, a correction is needed. I went searching for the video and the part they showed contained clips mixed from various scenes, mostly from the Superman III opening credits but not all of them. The line he says is from Superman II. So the context proper context was lost and why you wouldn't recognise that scene. However, that doesn't take away that he can still use, and does use, superspeed to save people. Superspeed does not equal going full speed every time.
@ he was played frank grillo. He was leader of strike team in winter soldier. The he returned in civil starting sequence. Hand some sort of eco suit with pile drivers and knives on it. He had the suicide vest which nearly killed captain America.
It hit me especially how badly Crossbones was wasted when I watched Falcon & Winter Soldier,the biggest problem with that show was the villain and if they had Crossbones on that show it would literally have been perfect considering his past with both Bucky & Sam.
Gunn's writing fixes a huge pet peeve I have with the Joss Whedon style writing that the MCU likes now which is that characters should take things seriously. A ton of MCU films just don't take themselves seriously at times or often have this self-depreciting winking at the audience because they know its dumb kind of humor and I'm kinda sick of it. What I love about Gunn's works is that the humor comes from the characters having to take rediculous things seriously. Its built on realism, not being realistic.
That was the fresh, original style at the time and it’s just been played out. The Guardians films played into this the most, nearly every time something sincere or emotional happened in the first 2 it got cut off with a punchline, so it’s weird to pin that on Whedon (well until Love and Thunder 10x it but that’s way later etc)
@ it must work on some level if it sustained it for a decade and it became one of the largest franchises of all time Just because it’s not popular now people forget quickly
Ummm...I'm a big fan of the MCU in general, and the GotG movies are all really good, and have some incredible moments in them, but WTF are you talking about? Gunn's movies are only second to Waititi's movies when it comes to never letting more than 10 seconds go by without a joke, many of them being the 'self-depreciating winking at the audience' type of joke. I personally don't mind this, because I think it fits the tone of the movies, has a lot of jokes that land, and takes time for serious moments as well, but acting like he somehow does it LESS than other MCU movies is absurd.
The two worst tropes are undoubtedly: 1. Killing someone and then bringing them back. There are zero stakes if you allow that to happen. 2. Using "the multiverse" as a lazy way to write your way out of anything.
In a weird way, those are both kinda the same problem. In the multiverse, nothing has stakes. I don't think it matters that much if a movie is internally consistent and self-contained. Like, bringing back Wolverine for some stupid comedy romp doesn't take away from the stand-alone brilliance of Logan. It just cheeses any stakes we might have for the character going forward. But because Deadpool meets Wolverine proceeded from the standpoint that none of it really matters, it avoided the trap of trying to sell itself on emotional weight, and could mostly just have fun as a self-congratulatory romp in jack-ass land. But you just know they've learned all the wrong lessons from that whole thing, and they're just dying to do that for Steve Rogers and Tony Stark as well, and it's going to be a disaster.
@@rottensquid fancasting isn't how MCU auditions work - ruclips.net/video/RmCbapLruHA/видео.htmlsi=xb1wYausS4UTW8vD New Rockstars already deduced Why RDJ is Doom ruclips.net/video/CHYrpg8S0RQ/видео.htmlsi=G4Oc-37IiMpES8Nc ruclips.net/video/o6g0KxWba1k/видео.htmlsi=DtsccvbnhtK1pP48 RDJ is an actor Remember Dolittle and Tropic Thunder He literally Played antagonist in Oppenheimer Real Name Victor Werner von Doom[1] Alias(es) Codenames Doctor Doom[1] Victor Werner von Doom, also known as Doctor Doom, is an enemy of the Avengers.[1] the only thing we know about him is his face resembles Tony Stark 199999 Whosoever RDJ is playing ,goes by Victor Von Doom whenever he would appear
@@rottensquid 3Birdman- "Hugh Jackman is heart of this film" " if u are experiencing comic book movie fatigue, I don't think this film does enough to pull u back into fall, it leaves more casual fans in dust & gives haters more ammunition in their feeble crusade" Cons-Villain is another "ok" MCU villain Very Casual fans may be lost If u hate Ryan's humor, well... New Rockstars "I don't think it’s this movie 's job nor does it even aim to do , "To save the MCU " or advance MCU's worldbuilding , i think that’s job of Kevin Feige at San Diego Comic Con "-Erik Voss
@@Nathan-gd7xq Indeed. They are different problems, of course. I meant to say they're the same problem in that they torpedo stakes by making clear nothing that happens has any finality. And yet, the stories pretend that consequences are final, because all stories depend on cause and effect. So when characters come back to life, or storylines are erased from history because "multiverse," it feels like I've been taken for a ride. This is why Everything Everywhere All At Once is the best multiverse movie, because it addresses all that directly. It establishes a reality without consequences, where nothing matters. And it makes plain how horrible that is, because without choice and consequence, existence has no meaning. But the film then ups the stakes by introducing the possibility of total self-erasure, the only dire consequence in a world without meaning. Of course, we're all waiting around to see if the final Spider-Verse movie sticks the landing and delivers an even better take on the multiverse concept. I have no idea where that movie will land, but I'm pretty optimistic.
I hate when they keep rebooting and retelling the same story a dozen times. Instead of 12 different versions of the Batman origin story, just tell 12 different Batman stories.
I hope this means that not every DC movie is going to be a comedy. A problem with the MCU is that almost every movie now, and every character, is cracking jokes and it's light-hearted. I hope Superman is bright and colorful, and Batman is darker and more serious.
that’s it. If Gunn will be coherent, DCU will be waaaay better than MCU because of this: every character/story deserves its own tone, it’s one style. MCU may be the most successful franchise money-wise, but story-wise it was dull. 90% of its films and shows are action comedies. Luckily Disney didn’t let Feige ruin Daredevil years ago, and the Netflix show proved that quality prevails, even if the tone doesn’t fit the rest of the franchise.
What was your take on Gunn's The Suicide Squad? I have a suspicion that's gonna be the vibe. Maybe not the ultra-violence, but leaning into the ridiculousness of the genre, without actually making fun of it. I doubt this Batman movie is going to be super serious. They already have a super-serious Batman film series going on. I'm sure Batman himself will be plenty dark, but the film may lean more Lego Batman.
This type of comedy is called buddy cop comedy (serious moments interrupted by comedy) featured in many buddy cop comedy films including Shaun of dead Marvel Cinematic Universe had no idea what they were doing at beginning of MCU So to play it safe , they used buddy cop comedy
@@Slask7 This type of comedy is called buddy cop comedy (serious moments interrupted by comedy) featured in many buddy cop comedy films including Shaun of dead Marvel Cinematic Universe had no idea what they were doing at beginning of MCU So to play it safe , they used buddy cop comedy
Gunn has the exact right attitude, and it's the one WB should've had a decade ago. They were so bent out of shape over not getting the perfect start, they squandered years of time trying to correct it. If they'd rolled with the punches and just let things play out organically, they may have come out ahead of the game eventually in terms of over all quality.
Which is exactly where they arrived at with Zack Snyder's Justice League a.k.a. the version of the Snyderverse that most of everyone was finally happy with and is a stable, solid template for the DCEU. Until they tanked it
@@thecarlocielo By that point they'd already committed to rebooting, but even that got delayed by second guessing and having to sort out old contracts. WB really was just in a constant seesaw with itself.
The majority of people deemed the snyder cut an absolute success, even people who don't like snyder. It's pretty obvious wb sabotaged his vision that would have made the studio billions. Instead they messed with it and this is what you get. The company sold. @@stunlord
@@thecarlocielo Very few people were happy with Snyder's vision, largely because he made a dark'n'gritty Superman. Superman isn't dark'n'gritty. Batman is, but even there you have to allow for the fact that you have a ninja who dresses like a giant bat roaming the city at night (basically a kind of silly concept - look at how people have treated the Reals here in our world).
No he doesn't.. and he stole credit from the person who started the first Guardians movie and tried to have their WGA credits removed. He's a self important douche
Yup. In the first Guardians movie, everybody almost died when the slave girl touched the power stone. In Infinity War Thanos is blasting everybody with it, and everybody just walks away from it unscathed. I liked Infinity War, but it was very much like watching the Skypiea arc in One Piece, where like 10 characters should have died from Eneru's lightning attacks, but everybody ended up being fine.
In Infinity War's defence, Thanos in that was very 'forgiving' in regards to those that got in his way. He seemed to be deliberately not killing people unless it was to uphold his 'half/half' philosophy (like on the Asgardian ship) So I imagined he used the stone more to dis-arm, throw opponents away then hurt them. While the slave girl was using it without any control, allowing its full power to be blasted out.
Also worth noting that the majority of the characters that actually took a full blast from the Power Stone in those two movies were Gods, Hulks, and Infinity Stone-imbued cosmic heroes like Captain Marvel. And maybe a shockwave hit Rhodey while in his armor. Which is all very different from a slave girl grabbing it with her bare hands.
@@jonathananderson5529 Yes- but the armor probably would have protected him regardless. And I don't believe regular Skrulls are that much stronger/more durable than humans since they can be killed by pretty conventional means.
@@jonathananderson5529 NO HE WASN't. I don't care what anyone says , Rhodey was replaced by a Skrull post Endgame 2023 Battle of Earth - Date October 17, 2023 New Rockstars -DELETED SCENE: How Marvel FIXED Rhodey Before Cap 4 & Armor Wars!
Well I could see saying that in space Superman/Supergirl (if they are in a solar system with a yellow sun/suns) could absorb more energy and faster. Making them able to travel a lot faster than they would be able to on earth. But it seems like you are referencing something specific that I don't know about.
You can easily argue that going at the speed of light would essentially kill everyone around him so he needs to go slower, whereas going at the speed of light in the space doesn't really cause any issues.
The fact is that neither Superman nor Supergirl nor Power Girl nor Superboy nor Zod nor whoever else... is capable of travelling at the speed of light, let alone faster than it. That's Flash's thing: only speedsters with access to the Speed Force are capable of physics-defying speed. Which means there's a hard speed limit on how fast Kryptonians can go and what they can do. The nearest star to Earth, the ABSOLUTE NEAREST STAR, is Proxima Centauri. And it's over 4 light-years away. That means that even at absolute top speed, for a Kryptonian like Superman or Supergirl to go anywhere noteworthy outside our solar system, anywhere at all, it would take them over eight years for a round trip. And that's the absolute nearest star. The other side of the galaxy is 100,000 light-years away. So if the plot of the Supergirl movie involves her flying into space and going to, let's say, the remains of Krypton, and it needs her to take less than a century getting there... then the movie will need her to use a spaceship. Something with some handwavey sci-fi tech that allows her to get there faster. Under her own power, she can't break the light barrier. Superman can't, and so she can't. It's not an ability that Kryptonians have. She needs a ship. Or a teleporter, or a wormhole... something external to her. Because in scifi you're allowed to make up the rules if you want... but once you've made them, you need to stay consistent on them.
Intend to agree, but also, that's literally why the DC multiverse exists. That was the whole point of Crisis on Infinite Earths. Of course, they thought at the time they were collapsing it all down to one persistent continuity, so THAT was adorable.
Most comic fans understand that when youre trying to keep a universe alive for over a century, its understandable that some continuity is gonna be scuffed. That's fine, that can be "patched" later with a story to explain any inconsistencies. Just make good movies that respects these characters man.
@@JT-cx2evI can't stand obtuse people like @PaperbackWizard. It's like are you that far on the spectrum? Arw you so inept that you have to automatically think you know more than what is really happening? F-in daft see you next Tuesday's I swear to gawd bruh
Something I've always appreciated about Gunn's work in the Guardians of the Galaxy movie is that the music is a major theme for the main character, and when music played in the battle scenes, there was almost always an "actual" reason for it, either through Peter's walkman or through loudspeakers or something. I know everyone loves Thor Ragnarok, but I found the inclusion of the Immigrant song to be kind of out of place both because Thor himself probably doesn't even know who Led Zeppelin are and has never personally heard the song in his life, but also because the song itself isn't playing from anywhere. You can tell as you're watching it that the song is only playing in that fight scene right now because the director personally liked it, and thought it would go well with the action. It just didn't have as much thought or planning behind it as Gunn usually employs.
One of my big pet peeves in Superhero movies is when the studio cares too much about not letting spoilers get out to the point where it gets in the way of the actors doing their job. Like not letting them have the whole script out of fear it’ll breach containment and as a result the actors don’t have the full context of the scene and can’t give their best performance
You missed his point if you think he was talking purely in term of continuity. His main point was getting so stuck on keeping canon, continuity, and making your movies feel like it’s all in one universe, that you take away creative freedom from the creators. That’s the reason a lot of MCU films feel bland and all the same.
I kinda loved the Thor Infinity Gauntlet retcon. Hela just walks in there and goes "Fake!" and knocks it over. It tracks with what she says about Odin in the movie.
The biggest thing that drives me nuts in super hero movies is inconsistent physics. Like, basic stuff. I've seen so many examples but here is one of the more glaring ones. One superhero/villain can throw another literally through the ground, but a car can stop them within a few feet of impact.
It's a little trippy to have kinda grew up in gunn movies(from dawn of the dead to weird stuff like slither) and now see him getting a older. Instead of just being a talented fan/ director, I can kind of see him as a young veteran now.
I guess what he's saying is everything should be consistent on a basic fundamental level but when it comes to the fine details that are specific to the characters, the things that make them not copies of one another, then it's ok for them to be different.
I truly wish that he’d made Guardians 3 just a little different… My takeaway was that Rocket was in a hallucinogenic state while on life support, which could’ve absolutely kept the emotional impact of his visions of Lyla and the others, while still allowing for one of them… specifically Floor… to have managed to survive Doesn’t mean she needs to actually *~DO~* anything of note, just that she could’ve lived and been a massive emotional reveal for Rocket after the evacuation to Nowhere A lot of others believe that Rocket was experiencing the gateway to the afterlife when he was conversing with Lyla, but not all of those scenes were preceded by him flatlining/his condition worsening With all the chaos of the High Evolutionary’s ship getting destroyed, they could’ve even had Floor just be implied to have gotten out with the mass-evacuation and emerge from literally any part of a crowd or behind a corner in Nowhere’s promenade after hearing Rocket’s voice Disbelief and shock washes over him as a 15 second scene follows where he runs out of the containment area and the camera pulls in a few seconds later to show even just 1 of her mech legs twitch… she voices over during those 15 seconds that she remembered pain and that when she came to that she pulled herself to a vent shaft to hide and had beed doing so since Yeah it’s not Lyla, but even just Floor living would be an indescribable moment for Rocket, especially since the Guardians are headquartered out of Nowhere Again, she doesn’t have to DO anything, but she’d surely fit right in on Nowhere and it’d be easy to make work, even if she just shows up visually for a few seconds here or there and/or has 1 or two exchanges with someone Hallucinations make a lot more sense to me as he’s trying to live with/come to terms with the guilt he’s felt from the moment his escape attempt resulted in their deaths (or in my mind 2 of their deaths) If that was a gates of the afterlife/verge of death, then I would’ve also expected to have seen Guardians’ 1 Groot there since Baby Groot and beyond is his offspring and not a resurrected OG Groot… But no, it’s just Rocket face-to-face with a representation of his strongest pain brought on by ever-present guilt at his self-perceived greatest failure It’s ok… in my mind and maybe nobody else’s, Floor lives on
I know this is a joke or hate but it's honestly the white in his beard and hair visioning him without it he actually looks crazy young for his age tbh.
Getting hack no-name "directors" to just be yes-men for the studio/producers. Remember when actual filmmakers with an actual identity made actual films that also happened to be superhero movies? Gotta love that brilliant, visionary auteur Jonathan Watkins or whoever it was that "made" those shitty Spider-Man movies.
Which is funny I just watched creature commandos love it but this one character pulls out a flintlock pistol and fires two shots without reloading and I’m like what?
I agree I love having a high stakes movie where no matter what the hero(s) do, they still lose For example, infinity war. Had all of them fighting Thanos, and in the end, it wasn't enough to beat him
I agree. Look at the Marvels. I had no fucking clue who was powerful and who wasn't, just a bunch of people all firing laser beams from their limbs and punching each other with super punches. There *have* to be stakes, there has to be some level of consistency and in-universe rules to understand power levels. Normal films, you understand bigger stronger guy is likely tougher than weedier smaller out of shape guy. You understand the dynamic. This needs to be clear in the films of the DCU, as marvel lost the plot.
My pet peeve with superhero movies is they either ham-fist an agenda into the film like the constant Jesus Metaphor in Zach's DCEU because Superman was Never a Jesus Metaphor to begin with.
@@redrick8900 Superman is an illegal alien whose biggest enemy is a multibillionaire who wants to rule the world. He was created by two Jewish boys during the run-up to the Second World War. He is not, nor has he ever been, a "Jesus metaphor". What he is, is Elon Musk's worst nightmare.
My biggest pet peeve is honestly 4th wall breaks. Because 99% of the time they just completely any sense of emotion or investment. Because it reminds you “oh yeah, none of this real in any capacity. So why should I care?” All those grand speeches and epic moments are suddenly meaningless. Because they only happened because the script of writer said so. It kills the weight of everything and it’s usually just a vehicle for Deus ex machina. It’s much more interesting to view the stories as looking into some other place to view a story, rather than it being shoved in our face how fake it all is
my superhero movie pet peeve is all the generic, throwaway music, as well as misplaced liscenced songs. it's getting better, and they did great with the avengers theme from day one, but especially in modern superhero movies, the music has not been as gut-wrenching as it should be.
It’s funny because Gunn had to ask Taika Waititi for the Guardians to part ways with Thor in Love And Thunder because his script for GOTG3 was without Thor 😛
this is what i mean by -- they dont want to tell THE story they want to tell THEIR story... and its one of the main reasons superhero movies dont work anymore. people arent getting tired of superhero movies. theyre tired of people making them that dont respect therm. james was great for guardians because he didnt change a whole lot. hes changing too much in dc.
So in Gunn's world Batman wouldn't hide a Kryptonite spear without knowing where the fight would end up or if Supes would just kill him with eyebeam or just fly him somewhere else
In the comics, Bats has a shard of kryponite in a lead-lined pouch on his belt. (Also, Clark gave it to him because he trust Bruce to use it if necessary - most of his friends would hesitate, but not Bruce.)
Kevin Feige: Everything has to look the same all the time! James Gunn: Not everything has to look the same all the time! The new DC cinematic universe (or whatever we're calling it) already has a leg up on the MCU because of this basic philosophical difference.
There is one thing that he said which is so fcking important: ,,I think the audience is smart enough“ Every marvel film is written for people who dont want to think about the film itself. Just care for the cameo in the credit scene. It seems like their audience never watched a movie at all
One thing that really drives me up the wall is that after a movie or a series, characters that wouldn’t have had any knowledge of what happened suddenly know the basics. For example, how the hell did the world know who Thanos was? He only got namedropped once during the fight with Ebony Maw and Black Dwarf/Cull Obsidian, and the only times he showed up on Earth, he does so in areas that no reporters or bystanders could see or make out anything like the Avengers Compound or the middle of a forest in Wakanda. Another thing, how do people know who Carol Danvers is? I’m not talking about Spider-Man, he makes sense. I’m talking about Kamala Khan, she was in Jersey when Endgame happened, which is probably several miles away from Avengers HQ, so all she would have seen if she saw anything was maybe a spaceship and said spaceship get blown up by a bright light. Also where did people get the name Captain Marvel from? I feel like the writers really dropped the ball here.
Carol was operating for five years between Infinity War and Engdame. I'm sure she dropped by Earth on occasion. She gave herself the name Captain Marvel, as an homage to Mar-Vell, the Kree who accidentally gave her powers. And Thanos was probably discussed on TV after the Snap, when the remaining Avengers were trying to explain what happened to _half the people on the planet._
Gunn can't tolerate internal inconsistency. Like when Star Lord used his signature mask to save Gamora in GoTG 1, and if the mask hadn't been broken in GotG 2, Peter could've saved Yondu. So of course Star Lord just stops wearing the mask entirely for GoTG 3.
James doesn't like the parts where the superheroes do things and the parts where the superheroes talk. He just likes the parts where children happen to be on screen.
@@Shampyon I mean, it's not a bad idea in itself, it's just indicative of the media trend of making everything louder and more violent. I remember back in 2009 when JJ Abrams took a crack at Star Trek, and there were some interesting additions to the flavor of that world. For instance, the Enterprise going into warp went off like a gunshot. And I thought it was cool at the moment, expressing the incredible power of such a technology. But the more I thought about it, the more it annoyed me. It was part of the "bad-ass-ification" of everything, whether it needs it or not. Not because everyone wants that, but because the people who do are a loudly vocal minority. I was excited by the Man of Steel trailer. It gave the impression that the film would have real depth, and explore the character in new and interesting ways. But ultimately, that film and the ones that followed had little to add to the world of the Justice League beyond making literally every aspect "sick, yo!" And though that's not necessarily a bad thing in itself, it's no replacement for actual substance. So Superman being depicted as nothing more than a power flex rings hollow. The films seemed far more interested in the "super" than the "hero." I'm not sure it knew or cared what that second word even means. It sure as hell doesn't mean "smash everything in sight just because you can."
Also stop building up sweet bad guys and killing them off in a minute like Aquaman And The Lost Kingdom, The Dark Knight, Fantastic Four(2016), etc. You all know where I'm going with this. I hope James Gunn does a Superman Domsday fight the right way.
Okay but like…. Avengers tower just NOT showing up is weird. Like that’s my one gripe with the Defenders, is you see the MetLife building and you go “wait that’s where Avengers Tower is, wth?”
To me, there are a couple of differences between Marvel and DC that are important and should be considered. There is a lot of overlap because the artists, writers, and editors often hopped to the other side and brought ideas with them, so the differences are kind of subtle. DC heroes have flaws, but are defined by their virtues. Marvel heroes have virtues, but are defined by their flaws. Batman is a deeply flawed character, but we cheer for him because of his dogged pursuit of justice and redemption (people forget about that second part, but it is significant that he spends so much money on Arkham). Iron Man often does the right thing for the right reasons, but we are interested in his stories because he's a self-absorbed jerk with poor social skills. The other difference is in emphasis when it comes to alter egos. Marvel places more emphasis on the "civilian" alter egos, while DC places emphasis on the hero personas. We care about what happens to Spider-Man in a fight because we know its outcome might affect whether or not he can pay rent that month. The alter ego is the focus, and his actions as a superhero are one facet of the complications in Peter Parker's life. When Superman says "Truth, justice, and the American way," we know he means it because we watched him pursue all those things as reporter Clark Kent. To people in the DC universe, Batman is a spirit of vengeance, but the reader knows Batman is also Bruce Wayne, who spends a lot of money trying to redeem the irredeemable in Arkham. In DC, the hero is the focus, while the alter ego informs the audience and gives context to the hero's actions and decisions.
Right now I'm reading early Hellblazer right after reading Alan Moore's Swamp Thing and despite HB being a direct spin-off of ST, super-heroes really don't exist in John's world. Sure Constantine can meet Batman in Swamp Thing, but it's totally against the vibe of HB where only the more supernatural entities have a presence. To me, this is what made DC special as it's a shared universe where you get to pick and choose what gets shared on a title to title basis, where a massive retcon in one title has no real affect on other titles that are far enough away from it in terms of tone.
Im annoyed when every movie has the same feel, comedic tone, and character dynamics. When the director/writer is IN the movie as much if not more than the stars. If you know, ya know.
In comic books, nothing is canon and everything is canon, all at the same time There's a base which you must respect, but honestly, not even celebrated Big Two writers are that hardcore about continuity with other runs
WATCH THE FULL 45 MINUTE JAMES GUNN CHAT HERE! ruclips.net/video/0y2RCSQC95o/видео.htmlsi=FkKkfJfQ0jKEc409
Continuity really is one of the rules you should constantly break
You know it would be a missed opportunity if at the end of the movie they didn't add this. Superman flies over the camera like in Superman the movie above the earth, but this time have Krypto and maybe even Supergirl with him. I like to believe James Gunn thought of that one as well.
Huh? @@musayibghani3986
The only real "rule" about how Metropolis and Gotham are drawn that I know of is this: even in its slums, Metropolis is bright and sunny. Even in its penthouses and art museums, Gotham is dark and shadowy.
That's actually pretty good.
I mean, there is real life parallels. If you go to London, even the nicest parts are gothic and dark. Money can't buy sunshine. However, if you are in San Francisco, everything is super bright and sunny, even with the homeless people camping on the sidewalks.
The only part I can't reconcile is that Gotham and Metropolis are supposed to be on opposite sides of the same bay. That's too close. They should be on opposite sides of the country like New York and LA.
@@Danielson1818exactly! Like why tf isn't superman always around? Its the worst city in the world and its accross the street!
@@XavIsOnlineexactly. I bet Gothamites are bitter about that. He saves everyone EXCEPT Gotham.
@@Danielson1818I’m pretty sure the two cities being so close is only really a thing in the dceu
I don't like it when they kill off a villian just after using them once.
You only have so many films. You can’t keep using the same villain with a few exceptions. Actors are only going to make so many films.
@@kenjisparks Yeah, but it's not like that in comics. I hate to compare movies with comics, but that's something I kind of admire about comics.
Thanos didn't die at the end of Infinity Gauntlet run, his story ended. He came back for many in many more interesting storylines even after that. In movies, he was killed after being used in just two movies (minus the few ones he was in as a cameo).
It's a fitting trope for villains like Killmonger. But the villains like Thanos or Red Skull or Doctor Doom need to be kept alive because they have that feeling of superiority, that they're a never ending threat that's just too big to be destroyed. An unavoidable stalemate for our heroes.
@@kenjisparks Two-Face is the perfect example in The Dark Knight. Such an underused character who didn't even get the chance to develop beyond that film.
@@LittleGalaxyBoywell Nolan said he was only doing three, he wasn’t trying to make two face the 3rd movie villain. Since theirs more bolder options that can raise the stakes (aka bane)
@@LittleGalaxyBoyI could get behind Nolan in that decision.Cuz the Dark Knight films are elseworld films.Also,Two-Face's death served the story of The Dark Knight Rises.
Biggest pet peeve.
Superhero movies using comedy as a crutch to undercut emotional moments. Like when a serious emotional moment happens and the one character decides to cut the tension with awkward/cringe moments/jokes. It’s okay if the scene is a little corny, own it with good writing and your characters and the audience will appreciate it.
That was my biggest problem with Thor Love & Thunder, the humor got in the way of the more serious aspects of the story, like Jane's cancer, way too often.
What super hero movies have you been watching? I've never seen that.
@ guardians of the galaxy 1-3, the last two Thor movies, every Ant-man, the Tom Holland Spider-man movies have a couple of guilty moments, the Captain Marvel movies, literally almost every marvel movie since Endgame (with the exception of Eternals and Wakanda Forever). Deadpool gets a pass cause his stories are always more entertaining than thrilling.
Disney excels at that (not just in Marvel movies) and has been doing it for many years.
@@44briggs I think underlying it is that companies don't believe in superheroes as a serious subject matter and at some point have to wink at the audience to say they know how silly they think this is. The longer an individual franchise goes on, the more likely it is to become a parody as they run out of ideas. This goes all the way back to Superman III and the Burton Batman series.
Hela shoving it over saying, "Fake", was a pretty good cover for me.
What works about it is that it's completely in character for MCU Odin to have a bunch of fake war trophies because he either couldn't or didn't want to grab the real deal. The Nine Realms' balance literally depended on him projecting strength.
@@raidenvakarian9362
There you go, that's as good an explanation as any. I like it.
And what sucks is Gunn is will probably have similar moments if need be but I don’t think people will be a lenient because one it’s DC and two they don’t have Snyder people bombing every little thing
@@raidenvakarian9362
Odin in the comics projected Honour and Strength
A fake trophy to a Viking is an insult
Yeah it’s nice when they can include in universe retcons to cover for any inconsistencies.
The short version: Gunn is actually a good writer. He understands when to be strict, and when to be loose. He sells it as almost a character flaw but he's fastidious about internal logic and internal consistency. It's the hallmark of a writer who gets that stories without a solid foundation fall apart. It's not complicated but plenty of people who are in professional screenwriting are not very good writers at all.
It's actually a writer who gives a shit.
A lot of you that are mad about this statement that think he doesn’t care at all about continuity/canon are missing Gunns point. He means getting so stuck up on keeping canon, continuity, and making your movies feel like it’s all in one universe, can take away creative freedom from the creators. That’s the reason a lot of Marvel films feel bland and all the same.
Yeah, most non-comic book fans don't care about canon and continuity, they just want good stories
I wouldn't use the word "bland", but I agree. Marvel Studios films do feel feel very much the same. But that is the reason the Avengers and the entire Cinematic Universe worked in the first place.
I think it’s been super clever in the MCU how they did keep it all in the same continuity and the way Markus and McFeely managed to wrap it up so perfectly in Infinity War and Endgame was so satisfying
Exactly. I think his main point is about the visuals. If you look at Marvel movies, they often share a similar color grading, and honestly, it’s quite unappealing. They frequently resemble Amazon commercials visually, especially in scenes that don’t rely heavily on CGI. For example, in No Way Home, the bridge scene looked so grey and lacked both color and depth.
Having all directors stick to one color palette or overarching visual style is incredibly limiting and, quite frankly, becoming tiresome. That’s why he referenced Metropolis-to highlight how a city’s look can evolve and change based on a director’s unique vision later down the line.
I’m not the biggest fan of the first Joker movie. While I loved it initially, it’s not something I’d rewatch often. However, I will say that the color grading and cinematography in Joker are elements you’d never see in a Marvel film. I really hope we see more unique visual styles like that moving forward with DC.
@@ANDYBARLOTVSo true.Also,if you look at Marvel movies.Besides them lacking color and depth.They don't look realistic.Cuz just look at The Batman.That film immerse you in the film with it's pov shots and dirtying the lens.While a movie like Spiderman NWH is just so clean and bland looking.With no style to it.
Can we be done with third act sky beams and armies of faceless CG minions too? Cool, thanks.
Magic ground chasms with cg spiders coming up!
Your comment made me realize this was literally the finale of arcane
has that happened recently? i feel like that was a mid-2000s to 2010s thing. besides arcane s2 of course.
It serves a greater purpose outside of cinema.
But the normies love sky lasers and CGI capeshit slop.
"I'm weird in that I like internal consistency..." I remember when that was just a basic principle in storytelling.
I remember when it wasn't. I'm talking all of the XX century and most of the XXI
Just say 20 and 21@@jesusmora9379
My pet peeve is when the heroes don't save civilians in the movies. It's more than just a fight with a big bad
Not all heroes are big on rescues. Batman rarely does it. Same goes for Iron man. When they skimp on the saves with Spider-Man and Superman that's a big problem.
@@redrick8900 There's another channel that recently highlighted that in Superman 3. Things are going wrong all around, many people are in danger including a scene with a man walking towards a manhole and phone boxes falling over. Yet Superman stands there calling for them to stop and 'think of the people' or something like that. In the time it takes to say it, he could have saved many with his superspeed.
@@Elwaves2925 Superman can't save people with super speed. If he tries to move them that fast they die. Also, no idea what you are talking about. In Superman 3 he's exposed to Kryptonite and loses his morality. Maybe that's what you are talking about?
@@redrick8900 Sigh. Except that he does it all the time because he can get to them really quickly, move them away really quickly as he doesn't have to move at full speed while moving them.
I don't think it's when he loses his morality, if that was the case he wouldn't be saying those things, which was in a genuinely concerned voice. I only have the recently watched clip to go off as I haven't seen the movie itself since the 80's.
@@redrick8900 Okay, a correction is needed. I went searching for the video and the part they showed contained clips mixed from various scenes, mostly from the Superman III opening credits but not all of them. The line he says is from Superman II. So the context proper context was lost and why you wouldn't recognise that scene.
However, that doesn't take away that he can still use, and does use, superspeed to save people. Superspeed does not equal going full speed every time.
I agree with Gunn's point.Cuz just look at how Marvel fumbled Crossbones in Civil War.His appearance wasted in that movie by him dying so early.
Would’ve liked to see him and klaw in punisher or Hawkeye.
Who is crossbones ?
@ he was played frank grillo. He was leader of strike team in winter soldier. The he returned in civil starting sequence. Hand some sort of eco suit with pile drivers and knives on it. He had the suicide vest which nearly killed captain America.
It hit me especially how badly Crossbones was wasted when I watched Falcon & Winter Soldier,the biggest problem with that show was the villain and if they had Crossbones on that show it would literally have been perfect considering his past with both Bucky & Sam.
He was a cool character too, Frank Grillo was really wasted with that choice.
The whole "nano-bot armor" constant unmasking is the worst. The superheros have gone almost full magical girl minus the transformation dazzle.
For real. The mask needs to STAY ON.
And the nanotech shit sucks
@@Ajr5691
Spider-Man is pretty much the only one that actually has a mask that he wears to hide who he is.
@@Carabas72 And he got a nanobot armor as well that could change into normal clothes.
Good thing he's back to using regular fabric again.
Gunn's writing fixes a huge pet peeve I have with the Joss Whedon style writing that the MCU likes now which is that characters should take things seriously. A ton of MCU films just don't take themselves seriously at times or often have this self-depreciting winking at the audience because they know its dumb kind of humor and I'm kinda sick of it. What I love about Gunn's works is that the humor comes from the characters having to take rediculous things seriously. Its built on realism, not being realistic.
That was the fresh, original style at the time and it’s just been played out. The Guardians films played into this the most, nearly every time something sincere or emotional happened in the first 2 it got cut off with a punchline, so it’s weird to pin that on Whedon (well until Love and Thunder 10x it but that’s way later etc)
@@Movietrailers-t1nthing is, guardians of the galaxy new how to balance it
That humor works in Buffy but not on other characters I agree entirely
@ it must work on some level if it sustained it for a decade and it became one of the largest franchises of all time
Just because it’s not popular now people forget quickly
Ummm...I'm a big fan of the MCU in general, and the GotG movies are all really good, and have some incredible moments in them, but WTF are you talking about? Gunn's movies are only second to Waititi's movies when it comes to never letting more than 10 seconds go by without a joke, many of them being the 'self-depreciating winking at the audience' type of joke.
I personally don't mind this, because I think it fits the tone of the movies, has a lot of jokes that land, and takes time for serious moments as well, but acting like he somehow does it LESS than other MCU movies is absurd.
The two worst tropes are undoubtedly:
1. Killing someone and then bringing them back. There are zero stakes if you allow that to happen.
2. Using "the multiverse" as a lazy way to write your way out of anything.
In a weird way, those are both kinda the same problem. In the multiverse, nothing has stakes. I don't think it matters that much if a movie is internally consistent and self-contained. Like, bringing back Wolverine for some stupid comedy romp doesn't take away from the stand-alone brilliance of Logan. It just cheeses any stakes we might have for the character going forward. But because Deadpool meets Wolverine proceeded from the standpoint that none of it really matters, it avoided the trap of trying to sell itself on emotional weight, and could mostly just have fun as a self-congratulatory romp in jack-ass land. But you just know they've learned all the wrong lessons from that whole thing, and they're just dying to do that for Steve Rogers and Tony Stark as well, and it's going to be a disaster.
@@rottensquid fancasting isn't how MCU auditions work -
ruclips.net/video/RmCbapLruHA/видео.htmlsi=xb1wYausS4UTW8vD
New Rockstars already deduced Why RDJ is Doom
ruclips.net/video/CHYrpg8S0RQ/видео.htmlsi=G4Oc-37IiMpES8Nc
ruclips.net/video/o6g0KxWba1k/видео.htmlsi=DtsccvbnhtK1pP48
RDJ is an actor
Remember Dolittle and Tropic Thunder
He literally Played antagonist in Oppenheimer
Real Name
Victor Werner von Doom[1]
Alias(es)
Codenames
Doctor Doom[1]
Victor Werner von Doom, also known as Doctor Doom, is an enemy of the Avengers.[1]
the only thing we know about him is his face resembles Tony Stark 199999
Whosoever RDJ is playing ,goes by Victor Von Doom whenever he would appear
@@rottensquid 3Birdman- "Hugh Jackman is heart of this film"
" if u are experiencing comic book movie fatigue, I don't think this film does enough to pull u back into fall,
it leaves more casual fans in dust & gives haters more ammunition in their feeble crusade"
Cons-Villain is another "ok" MCU villain
Very Casual fans may be lost
If u hate Ryan's humor, well...
New Rockstars
"I don't think it’s this movie 's job nor does it even aim to do , "To save the MCU " or advance MCU's worldbuilding , i think that’s job of Kevin Feige at San Diego Comic Con "-Erik Voss
@rottensquid yeah definitely a lot of overlap between those two points
@@Nathan-gd7xq Indeed. They are different problems, of course. I meant to say they're the same problem in that they torpedo stakes by making clear nothing that happens has any finality. And yet, the stories pretend that consequences are final, because all stories depend on cause and effect. So when characters come back to life, or storylines are erased from history because "multiverse," it feels like I've been taken for a ride.
This is why Everything Everywhere All At Once is the best multiverse movie, because it addresses all that directly. It establishes a reality without consequences, where nothing matters. And it makes plain how horrible that is, because without choice and consequence, existence has no meaning. But the film then ups the stakes by introducing the possibility of total self-erasure, the only dire consequence in a world without meaning.
Of course, we're all waiting around to see if the final Spider-Verse movie sticks the landing and delivers an even better take on the multiverse concept. I have no idea where that movie will land, but I'm pretty optimistic.
I hate when they keep rebooting and retelling the same story a dozen times. Instead of 12 different versions of the Batman origin story, just tell 12 different Batman stories.
That's what Reeves is doing, and i'm happy for it
there have been 2 batman origin films ever.
with all due respect no, each director will have a different vision, there has to be an ending point for each trilogy
reeves is only making trilogy
I posted a reply with a link to a short RUclips clip showing at least 19 different Batman origin stories on film, but apparently it was deleted. 🤔
I hope this means that not every DC movie is going to be a comedy. A problem with the MCU is that almost every movie now, and every character, is cracking jokes and it's light-hearted. I hope Superman is bright and colorful, and Batman is darker and more serious.
that’s it.
If Gunn will be coherent, DCU will be waaaay better than MCU because of this: every character/story deserves its own tone, it’s one style.
MCU may be the most successful franchise money-wise, but story-wise it was dull. 90% of its films and shows are action comedies.
Luckily Disney didn’t let Feige ruin Daredevil years ago, and the Netflix show proved that quality prevails, even if the tone doesn’t fit the rest of the franchise.
What was your take on Gunn's The Suicide Squad? I have a suspicion that's gonna be the vibe. Maybe not the ultra-violence, but leaning into the ridiculousness of the genre, without actually making fun of it. I doubt this Batman movie is going to be super serious. They already have a super-serious Batman film series going on. I'm sure Batman himself will be plenty dark, but the film may lean more Lego Batman.
@@rottensquid that’s going to be the vibe for some films maybe (like The Authority), not for all of them.
This type of comedy is called buddy cop comedy (serious moments interrupted by comedy) featured in many buddy cop comedy films including Shaun of dead
Marvel Cinematic Universe had no idea what they were doing at beginning of MCU
So to play it safe , they used buddy cop comedy
@@Slask7 This type of comedy is called buddy cop comedy (serious moments interrupted by comedy) featured in many buddy cop comedy films including Shaun of dead
Marvel Cinematic Universe had no idea what they were doing at beginning of MCU
So to play it safe , they used buddy cop comedy
Gunn has the exact right attitude, and it's the one WB should've had a decade ago. They were so bent out of shape over not getting the perfect start, they squandered years of time trying to correct it. If they'd rolled with the punches and just let things play out organically, they may have come out ahead of the game eventually in terms of over all quality.
Which is exactly where they arrived at with Zack Snyder's Justice League a.k.a. the version of the Snyderverse that most of everyone was finally happy with and is a stable, solid template for the DCEU. Until they tanked it
@@thecarlocielo By that point they'd already committed to rebooting, but even that got delayed by second guessing and having to sort out old contracts. WB really was just in a constant seesaw with itself.
@@thecarlocielo you must be in a mighty small echo chamber to think that "everyone" was finally happy with Zack Snyder's Justice League lmao
The majority of people deemed the snyder cut an absolute success, even people who don't like snyder. It's pretty obvious wb sabotaged his vision that would have made the studio billions. Instead they messed with it and this is what you get. The company sold. @@stunlord
@@thecarlocielo Very few people were happy with Snyder's vision, largely because he made a dark'n'gritty Superman. Superman isn't dark'n'gritty. Batman is, but even there you have to allow for the fact that you have a ninja who dresses like a giant bat roaming the city at night (basically a kind of silly concept - look at how people have treated the Reals here in our world).
James Gunn is one of the few people I think understands how to adapt comic material to the big screen.
No he doesn't.. and he stole credit from the person who started the first Guardians movie and tried to have their WGA credits removed. He's a self important douche
@@summoner2100 LMFAO okay dude
im the same way, I think thats a good thing, it just adds to the quality of the film when you can believe what the superheroes are doing
Let's all remember this video and see how many times he actually follows through with these
Ppl are trying to sabotage this man out of jealously. Lol let him cook.
ONG let the cavil glazers cry
People always be salty everytime this guy talks
Yup. In the first Guardians movie, everybody almost died when the slave girl touched the power stone. In Infinity War Thanos is blasting everybody with it, and everybody just walks away from it unscathed. I liked Infinity War, but it was very much like watching the Skypiea arc in One Piece, where like 10 characters should have died from Eneru's lightning attacks, but everybody ended up being fine.
In Infinity War's defence, Thanos in that was very 'forgiving' in regards to those that got in his way. He seemed to be deliberately not killing people unless it was to uphold his 'half/half' philosophy (like on the Asgardian ship)
So I imagined he used the stone more to dis-arm, throw opponents away then hurt them. While the slave girl was using it without any control, allowing its full power to be blasted out.
Also worth noting that the majority of the characters that actually took a full blast from the Power Stone in those two movies were Gods, Hulks, and Infinity Stone-imbued cosmic heroes like Captain Marvel. And maybe a shockwave hit Rhodey while in his armor. Which is all very different from a slave girl grabbing it with her bare hands.
@@The2ndQuest wasn’t he a skrull by then?
@@jonathananderson5529 Yes- but the armor probably would have protected him regardless. And I don't believe regular Skrulls are that much stronger/more durable than humans since they can be killed by pretty conventional means.
@@jonathananderson5529 NO HE WASN't.
I don't care what anyone says , Rhodey was replaced by a Skrull post Endgame 2023
Battle of Earth - Date
October 17, 2023
New Rockstars -DELETED SCENE: How Marvel FIXED Rhodey Before Cap 4 & Armor Wars!
"i think the audience is smart enough" That's why this will work. He doesn't take us as morons
Yeah, it wouldn't make sense if Superman is faster than a speeding bullet, meanwhile Supergirl is traveling between solar systems at light speed.
What?
Well I could see saying that in space Superman/Supergirl (if they are in a solar system with a yellow sun/suns) could absorb more energy and faster. Making them able to travel a lot faster than they would be able to on earth.
But it seems like you are referencing something specific that I don't know about.
But light speed is faster than a speeding bullet, so, just going off your statement, why couldn't Superman do the same thing?
You can easily argue that going at the speed of light would essentially kill everyone around him so he needs to go slower, whereas going at the speed of light in the space doesn't really cause any issues.
The fact is that neither Superman nor Supergirl nor Power Girl nor Superboy nor Zod nor whoever else... is capable of travelling at the speed of light, let alone faster than it. That's Flash's thing: only speedsters with access to the Speed Force are capable of physics-defying speed. Which means there's a hard speed limit on how fast Kryptonians can go and what they can do.
The nearest star to Earth, the ABSOLUTE NEAREST STAR, is Proxima Centauri. And it's over 4 light-years away. That means that even at absolute top speed, for a Kryptonian like Superman or Supergirl to go anywhere noteworthy outside our solar system, anywhere at all, it would take them over eight years for a round trip. And that's the absolute nearest star. The other side of the galaxy is 100,000 light-years away.
So if the plot of the Supergirl movie involves her flying into space and going to, let's say, the remains of Krypton, and it needs her to take less than a century getting there... then the movie will need her to use a spaceship. Something with some handwavey sci-fi tech that allows her to get there faster. Under her own power, she can't break the light barrier. Superman can't, and so she can't. It's not an ability that Kryptonians have. She needs a ship. Or a teleporter, or a wormhole... something external to her.
Because in scifi you're allowed to make up the rules if you want... but once you've made them, you need to stay consistent on them.
My pet peeve is the "multiverse" being constantly used as a magic eraser to be able to completely ignore any need for continuity.
Intend to agree, but also, that's literally why the DC multiverse exists. That was the whole point of Crisis on Infinite Earths. Of course, they thought at the time they were collapsing it all down to one persistent continuity, so THAT was adorable.
Most comic fans understand that when youre trying to keep a universe alive for over a century, its understandable that some continuity is gonna be scuffed. That's fine, that can be "patched" later with a story to explain any inconsistencies. Just make good movies that respects these characters man.
My superhero movie pet peeve is forcing every damn superhero movie you make to have a team
You actually asked James Gunn, the man who put five post-credits scenes in Guardians 2, if post-credits scenes bother him?
It was an example
@@JT-cx2evI can't stand obtuse people like @PaperbackWizard. It's like are you that far on the spectrum? Arw you so inept that you have to automatically think you know more than what is really happening? F-in daft see you next Tuesday's I swear to gawd bruh
@@Former_Employee The scary part is the amount of people who liked his comment
@@JT-cx2evFRRRR!! Goes to show a lot of people that don’t listen. Quite scary when you think about it lowkey.
@@Former_Employee Hey buddy please don’t drag autistic people into your petty internet tantrum
I would love a movie or limited series about a serious house on a serious earth
Same here.
I want DC to hire Panos Cosmatos specifically for ASHOSE
Good news! They literally adapted that book into a big triple-A game titled Arkham Asylum.
So in other words, it all has to make sense if he thinks it makes sense? It's fine to be inconsistent if he's ok with it?
Something I've always appreciated about Gunn's work in the Guardians of the Galaxy movie is that the music is a major theme for the main character, and when music played in the battle scenes, there was almost always an "actual" reason for it, either through Peter's walkman or through loudspeakers or something. I know everyone loves Thor Ragnarok, but I found the inclusion of the Immigrant song to be kind of out of place both because Thor himself probably doesn't even know who Led Zeppelin are and has never personally heard the song in his life, but also because the song itself isn't playing from anywhere. You can tell as you're watching it that the song is only playing in that fight scene right now because the director personally liked it, and thought it would go well with the action. It just didn't have as much thought or planning behind it as Gunn usually employs.
One of my big pet peeves in Superhero movies is when the studio cares too much about not letting spoilers get out to the point where it gets in the way of the actors doing their job. Like not letting them have the whole script out of fear it’ll breach containment and as a result the actors don’t have the full context of the scene and can’t give their best performance
I feel like of the things you could be a hardass on, continuity is a very reasonable one.
Nawwww, X-men did fine without it lol
@@Theblackout292yeah totally 😂
@@Theblackout292Naahhh they didn’t
@@DTCAllOver that was never the problem with the movies
You missed his point if you think he was talking purely in term of continuity. His main point was getting so stuck on keeping canon, continuity, and making your movies feel like it’s all in one universe, that you take away creative freedom from the creators. That’s the reason a lot of MCU films feel bland and all the same.
Has anyone seen James Gunn and Adam Savage in the same room at the same time? Just sayin'...
I was here thinking that MythBusters was going to get back on the air again…
On all your lives, DC is making a comeback 🙏
Please no giant blue energy beam shooting at the sky at the end of movies...
We've been waiting for a long time for a Superman game
I don’t like when the villain just has the same powers/MO as the hero.
This is why I find the Flash boring. Some of his most prominent villains are just evil versions of himself.
@@thenewapelles6448 tbh thats bc flash is ridiculously way too op compared to other heroes he kinda has no one but another speedster to rival him
I kinda loved the Thor Infinity Gauntlet retcon. Hela just walks in there and goes "Fake!" and knocks it over. It tracks with what she says about Odin in the movie.
From Slither to Brightburn and now Superman. Congrats Mr.Gunn
I love James and Zack so much. I don't get why the two fandoms have to hate each other.
He’s not doing a good job in convincing me he cares about canon.
The biggest thing that drives me nuts in super hero movies is inconsistent physics. Like, basic stuff. I've seen so many examples but here is one of the more glaring ones. One superhero/villain can throw another literally through the ground, but a car can stop them within a few feet of impact.
The best SFX that Adam Savage has ever done is his alternate persona, James Gunn.
It's a little trippy to have kinda grew up in gunn movies(from dawn of the dead to weird stuff like slither) and now see him getting a older. Instead of just being a talented fan/ director, I can kind of see him as a young veteran now.
All of us never new that the infinity gauntlet was gonna be a huge part when we saw thor it was like any easter egg
I guess what he's saying is everything should be consistent on a basic fundamental level but when it comes to the fine details that are specific to the characters, the things that make them not copies of one another, then it's ok for them to be different.
I truly wish that he’d made Guardians 3 just a little different…
My takeaway was that Rocket was in a hallucinogenic state while on life support, which could’ve absolutely kept the emotional impact of his visions of Lyla and the others, while still allowing for one of them… specifically Floor… to have managed to survive
Doesn’t mean she needs to actually *~DO~* anything of note, just that she could’ve lived and been a massive emotional reveal for Rocket after the evacuation to Nowhere
A lot of others believe that Rocket was experiencing the gateway to the afterlife when he was conversing with Lyla, but not all of those scenes were preceded by him flatlining/his condition worsening
With all the chaos of the High Evolutionary’s ship getting destroyed, they could’ve even had Floor just be implied to have gotten out with the mass-evacuation and emerge from literally any part of a crowd or behind a corner in Nowhere’s promenade after hearing Rocket’s voice
Disbelief and shock washes over him as a 15 second scene follows where he runs out of the containment area and the camera pulls in a few seconds later to show even just 1 of her mech legs twitch… she voices over during those 15 seconds that she remembered pain and that when she came to that she pulled herself to a vent shaft to hide and had beed doing so since
Yeah it’s not Lyla, but even just Floor living would be an indescribable moment for Rocket, especially since the Guardians are headquartered out of Nowhere
Again, she doesn’t have to DO anything, but she’d surely fit right in on Nowhere and it’d be easy to make work, even if she just shows up visually for a few seconds here or there and/or has 1 or two exchanges with someone
Hallucinations make a lot more sense to me as he’s trying to live with/come to terms with the guilt he’s felt from the moment his escape attempt resulted in their deaths (or in my mind 2 of their deaths)
If that was a gates of the afterlife/verge of death, then I would’ve also expected to have seen Guardians’ 1 Groot there since Baby Groot and beyond is his offspring and not a resurrected OG Groot…
But no, it’s just Rocket face-to-face with a representation of his strongest pain brought on by ever-present guilt at his self-perceived greatest failure
It’s ok… in my mind and maybe nobody else’s, Floor lives on
Pet Peeve: when I’m Gotg V3 with the slow mo hallway fight, once it’s over, it hard cuts to another scene.
Tone is the word he's looking for
I'd love to see James Gunn reacting to people reacting to the trailer.
Does this mean Superman doesn’t have rebuild the Great Wall of China vision anymore?
He suddenly looks 80 years old.
I know this is a joke or hate but it's honestly the white in his beard and hair visioning him without it he actually looks crazy young for his age tbh.
Getting hack no-name "directors" to just be yes-men for the studio/producers. Remember when actual filmmakers with an actual identity made actual films that also happened to be superhero movies? Gotta love that brilliant, visionary auteur Jonathan Watkins or whoever it was that "made" those shitty Spider-Man movies.
Sam Raimi. That's who made the shitty Spider-Man movies.
Which is funny I just watched creature commandos love it but this one character pulls out a flintlock pistol and fires two shots without reloading and I’m like what?
Was it a pepperbox? Those have four barrels, which can be fired independently.
@ nope it was a one barrel
So basically James would side with Miles against Miguel
Superheroes always winning. Would be great to have the villains win more often.
You already have that. Just look out your window.
I agree
I love having a high stakes movie where no matter what the hero(s) do, they still lose
For example, infinity war. Had all of them fighting Thanos, and in the end, it wasn't enough to beat him
Is this an episode of Mythbusters, because my man is looking like Adam Savage and rocking that white beard ???
🤣🤣🤣😭😭
Adam Savage doppelganger 😝😝😅😅🤣🤣
Nothing matters when you have a guy at the end that reverses time making it so nothing really ever happened.
I hate it when they spend a good portion of the movie building up how badass the hero is, then gimp him right before he faces the villain.
I agree. Look at the Marvels. I had no fucking clue who was powerful and who wasn't, just a bunch of people all firing laser beams from their limbs and punching each other with super punches. There *have* to be stakes, there has to be some level of consistency and in-universe rules to understand power levels. Normal films, you understand bigger stronger guy is likely tougher than weedier smaller out of shape guy. You understand the dynamic. This needs to be clear in the films of the DCU, as marvel lost the plot.
My pet peeve with superhero movies is they either ham-fist an agenda into the film like the constant Jesus Metaphor in Zach's DCEU because Superman was Never a Jesus Metaphor to begin with.
Superman has always been a Jesus metaphor. People have been talking about this longer than you have been alive.
@@redrick8900He was created by two Jewish kids and meant to be like a golem. Superman was not conceived as a Jesus-like figure.
@@redrick8900 Superman is an illegal alien whose biggest enemy is a multibillionaire who wants to rule the world. He was created by two Jewish boys during the run-up to the Second World War. He is not, nor has he ever been, a "Jesus metaphor". What he is, is Elon Musk's worst nightmare.
@@redrick8900 No the guy written by two Jewish dudes is not a Jesus metaphor. He is at best a Moses metaphor.
So . . . every superhero movie in the last 30 years.
Im with him on the internal inconsistency. It drives me insane.
Spider-man into the spider-verse is his fav superhero movie!😁👍👍🕷
That's promising.
My pet peeve, Helmets and masks that apear from nowhere over the back of the hero's head.
he's putting his ass on the line, they're no denying that
My biggest pet peeve is honestly 4th wall breaks. Because 99% of the time they just completely any sense of emotion or investment. Because it reminds you “oh yeah, none of this real in any capacity. So why should I care?” All those grand speeches and epic moments are suddenly meaningless. Because they only happened because the script of writer said so. It kills the weight of everything and it’s usually just a vehicle for Deus ex machina. It’s much more interesting to view the stories as looking into some other place to view a story, rather than it being shoved in our face how fake it all is
They should never kill off the best villain right away. Batman 1989 and Black Panther are perfect examples. Why kill KillMonger?? Pointless.
Because Killmonger was a terrible one note villain.
Amen to that!! Stop slaughtering massive villains.
my superhero movie pet peeve is all the generic, throwaway music, as well as misplaced liscenced songs. it's getting better, and they did great with the avengers theme from day one, but especially in modern superhero movies, the music has not been as gut-wrenching as it should be.
It’s funny because Gunn had to ask Taika Waititi for the Guardians to part ways with Thor in Love And Thunder because his script for GOTG3 was without Thor 😛
James Gunn movies are for people who want "snarky" superhero juvenile popcorn camp.
I'd rather have that than Snyder's films where Joker jokes about giving Batman a reacharound. 😅
Gunn and I would get along just fine..
this is what i mean by -- they dont want to tell THE story they want to tell THEIR story... and its one of the main reasons superhero movies dont work anymore. people arent getting tired of superhero movies. theyre tired of people making them that dont respect therm. james was great for guardians because he didnt change a whole lot. hes changing too much in dc.
So in Gunn's world Batman wouldn't hide a Kryptonite spear without knowing where the fight would end up or if Supes would just kill him with eyebeam or just fly him somewhere else
In the comics, Bats has a shard of kryponite in a lead-lined pouch on his belt. (Also, Clark gave it to him because he trust Bruce to use it if necessary - most of his friends would hesitate, but not Bruce.)
We are in good hands DC!
Kevin Feige: Everything has to look the same all the time!
James Gunn: Not everything has to look the same all the time!
The new DC cinematic universe (or whatever we're calling it) already has a leg up on the MCU because of this basic philosophical difference.
There is one thing that he said which is so fcking important: ,,I think the audience is smart enough“
Every marvel film is written for people who dont want to think about the film itself. Just care for the cameo in the credit scene. It seems like their audience never watched a movie at all
he reminds me so much of Adam Savage
Hey, it's Minute Man.
One thing that really drives me up the wall is that after a movie or a series, characters that wouldn’t have had any knowledge of what happened suddenly know the basics. For example, how the hell did the world know who Thanos was? He only got namedropped once during the fight with Ebony Maw and Black Dwarf/Cull Obsidian, and the only times he showed up on Earth, he does so in areas that no reporters or bystanders could see or make out anything like the Avengers Compound or the middle of a forest in Wakanda.
Another thing, how do people know who Carol Danvers is? I’m not talking about Spider-Man, he makes sense. I’m talking about Kamala Khan, she was in Jersey when Endgame happened, which is probably several miles away from Avengers HQ, so all she would have seen if she saw anything was maybe a spaceship and said spaceship get blown up by a bright light. Also where did people get the name Captain Marvel from?
I feel like the writers really dropped the ball here.
Carol was operating for five years between Infinity War and Engdame. I'm sure she dropped by Earth on occasion. She gave herself the name Captain Marvel, as an homage to Mar-Vell, the Kree who accidentally gave her powers. And Thanos was probably discussed on TV after the Snap, when the remaining Avengers were trying to explain what happened to _half the people on the planet._
Gunn can't tolerate internal inconsistency. Like when Star Lord used his signature mask to save Gamora in GoTG 1, and if the mask hadn't been broken in GotG 2, Peter could've saved Yondu. So of course Star Lord just stops wearing the mask entirely for GoTG 3.
The timeline mistake in SpiderMan Homecoming must’ve drove him insane!
The MCU timeline book had to explain it with Miss Minutes saying a TVA analyst must have misplaced a case file
James doesn't like the parts where the superheroes do things and the parts where the superheroes talk. He just likes the parts where children happen to be on screen.
When personal agenda trumps canon.
Pet peeve for me is superhero landings. I think if i never see another one it'll be too soon!
Ok Deadpool 😂
Boy, yer gonna love The Batman.
OK Yelena.
I miss the days when Superman floated gracefully to the ground instead of striking the earth like a falling anvil.
@@Shampyon I mean, it's not a bad idea in itself, it's just indicative of the media trend of making everything louder and more violent. I remember back in 2009 when JJ Abrams took a crack at Star Trek, and there were some interesting additions to the flavor of that world. For instance, the Enterprise going into warp went off like a gunshot. And I thought it was cool at the moment, expressing the incredible power of such a technology. But the more I thought about it, the more it annoyed me. It was part of the "bad-ass-ification" of everything, whether it needs it or not. Not because everyone wants that, but because the people who do are a loudly vocal minority.
I was excited by the Man of Steel trailer. It gave the impression that the film would have real depth, and explore the character in new and interesting ways. But ultimately, that film and the ones that followed had little to add to the world of the Justice League beyond making literally every aspect "sick, yo!" And though that's not necessarily a bad thing in itself, it's no replacement for actual substance. So Superman being depicted as nothing more than a power flex rings hollow. The films seemed far more interested in the "super" than the "hero." I'm not sure it knew or cared what that second word even means. It sure as hell doesn't mean "smash everything in sight just because you can."
Also stop building up sweet bad guys and killing them off in a minute like Aquaman And The Lost Kingdom, The Dark Knight, Fantastic Four(2016), etc. You all know where I'm going with this. I hope James Gunn does a Superman Domsday fight the right way.
Okay but like…. Avengers tower just NOT showing up is weird. Like that’s my one gripe with the Defenders, is you see the MetLife building and you go “wait that’s where Avengers Tower is, wth?”
Too many jokes in MCU kills it for me
To me, there are a couple of differences between Marvel and DC that are important and should be considered. There is a lot of overlap because the artists, writers, and editors often hopped to the other side and brought ideas with them, so the differences are kind of subtle.
DC heroes have flaws, but are defined by their virtues. Marvel heroes have virtues, but are defined by their flaws. Batman is a deeply flawed character, but we cheer for him because of his dogged pursuit of justice and redemption (people forget about that second part, but it is significant that he spends so much money on Arkham). Iron Man often does the right thing for the right reasons, but we are interested in his stories because he's a self-absorbed jerk with poor social skills.
The other difference is in emphasis when it comes to alter egos. Marvel places more emphasis on the "civilian" alter egos, while DC places emphasis on the hero personas. We care about what happens to Spider-Man in a fight because we know its outcome might affect whether or not he can pay rent that month. The alter ego is the focus, and his actions as a superhero are one facet of the complications in Peter Parker's life. When Superman says "Truth, justice, and the American way," we know he means it because we watched him pursue all those things as reporter Clark Kent. To people in the DC universe, Batman is a spirit of vengeance, but the reader knows Batman is also Bruce Wayne, who spends a lot of money trying to redeem the irredeemable in Arkham. In DC, the hero is the focus, while the alter ego informs the audience and gives context to the hero's actions and decisions.
Queue the 80's B side... Thats my pet peeve.
Right now I'm reading early Hellblazer right after reading Alan Moore's Swamp Thing and despite HB being a direct spin-off of ST, super-heroes really don't exist in John's world.
Sure Constantine can meet Batman in Swamp Thing, but it's totally against the vibe of HB where only the more supernatural entities have a presence. To me, this is what made DC special as it's a shared universe where you get to pick and choose what gets shared on a title to title basis, where a massive retcon in one title has no real affect on other titles that are far enough away from it in terms of tone.
Im annoyed when every movie has the same feel, comedic tone, and character dynamics. When the director/writer is IN the movie as much if not more than the stars. If you know, ya know.
I hate it when supervillains delete all their inappropriate tweets and everyone pretends it never happened.
We don’t pretend it didn’t happen, we simply don’t care
"The audience is smart enough...." to handle a TV version and a movie version of the same character. I said what I said!
In comic books, nothing is canon and everything is canon, all at the same time
There's a base which you must respect, but honestly, not even celebrated Big Two writers are that hardcore about continuity with other runs
Comic book guy likes comic book logic. Fans: RAGE