Support NeoGAF

[Cuburt]

They could just make a stand alone movies and not have everything be connected.

The X-Men movies are the closest thing to that with their disregard for continuity and even they have to pay lip service to it to some degree.

It's inevitable to some degree because how can you have sequels to the same franchise with the same actors and not act like the stories exist in the same universe. I don't think audiences can accept a film to be just like an episode of the Simpsons where everything can be ruined and go back to normal next week. Although, it is kind of weird to think that the Burton/Schumaker Batman films have lots of different actors and have little tying one film to the next (except for Michael Gough's Alfred) but they all seem to be a line of sequels feeding off it's predecessor. Even Batman 89 is not the same as Batman Returns.

 

[Sibersk Esto]

He's busy with the Kong: Skull Island movie.

they got some meh ass cinematographers for Justice League and Wonder Woman. Man couldn't WB just call up Wally Pfister. Dude's done nothing since leaving Nolan's work and making transcendence.

his tdk trilogy looked great too.

Pfister turns his nose up to superhero films if I remember

 

[Discotheque]

Real shame is George Miller's Justice League never materialized. Not just for, hey, it's George Miller making JL, but WB was about to have Nolan Batman and a separate universe JL coexist. It'd be cool if we had the elseworld stories in addition to mainline.

forreal. if it succeeded it would have set a great precedent to make this out of canon stuff.

like we could have gotten batman beyond with keaton as old wayne and a modern day batman movie from the same studio.

but nah...now everybody wants that marvel money/audience

 

[dabig2]

You need great characters that audiences enjoy to pull off a cinematic universe. Even if the Thor films were bad to average, people love the Thor character. Even if TiH underperformed and that there's been no Hulk movie since, people love the Hulk. Even if Iron-Man films were divisive following IM1, people still think Tony Stark is one of the greatest comic book character adaptions in the world. Even though Black Widow and Hawkeye don't even have their own films, people love those characters too.

A thirst and love for all these wildly different personas means that you can build a cinematic universe because people want to see these characters beyond their own spheres. We'll see what happens with DC after Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman, but the fact that people aren't being too receptive of Superman after 2 movies has got to be disappointing to DC. He was the guy they were building off and he's also the most popular and recognizable of their superheroes, followed by Batman (maybe that's reversed in recent years).

 

[BadAss2961]

Because



of this.

If Suicide Squad is a success it wouldn't be because it benefited from the DCEU concept, it would be because audiences like it. With Batman v Superman doing next to nothing to advertise it, it wouldn't be validation of their cinematic universe plan. You'd need Wonder Woman or Aquaman to be a success for the DCEU to seem like a good idea, otherwise the message will be "Stick Batman or the Joker into a film and it'll be a success", which is something they already know.

I'm not saying Suicide Squad's success would stop them making DCEU films, just that it would probably dissolve the DCEU as a concept more than it would reinforce it.

Suicide Squad is finally going down because of the DCEU concept. It's its own thing as well as a breeding ground for potential spinoffs, similar to Justice League, just on a lower level. Its characters aren't confined to just Batman, they expand the universe in multiple directions. Including villains of League members and heroes we're yet to see. It could even bring us to other groups like Justice League Dark.

This isn't like Marvel has been thus far where everything they do ultimately links to The Avengers storyline.

 

[Discotheque]

Suicide Squad is finally going down because of the DCEU concept. It's its own thing as well as a breeding ground for potential spinoffs, similar to Justice League, just on a lower level. Its characters aren't confined to just Batman, they expand the universe in multiple directions. Including villains of League members and heroes we're yet to see. It could even bring us to other groups like Justice League Dark.

This isn't like Marvel has been thus far where everything they do ultimately links to The Avengers storyline.

hopefully. would be nice if a lot of these plots have no bearing on justice league (like we don't need to hear about darkseid in wonder woman and aquaman and every other movie like he's thanos and his gems again)

like maybe suicide squad hints at a batman-only thread in the future instead (if even that). and maybe wonder woman relates a bit to aquaman more than anything else.

 

[guek]

This isn't like Marvel has been thus far where everything they do ultimately links to The Avengers storyline.*

*except for Incredible Hulk, Iron Man, Iron Man 3, and Ant-Man

Suicide Squad could still tie in to Darkseid somehow but it's not guaranteed and could easily not be connected at all.

 

[KonradLaw]

They could just make a stand alone movies and not have everything be connected.

That's a sure way to financial failure.

 

[BadAss2961]

*except for Incredible Hulk, Iron Man, Iron Man 3, and Ant-Man

Suicide Squad could still tie in to Darkseid somehow but it's not guaranteed and could easily not be connected at all.

Hulk, Iron Man, Ant-Man, they're all part of that Avengers branch. All I meant by that.

 

[Chariot]

*except for Incredible Hulk, Iron Man, Iron Man 3, and Ant-Man

Suicide Squad could still tie in to Darkseid somehow but it's not guaranteed and could easily not be connected at all.

Ant-Man, you're calling Ant-Man? The movie that actually had another Avenger appear, raised the question whether they should ask the Avengers for help and established a connection to Cap's side in preparation to Civil War.

 

[Not]

It's still gonna be years if not decades until someone nails a Superman movie, huh

 

[Chariot]

It's still gonna be years if not decades until someone nails a Superman movie, huh

They just need to put someone in that isn't ashamed of Superman.

 

[guek]

Ant-Man, you're calling Ant-Man? The movie that actually had another Avenger appear, raised the question whether they should ask the Avengers for help and established a connection to Cap's side in preparation to Civil War.

It was part of the larger universe but didn't do anything to progress the primary Avengers story line with the infinity stones

 

[LionPride]

It's still gonna be years if not decades until someone nails a Superman movie, huh

Well the best Superman movie made came out like three years ago, it was pretty good

 

[Ad0ve]

That's a sure way to financial failure.

Seemed to work with TDK and Spiderman films

 

[Busty]

they got some meh ass cinematographers for Justice League and Wonder Woman. Man couldn't WB just call up Wally Pfister. Dude's done nothing since leaving Nolan's work and making transcendence.

Pfister has been busy directing episodes of Flaked, Will Arnett's new self indulgent comedy/drama on Netflix so he's..., he's doing okay.

*cough*

 

[Chariot]

My friend said once that Snyder's films are perfect 9gag material. Lol

Ah, that explains why the 9gag community is so adamant in defending it.

 

[Rymuth]

The X-Men movies are the closest thing to that with their disregard for continuity and even they have to pay lip service to it to some degree.

It's inevitable to some degree because how can you have sequels to the same franchise with the same actors and not act like the stories exist in the same universe. I don't think audiences can accept a film to be just like an episode of the Simpsons where everything can be ruined and go back to normal next week. Although, it is kind of weird to think that the Burton/Schumaker Batman films have lots of different actors and have little tying one film to the next (except for Michael Gough's Alfred) but they all seem to be a line of sequels feeding off it's predecessor. Even Batman 89 is not the same as Batman Returns.

Tonally, yes but BR had micheal keaton, same actor playing Gordon and a Viki Vale mention. I consider it a direct sequel.

 

[GabeTheGrouch76]

Don't want to spoil the movie here but

Spoiler

that pretty much already happens in the movie complete with the spear of Longinus, cross symbolism and Christ's body wrapped in cloth as he's brought down.

Good lord lmao

I haven't even seen BvS and I only made that post as a joke

And yet I indirectly guessed a plot point in the film correctly GG

 

[Cheebo]

Nah... In no way would Suicide Squad's success be bad for the DCEU, it'll just add needed momentum.

A good movie is a good movie, that's all there is to it.

Agreed. What it needs is a good movie first and foremost. The DCEU started with two movies that most deem to be terrible movies. It can't go 0-3 here. It needs a movie the audiences actually likes, and soon. You need some sort of positive momentum. Both movies we have gotten were steps backwards.

 

[Cuburt]

Tonally, yes but BR had micheal keaton, same actor playing Gordon and a Viki Vale mention. I consider it a direct sequel.

There is so little continuity between films that people seem to regard the Burton films as a separate series then the Schumacher films now but they are connected in the loosest sense. At the same time, they could all be separate Batman stories and you don't really need to see any of the previous films to watch any of them, from what I remember.

 

[tomtom94]

Pfister has been busy directing episodes of Flaked, Will Arnett's new self indulgent comedy/drama on Netflix so he's..., he's doing okay.

*cough*

Presumably to prove that he doesn't need Christopher Nolan producing to make something which sucks*.




*going off consensus here. if you liked any of Pfister's directorial efforts, more power to you though

 

[GabeTheGrouch76]

that's the best imo. but nah marvel's changed things too much for the genre. not a lot of people want that anymore.

Correction, not a lot of studios want that anymore, even though the Nolan Batman films did fine as a standalone trilogy. There isn't one major studio that isn't or hasn't tried cultivating or owning a CU of their own ever since Marvel Studios struck gold.

Disney started the roadmap by housing Marvel as a whole under their roof (even though they had been planning to buyout Marvel for a while now). If Marvel and Marvel Studios stayed independent, Paramount (who had distributed most of the MCU films up to Disney's acquisition) would have made a longstanding lock on Marvel Studios regarding distribution.
Speaking of which, Paramount and Hasbro from what I remember reading are hacking out a shared universe for Hasbro properties. Transformers and the recent G.I. Joe films in particular I remember were being discussed.
Universal's trying to establish a CU for monster movies. Dracula Untold didn't kickstart things as they wanted, and now they seem to be shuffling their hopes onto their reboot of The Mummy.
Sony tried their gamble at an Spider-Man-themed MCU and fumbled it with their second movie in, they managed to get a consolation price of making a deal with Marvel and getting a check for allowing Spider-Man play on MCU turf.
Fox looks to be crafting one for the Marvel properties they own the film rights to as of the moment. They brought X-Men back to form after The Last Stand and Origins: Wolverine derailed things; and while they royally screwed up Fant4stic, they struck an unintended hit with Deadpool.

Which takes us to WB, who's has made a point of failing to properly maintain their DCCU fire at least twice now (Miller's JL being canned and GL 2011 being a dud). And depending on how things turn out in the wake of BvS, the fire may end up dying out for a third time.

Agreed. What it needs is a good movie first and foremost. The DCEU started with two movies that most deem to be terrible movies. It can't go 0-3 here. It needs a movie the audiences actually likes, and soon. You need some sort of positive momentum. Both movies we have gotten were steps backwards.

Some would argue in order to go backwards, you need to have at least gone forwards first. MoS not being the mega-hit WB hoped for and BvS starting to tank makes them both non-starters more than anything else.

 

[Dash_Riprock]

It's still gonna be years if not decades until someone nails a Superman movie, huh

So long as WB keeps trying to turn every superhero into Nolan's Batman, yeah, pretty much...

Sucks that the failure of Green Lantern made them cling even more to the dark n gritty aesthetic.

 

[ArtHands]

Perhaps DC trinity just isn't as popular as before any more, due to the shift to gloom tone and the raise of popularity of MCU. That and DC doesn't have any popular characters outside of JL. Heck even half of JL isn't that popular (Cyborg etc)

 

[Nekofrog]

There is so little continuity between films that people seem to regard the Burton films as a separate series then the Schumacher films now but they are connected in the loosest sense. At the same time, they could all be separate Batman stories and you don't really need to see any of the previous films to watch any of them, from what I remember.

I remember reading something about early treatments of Batman Forever that still had Keaton/Burton attached where the Joker as played by Jack Nicholson would appear in a nightmare/hallucination sequence.

Maybe it was bunk info, it was a long time ago. If that happened, it would probably one of the only links connecting the Burton movies because they do indeed feel totally separated as is.

 

[Cipherr]

That's a sure way to financial failure.

Nope. TDK movies were some of the best SH films ever even during Marvel's startup, and it had no connections to a 'shared universe'. People are acting like it's a requirement post Avengers and that's a damn lie.

Yes Marvel/Disney made it work, but that's not the only way it can be done.

Correction, not a lot of studios want that anymore, even though the Nolan Batman films did fine as a standalone trilogy. There isn't one major studio that isn't or hasn't tried cultivating or owning a CU of their own ever since Marvel Studios struck gold.

Yep, this here. So many connected universes popping up now. It's just trending within the film world, that's all. But I don't believe for a second that it's the only way to succeed. All I know is I loved Nolans trilogy, and I haven't liked anything that's a part of the new DCEU so far, so it all feels like regression to me.

Perhaps DC trinity just isn't as popular as before any more, due to the shift to gloom tone and the raise of popularity of MCU. That and DC doesn't have any popular characters outside of JL. Heck even half of JL isn't that popular (Cyborg etc)

Popularity doesn't stop you if the movie is good. Ironman is punching waaay above his popularity level, so is Antman and Guardians and probably even Deadpool at this point. A small name can become a big name really fast if the film is done right.

 

[XAL]

Don't want to spoil the movie here but

Spoiler

that pretty much already happens in the movie complete with the spear of Longinus, cross symbolism and Christ's body wrapped in cloth as he's brought down.

Not to mention going up on a fucking

Spoiler

mountain and having a conversation with his dead father.

 

[ArtHands]

Nope. TDK movies were some of the best SH films ever even during Marvel's startup, and it had no connections to a 'shared universe'. People are acting like it's a requirement post Avengers and that's a damn lie.

Yes Marvel/Disney made it work, but that's not the only way it can be done.



Yep, this here. So many connected universes popping up now. It's just trending within the film world, that's all. But I don't believe for a second that it's the only way to succeed. All I know is I loved Nolans trilogy, and I haven't liked anything that's a part of the new DCEU so far, so it all feels like regression to me.



Popularity doesn't stop you if the movie is good. Ironman is punching waaay above his popularity level, so is Antman and Guardians and probably even Deadpool at this point. A small name can become a big name really fast if the film is done right.

Could be a mix of both. Decreasing popularity and a string of shitty DC movies and others.

While it is said that Marvel's way isn't the only way it can be done, nobody has found a way to make it work. WB, Sony, Fox all have failed to an extend so far. Fox is picking itself up though by taking it one step at a time. Greenlit Deadpool & Wolverine sequel, canning Fantastic 4 sequel etc.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

People take a risk, and they get ripped to shreds for it.

Yeah, because people didn't like it. Funny how opinions work.

 

[jmood88]

Yeah, because people didn't like it. Funny how opinions work.

I do agree that it was a big risk to put out a bad movie to launch the DC cinematic universe.

 

[jackdoe]

Nope. TDK movies were some of the best SH films ever even during Marvel's startup, and it had no connections to a 'shared universe'. People are acting like it's a requirement post Avengers and that's a damn lie.

Yes Marvel/Disney made it work, but that's not the only way it can be done.



Yep, this here. So many connected universes popping up now. It's just trending within the film world, that's all. But I don't believe for a second that it's the only way to succeed. All I know is I loved Nolans trilogy, and I haven't liked anything that's a part of the new DCEU so far, so it all feels like regression to me.



Popularity doesn't stop you if the movie is good. Ironman is punching waaay above his popularity level, so is Antman and Guardians and probably even Deadpool at this point. A small name can become a big name really fast if the film is done right.

One benefit of the shared universe, is that every movie becomes part of the franchise, so if you have one mega hit movie, like the Avengers, it props up all the other movies in your franchise. Iron Man 3, Thor Dark World, and Winter Soldier saw bumps in their worldwide gross post Avengers. It helps absorb stinkers like Dark World and makes tough sells like Captain America easier sells.

 

[kurahador]

Trump took risk too with his campaign. Let's applaud him for it.

 

[Cipherr]

One benefit of the shared universe, is that every movie becomes part of the franchise, so if you have one mega hit movie, like the Avengers, it props up all the other movies in your franchise. Iron Man 3, Thor Dark World, and Winter Soldier saw bumps in their worldwide gross post Avengers. It helps absorb stinkers like Dark World and makes tough sells like Captain America easier sells.

That is true. I can see how that's something every studio would want.

 

[darkistheway]

Zack Snyder is at his best recreating graphic novels. Pick the best Justice League graphic novel and let him film it.

Marvel has had so much success by constantly going back to the comics to mine story ideas and character development. It is a free story development cycle. DC/Warner doesn't to realize the treasure trove of stories they already have waiting to be filmed.

I liked MoS and BvS but they did not feel like cinematic versions of the best Superman or Batman stories.

BvS, especially, was just a mishmash, story-by-marketing vehicle for the next film. Totally wrong way to go.

And I really want Warner to succeed in this. Because I would rather live a world where someone gives the Wachowskis' 150 million dollars for Jupiter Ascending than a world where every movie is a sequel.

 

[KonradLaw]

Seemed to work with TDK and Spiderman films

Didn't work all that well for Batman Begins though.
The whole point of shared universe is to create a sequel like effect, with people getting interested in new movie because of previous ones, but without the negative effects of "dear God, how many sequels they can make".

It makes zero sense to make superhero movies outside of shared universe. Every movie has to stand up on it;s own then and there's no creative advantage either, as let's be honest, the shared universe bit is always pretty small. So at most you will get couple minutes of Batman in Suicide Squad anyway.

 

[Ross61]

We keep talking about Miller's Justice League like we know for a fact it wood be good. Like are we just assuming that just because he was a good director that the movie would have been great? Did ya'll forget that Martin Campbell , a great director, directed GL?

 

[KonradLaw]

Nope. TDK movies were some of the best SH films ever even during Marvel's startup, and it had no connections to a 'shared universe'.

Financially BvS will probably end up bigger success than Batman Begins was.
TDK became big mostly because of how good Batman Begins ended up being plus Ledger's Death. So even TDK needed a boost from other movie. In this case it was simply it's prequel.

 

[EGM1966]

I'm hearing the rhetoric a lot, and it may be absolutely true... but if BvS fails to break even $850 million, will WB actually take a loss on this? Was the production and marketing budget really THAT high? (It could very well have been).

That's insane to think a film could make $850 and still loss money in its initial theatrical run. Regardless of reviews, poor word of mouth, and historic drops, maybe that tells you that WB shouldn't write blank checks to Zack Snyder, especially when they must be looking at the $800 million Deadpool pulled off on a $60 million budget.

I know it seems crazy, and to be fair Snyder isn't the issue in terms of the accounting; any director in this situation faces this.

The issue is an expensive film that is given big global marketing seems now to be in the position that it has to have large domestic haul (where WB make most money) and get close to or break a billion.

WB clearly threw every expense at the film expecting around a billion and a big domestic chunk of that.

So if the film doesn't got that... well they will have overspent vs return and may only see small or negligible profit.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

The film was flawed and poor reception from critics and fans tanked this film. In the hands of another director Batman v. Superman could've raked in over a billion.

With that said, I feel the general sentiment in this thread and on the Internet in general is over the top. I have my issues with the film and I'm nervous as to how JL will turn turn out. Although I'm not as worried about the DCU. Snyder said he really wants these films to be the director's vision and he wants to give them a lot of freedom to do what they wanted. We'll see with SS and WW. These two films will show whether the DCU is capable of putting out good films without Snyder's involvement(he may be producing but he isn't writing or directing). WW is in particular interesting as it's a female director for the movie and it's pretty rare to see a female director direct a major film like this.

 

[excaliburps]

I understand where all the criticism came from, but I kinda dug the film. Lots of room for improvement but overall, still not as bad as some critics say.

Also, I think the main issue here is no one reining in Snyder and -- this is a big one -- Dave Goyer writing it. Has Goyer written any movie that was good (solo or collaborated?).

Don't forget, Goyer directed this turd:

 

[neorej]

I understand where all the criticism came from, but I kinda dug the film. Lots of room for improvement but overall, still not as bad as some critics say.

Also, I think the main issue here is no one reining in Snyder and -- this is a big one -- Dave Goyer writing it. Has Goyer written any movie that was good (solo or collaborated?).

Don't forget, Goyer directed this turd:

It wasn't all bad. In the end, we got Deadpool out of it.

 

[KonradLaw]

Has Goyer written any movie that was good (solo or collaborated?).

A lot actually
Batman Begins, THe Dark Knight, Dark Knight Rises, Blade and Blade 2.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm still trying to figure out why they went straight from Man of Steel to Batman vs. Superman. The Marvel movies did an origin movie for each member of the Avengers first (sans Hawkeye cause who gives a fuck) before The Avengers even got made. I mean they even had multiple movies for Iron Man because why the hell not.

You could argue that the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy made it unnecessary and even redundant for a specific DCCU Batman origin film, but the Nolan trilogy has a clear beginning and ending for Batman's solo (with no other superheroes in the world) journey and that couldn't just roll over to a unified cinematic universe.

If Warner had wanted to follow the MCU methodology for DCCU, there should have been a standalone Batman movie which reboots him for the DCCU, there should have been a Wonder Woman origin movie, and they should probably have gone ahead and done the origins for whatever other members of the Justice League they wanted. The Flash at least. No one cares about Aquaman or Green Lantern or whoever else they would throw in there, no big deal if they didn't get standalone movies.

And then after all that, they could have made the Justice League movie to get everyone together.

AND THEN AFTER THAT, they could have made Batman vs. Superman, in the context of the entire JL, and also the critical story which is drawn from one of DC's biggest comic events of all time, as the critical film that ends Phase 1 of DCCU.

Instead, they tried to cram an origin story, a setup story, and a very famous DC comic event into one movie. Why? Does Warner hate money? Why wouldn't they make 5-6 movies and get revenue from each one the way Marvel did? It's completely baffling how Warner looked at MCU, decided they wanted money, and completely ignored how MCU was structured to create a cohesive ongoing story and also maximize revenue.

 

[KonradLaw]

I'm still trying to figure out why they went straight from Man of Steel to Batman vs. Superman. The Marvel movies did an origin movie for each member of the Avengers first (sans Hawkeye cause who gives a fuck) before The Avengers even got made. I mean they even had multiple movies for Iron Man because why the hell not.

You could argue that the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy made it unnecessary and even redundant for a specific DCCU Batman origin film, but the Nolan trilogy has a clear beginning and ending for Batman's solo (with no other superheroes in the world) journey and that couldn't just roll over to a unified cinematic universe.

If Warner had wanted to follow the MCU methodology for DCCU, there should have been a standalone Batman movie which reboots him for the DCCU, there should have been a Wonder Woman origin movie, and they should probably have gone ahead and done the origins for whatever other members of the Justice League they wanted. The Flash at least. No one cares about Aquaman or Green Lantern or whoever else they would throw in there, no big deal if they didn't get standalone movies.

And then after all that, they could have made the Justice League movie to get everyone together.

AND THEN AFTER THAT, they could have made Batman vs. Superman, in the context of the entire JL, and also the critical story which is drawn from one of DC's biggest comic events of all time, as the critical film that ends Phase 1 of DCCU.

Instead, they tried to cram an origin story, a setup story, and a very famous DC comic event into one movie. Why? Does Warner hate money? Why wouldn't they make 5-6 movies and get revenue from each one the way Marvel did? It's completely baffling how Warner looked at MCU, decided they wanted money, and completely ignored how MCU was structured to create a cohesive ongoing story and also maximize revenue.

THey wanted quicker start instead of waiting 3-4 years for their Avengers.
I don't think it's necessary to make a origin movie first. Even Marvel doesn't really do that all the time anymore. You think people will react badly to Spider Man and Black Panther being in Civil War without having their own movies first? Nah.

 

[HowZatOZ]

Suicide Squad will be the telling sing of whether its just DC itself not being Marvel or if it is indeed Snyder being Snyder.

 

[tpfkanep]

The Marvel movies did an origin movie for each member of the Avengers first (sans Hawkeye cause who gives a fuck)
[...]
No one cares about Aquaman or Green Lantern or whoever else they would throw in there, no big deal if they didn't get standalone movies.

I am still sad for no Hawkeye standalone, but it seems no one learnt from Iron Man/Deadpool/GotG/Antman... I do agree with your setup for the DCCU: it makes too much sense for Warner.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

I'm still trying to figure out why they went straight from Man of Steel to Batman vs. Superman. The Marvel movies did an origin movie for each member of the Avengers first (sans Hawkeye cause who gives a fuck) before The Avengers even got made. I mean they even had multiple movies for Iron Man because why the hell not.

Because there have been in the live action space 7 superman (Supergirl inclusive) movies since 1978, plus the long term, successful TV show Smallville and the less successful Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman between 1993 and 2011. Then there was Batman who had 7 movies between 1989 and 2012, plus the old iconic Adam West TV stuff and more modern origin stuff like Gotham.

Should we move into animated media too? Becuase there were aproximately 3 million animated TV shows for both Superman and Batman between the dawn of time and today, many of which were highly successful. Then they both appeared in collaborative media, and are both historically extremely popular comic book characters for those that read them.

Everyone knows the origin story of Batman. Everyone knows the origin story of Superman. Both Batman and Superman had origin stories in commercially successful films in the 21st century, so its not like young audiences would have to go back to these ancient heiroglyphic tablets to find it all out.

The only problem caused by not doing individual Justice League Bro films before BvS is that you don't have time to do course corrections on characters that don't do so good like that Hulk movie. But BvS is not shitty because it has to do origin story stuff - it doesn't, except as a momentary flashback for the credits to remind you in case you forgot. The problems with this film aren't caused by not having done Solo Superman, Solo Batman, Solo Wonder Woman before hand. They have been listed many many times. This movie could have spectacularly succeeded if it was better written and they made better choices in it.

Fuck they could have jumped straight into JL with no precursor movies at all and it could have been awesome. Team movies can and have worked straight off the bat - do you really need origin stories for the X-men or can you just have an established team? You absolutely can! It can be good too and be commercially successful. You can pick up the Justice League cartoon having seen none of the older Batman and Superman animated material and it makes sense and is a damn fine cartoon. You can pick up Young Justice without seeing the stuff before it and it's also damn fine. We don't live in an age where audiences are unaccepting of superheros as a concept and thus you need to introduce them one at a time. That is one path that works, it is not the only one.

That George Miller Justice League flick probably would have been great running on this concept!

 

[Fudgepuppy]

Just reboot the whole universe, starting with Batman. Grant Morrison writes, Fincher directs, Affleck is Batman.

I am so fucking on board for Fincher to helm a superhero movie, granted if he gets total control.

 

[sleepykyo]

If Suicide Squad succeeds the DCCU is in trouble, too.

It would show that, despite Batman v Superman doing very little to promote it and starting the 'cinematic universe' off badly, a relatively standalone DC movie can still see success.

I think the DCCU's future is riding on Wonder Woman at this point.

Suicide Squad doing well is great for the universe. It would mean someone in the DCCU capable of making a successful movie.