Jeffrey Dean Morgan
I'd cast him. He's a good actor and he can handle the role.
shareGunn wants someone younger this time around. One of the reasons Cavill was 'let go'.
shareCavill is also associated with some weak Superman movies. A fresh start is undoubtedly necessary.
shareIt's not Cavill's fault that the movies underperformed. He's perfect as Superman, and so is Affleck as Batman. The actors weren't the problem... Ezra Miller maybe. The DCEU needed a better director, not a hard reboot.
The problem with Gunn is that he's all about "his vision" and not what the fans want. Guardians, SS, and now another band of misfits?
Must say I disagree. Christopher Reeve was perfect as Superman. He was stone cold perfect. Cavill? Rather bland, I must say. And Affleck was OK as Batman. To be fair, perhaps Cavill could have done better with different director. Unfortunately, Zack Snyder's approach ruined the potential of those films. "Man of Steel" remains one of the most disappointing cinema experiences for me. In my view, James Gunn should start fresh, just as Matt Reeves did when he cast Robert Pattinson in "The Batman."
Regarding the issue you mentioned about James Gunn, I fail to comprehend the problem. What is wrong with a filmmaker having a unique vision for a film? After all, it is the director who crafts the movie, not the fans.
I think we agree on the director issue; with a better filmmaker, the DCEU would have been much more successful. Snyder's movies are certainly visually stunning, but that's where it ends because there's always something off or "missing" in the end.
MoS could have been much better, but again, that's not the actors' fault.
Regarding DC and Marvel, they already have a huge fanbase, so any director should certainly make sure to meet expectations and not try to come up with "their version" of things. I would certainly love to see how the DCEU ends, with at least one or more Justice League sequels.
So many characters and worlds were already established, and so many things were done right in the DCEU so far. Change things, sure, fix the problems, but at least keep the actors the fans got used to seeing over the years.
Seeing what James Gunn revealed so far I highly doubt that his "vision" and movies will be so much better anyway. Also, was Superman's/Cavill's age even one of the reasons people didn't watch BvS or Justice League?
Edit: wording
>> MoS could have been much better, but again, that's not the actors' fault.
True, but being associated with those films likely made Gunn want to go a different direction. Brandon Routh faced a similar fate.
>> So many characters and worlds were already established, and so many things were done right in the DCEU so far. Change things, sure, fix the problems, but at least keep the actors the fans got used to seeing over the years.
Sure, but the primary focus should be on creating the best Superman movie possible. While the existing characters and worlds hold importance to many people, their significance should take a backseat to the goal of producing a great film. And who knows, maybe Gunn will be faithful and still make a stellar film? I just hope he can keep it serious enough.
>> Seeing what James Gunn revealed so far I highly doubt that his "vision" and movies will be so much better anyway.
If he does a better job than Znyder then we can all be happy. I hope he can capture the essence of "Richard Donner," while being careful not to repeat the mistakes made by Bryan Singer in his attempt to imitate that style in Superman Returns.
>> Also, was Superman's/Cavill's age even one of the reasons people didn't watch BvS or Justice League?
No. The films were just terrible.
>> .. the primary focus should be on creating the best Superman movie possible
yes, but there's also 'unfinished business' so to speak. I don't even consider myself a fan of the DCEU, but I'd certainly want to see a conclusion to the Cavill-Affleck-Gadot era.
My point is, could good and profitable movies (even the best Superman movie) be made using the current actors? Sure. Is Gunn trying to do that? No.
>> If he does a better job than Znyder..
IMHO his movies are generally better than Snyder's, but we'll see.
>> I hope he can capture the essence of "Richard Donner,"..
I'm not sure if that's even his priority. He tweeted that he'd rather tell stories of lesser-known characters. We can expect more 'band-of-misfits' type of movies because that's the announcement we're all waiting for.
>> No. The films were just terrible.
Not exactly terrible, but they should have been much better, for sure.
And that proves my point: there's no reason for a younger Superman and, hence, no reason for a new actor.
>> I'm not sure if that's even his priority. He tweeted that he'd rather tell stories of lesser-known characters. We can expect more 'band-of-misfits' type of movies because that's the announcement we're all waiting for.
Hah, I hope that is not the case.
On Cavill we'll just have to agree to disagree, but I'm genuinely curious. What are your thoughts on The Batman? Specifically, how do you feel about the casting choice of Robert Pattinson and his performance?
I think Pattinson is one of the better actors of his generation. It's been a while since I've seen the movie, but he was fine as Batman and Wayne, but IMO the movie itself was mediocre at best.
There's a 4 min trailer for Batman Arkham Origins from a few years ago (it's on Youtube), where Batman's fighting Deathstroke. I think a standalone Ben Affleck Batman movie could have come close to that. One can dream lol.
edit: wording, best -> better
I agree, Pattinson was fine in the role. Personally, I would place him below Keaton but above Kilmer (I suppose I'm in the minority who actually enjoyed Kilmer as the Caped Crusader). Affleck also delivered a commendable performance, although it's worth noting that his pre-existing reputation brought some baggage to the role. Despite that, not bad.
sharePattinson was a very bad bruce Wayne.
shareFunny you should say that, since I have only seen the film once and I don't remember how he portrayed Bruce Wayne at all. What stuck with me was his captivating performance as Batman, and of course, the fantastic turn by Colin Farrell. I definitely need to rewatch the film. Who knows, maybe Pattinson will excel as Bruce Wayne in the sequel.
shareNo. Maybe as Zod or Jor-El.
shareYou would have cast a nearly 60 year old man to play Superman?
shareEver read kingdom come?
shareThey're trying to build a franchise. Starting with an old, alt version of the flagship hero would make no sense.
shareAnd that mentality of franchise before a good story is why it sucks to go to the theater. Most movies are sequels.
shareA franchise and a good story aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Why would Warner(or any company) leave billions on the table by not building a franchise to milk?
Hell from a story telling standpoint, why would Gunn, who was hired for the purpose of building a DCEU, fuck all that up by casting an old Superman who's story wouldn't really fit with the Justice League vibe they are going for.
Your reasoning makes no sense.
They're not exclusive. But there's a reason we have TV shows. Not every super hero flick needs to be a series. That's been DC's biggest failure. They thought about sequels before the actual movie. Marvel started with single movies and added onto them. Movies like the watchmen or 300 didn't worry beyond the movie. It's a bad trend that leads to a glut of unimpressive flicks that people don't remember.
shareMarvel started with single movies that were still clearly connected and always intended to be a franchise. It wasn't a coincidence that coulson and fury are in each of the solo pre-avengers films. The definitely story boarded out how phase 1 was gonna go long before they started filming.
Probably would have been much harder if they had cast a 60 year old Tony Stark.
And yet, most of those movies are passable at best. Don't kid yourself. 90% of marvel is a commercial. Talking to normies, they can't tell one from the next. They're lucky the hit the landing. Since then, the movies are trash. Why? Franchise mentality.
DC, same story. I'm talking about making one good movie. Not wasting years and getting lower returns on investment in hopes to repeat lightning in a bottle. Joker did that. It's a good movie first. Not a franchise starter.
A 60 year old superman doesn't matter if you make one good movie. Franchise mentality destroys this opportunity and leads to Quantumania. Fuck that.
You and Warner are just assuming there are still billions on the table but the truth is this cow has been milked dry.
shareKingdom Come is my all-time #1 graphic novel. It's a fantastic work. But there's no way it could be the foundation of a new DCU. If it's going to be adapted it should be the very last entry.
sharewhat role?
superman's grandpa?