WittyUsername

Well, supposedly, the reason the previous regime decided to cut ties with Cavill was because they found his demands unreasonable. I think it’s possible that Cavill’s agents may have tried to argue that he should get paid a certain amount of money that Zaslav thought wasn’t worth it. I’m not saying I know it for a fact. It’s just a fun little thing to speculate about. Of course, assuming that Superman will be in the 25-30 range, then that would be a different story entirely, although that would beg the question of why Gunn even bothered clarifying “I never said he was going to be 25” on Twitter. Anyway, count me as someone who would love for @grim22 to provide us the details.

I’m making an assumption because a Superman in his 30s doesn’t strike me as being very far off from a Superman who’s just barely in his 40s. When it was initially announced that they would be looking for a younger Superman, the assumption was that they wanted a Superman who was still green and in his mid-20s, which Cavill obviously wouldn’t be able to play. If Gunn’s Superman is going to be an experienced hero who’s past his 20s though, then that kind of begs the question of why they’d even bother looking for a new actor. It’s not like Henry Cavill is geriatric. Sure, he’s turning 40 this year, but unless Superman is meant to be particularly young, that shouldn’t really matter much. For the record, I’m simply going off a rumor I remember hearing a couple of months ago. I’m not saying it’s true. I’m merely saying that if they aren’t going for an especially young Superman, then that makes me more inclined to believe that rumor is true, especially given all the reports about how starved for cash WBD is.

Apparently, Gunn has recently implied that the new Superman won’t be as young as we thought he’d be (25). That makes me inclined to believe that Cavill really was let go because Zaslav thought he was too expensive.

There is absolutely no reason to move it to October 6th.

Personally, instead of focusing on mutants, I’d rather they spend more time focusing on the Fantastic Four, and setting up Dr. Doom as the next Thanos. I think they could still have done NWH the way we got it, though.

Out of curiosity, what route would you have preferred Marvel went after their next saga, instead of the multiverse?

That’s what Andy Serkis tried to do. It didn’t work out too well. Anyway, as far as the live action remakes are concerned, this looks slightly more inspired than most of the others, from what little we’ve seen of it, but that’s faint praise.

Now that Blue Sky is gone, they’ve officially become the blandest mainstream animation studio in Hollywood.

Interesting little tidbit, but the past four movies in the DCEU all received a B+ on Cinemascore. The last movie to get anything higher than a B+ was the first Shazam movie, which is tied with WW for the highest Cinemascore in the DCEU at an A. Anyone suppose this movie will continue the DCEU’s B+ streak? If it does, I guess The Flash will be the one to break it.

The news that Marvel was going to reevaluate what didn’t work in Phase Four and scale things back moving forward came at the end of last year, and none of the films in their 2024 slate have begun filming yet, so maybe they’ll have the chance to turn things around. I don’t know how likely that is, but at least they’re apparently trying.

It’s funny to think that both Marvel and DC have a lot riding on this movie now.

I’m sorry, what?

I’m not interested in this movie, but I don’t see a need to roast the CGI. Does every movie that isn’t Avatar need to face these complaints?

Well, there is gonna be a nearly 10 month gap between The Marvels and Cap 4. That might help a bit.

Jesus. The discourse here is starting to feel like a DC thread.

Even as far as the potential for multiverse crossovers in Secret Wars is concerned, we already had NWH, and Deadpool 3 is bringing back Hugh Jackman. I suppose there could be some appeal in seeing Tobey Maguire interact with Hugh Jackman, but still, we will have already seen their returns by then. Plus, would that be anymore exciting than seeing the three Spider-Men together?

When are we getting a crossover movie between Joaquin Phoenix, Barry Keoghan and whoever inevitably gets cast as the Joker in James Gunn’s DCU?

No. IW was actually around 83 or 84 percent on RT when Ant-Man 2 came out.

I think Eternals is currently the only MCU movie to get a flat B on Cinemascore. MoM and L&T both received a B+.

I don’t care for the Tim Burton movies, but I know that Keaton’s Batman holds a special place in the hearts of many older Millennials and Gen X people.

I feel like WV had the advantage of being the first of the bunch, as well as being the first Marvel Studios production since NWH.

This seemed like it would be seen as a meh movie to me based on the trailers and the general response to Phase Four. I think we’ve reached the point where critics won’t be particularly impressed by a superhero movie, unless it really does something out of the ordinary, but this just sort of looks like another Marvel movie.

People have been griping about the lack of originality in Hollywood at least since the 2000s, but probably even earlier than that. It’s not a particularly recent complaint. I remember when District 9 came out (I was in middle school at the time), and one of the things it was praised for was being an original sci-fi movie.

Am I the only one who thinks killing off any of the Guardians would be really cliche at this point?

I’m not even sure fighting Nazis is considered as universally non-controversial as it once was…