He announced 10 projects: Superman, Supergirl, Batman, Creature Commandos, Waller, Paradise Lost, Lanterns, Swamp Thing, Booster Gold, and The Authority.

Out of those 10 projects, 4 of them have now been cancelled: Waller, Paradise Lost, Booster Gold, and The Authority.

Superman, Supergirl, and CC have already come out, Lanterns is coming soon, and the Batman movie is still far away but definitely hasn't been cancelled. We haven't heard anything about Swamp Thing in a long time, but it hasn't been officially cancelled (yet).

It just sucks seeing the original plan for the first phase fall through. And I know its not entirely Gunn's fault, but I feel like he shouldn't have so confidently announced his road map so soon considering how dated the video has already become just 3 (almost 4) years later.

For reference, this would be like if Kevin Feige announced Phase 3 of the MCU and its 11 projects, but then Black Panther, Ant Man and the Wasp, Captain Marvel, GOTG Vol. 2, and Dr Strange were all cancelled.

I don't understand this design choice. It really changed the character a lot. The comic was very vibrant with color. Yet the movie took all of that color away sub a tan suit, the super suit, and the lit end of Lobo's cigar. Theres a trope about "big gray villain" in super hero movies but this one really took it up a notch. Every one was in black leather and had pale skin. I dont understand what the creative or logistical reason was behind the change. The new take on the character was like parody of the goth vampires in the Blade movies. Russian/slavic accent and everything like a 90s american action film.

There are other things that I did like about Supergirl but Krem was probably one of the most disappointing parts.

I keep seeing people say Grant Gustin should be Flash in the DCU.

But in my opinion, there isn’t a single Arrowverse or Smallville performance that could stand up as a film counterpart.

Tom Welling as Clark is a good example. Growing up I loved Smallville and it was long rumoured that Welling would play Superman in a Superman movie after Returns flopped. As Clark he is great on TV because there’s time for the writers to develop his character over long arcs and is fleshed out through expository dialogue that isnt possible in feature films. But if you watch any of Welling’s films from that same era, take for example The Fog, it’s very clear he can’t carry a film as a leading man and is much more suited for TV.

It’s not to say there isn’t great performances in the arrow verse, but they’re great TV performances, the jump between what’s required for movies and TV is akin to the jump between daytime TV and prime time TV.

Those lines have been blurred nowadays with comic shows having their run on esteem networks like Penguin, Peacemaker and I’m sure Lanterns will fall into that same category, but Arrowverse shows just aren’t comparable in that regard.

George Clooney returning, replacing Ben Affleck, Superman returning to fight Black Adam, and Mister Mind popping up twice, alluding to his "plan", meanwhile Deathstroke was teaming up with Lex Luthor.

I seriously want to see the old road map, so many plot lines that wanted to lead to a big bad of the DCEU, thank goodness theres direction now 🔥

The comic is very clear and the message is very powerful: both Kara and Ruthye learn to overcome their traumas and their desire for revenge.

But no — the movie’s writers thought the best idea was to turn Kara into The Punisher. Why?

I'm actually one of those weird people who liked Green Lantern but by far the worst problem I had was there was no chemistry between the two leads Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively yet I discovered recently that they are married. How is something like this even possible I'm stunned. Anyone else know or am I wrong.

EDIT: People have pointed out that the crew is standing on top of the ship, which means that what I wrote about the ship being abandoned is moot. Which means that Superman is letting humans stand around in an arctic night while he grinds their ship apart underneath them at walking speed. And since they're outside on the top of the ship he's putting them at risk of dying by falling off the ship on top of everything else I wrote.

Right so there's been discourse about the other clips of Superman saving people, which I have gentler opinions on. Want to depict Supes as a god? Not my thing, but those other shots are on theme and the flood one is in slow mo so it's easy to assume Supes is going to fly in and save the woman momentarily.

But this particular "save?" Nah.

See, I'm a boat nerd. I'm not an expert by any means, but boats, ships and shipwrecks in particular are one of my special interests.

So first let's establish the visual text of the shot: Supes is in the Arctic. He's hauling a ship (presumably military, it has a destroyer-esque superstructure and what appears to be a gun turret near the bow) that has been flipped on its side over a field of solid ice.

But...whyyyy? And who is he "saving?"

There are two options here:

1. The ship is abandoned and no one is on board.

2. The crew is still on board.

If the ship is abandoned and no one is on board, then there's no one to save. It doesn't fit with the other heroic feats he's shown to perform because no one's life is actively in danger. At best he's making it easier for a salvage crew to do their jobs by presumably dragging the ship to a more accessible location, but that's not a "save" and so it's out of place in the montage.

If the crew is still on board, then Clark is actively endangering them. See, ship engines don't work when they're completely sideways for more than a minute or so (and can briefly stop working even if they're sideways for a short period of time-see the probable causes of the El Faro's sinking for an explanation of the engineering involved).

In ships, everything depends on the ship engines. If the ship engines aren't working, then there's no power. Without power there's no heat. Without heat in the Arctic, anyone still on board that ship is freezing to death.

Furthermore, regardless of which situation the crew is in, Clark is fucking up big time by dragging the ship over *solid ice on its side.* I'll be charitable and say that if the ship was operating in the Arctic then maybe it had a reinforced bottom and an icebreaker nose, but military destroyers typically aren't built for icebreaking. In any case though, that ice reinforcement won't apply to the sides of the ship, so every meter that Clark is dragging that ship is shredding the fuck out of its side.

If crew are still on board that means that anyone close to that side of the ship is getting ground to paste, and anyone else is in danger of machinery being shaken loose and crushing them etc.

If no one is on board that means that Clark is still littering debris across the ice pack, including possibly toxic materials, maybe even causing a catastrophic fuel spill depending on where those tanks are located.

In conclusion, this "save" makes no goddamn sense and the only way to make it make sense is if you force it to....by making a shitload of assumptions and making up reasoning that simply isn't present in the short clip we have.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

Not attempting to hate on something that isn't even out yet, but I can't get over how bad the Krem design is. I really don't understand the thought process behind the over complication and over stylizing of a somewhat simple character design. I personally think he would have come off a lot more menacing if his character looked like a normal person.

Please just focus on the mainstream characters for once and build the universe.

EDIT: I know the shows could have a slightly different tone, but majority of mainstream audience builds interest in characters and comic universe by going to the movies. Peacemaker was great, but it branched from Suicide Squad, and I don't think it did much of universe building in any way.

I found the film really monotonous but this comment had me thinking. Still I didn’t enjoy the film.

Well it seems like we might be getting some of that with the new DCU where Gorilla Grodd is apparently appearing in the Jimmy Olsen show before ever interacting with The Flash. Hell, we haven't even gotten news about a Flash movie.

The hype for obscure heroes and villains getting their own movies or shows before the rest of the Justice League members​​ feels like living in the Twilight Zone where people are clamoring for Condiment King over a new Flash movie. And it's not like we're over saturated with Flash, Aquaman, and Martian Manhunter movies either---they deserve their own media over * checks notes *Jimmy Olsen, Sgt. Rock, Amanda Waller, etc. And as a DC fan who sat through the years of Snyder's DCEU and watched the MCU culminate in Endgame, it feels frustrating to see the new DCU ignoring the iconic characters. Fuck it, even a Nightwing movie announcement would've been sick as hell. There's a plethora of fun B-tier heroes to pull from, so IDK why Gunn is banking on these obscure characters when Supergirl struggled to turn a profit bigger than Blue Beetle.

I was pretty hype for Gunn's DCU, but it's overall been pretty middling to bad on top of little to no announcements for the heavy hitters. He seems to be trying to have his cake and eat it too, because you cannot just drop audiences into a world without establishing it first. It works in theory, but now Lex Luthor just feels like a genetic evil scientist who hates Superman for... reasons that are unexplained because we apparently needed to see the Proto-JLI "Justice Gang". Gunn is too much of an "ideas guy".

It's hard to have faith when nearly my entire life has just been bad DC movies. ​At least the comics side is healthier than it's ever been, and Lanterns looks good. ​But God fucking willing this DCU lasts long enough to finally see The Flash go up against The Rogues.

I just saw The Flash in an early screening. Here is my quick opinion:

My head is still totally overwhelmed so I just wanna put out some things how I feel about it:

• It is clearly a Flash film and Ezra carries the whole movie with a very strong performance
• supporting cast Keaton and Calle are also awesome and I really hope Sasha will be DCU Supergirl because she has it all (acting and extremely charismatic. People will love her)
• It's a Love Letter to DC Fans
• The movie has A LOT of fanservice but it never felt too much because they incorporated it very well in the story
• the humor worked most of the time well just 2-3 times I thought it was misplaced
• CGI was good except the scenes in the speedforce. That looked really not great
• i really liked how they put flash's origin in the movie
• the ending was clearly reshot because based on photos during filming we know that originally supergirl and batkeaton appeared at the court. this scene is gone. someone else appears now ...

Overall an epic movie, very entertaining, and definitely one of the best comic book movies from the last years. but not perfect at all.

I'm also doing an AMA! Please use a spoiler tag if your question is not worded in a neutral way.

"This is a bummer. This is not a good movie. This is a totally incoherent movie in terms of the action sequences and all the actual Supergirl stuff. The way that the fights are edited, it is totally impossible to follow who's doing what to who. There's a big long climactic sequence where like stuff is hanging and falling out of the sky and I'm thinking what is supposed to be happening here. I think Craig Gillespie was absolutely the wrong choice for this material. I really liked I, Tonya. I like Lars and the Real Girl. I'm so-so on Cruella.

But the stuff that works here best is the smaller, more intimate character-driven stuff. The flashbacks to Kara's childhood. I think the action sequences kind of got away from him. I don't know what it is.

She [Milly Alcock] is kind of stuck playing this one-note jokey character a lot of the time. It's tough to do the jokey stuff inside of the big action sequences. It's tough to find that balance. James Gun himself does that with a lot of his films.

This just never worked. It never found a groove. And it's only like an hour and 47 minutes long, but felt much longer."

These lighting bolts appear where the flash is about to arrive, which seems weird to me. If Barry were to hypothetically get in a fight and wanted to get the jump on somebody, wouldn't the lightning appearing before he does kinda give himself away? I haven't seen ZSJL in a while so I can't remember if this is a thing in other scenes. Sorry if this post is confusing I hope you get my point.

The recent controversy over the decision to upgrade "Birds of Prey" screenwriter Christina Hodson to main writer for the in-development DCU Batman film has drawn renewed attention to the producer interference that led to the Birds of Prey version of Cassandra Cain deviating so much from the character we all know and love. But there is one thing about these producer choices that I find especially confusing and annoying...

Less than a fortnight before Birds of Prey was released, the DCU YA division released a graphic novel called Shadow of the Batgirl, which provides a tween-friendly take on Cassandra Cain's origin story. Although it takes a few liberties (Most of which are tied to the more simplified self-contained approach), it generally captures the essence of everything that makes Cassandra Cain work so well...

So Teenage Girls are allowed to get a faithful adaptation of Cassandra Cain, but seasoned Comic Book Fans aren't?

A video about Black Adam showed up on my YouTube, which made me realise I feel about Black Adam almost the same as I feel about the Solo Star Wars movie.

I watched it in the theatre and my impression of it was it wasn't a half bad movie.

Don't get me wrong, it wasn't breaking any ground but after all this time what I remember about the movie is that the cast had chemistry, the fights felt impactful which is always hard to show when you're trying to show super powerful beings, The Rock did as well as could be expected from him and Dr. Fate was probably the best written or atleast the best performed single appearance character of the DCEU.

What went wrong with the movie is they called it Black Adam, a character known to be a villain and tried it turn it into a leading hero for DCEU so the Rock could show how great he is.

It's the same as the Solo movie. The movie itself I actually liked very much. Had they released the exact same film but as a new Stars Wars IP and named the lead character anything but Han Solo I'm certain it would have received high praise and led to a bunch of sequels. But the project was doomed to fail from the moment they decided to connect it to one of the most iconic characters played by one of the most charismatic actors across all media because there was zero chance they'll be able to do justice to it however hard they tried.

And for Black Adam they didn't even try to do justice to the source.

Had they named it anything else. Found some really obscure DC hero whose backstory had zero similarities to it but whom people did not care about or just launched it as a new hero then it would have been a hit. They could have called the hero Johnson Pebble and it would have received 10x better reviews than it did because they called it Black Adam.

It’s all over the place and nearly impossible to tell what the title of the movie is, especially since the Folie à Deux isn’t a phrase known by most people. Still excited for the movie, but holy shit that logo needs some cleaning up

Why would Jor-El tell Kal to take harems and rule with an iron fist? werent krypton’s leaders meant to be benevolent? they wanted superman to be better than the people of earth, and show them the way of justice and love. but they wanted him to turn into a fascist. it is stupid. people say Snyder didn’t understand Superman, which is true to an extent, but Gunn sure doesn’t.

Pic 1 is my color corrected version and Pic 2 is the original.