|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 13, 2018 16:41:35 GMT
So say it's final, which I think it is, that Henry Cavill is out as Superman... I don't think it will be long before Ben Affleck makes it official too that he's no longer interested in being Batman either.
So what happens if these things come to pass?
With Henry/Superman its an easier solve: A) They weren't planning on doing any stand alone Superman movies anyway, so no problem there. And as for the character, they can simply re-cast when they do decide to come back to him. I would prefer Cavill to stay, but it looks unlikely right now. (Congrats to him on getting The Witcher)
With Affleck/Batman that's a bit of a harder solve. Here's why: The current version of Batman is an older guy who's been around a long time, but all reports lately point to "The Batman" movie that Matt Reeves is doing being based on a "younger Batman closer to the beginning of his career". If that movie is successful there's no chance the WB WONT do a sequel and continue with that younger version as a franchise, instead of the Affleck version. So where would that leave Affleck and the current day older version of Batman? Kind've in limbo. Especially with the failure of Justice League.
What I think they're going to do is this: No Superman. No Affleck as Batman. Younger version of Batman with younger actor in his own standalone franchise; which will take place in the past, so no team-ups with other Justice League characters. No Justice League sequels. Only stand alone franchises like Wonder Woman and Aquaman from now on. No interconnectedness between movies aside from MAYBE a cameo here and there. And who knows if any of those Margot Robbie/Harley Quinn related movies are ever really going to happen?
IMO: ALL big mistakes. Its clear WB has no focus for DCEU whatsoever.
p.s. I don't believe they will recast with Michael B. Jordan. Those are just contractual talks.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Sept 13, 2018 16:43:55 GMT
I’d recast both parts, continue on with the series at this point, and dare anyone to do anything about it. Seriously. Which sounds rather simplistic, but if the movies are really good, I doubt the mass audiences, which DC/WB are going for, would really mind.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 13, 2018 16:46:14 GMT
Why are we referring to them on a first name basis?
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Sept 13, 2018 16:47:04 GMT
Continue the series and kill off Batman and Superman (again).
WB won't go through with it, because they're pussies.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 13, 2018 16:55:22 GMT
I’d recast both parts, continue on with the series at this point, and dare anyone to do anything about it. Seriously. Which sounds rather simplistic, but if the movies are really good, I doubt the mass audiences, which DC/WB are going for, would really mind. I would agree, BUT, as I said above...
They have no plans to do any Superman standalone movies, which tells me they have no faith in Superman as a character that can make money for them. SO whoever they re-cast would have to be satisfied with not having a standalone movie and franchise, and only doing cameos or supporting roles in other characters movies. Not very appealing for the actor or the character.
Whoever they re-cast as the older current day version of Batman would have to accept the same scenario. No standalone movie and franchise, and only doing cameos or supporting roles in other characters movies, because "The Batman" movie that Matt Reeves is doing being is based on a "younger Batman closer to the beginning of his career", so they wouldn't use the same actor in both versions; and if the younger version is successful that's the version they'll continue with, not the older, current day version. Again, not very appealing for the older actor or for the character.
I agree with what you're suggesting, and that's what I would do, but I think they're just going to go in different directions; kind've disregarding what's already come before.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 13, 2018 16:56:50 GMT
Why are we referring to them on a first name basis? Oh, I know them personally. Ask me anything. I'll tell you everything.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Sept 13, 2018 16:59:28 GMT
I’d recast both parts, continue on with the series at this point, and dare anyone to do anything about it. Seriously. Which sounds rather simplistic, but if the movies are really good, I doubt the mass audiences, which DC/WB are going for, would really mind. I would agree, BUT, as I said above...
They have no plans to do any Superman standalone movies, which tells me they have no faith in Superman as a character that can make money for them. SO whoever they re-cast would have to be satisfied with not having a standalone movie and franchise, and only doing cameos or supporting roles in other characters movies. Not very appealing for the actor or the character.
Whoever they re-cast as the older current day version of Batman would have to accept the same scenario. No standalone movie and franchise, and only doing cameos or supporting roles in other characters movies, because "The Batman" movie that Matt Reeves is doing being is based on a "younger Batman closer to the beginning of his career", so they wouldn't use the same actor in both versions; and if the younger version is successful that's the version they'll continue with, not the older, current day version. Again, not very appealing for the older actor or for the character.
I agree with what you're suggesting, and that's what I would do, but I think they're just going to go in different directions; kind've disregarding what's already come before.
True—I agree that it’s probably not what Warner Bros. will do, but it’s just what I think they should do. I’m not one for continuities or canons, and I can excuse lots of changes in this regard. I’m disappointed that they’re not doing any Supes or Bats stand-alones, but I guess I’ll have to delve more into the animated stuff for that (especially as I really liked Gotham by Gaslight).
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 13, 2018 17:04:49 GMT
Why are we referring to them on a first name basis? Oh, I know them personally. Ask me anything. I'll tell you everything. Well, if you insist. Is Henry Cavill really leaving the franchise? How did he feel about losing his legendary mustache? How’s Mr. Affleck’s rehab going along? What was up with Live by Night?
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 13, 2018 18:41:06 GMT
Oh, I know them personally. Ask me anything. I'll tell you everything. Well, if you insist. Is Henry Cavill really leaving the franchise? How did he feel about losing his legendary mustache? How’s Mr. Affleck’s rehab going along? What was up with Live by Night?
Mr. Cavill will no longer be playing the role of Superman in future Warner Brothers movies. As for the mustache incident Mr. Cavill felt lousy about it, and guilty, though it wasn't his fault. It was decided that he should sport facial hair in the movie Mission Impossible: Fallout to further differentiate him from his more well known character of Superman. Little did he know that said facial hair would hurt his role as Superman.
There is no word on Mr. Afflecks rehab at this time. But in somewhat related news Afflecks ex-wife Jennifer Garner, the person who took him to rehab, is in a new movie called Peppermint. Word is she's back in top form. Live By Night was Mr. Afflecks attempt at an old time gangster movie. Though it was beautifully shot and well acted the general public and critical acclaim were not on his side in this case. Mr. Affleck hopes to return to directing as soon as possible. No news is forthcoming at this time as to his future involvement with the character of Batman.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 13, 2018 19:51:57 GMT
Its really not that big a deal... What's really the worst that would happen? Explain why this would be SOOOO bad?
...er... without the earings, that is. LOL!
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 13, 2018 23:26:44 GMT
I don't think we'll certainly see any more Justice League movies for a long time.
For some reason, I think they'll still continue that subseries of Harley Quinn/Joker movies. I think they'd want to ride that Margot Robbie wave out as long as they can. Already I see the trailer sporting the text "starring Academy Award nominee Margot Robbie.."
They may retire Superman for a while. If they bring him back (Cavill or someone else) then just use him as a supporting character a la Marvel's Hawkeye which isn't fair I know but if WB cannot be bothered to spend time and effort on one of DC's flagship characters, so be it.
Agreed about the stand-alone movies. The DCEU as we recognized it from MoS to Justice League is almost certainly dead.
Concerning Batman, I think they can cheat. Like cast some actor who's in his late 30s or early 40s but can pass for a middle aged dude. It's not based in reality to begin with, older people can look as fit as they want them to in comics.
As for the timeline screwups, which would be innumerable, they could use the Flash movie to pull a Star Trek and change the timeline. If WB/DC were smart, that is. And before anyone says it's too soon to do that in a Flash movie, what more do we possibly need to learn about his backstory? For all of Justice League's problems, it handled Barry Allen's arc in a perfectly economical fashion.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Sept 14, 2018 0:56:53 GMT
Its really not that big a deal... What's really the worst that would happen? Explain why this would be SOOOO bad?
...er... without the earings, that is. LOL!
If they made Blade a white guy, would that be racist?
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Sept 14, 2018 2:26:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 14, 2018 5:18:28 GMT
He should be the new Indiana Jones?!?!?
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 14, 2018 14:02:10 GMT
Its really not that big a deal... What's really the worst that would happen? Explain why this would be SOOOO bad?
...er... without the earings, that is. LOL!
If they made Blade a white guy, would that be racist? Would it? You tell me.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 14, 2018 14:04:25 GMT
AH! YOU CAUGHT THE PUN/JOKE! YOU GET A PRIZE!
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 14, 2018 14:05:53 GMT
I think they'd want to ride that Margot Robbie wave out as long as they can.
I would! LOL!
Ah, I make the jokes!
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Sept 15, 2018 0:16:16 GMT
If they made Blade a white guy, would that be racist? Would it? You tell me. The screams of “ racist!!!” would shatter your eardrums ... by the very same people who would applaud a non-Caucasian Superman.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 15, 2018 2:12:24 GMT
Would it? You tell me. The screams of “ racist!!!” would shatter your eardrums ... by the very same people who would applaud a non-Caucasian Superman. Alright, we've had our differences of opinion before, but let's have this conversation rationally, and without immaturity.
By the same token you bring up "What if they cast Blade with a white actor would that be racist?" (Or for that matter Black Panther, etc. etc.) then you must acknowledge that whenever they've cast black characters with white actors that its racist too, right? If its good for the goose its good for the gander right? We should be on the same page so far. And yet...
From: www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/26-times-white-actors-played-people-of-color-and-no-one-really-gave-a-sht_us_56cf57e2e4b0bf0dab313ffc "...while an average of 75.2 percent of speaking roles already go to white actors, according to the 2014 University of Southern California study “Inequality in 700 Popular Films,” some of those parts are actually characters of color. Over time we have come to expect a tsunami-sized wave of backlash when an actor of color is cast as a fictional character that audiences feel should be white ― see controversies over Michael B. Jordan as the Human Torch or Amandla Stenberg as Rue of “The Hunger Games” ― but the outrage isn’t quite the same when white actors portray characters of color. Even when, often, they are based of off real-life people of color."
and
"The Internet was shocked — shocked! — to learn this week that white guy Joseph Fiennes has been cast as African American icon Michael Jackson in a TV movie. But anyone who’s surprised at this news hasn’t been paying attention. Despite decades of protests over racially inappropriate casting and the recent protests over the lack of diversity among Oscar nominees, filmmakers continue to cast white actors as minority characters on a depressingly regular basis..." From: www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/28/100-times-a-white-actor-played-someone-who-wasnt-white/?noredirect=on
and
"25 Worst Cases of Hollywood Whitewashing Since 2000" (SINCE 2000! SO IT ISNT SOME LONG TIME AGO THING!) From: www.indiewire.com/gallery/hollywood-whitewashing-25-roles-emma-stone-jake-gyllenhaal-scarlett-johansson/
and...
...I don't think I need to go on, do I? Its a well known fact that whitewashing, white actors playing people of color, is a historically well known and accepted trope in movies. I remember when I was a little kid and I saw a movie with the whitest white dude of all white dudes, Charlton Heston, playing a... MEXICAN! Yep! A Mexican! That's him in the pic, in "dark" face with oily hair and swarthy mustache. Touch of Evil. 1958. An Orson Welles film.
Did any white folks have anything to say about that? Nope! Why? Because that's what was done. Did they cast him because there were no Mexican actors in Hollywood? Of course not. Ricardo Montalban, for example, was already working, as were several others.
My point being that this has been done time and time again, and the time when you complain its when its only lately starting to be done to white actors? ITS THE HEIGHT OF HYPOCRISY TO CRY FOUL NOW WHEN ITS BEEN TO PEOPLE OF COLOR FOR THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE CREATION OF MOVIES!!!!!! People of color have had to endure this since forever and you're butt hurt because its been happening to you only lately? I'm sorry I just don't have any sympathy for that.
But lets get more to the point of the character itself:
Blade, Black Panther, Black Lightning, Othello, etc. are characters who are inherently black. If you change their race you change the character, it no longer holds any meaning.
That's not the case with Superman. Let me be perfectly clear that I would prefer they stay with Henry Cavill because I like Cavil and I think he looks like what we've all been taught to believe Superman is. BUT there's nothing inherently white about him. He's an alien from another planet. He could be any color and he'll still be Superman; because what Superman stands for, his meaning, is/are the ideals of "truth, justice, and the American way" as the saying goes. A black man could stand for those ideals just as well as a white man. If you accept that an alien could look like a white dude, then you should accept that an alien could look like a black dude too. And if said black looking alien landed on Earth as a baby, a Kansas farming couple could adopt and raise him. Voila! Superman! There's nothing inherently white about that story.
Whereas with Blade, Black Panther, Black Lightning, Othello, their blackness matters. Those character were CREATED (by white men mind you) with BLACKNESS in mind. Every super hero up until the 70's, including Superman, was created as white because that's just what was done, not because they NEEDED to be white. Those other characters NEED to be black. Just like Shang Chi needs to be Asian, and Black Widow needs to white because of her Russian back story.
So Batman could be a black dude. Spiderman could be a black dude. Flash could be a black dude. Professor X could be a black dude. Iron Man could be a black dude. Winter Soldier could be a black dude. Daredevil could be a black dude. There's nothing inherently "white" about their stories.
Thor could not be a black dude, but MCU turned the Asgardians into aliens instead of strictly Norse gods, so that opened the door to Heimdal and Valkyrie being cast differently; hey, I didn't make that decision; They did! They opened that door.
Lets get even more to the heart of the matter:
The real reason it rankles us when they cast our white heroes with black actors is because when they do that we can no longer imagine ourselves in that characters shoes. Subconsciously we all have the fantasy of being these characters. We've loved these characters since we first saw them as little kids. Who hasn't imagined himself flying, having bullets bounce off their chest, or wearing a bat cape and beating up the bad guys? And when we saw those characters for the first time they were white. Like US.
But when they're cast with black actors... all of the sudden they lose that "US"ness. Now they've become a "them". How can we be them if they're black? We're not black. So we can no longer be them and in a way we imagine that something has been taken away from us. "How dare they?! Superman is as white as bread!"
Now, just for a moment, imagine you're a little black kid, and when you look out into the world all you see is white guys being sold to you, and you have no choice but to accept that when you imagine yourself as a superhero it has to be as a white guy. Because we all know Superman is white. Batman is white. Spiderman is white. Iron Man is white. And you better just accept it because if you suggest Superman COULD/MIGHT be black everyone and their mother is going to come out their ass with anger!
No, man. We have to better than that. These characters are templates. And most of those templates are interchangeable. No one complained when Batman, Superman and Spiderman were played by British dudes. We all know Batman, Superman and Spiderman are American, but brits can play them because they're white. You pick and choose what bothers you. Choose not to let race bother you too.
--------------------------------------------------------
Now, when you respond to this I want something, anything, better than just "what you wrote doesn't make any sense". If you respond with some pat answer like that I will absolutely think of you as stupid and consider myself the "winner" of this discussion. Instead I want some fact and figures like I provided, and some rational reasoning, why it should offend you that a black man is even being considered to play Superman. I want a response that's giving at least as much thought as I've given you. That's only fair. And I'll read your response and give it the same consideration you've given mine. I'm genuinely interested to read your response.
Or for that matter anyone else who cares to respond. Serious responses only though. I will totally shade any dumb responses.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Sept 15, 2018 13:00:29 GMT
Would it? You tell me. The screams of “ racist!!!” would shatter your eardrums ... by the very same people who would applaud a non-Caucasian Superman.
Now, when you respond to this I want something, anything, better than just "what you wrote doesn't make any sense". If you respond with some pat answer like that I will absolutely think of you as stupid and consider myself the "winner" of this discussion.
Well, you certainly are the winner of the most long-winded rambling post award, chum! We all know what this is about. Some folks think that white people and their “toxic“ culture have been dominant for too long in this country, and they want to tear down all the white icons. You see them trying to chip away at our culture, nearly every day. If the matching ethnicity of a superhero charactor is so important to the self esteem of the children, then the answer for the black kids is to create more black superhero characters. Instead, you think it’s a-okay to rob the white kids of one of their superhero role models by giving him a minority makeover. A sort of demented superhero reparation program to atone for the sins of their parents ... who cast Charlton Heston as a Mexican. Note that they cast a major movie star for the Mexican role. They did not change the Mexican charactor to a white European character. Hey, if a minority actor can pass himself off as the lily-white Superman, then all the power to him! No one would give two shits.
|
|