• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Official Tweet James Gunn outlines his and Peter Saffran's plans for the DC Universe

Brofield

Brofield

Magical Famicomrade
Founder
Pronouns
He/Him/His


I can't quite transcribe just yet while at work, but from what I do recall real quick right now:

Existing DCU films are being pushed out as they currently are (Shazam, Flash, the other thing i cant remember, and Aquaman)

First Chapter of DCU (spanning 8-10 years): Gods & Monsters. This will comprise films, television, animation, video games, actors often reprising their roles in both live action and animated. These are only some of the projects greenlit, but not all of them. Note no video games were announced as part of this new canon; we likely won't see them before the tailend of this first chapter.

Superman: Legacy - In theatres July 11, 2025

The Brave and The Bold - Batman and his son, Damian Wayne, springboard for rest of Bat family

Waller (ties into Peacemaker), Lanterns, The Authority, Supergirl, Swamp Thing, some other stuff. Again, I'll transcribe later. Today's been long, I just didn't see a thread for this yet. Some other projects like Matt Reeve's The Batman will continue to exist in their own little offshoots, marked off specifically as DC Elseworld and have no bearing on the overall story being told.
 
My biggest wish for these movies is what it's always been; that the tone isn't super airy like the MCU.

'Lanterns' sounds the most interesting of these to me. Based on the illustrations that were in the video, Jensen Ackles and John David Washington would be a great Hal Jordan and John Stewart respectively.
 
0
What I find most interesting's how there's mention of multiple mediums involved here, it makes me wonder how connected the different mediums are gonna be toward each other. I'd really hope they don't go overboard on the connections between the mediums, or things are gonna get convoluted really quickly. It's one thing expecting viewers to have watched prior stuff in the same medium. It would be another to be also adding in other mediums like animated tv shows and video games to the list of homework as well.

I'll be the first to admit I could be reading too deep into that though, and it could work as long as they don't go too off the deep end with connecting everything.
 
so like

IP is weird, right?

here's our plan for chapter 1: ten fucking years of movies about characters from the 40s
 
Brock Reiher said:
Is there going to be a The Batman 2? None of those other plans sound interesting, I'm kind of over the cinematic universe stuff.
Click to expand...
The Batman sequel is titled The Batman: Part II and releases October 3, 2025.

I'm personally very excited for a Swamp Thing horror film, Brave and the Bold, and the Supergirl movie just because of the comic runs they're inspired by, respectively. Lanterns being a megabudget True Detective is promising if they stick the landing. The others are cool to me, but I am fatigued from Marvel. Gunn's got the juice, though - I'm officially going to give anything he's involved with some benefit of the doubt.
 
.....Then the Batman 2...

AdorableHandmadeIrishdraughthorse-size_restricted.gif
 
Kind of boring tbh. I'm also not into the soft reboot concept he seems to be going for. It's too messy to follow and I would have just preferred a clean slate hard reset of everything.
 
I've not been following superhero films super closely as of late, but I've always had a soft spot for the DC trinity. I'm going to say it; this reboot seems half assed and ill advised.

1) You've got new characters being cast while old characters are also being kept the same, meaning it's unclear if this is actually a hard reset or not. You've also got the awkward decision of Gunn and Co trying to justify getting rid of actors like Henry Cavill or Ray Fisher while also defending Ezra Miller.

2) James Gun's The Suicide Squad was a box office bomb. I know it had its fans, but so did Man of Steel. His one big DC movie was a total nonstarter at the box office, and he's now been given the keys to oversee the whole cinematic franchise. There are countless other directors who could take on shepherding the franchise while actually having some receipts.

I honestly think the horse has already bolted. Marvel is getting by on pre-established goodwill with their fanbase, but super hero films are getting more and more frontloaded at the box office. I don't see DC managing to get this all off the ground a second time.
 
JazzPotatoes said:
I've not been following superhero films super closely as of late, but I've always had a soft spot for the DC trinity. I'm going to say it; this reboot seems half assed and ill advised.

1) You've got new characters being cast while old characters are also being kept the same, meaning it's unclear if this is actually a hard reset or not. You've also got the awkward decision of Gunn and Co trying to justify getting rid of actors like Henry Cavill or Ray Fisher while also defending Ezra Miller.

2) James Gun's The Suicide Squad was a box office bomb. I know it had its fans, but so did Man of Steel. His one big DC movie was a total nonstarter at the box office, and he's now been given the keys to oversee the whole cinematic franchise. There are countless other directors who could take on shepherding the franchise while actually having some receipts.

I honestly think the horse has already bolted. Marvel is getting by on pre-established goodwill with their fanbase, but super hero films are getting more and more frontloaded at the box office. I don't see DC managing to get this all off the ground a second time.
Click to expand...

I agree,

Also the biggest red flag I noticed (as small as it seems) is that they started comparing themselves with other media since the beginning .

"The Game of Thrones of this"

" The True Detective of that"


That makes it even more lame and boring.
 
JazzPotatoes said:
2) James Gun's The Suicide Squad was a box office bomb. I know it had its fans, but so did Man of Steel. His one big DC movie was a total nonstarter at the box office, and he's now been given the keys to oversee the whole cinematic franchise. There are countless other directors who could take on shepherding the franchise while actually having some receipts.
Click to expand...
This man will have the GotG trilogy under his belt before his Superman movie comes out, and The Suicide Squad is the best reviewed film in the entire universe that also released day and date on HBO Max during a COVID peak. It was never going to do gangbusters after the brand damage DC has endured at the hands of Snyder. But even so, do you think comic book fans are going to be not excited by the prospect of the GotG helmer running a CBM franchise?

Nobody in the GA knows or cares about Ray Fisher professionally, I promise you. The Ezra situation is totally dicey, but we have to actually see if they're just waiting till the movie comes out before firing them. It's all up in the air at this point, but I can't fathom how this could seem half-assed. It's a mix of huge legacy characters and deep cuts, which Gunn is known for making the most of.
 
Fercho said:
I agree,

Also the biggest red flag I noticed (as small as it seems) is that they started comparing themselves with other media since the beginning .

"The Game of Thrones of this"

" The True Detective of that"


That makes it even more lame and boring.
Click to expand...
This is how the entire entertainment industry operates, unfortunately. Every pitch meeting you'll ever sit in consists of "it's X meets X", or "it's X, but set in the 80s". Marvel and DC are both guilty of the entire industry's tendencies :(
 
0
Dragoncaine said:
This man will have the GotG trilogy under his belt before his Superman movie comes out, and The Suicide Squad is the best reviewed film in the entire universe that also released day and date on HBO Max during a COVID peak. It was never going to do gangbusters after the brand damage DC has endured at the hands of Snyder. But even so, do you think comic book fans are going to be not excited by the prospect of the GotG helmer running a CBM franchise?

Nobody in the GA knows or cares about Ray Fisher professionally, I promise you. The Ezra situation is totally dicey, but we have to actually see if they're just waiting till the movie comes out before firing them. It's all up in the air at this point, but I can't fathom how this could seem half-assed. It's a mix of huge legacy characters and deep cuts, which Gunn is known for making the most of.
Click to expand...
He had GotG under his belt when he released TSS, and it still bombed. Dune, Godzilla Vs Kong and even Tenet managed to make money at the cinema during Covid and having day and date HBO streaming, but TSS didn't just bomb, it was a historical bomb.

If audiences didn't turn out for his take on TSS, I have my doubts they'll turn out en masse for his sorta reboot but not really take on properties like The Authority.

And I'm all out of patience for any defending of Ezra Miller. They have committed some out and out heinous shenanigans, but the only thing coming out of WB is

"Ezra is getting help"

"We absolutely want to keep Ezra for future films"

"If Ezra is able to turn things around, why wouldn't we still want to work with them?"

Meanwhile Ray Fisher not only saw his character get eviscerated by studio execs, he suffered actual bullying and bullshit from WB execs, deserved for things to be made right, and instead got unceremoniously dropped, despite not being a felon or a walking PR disaster.

Sorry, but I just don't see this working. DC has already got an uphill battle to get audiences onside after the last few years, and keeping the worst elements of the previous films while arbitrarily getting rid of the good things just seems misguided.
 
DC has everything but recent dominance in the box office. While Disney (with their marvel IP) has eaten their potential lunch since 2010, its Superman, Batman and Wonder woman stupid! If you're just driving around and you see the 'S' (superman symbol) and the bat symbol IRL (which I've seen plenty of, just over the past month) it isn't a stretch to say that DC can be bigger than ever. I'm not waiting with baited breath but I'll tune in a couple of years.

No dog in fight as far as "MCU vs DCU". Just think though, if they made a movie based off "Superman: Up in the Sky".... Damn that would be something,
 
0
JazzPotatoes said:
He had GotG under his belt when he released TSS, and it still bombed. Dune, Godzilla Vs Kong and even Tenet managed to make money at the cinema during Covid and having day and date HBO streaming, but TSS didn't just bomb, it was a historical bomb.

If audiences didn't turn out for his take on TSS, I have my doubts they'll turn out en masse for his sorta reboot but not really take on properties like The Authority.

And I'm all out of patience for any defending of Ezra Miller. They have committed some out and out heinous shenanigans, but the only thing coming out of WB is

"Ezra is getting help"

"We absolutely want to keep Ezra for future films"

"If Ezra is able to turn things around, why wouldn't we still want to work with them?"

Meanwhile Ray Fisher not only saw his character get eviscerated by studio execs, he suffered actual bullying and bullshit from WB execs, deserved for things to be made right, and instead got unceremoniously dropped, despite not being a felon or a walking PR disaster.

Sorry, but I just don't see this working. DC has already got an uphill battle to get audiences onside after the last few years, and keeping the worst elements of the previous films while arbitrarily getting rid of the good things just seems misguided.
Click to expand...
I'm not gonna disagree on Ezra Miller. They need to go. But what any business would do is wait until their movie is out and makes whatever money it's going to make before announcing the firing of their lead actor. That's just business sense. Now, if they actually keep Ezra, that'd be fucked up.

As for your other points, which elements were "good" vs. "the worst" is extremely polarized across the fanbase and explains the soft reboot. The GA doesn't care about Henry Cavill as Superman, if that's what you're referring to. MoS (which I adore) was a commercial and critical disappointment, BvS has the worst multiplier EVER for a movie that opened over $100m, and Justice League was a total bomb. I mean, BvS grossed $425m opening weekend and couldn't even hit $1b worldwide over its entire run. That is absurdly bad word of mouth. These aren't Cavill's fault, but the GA associates his likeness and take on the character with these movies.

Aquaman is the highest-grossing DC movie of all time, Peacemaker was a smash hit, Shazam! is one of the best reviewed DCEU movies and turned a nice profit with its small budget, The Batman was a major success, and Joker was nominated for 11 Oscars and is the highest grossing R-rated movie ever made. Sequels to all of these movies or TV projects are coming. How does that signify "keeping the worst elements?"
 
I can't believe they're trying to launch a cinematic universe AGAIN. Don't see it working out any better than it did the last time. Just don't think there's much appetite for it outside marvel, seeing as not a single one has stuck.
 
Lots of interesting projects announced. I'm cautiously optimistic with Gunn at the helm. Worst case, at least there's still the Matt Reeves-verse.
 
I think Gunn has learned from Feige. I look forward to the films in Chapter One. Hopefully they're better than what came before.
 
I'll take pretty much any new stab at one of these things over most of Phase 4 if that's the direction we're heading, tbh. I hope Gunn actually manages to pull off tonally unique stories in the CBM space.
 
This announcement sunk the probability of me ever watching a comic book film in theaters again. The internet blew up about batgirl being erased, many throwing racist aspersions about what isn't and is cut. But the snydercut has more brown and black leads alone than that announced slate and it's being celebrated.

With how black Adam, along with MoS and BvS, was received, it kind of seems like the general audience doesn't want leftist ideals in their cape movies. Which sure, have at it, but that's not for me and kind of betrays what comics try to do as an art form, ie translating hard subjects to an audience that usually doesn't care to listen.

What we get in return is just more of the same in a different wrapper. They're even putting cyborg back in his place on Titans, gotta stick to 'canon.'
 
Harina said:
With how black Adam, along with MoS and BvS, was received, it kind of seems like the general audience doesn't want leftist ideals in their cape movies. Which sure, have at it, but that's not for me and kind of betrays what comics try to do as an art form, ie translating hard subjects to an audience that usually doesn't care to listen.
Click to expand...
How is Snyder's Randian bullshit leftist?

And even then, stuff like TSS, Peacemaker and especially The Boys prove people like leftist themes in their superhero movies and shows, they just want said movies and shows to be good, MoS, Black Adam and especially BvS failed to do
 
robertman2 said:
How is Snyder's Randian bullshit leftist?

And even then, stuff like TSS, Peacemaker and especially The Boys prove people like leftist themes in their superhero movies and shows, they just want said movies and shows to be good, MoS, Black Adam and especially BvS failed to do
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
0
robertman2 said:
How is Snyder's Randian bullshit leftist?

And even then, stuff like TSS, Peacemaker and especially The Boys prove people like leftist themes in their superhero movies and shows, they just want said movies and shows to be good, MoS, Black Adam and especially BvS failed to do
Click to expand...
Truly never thought I'd see the day Zack Snyder was described as a leftist filmmaker. The man's dream project is literally The Fountainhead! Also, The Rock is one of Hollywood's most prominent Republicans.
 
My hot take:

They are trying to make a cinematic universe, but that is built from movies. Movies are built from good scripts, but they aren't being delivered.

Only a small part of the audience wants to escape to/immerse themselves in a cinematic universe. Of the rest of us, fewer and fewer want to come along for the ride because the movies aren't great and the superhero thing has gotten tiresome.
 
0
robertman2 said:
How is Snyder's Randian bullshit leftist?

And even then, stuff like TSS, Peacemaker and especially The Boys prove people like leftist themes in their superhero movies and shows, they just want said movies and shows to be good, MoS, Black Adam and especially BvS failed to do
Click to expand...
I'm not going to have a drawn out discussion on objectivism, so I'm just going to give you an example from his latest movie to show you why that's made-up conjecture from a sex pest* that you're just repeating like truth.



The boat in the scene is named after a place built by a singular person in the fountainhead. Aquaman saves the owner of this boat and chastises them for trying to do something on their own. Aquaman does espouse similar objectivists feelings but ends up not actually wanting that life.



Cyborgs whole deal as well.

In MoS, Clark goes to India to save the whole world, not just metropolis. Then he smashed a US drone for good measure.

BvS is about ceos and tech bros having too much money, Batman literally quotes dick Cheney's 1% doctrine.

The boys creators adore and use Zach's work.

As for Black Adam, I haven't heard any complaints that you can't apply to almost every Marvel movie, aka bad exposition. But within 5 minutes the annoying kid is also spouting anti-capitalist, anti-western dogma. And the movie is about colonization and western intervention.


Phosphorescent Skeleton said:
Truly never thought I'd see the day Zack Snyder was described as a leftist filmmaker. The man's dream project is literally The Fountainhead! Also, The Rock is one of Hollywood's most prominent Republicans.
Click to expand...
The book is about something being taken from a creator, very relevant to Snyder. I'm as surprised as anyone that the rock made black adam. He's as safe as they come, but maybe that's by design 🤷🏽‍♀️

And you haven't even touched anything else I've said which is what I'm talking about. Gunns "politics" are way worse, what's leftist about tss, the explicit animal cruelty for a dumb punchline? He doesn't have a noble reason for deleting his tweets.

If you're looking for a Randian movie, they're called Iron Man 1&2, but y'all ain't ready for that convo and this isn't the thread.


*Devin Farci is the sex pest who started the idea that Snyder is objectivist based on an eighth of a scene that goes on for another 3 minutes.
 
Last edited:
Harina said:
I'm not going to have a drawn out discussion on objectivism, so I'm just going to give you an example from his latest movie to show you why that's made-up conjecture from a sex pest that you're just repeating like truth.



The boat in the scene is named after a place built by a singular person in the fountainhead. Aquaman saves the owner of this boat and chastises them for trying to do something on their own. Aquaman does espouse similar objectivists feelings but ends up not actually wanting that life.



Cyborgs whole deal as well.

In MoS, Clark goes to India to save the whole world, not just metropolis. Then he smashed a US drone for good measure.

BvS is about ceos and tech bros having too much money, Batman literally quotes dick Cheney's 1% doctrine.

The boys creators adore and use Zach's work.

As for Black Adam, I haven't heard any complaints that you can apply to almost every Marvel movie, aka bad exposition. But within 5 minutes the annoying kid is also spouting anti-capitalist, anti-western dogma. And the movie is about colonization and western intervention.

If you know anything about those book, you know it's about something being taken from a creator, very relevant to Snyder. I'm as surprised anyone that the rock made black. Adam. He's as safe as they come, but maybe that's by design 🤷🏽‍♀️

And you haven't even touched anything else I've said which is what I'm talking about. Gunns "politics" are way worse, He doesn't have a noble reason for deleting his tweets.
Click to expand...

I don't want to sound rude, but I'm begging you to engage in political art that isn't corporate super hero franchise films.

You cannot be a fan of Ayn Rand in any capacity in the 21st century without being a shithead, I'm sorry, its comparable with being a JK Rowling fan

I also have no respect or even opinion on James Gunn except that I think his movies are bad. Don't worry, I also think Marvel movies are bad and have noxious politics.
 
Last edited:
Phosphorescent Skeleton said:
I don't want to sound rude, but I'm begging you to engage in political art that isn't corporate super hero franchise films.

You cannot be a fan of Ayn Rand in any capacity in the 21st century without being a shithead, I'm sorry, its comparable with being a JK Rowling fan

I also have no respect or even opinion on James Gunn except that I think his movies are bad. Don't worry, I also think Marvel movies are bad and have noxious politcs
Click to expand...
This is severely reductionist.

Who said he's a fan? And this is pretty gross because there are still trans people that are fans of Harry Potter. But they no longer engage, the real difference.

But unless you can actually prove to me you know what objectivism is, this just comes off as a really bad condescension, because you're attacking the subject based on social media gaslighting for the last decade and not my words.

Please use my words and say where I'm wrong, I am not apologizing for anybody.
 
Harina said:
This is severely reductionist.

Who said he's a fan? And this is pretty gross because there are still trans people that are fans of Harry Potter. But they no longer engage, the real difference.

But unless you can actually prove to me you know what objectivism is, this just comes off as a really bad condescension, because you're attacking the subject based on social media gaslighting for the last decade and not my words.

Please use my words and say where I'm wrong, I am not apologizing for anybody.
Click to expand...
His dream movie is an adaptation of the Fountainhead, I think that lends some credence to the idea that he's a fan of Ayn Rand.
www.google.com

Zack Snyder Says Country Is ‘Too Divided’ for an Adaptation of ‘The Fountainhead’ Now

The director talked about his long-gestating adaptation of "The Fountainhead"
www.google.com www.google.com
 
Phosphorescent Skeleton said:
His dream movie is an adaptation of the Fountainhead, I think that lends some credence to the idea that he's a fan of Ayn Rand.
www.google.com

Zack Snyder Says Country Is ‘Too Divided’ for an Adaptation of ‘The Fountainhead’ Now

The director talked about his long-gestating adaptation of "The Fountainhead"
www.google.com www.google.com
Click to expand...
At least finish reading my other post before saying this. The fountainhead is about something being stolen from a creator, that's Zack Snyder's whole bag in the industry.

Snyder believed the political climate still isn’t right for the feature film. “We need a less divided country and a little more liberal government to make that movie, so people don’t react to it in a certain way.”

Literally in the article, why would he say this?
 
Harina said:
At least finish reading my other quote before saying this. The fountainhead is about something being stolen from a creator, that's Zack Snyder's whole bag in the industry.
Click to expand...
He could make a movie about that that isn't literally an adaptation of a key Objectavist text.
 
Phosphorescent Skeleton said:
He could make a movie about that that isn't literally an adaptation of a key Objectavist text.
Click to expand...

What somebody chooses to work on is not about their beliefs. Starship troopers was considered fascist until the director had to say something on his commentary.

"Snyder believed the political climate still isn’t right for the feature film. “We need a less divided country and a little more liberal government to make that movie, so people don’t react to it in a certain way.”

Snyder has been vocally adamant about people needing to engage with his work beyond surface level.
 
I mean yeah if my dream is adapting a particular work of art to another medium it's probably because that work of art has a deeply profound impact on me as a person.

This does not feel coincidental when his dream adaptation is Ayn Heckin' Rand.
 
Harina said:
What somebody chooses is not about their beliefs. Starship troopers was considered fascist until the director had to say something on his commentary.

"Snyder believed the political climate still isn’t right for the feature film. “We need a less divided country and a little more liberal government to make that movie, so people don’t react to it in a certain way.”

Snyder has been vocally adamant about people needing to engage with his work beyond surface level.
Click to expand...
Nothing about Snyder tells me that his Fountainhead will be a cutting satirical adaptation of a fascist text the way Verhoeven's film was. By all accounts the novel resonates with him sincerely. I also don't feel that Snyder comes off particularly well in that quote.
 
Harina said:
I'm not going to have a drawn out discussion on objectivism, so I'm just going to give you an example from his latest movie to show you why that's made-up conjecture from a sex pest* that you're just repeating like truth.



The boat in the scene is named after a place built by a singular person in the fountainhead. Aquaman saves the owner of this boat and chastises them for trying to do something on their own. Aquaman does espouse similar objectivists feelings but ends up not actually wanting that life.



Cyborgs whole deal as well.

In MoS, Clark goes to India to save the whole world, not just metropolis. Then he smashed a US drone for good measure.

BvS is about ceos and tech bros having too much money, Batman literally quotes dick Cheney's 1% doctrine.

The boys creators adore and use Zach's work.

As for Black Adam, I haven't heard any complaints that you can't apply to almost every Marvel movie, aka bad exposition. But within 5 minutes the annoying kid is also spouting anti-capitalist, anti-western dogma. And the movie is about colonization and western intervention.



The book is about something being taken from a creator, very relevant to Snyder. I'm as surprised as anyone that the rock made black adam. He's as safe as they come, but maybe that's by design 🤷🏽‍♀️

And you haven't even touched anything else I've said which is what I'm talking about. Gunns "politics" are way worse, what's leftist about tss, the explicit animal cruelty for a dumb punchline? He doesn't have a noble reason for deleting his tweets.

If you're looking for a Randian movie, they're called Iron Man 1&2, but y'all ain't ready for that convo and this isn't the thread.


*Devin Farci is the sex pest who started the idea that Snyder is objectivist based on an eighth of a scene that goes on for another 3 minutes.
Click to expand...

Most of this is nonsense babbling, so I'm just gonna address stuff I bolded

I have no idea what sex pest you're talking about, and this is just an extremely bad faith attack.

No, The Boys actively and repeatedly mocks Snyder's DC works, from the aesthetics of the movies themselves to all the hashtag bullshit Snyder's diehard stans are constantly pushing on Twitter.

TSS's entire plot is permeated by anti-US imperialism, far more than most big budget movies, let alone superhero movies. Everything from all problems in the movie being caused by the US government, to the usage of Starro, a giant red and blue starfish, to the fact the Squad only starts to do actual good when they deliberately disobey Waller and the US government.
 
Oh goody, we're at the stage where we argue which corporate franchise mega-blockbusters are left wing and which corporate franchise mega-blockbusters are right wing.

Pro tip: if your film is a superhero blockbuster costing hundreds of millions of dollars, and using characters that were stolen from their creators and used to create a status quo of pumping the same recycled content in the name of consumerism for decades unending, then it ain't progressive or radical or left wing, it's another cog in the capitalist machine. DC/Marvel Superheros are inherently exploitative and capitalistic, and the only way to get around that is do an Alan Moore and disavow the entire machine.

James Gunn is now managing a franchise in one of the biggest corporations in the world. He's as corporate as McDonalds.

The Boys is produced by one of the biggest anti-union, most exploitative corps in the world.

Zack Snyder likes Ayn Rand. He also, by all accounts, is a genuinely nice guy who does right by his cast and crews and is able to get them to follow him to different projects as a result.
 
robertman2 said:
Most of this is nonsense babbling, so I'm just gonna address stuff I bolded

I have no idea what sex pest you're talking about, and this is just an extremely bad faith attack.

No, The Boys actively and repeatedly mocks Snyder's DC works, from the aesthetics of the movies themselves to all the hashtag bullshit Snyder's diehard stans are constantly pushing on Twitter.
Click to expand...
You don't know what you're talking about sorry.

The problem with the idea of "parodying" MoS and BvS doesn't work outside small bits because Superman isn't bad.

The idea that this is what Snyder was "actually" going ignores the movies in service of social media narrative. Nobody here has actually knows anything about Rand but they've heard its Snyder's favorite so it must be true. Only Snyder must control not fans, I've not once seen anyone condemn Feige or Feloni for their fans attacking black folk and made up villians.

Honestly, I'm sorry I brought this up, I thought folks were actually more open now to reading beyond surface level and headlines, which is what the boys is about. Everybody keeps skipping over everything once they see words in my post to write what they want instead of actually engaging what I wrote.
Phosphorescent Skeleton said:
Nothing about Snyder tells me that his Fountainhead will be a cutting satirical adaptation of a fascist text the way Verhoeven's film was.
Click to expand...
Please explain the difference.

Spoilers: there is none. You can go back and look at the reviews, starship troopers came out, it was the same thing as how they treated Snyder. The only reason it's considered one now, is because of the commentary on the home release. Snyder even brought this up in 300 interviews, so acting like that is some standard doesn't hold.

But again nobody can actually show me where rand stuff is in his movies, so here's a little something a friend of mine made.

 
0
JazzPotatoes said:
Oh goody, we're at the stage where we argue which corporate franchise mega-blockbusters are left wing and which corporate franchise mega-blockbusters are right wing.

Pro tip: if your film is a superhero blockbuster costing hundreds of millions of dollars, and using characters that were stolen from their creators and used to create a status quo of pumping the same recycled content in the name of consumerism for decades unending, then it ain't progressive or radical or left wing, it's another cog in the capitalist machine. DC/Marvel Superheros are inherently exploitative and capitalistic, and the only way to get around that is do an Alan Moore and disavow the entire machine.

James Gunn is now managing a franchise in one of the biggest corporations in the world. He's as corporate as McDonalds.

The Boys is produced by one of the biggest anti-union, most exploitative corps in the world.
Click to expand...
Yeah that.

Rocket Raccoon is a world-beloved movie icon and Bill Mantlo needs to crowdfund his own lifelong care. Batman was outright stolen from his creator, Bill Finger, and good-for-nothing thieving ratfuck Bob Kane has it stipulated in his contract that Bill Finger can never be officially recognized as such. Finger died penniless and alone, and only in recent years has a loophole been found to add Bill Finger's name to the credits as "Batman created by Bob Kane with Bill Finger."

By all means enjoy these characters and their universes, but the MCU introducing its first LGBT hero for the 8th time isn't a fair tradeoff for the decades of artistic exploitation and abuse that led to its massive farm of IPs it can use to exploit an entirely different industry of creatives.
 
stopping by to say that starship troopers is awesome in the modern day and very, very obvious in its satire
 
Raccoon said:
stopping by to say that starship troopers is awesome in the modern day and very, very obvious in its satire
Click to expand...

Can you please explain where the obviousness is. 300 begins, ends, and is narrated by a blind man that wasn't at the battles. I know folks talk about Snyder's 'lack' of subtlety and blah blah blah but how can you not catch the whole unreliable narrator? On top of this , a major scene has literal strawmen in the battle.

My major issue with the whole mess is that this read of 'what he creates is what he believes' is not put upon anybody else.

I have yet to see anybody say Ryan coogler hates black people, but black panther kills multiple people that are fighting for black liberation. Wakanda Forever even still calls us the lost tribe because they did nothing but join the white supremacists driven capitalist system that oppresses black people, with the tech center representing bootstraps that people just need to get better. Of course not, because that's a silly idea.
 
Harina said:
Can you please explain where the obviousness is. 300 begins, ends, and is narrated by a blind man that wasn't at the battles. On top of this , the major scenes has literal strawmen in the battle. I know we talk about Snyder's 'lack' of subtlety and blah blah blah but how can you not catch the whole literally unreliable narrator?

My major issue with the whole mess is that this read of 'what he creates is what he believes' is not put upon anybody else.

I have yet to see anybody say Ryan coogler hates black people, but black panther kills multiple people that are fighting for black liberation. Wakanda Forever even still calls us the lost tribe because they did nothing but join the white supremacists driven capitalist system that oppresses black people, with the tech center representing bootstraps that people just need to get better.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen any of those other movies, but everyone and every institution in starship troopers is either idiotic, evil, or both

edit: I did not intend to insinuate anything about the real world ethnic minorities depicted in 300 with this post. I regret sharing my thoughts about Starship Troopers given their irrelevance to the broader topic. I want to underscore that I have no basis to comment on any racism implicit to these or any other films.
 
Last edited:
Raccoon said:
I haven't seen any of those other movies, but everyone and every institution in starship troopers is either idiotic, evil, or both
Click to expand...
Why are the spartans not evil? Are you saying you have less empathy for the brown people than you do the aliens? Again, 300 begins, ends, and is narrated by a blind man that wasn't at the battles. Just like starship troopers, its about recruiting new troops.
 
Harina said:
Why are the spartans not evil? Are you saying you have less empathy for the brown people than you do the aliens? Again, 300 begins, ends, and is narrated by a blind man that wasn't at the battles. Just like starship troopers, its about recruiting new troops.
Click to expand...
what the  fuck are you on about
 
Harina said:
Why are the spartans not evil? Are you saying you have less empathy for the brown people than you do the aliens? Again, 300 begins, ends, and is narrated by a blind man that wasn't at the battles. Just like starship troopers, its about recruiting new troops.
Click to expand...
300 is based on a comic by Frank Miller, who has shown over the decades that he is not being ironic when it comes to his invocation of and reliance on fascist tropes and hawkish conservative talking points.

Now yes, it's possible a director could make a satirical version of 300 in the same way Verhoeven took Starship Troopers and made it satirical... But Snyder didn't do that. 300 the film is a very straight adaptation of 300 the comic. And that has some very uncomfortable baggage.
 
Harina said:
Why are the spartans not evil? Are you saying you have less empathy for the brown people than you do the aliens? Again, 300 begins, ends, and is narrated by a blind man that wasn't at the battles. Just like starship troopers, its about recruiting new troops.
Click to expand...
Snyder said of Xerxes, "What's more scary to a 20-year-old boy than a giant god-king who wants to have his way with you?" - Zack Snyder, cool person who was totally making a cool point.

web.archive.org

Double-Edged Sword | EW.com

In all likelihood, Spartan warriors didn't actually do battle in nothing but clingy leather underwear and red capes. They wore body armor and loose drawers…
web.archive.org web.archive.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom