DC Films Bosses Explain Why BATMAN v SUPERMAN And SUICIDE SQUAD Didn't Work

>"There are lessons from every movie," Jon Berg said. "You would be silly not to analyze how a movie was received — what went right and what went wrong on the making of a movie. On Suicide Squad, the movie did incredibly well commercially. It didn’t work narratively. You had some great casting and some great characterizations, but where the story fell down was on narrative, on plot. We could do better. Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that."
>"Most of the DC Universe is known as being a hopeful and optimistic place." Johns added. "It’s known for characters that are inspirational and aspirational. Anyone who knows and loves the DC Universe knows that a lot of that has to do with its hope and optimism. Wonder Woman celebrated exactly who the character is, but looking at it, it’s not like we should change everything to be about hope and optimism. There’s nothing to change. That’s what these characters are."

Thoughts? Are you excited about the more light/hopeful tone of the DCEU with Johns and Berg in charge?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=38Cy_Qlh7VM
youtube.com/watch?v=467ehoaGDaE
tasteofcinema.com/2015/15-great-movies-that-the-critics-got-wrong/
msn.com/en-us/movies/gallery/40-blockbuster-movies-that-the-critics-got-wrong/ss-AAj9zUT#image=2
esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a52344/movie-critics-on-their-mistakes/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>It was because of Snyder
That's all that needed to be said.

Sure.

I want to like movies with DC heroes in then by default, everything they have to do is be not shit, so I guess they're on the right track now.

>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that.

FUCK ALL OF YOU AND YOUR SHITTY TASTE. I LIKED THE DARK TONE.

>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that.
It was necessary and a 100% high level strategy from Snyder. Not only was it a great movie, it made people yearn for more of the hope and optimism which was given to us near the end. You really think WW would have done as well as it did if it weren't for BvS? JL is also going to play on that want. Snyder is both a master film maker and business man.

>Are you excited about the more light/hopeful tone of the DCEU


I think that's the wrong message to take away from what was just said. If they've learned anything, I hope it's just being true to the motivations and personalities of the characters they are using in the movies.

I did too but true fans know that Superheroes can never be dark cause then that means you hate Superheroes.

>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that."
Fuckers didn't learn a thing.

>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that.
Did they just forget about TDK?
They were just trash movies.

>>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that.
>FUCK ALL OF YOU AND YOUR SHITTY TASTE. I LIKED THE DARK TONE.

Same, but that's an oversimplification. What people "didn't respond to" is deconstructions, gen audiences don't want to be challenged. They want a shallow spectacle that ends with big proclamations about 'the power of love and friendship'

Ah well, hopefully they'll let some of the smaller films keep taking risks

>TDK
>dark
lol

I find it poetic that the New 52 was done to kickstart a cinematic universe, yet it took until the New 52 was reverted for the DCEU to get going.
Justice League will probably still suck, but I'm more excited for Aquaman now.

Introducing Jimmy Olsen just so you can kill him off immediately for shock value was pretty stupid.

>Not only was it a great movie, it made people yearn for more of the hope and optimism which was given to us near the end.
People said this after man of steel, Satan.
And after Justice League you'll either say it again, blame Whedon, or pretend it was never on the cards.

>are you excited for Johns cookie cutter bland shit made for children that are triggered by anything a little more mature
Yeah fuck them. They had something special with Snyder, but then they had to ruin it because NOT MUH fanboys and Disneyfied audiences started crying.

>What people "didn't respond to" is deconstructions, gen audiences don't want to be challenged.
I don't usually post in movie threads but I'm being trolled right?

Would have never EVER have known that was supposed to be Jimmy Olsen from the theatrical cut, unless he had a name tag showing for a split second or some stupid shit.

Sadly no.

I would like the tone if they understood what the fuck The Dark Knight was about. But Snyder somehow thought it was all about Jesus

> You really think WW would have done as well as it did if it weren't for BvS? JL is also going to play on that want. Snyder is both a master film maker and business man.
>We were just pretending to be retarded We actually wanted to do a divisive movie!
You don't really think that, do you?

>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that
It was also shittily written and made no sense.

So maybe fix that.

>Zack Snyder movies
>"A little more mature"
Man, I remember being 13, what a horrible time.

>>are you excited for Johns cookie cutter bland shit made for children that are triggered by anything a little more mature
>Yeah fuck them. They had something special with Snyder, but then they had to ruin it because NOT MUH fanboys and Disneyfied audiences started crying.

Right on, but I'd give them a little more credit than that. Geoff Johns actually writes pretty adult stories, he just knows how to do so delicately enough to not trigger the snowflakes

Plus all it takes is one Green Lantern-style flop for them to leverage as an excuse to return to mature storytelling

And that's why everyone hated Civil War. Fucking movie had a fakeout and instead of fighting a giant monster or the army of Winter Soldiers Cap and IM started beating the shit out of each other. So meanspirited!

It shouldn't have been divisive. Audiences should have liked both.

Snyder was aiming to do what Nolan did, which in his eyes was a dark version of a popular superhero.
Snyder's just an idiot. He's made bad movies one after the other. He wasn't trying to make a grand statement on humanity with BvS. He used the religious references because in his head it sounds cool, and epic. It's video game tier writing that's right at home in a Bethesda game.
The further DC is from this guy, the better.

I remember when MoS came out and people were blaming Goyer for all the problems in that movie.

Well, no, satan. Obviously BvS being such a shitty trash fire helped Wonder Woman garner a ton of praise for just being good.

>there's nothing to change
>changed suicide squad to a goofy commercial blockbuster to satisfy the fanboys who hated BvS
and in spite of all their problems they still don't know why people like these characters

Batman isn't even the darkest DC character but a movie surrounding him should be on par with the nolan movies.
DC did Suicide Squad badly in response to BvS
expect Justice League to be bad as well

>Joss Whedon is overseeing reshoots on “Justice League” and will write and direct “Batgirl.” How important will he be to the DC cinematic universe going forward?

>Berg: He’s a big part already. We love him. He’s a great partner, collaborator; we want him to be ensconced. We bring people by, have general meetings and talk about comics and their favorite superhero movies. With Joss, he saw the master board, and he saw a “Batgirl” title and he said, “You guys seriously want to do ‘Batgirl’?” And we said, “Absolutely.” He said, “That’s my jam.”

This. A lot of the praise of Wonder Woman is comparative. On it's own it's at best a 6/10 but in comparison to its predecessors people are giving it 2-3 bonus points

Precisely

but they dodnt because one was a horribly edited horibly written piece of crap

They are telling idiots what they want to hear. That's it, it'd a PR movement. Johns lies all the time and berg is a jew. SS was killed by the editing and you can't hire Snyder and at the same time force him into the pg13 rating, either let him have real control or just don't hire him. Snyder can be defined as uncompromised, you don't ask him to do something and then butcher his movie. The problem is WB.

I'd give it a 7/10. Well cast and acted, good choreography and visuals. The story was simple, but functional. They even balanced Steve Trevor's role with Diana's pretty well, instead of just having her carry the whole film herself.

It wasn't a masterpiece, but it was certainly well done.

At the end of the day the problem is that the guys making (and defending) these movies think there's a general formula and don't recognize that characters are individuals.

So it becomes "you just hate dark movies" when no, you can do a dark Batman story or a cynical Wolverine story or Swamp Thing or Deadman or something. Those characters are better suited for that. They're like 70/30 on the dark light split. But you try and angst up Superman, he's just not that guy. The proportions are different. It's gotta be the other way around. People like their darks dark and their lights light.

It's like laundry, you keep them separate. But I guess no one here does their own laundry so I can see why there's confusion.

This. The dark tone didn't make it shit. The shitty story and direction made it shit.

>mfw there was a glimpse of a simpler, happier Clark when Lois is worried about their future together and he just hops in the bath with her with all his clothes on

they cant just say "the movie was shit and it's snyder's fault"
hey gotta play the pr game

You say that as if Snyder's movies aren't bland either.

It was literally just an easter egg that they didn't even end up going through with bc they knew how many manbaby tears the fragile would shed

They knew they wouldn't be using the character so they figured why not make a cute reference to the character and his Supes signal, and then they even were nice enough to hide it in the director's cut so the manchildren didn't get MAD

>
>It shouldn't have been divisive. Audiences should have liked both.
Absolutely

Just what Batgirl needed, more quips.

>he thinks DC killed off a CIA agent

if they arent going to use the character why have him just to kill him off?

this. the dark tone isnt the problem
stop casting jesse eisenberg
stop jamming characters into 10 second scenes
stop giving henry cavill garbage lines
stop batman from killing people
stop jamming contrived plot devices in in order to do a half ass version of a famous story
stop cutting half the film out of your theatrical releases
stop taking creative control from your directors and just let them tell a story

See Sup Forums even DC is saying "Make Mine Marvel" better join the winning side before it's too late

The dark wasn't the problem. It was too long, boring at times, and Lois and Lex were fucking unbearabable.

Being 'dark' was the least of its problems.

I agree, the tone was not the problem. I love dark superhero movies more than light tone ones. BvS was bad because it had shitty editing, boring/unlikable characters and awful setups for future movies (the retarded mail cameos, all those nonsensical dream sequences, doing the death of Superman in the 2nd movie etc.). This guy explains it pretty well:

youtube.com/watch?v=38Cy_Qlh7VM

Yeah but it was just like your image. I felt like a huge guy that had to squint at a tiny ass glimmer of something positive. The reverse is better because then it's "holy shit Superman is angsting or struggling that means shit has gotten real"

But when it's his default it just leads to apathy.

It kind of makes me wonder if Snyder even paid attention to the stuff he adapted in the past because a huge part of 300 was "Xerxes is this invincible figure, making him bleed and look weak is a huge deal and a symbolic victory" but then you've got Superman and he can't seem to apply that same logic.

Zack Snyder is an edgy, bitter asshole.

They didn't hide shit, they just cut the fat which just happened to have his introduction in

His name was still in the credits, that's how people found out

Also
>lol, wouldn't it be funny if we took this character just for the sake of murdering him?

Pkus no, it wasn't "just an easter egg", Snyder specifically said he wanted to use him to send out the message "things are going to get serious, not your daddy's comics!" and such

>better join the winning side before it's too late

> (You)
>if they arent going to use the character why have him just to kill him off?

As an Easter Egg or a tip of the hat to the character

Just like Fin Fang Foom and the OG Human Torch showing up for a few frames in the MCU

If they really wanted to bring him back anyway, they easily could just like the MCU did w/ the Infinity Gauntlet and Adam Warlock, both of which they made quick references to and later decided to use separately

So what is Amy's drug of choice? You can tell she's into something.

Cocaine. That's what all film producers have.

She had the good sense to join up and soon Fox will too and with DC copying based Marvel and failing horribly we will dominate movies just like we do comics and everything else... well dominate more than we already do

That just covers one angle of the flaws. There are so many that I could post probably a dozen deconstructions taking different issues with it. But Wisecrack is USUALLY good and I think they do a good one on this

youtube.com/watch?v=467ehoaGDaE

bro, c'mon. I know ledger is "ew le edge fag"s favorite joker but it's even more "ew le edge fag" to act as if that movie isn't dark.

This isn't Sup Forums we aren't comparing it to fucking snuff flicks like those fake cannibal documentaries.

>he thinks the dream sequences were just set ups for other movies


how does it feel to be dumb?

No, it was because of Nolan. They let Snyder shit on everything because Nolan's success told them it makes money.

The actual problem is that they're all poorly constructed films full of boring non-characters.

>make a cute easter egg referencing a character
>by just using the character

i liked that Ant-Man easter egg in civil war as well.

>it made people yearn for more of the hope and optimism which was given to us near the end

Making people wish this horrible nightmare that is the DCEU would just end already is not the same as giving people a taste for hope and optimism.

But nice try, Satan.

This. The dark tone wasn't the problem. Wonder Woman showed you can still have a good movie while including dark subject matter.

>Fin Fang Foom and the OG Human Torch showing up for a few frames
Wait what?

>but where the story fell down was on narrative

Woaw.

Same deal with MOS : so, why have you guys waited to take lessons ??

>Batman v. Superman was tonally dark
That is the smallest issue in a mountain of issues.

And even then I wouldn't say dark is necessarily a problem. Its the way everything is executed that was horrible, from the script to the direction.

And all they had to do was make light of them

>Why BATMAN v SUPERMAN And SUICIDE SQUAD Didn't Work

How they didn't work? They made lot of money with those shows, lot of critics praised BvS and SS got an Oscar.

> Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that.


In no way is he saying BvS didnt work, he is just saying critics didnt like the tone. Which is obvious. He is basically saying the sky is blue.
Good job being retarded OP.

No prison rape, so it's not dark.

>critics praised BvS
factually incorrect

The headline is sensationalist, dont listen to the shill. He is literally just talking about why most critics didnt like them.

>BvS is good because it was so shitty, it made people pine for not shitty movies, making it all the more sweeter when we eventually get not shitty movies.
Thats what you just said. Fuck you, blatant falseflagger.

To be fair, I have noticed in the last couple of years since TDKR more people being critical of Nolan's trilogy for not being 'fun'.

He is talking about Skwad you idiot, which has little to do with the teams behind MoS or BvS really.

Futher Synder didn't have the same certain something that Nolan did. Nolan wrote great story and dialogue. Nearly every line could be used as a quote. Synder? Forgettable most of the time. Deadshot had a few good lines. But otherwise forgettable.

nah, factually there were some critics that praised it.

>They made lot of money with those shows
True, but they want critical acclaim as well.

>lot of critics praised BvS
No, they didn't.

>and SS got an Oscar.
For best make-up.

Armond White praised it.

Thats all you need to know, shitposter.

The John Hammond Human Torch is in the world's fair expo they go to before Bucky ships out. Don't know where Fin Fang Foom is

Either way they didn't show either of those getting destroyed so it's not really comparable and I'm not sure why we're talking about it.

>Deadshot

Snyder had nothing to do with Squad at all, except for directing a single scene with Flash, and he hasnt written any of these movies except WW.


I can't believe they let idiots like you near a keyboard.

If most critics didn't like them, then by definition they didn't work.

>lot of critics praised BvS
*twatter accounts

Well if they let you on then the bar must be pretty low huh?

I meant to include the lots parts. it wasnt lots of critics

It's because TDKR is on tv more than TDK and so they consistently tune into a half-completed tv-edited version of the worst one in the trilogy.

IMO Begins is the only one that holds up to a decade of viewing. I fucking love that movie still. TDK is great but I skip right through a lot of it if I can and get to the highlights. After the hospital blows up it's pretty much over.

>stating a fact is shitposting now

wew lad

Armond White praised No Country for Old Men too. So I guess thats a bad movie now?

If thought Superman represented hope and optimism. I guess not. Fuck you.

...

> (You)
>>Fin Fang Foom and the OG Human Torch showing up for a few frames
>Wait what?

Pic related

Foom showed up on a billboard in Iron Man

Does it preclude them from appearing in the universe later on? Not really, see the infinity gauntlet and adam warlock

Does it 'ruin' them? Lmfao no, it's a quick reference for the fans to material they don't think they'll ever get to

People only got pissy about Jimmy bc they're lemmings and the narrative around the film was bad, nobody on earth cared that they never planned to use him in the first place

WB didn't think they have to.
They thought "We've got the the biggest names in the game. We don't need to put in effort; they'll print money on their own"

I wonder whether he writes his reviews before or after seeing other reviews. The guy unerringly marches against general opinion. It does work out well when you hate a well-received movie - in those situations you can read his reviews and everything seems to make sense.

>So many autistic DCEU and company wars thread in one day.
It's like an early Christmas. I fucking love how autistic anons on Sup Forums and Sup Forums get over this shit, it's hilarious.

>We could do better. Batman v. Superman was tonally dark. People didn’t respond to that.

Uggh. The movie wasn't bad because it was dark. It was bad because it was dumb.

If they turn off the dark but don't turn off the dumb, we'll just get Green Lantern again.

they got pissy because snyder had him shot in the head

There is a stark contrast between that and brutally killing a longtime character such as Jimmy Olsen for what amounts to a cheap gag.

But carry on.

Tomato, tomato

thats not true at all user, critics, especially today, dont mean anything on whether or not a movie worked.


2001: A Space Odyssey had really mixed reviews when it first came out and it most definitely works.


Critics get it wrong all the time.


tasteofcinema.com/2015/15-great-movies-that-the-critics-got-wrong/


msn.com/en-us/movies/gallery/40-blockbuster-movies-that-the-critics-got-wrong/ss-AAj9zUT#image=2
esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a52344/movie-critics-on-their-mistakes/

>is factually wrong
>n-no you!!

wow, you really showed me!