As touched on in the article, I think one of the key strengths that DC has always had over Marvel - and this extends to the comics too - is the past willingness to allow auteurs the freedom to...
As touched on in the article, I think one of the key strengths that DC has always had over Marvel - and this extends to the comics too - is the past willingness to allow auteurs the freedom to take characters and run with them in whatever direction they deemed most interesting. From Burton's deliciously gothic exaggerations of the Dark Knight in Batman Returns to Gaiman's radical reinvention of a minor B-list hero (and the medium) in The Sandman, I feel this creative freedom has led to far more compelling works than anything the Marvelverse can boast. Easy to say in hindsight, sure, but going down the road of overly-interconnected homogeneity paved by the MCU really was an awful mistake for DC. Hopefully Gunn is happy to take a step back and work only in broad strokes while writers and directors get to do their thing unperturbed.
I would agree. The main problem I have had with the DC movies is that they feel like they're paint-by-numbers products; things produced by a checklist of things to appeal to the widest possible...
I would agree. The main problem I have had with the DC movies is that they feel like they're paint-by-numbers products; things produced by a checklist of things to appeal to the widest possible audience.
I get the impression that they are operating under the idea that Gunn is an auteur who is magically capable of making super appealing movies better than they can, and that's not really the case. The secret to his success is not so much that he's an auteur, but rather that he was able to understand the appeal of the stories he's worked on and gathered people who also understood it. The synergy between them is what made the movies he worked on so good.
The thing I'm worried about is one of the movies he makes won't make a lot of money, regardless of if it's good or not, and what Warner Discovery will do after that.
There’s a chance, even if Superman: Legacy isn’t highly successful, that they’ll allow him to continue if the reviews/audience reception and the legs are good. Like how Batman Begins didn’t light...
There’s a chance, even if Superman: Legacy isn’t highly successful, that they’ll allow him to continue if the reviews/audience reception and the legs are good. Like how Batman Begins didn’t light the box office on fire
As touched on in the article, I think one of the key strengths that DC has always had over Marvel - and this extends to the comics too - is the past willingness to allow auteurs the freedom to take characters and run with them in whatever direction they deemed most interesting. From Burton's deliciously gothic exaggerations of the Dark Knight in Batman Returns to Gaiman's radical reinvention of a minor B-list hero (and the medium) in The Sandman, I feel this creative freedom has led to far more compelling works than anything the Marvelverse can boast. Easy to say in hindsight, sure, but going down the road of overly-interconnected homogeneity paved by the MCU really was an awful mistake for DC. Hopefully Gunn is happy to take a step back and work only in broad strokes while writers and directors get to do their thing unperturbed.
I would agree. The main problem I have had with the DC movies is that they feel like they're paint-by-numbers products; things produced by a checklist of things to appeal to the widest possible audience.
I get the impression that they are operating under the idea that Gunn is an auteur who is magically capable of making super appealing movies better than they can, and that's not really the case. The secret to his success is not so much that he's an auteur, but rather that he was able to understand the appeal of the stories he's worked on and gathered people who also understood it. The synergy between them is what made the movies he worked on so good.
The thing I'm worried about is one of the movies he makes won't make a lot of money, regardless of if it's good or not, and what Warner Discovery will do after that.
There’s a chance, even if Superman: Legacy isn’t highly successful, that they’ll allow him to continue if the reviews/audience reception and the legs are good. Like how Batman Begins didn’t light the box office on fire
I like DC when it doesn't feel like DC.