Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon-Strike VII: DC Cinematic Universe

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Canon-Strike VII: DC Cinematic Universe

    Eight months since the last Canon-Strike took place I've come to the conclusion that this break down format probably works best than focusing on the overall timeline focused aspects of the first five C-S' threads. After breaking down per day the world building Marvel films it seems only natural to turn our attention next to the semi-aborted attempt to create a DC competitor where now some films do take place within its realms but on a more standalone nature depending on the project and reception of the casting involved.

    The DCU is without a doubt less well received than Marvels efforts which typically vary from being thought of as either good or at worst merely okay. The DCU films on the other hand have been much more divisive. Each an attempt to reap gold from both copying and being a counter point to their Marvel rivals but failing to give the audience what they want. That lack of cohesion though does make DC's offerings potentially that bit more ripe for experimentation and variety of content as we're now seeing the studio brave its toes into with the in-canon future offerings ranging from comedy's, the horror and then the usual big budget event stuff we're used to.

    The DC Cinematic Universe

    You can essentially look upon the opening slate of films leading up to and including Justice League as being the Phase One of the DCU. These films broadly link together to tell the tale of a cynical world where superheroes exist but not on the world stage and chart Superman's emergence and struggle to become the hero that would light the way for others. That journey begins with the first film we'll be looking at, the first of the DCU itself.

    Movie 01 - Man of Steel
    The central crux of the film is pretty simple, to try and show the genesis of Superman from the point of view of how would he be viewed from a more realistic world view rather than the boy scout approach of the prior films. Here, one of his adoptive parents struggles with the fear that Clark would be accepted by the world rather than treated as an alien to be feared whilst Clark himself is finding his footing and very much discovering as he goes the ideals that would ultimately make him Superman. It's arguable that the film is the first stepping stone of an arc in which Clark only truly becomes Superman at the end of Justice League, this film introducing him to the world and later appearances charting the path to setting his own code of conduct and the world seeing him as a beacon of hope. The film doesn't communicate that all too clearly though meaning the three years it spent as the sole dissectable entry led to a lot of analysis being carried out on it when weighed against five to six years of Marvel content.



    Looking on this first entry, what is your view of the film now and what do you perceive to be its failings and its successes in being the first stepping stone for the DCU?

    #2
    I was out of the DCU at this very movie. I thought Cavill was terrible and the movie was very dumb and didn't know it was dumb. Most of the latter part of the movie was a big dull fight, causing total carnage with no thought towards actually saving anyone and then there was that ending. I really dislike that movie, have no need to ever watch it again and I was out of the DCU right then and there.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Superman Falls View Post
      to try and show the genesis of Superman from the point of view of how would he be viewed from a more realistic world view rather than the boy scout approach of the prior films
      Kinda feel that they started off from entirely the wrong perspective with that one.

      I didn't hate this movie, but it kinda washed over me. I struggle to recall much from it, even.

      Comment


        #4
        The trouble with Man of Steel is that it clearly was formed from three aims:

        01-Following the failure of Green Lantern, a need to create a film that differentiates itself in tone from Marvel's offerings
        02-Following Superman Returns, to approach the character from a standpoint that was clearly separate from first sight
        03-To carry over visual and narrative aspects of the recent success story of the Dark Knight trilogy

        Effectively they were so busy focusing on what the film shouldn't be that they didn't focus enough on what it should be. That aside I was always alright with the notion of having an approach to Superman that more accurately reflected how the world would perceive an alien with those powers emerging. If Superman were real and suddenly made himself known he wouldn't be revered, he'd be feared and the film has Clark wrestle with that decision in his early years. In order to highlight it they have Jonathan Kent become a cynic of the world which also is much more realistic a take on the character. A lot of fan thinking of Superman is that he learns his moral code from his upbringing which is fine in a sense but it's less realistic than the notion of a parent who puts thoughts of protecting his son from a cruel world above anything else. Jonathan is clearly a good father to Clark but he repeatedly wrestles with the thought that Clark should protect himself from the world rather than reveal himself to potential harm for the sake of others. It may come across as cold in the film but it's what most would do. That also feeds one of the most parodied scenes - the Hurricane. The issue with the scene really is that it isn't well executed, the point of it still stands up - that Jonathan is willing to die to protect his son's secret - but the set up doesn't earn the sacrifice. Lots is made of how Clark could have easily saved him but it misses the point that there are witnesses he's been raised not to use his powers in front of and he's not Superman at this point, he's supposed to be a teen (not helped by unconvincingly having Cavill play this sequence looking way too old) who is still unsure and reliant on his fathers guidance. It should have been better designed as a sequence but it's a fair pointed one.

        You then have all the lead in stuff to the Smallville fight. I think, again, part of the issue here is that the following sequences show Clark discover the buried ship and put on his costume but still - he isn't Superman at this point - he's still in a mode of discovery and learning which is interrupted by Zod's arrival. The Smallville fight is good stuff and along with the Zod fight gets over criticised. Lots is made of the level of destruction on show but much of it is down to the enemy and the scale of destruction is over stated. The actual fight only covers several blocks of Metropolis and this is literally the first powered fight Clark has ever had in his life, he's unrefined and not the 'Superman' he will eventually be so it makes sense that being thrown into such a battle with a military general would be so scrappy. There's an aspect of him overlooking the safety of civilians but this feeds the narrative of BvS later and inexperience would likely lean him to focus on more the bigger threat of Zod.

        Now - Here's where I bow somewhat to criticism of the film. There's a certain level of accounting on the films behalf there which is a reflection of how the film should really have better framed much of its set up and decision making.

        As for Zod's death, it's troublesome but not for the reason many complain about. At no point does the film say that this incarnation of Clark won't kill so it's not a stretch to instead see the moment as a defining one for the character's development. Here he's found himself at odds with the only link to his real heritage that exists and he doesn't actually want to kill Zod. However, he chooses to lose that to save the cornered civilians. It's easy to see why he chose that but also how that decision could be the key moment where he decides he will never kill again - and why he'd make that commitment. I don't think it's that problematic a scene... but... BvS then ruins that by showing him not even react to blatantly killing a terrorist so I have to concede this one somewhat.


        I'm not a fan of the colour toning, the attempts to Nolan-fy the film slighty but there's lots that I like about it. I like the Krypton opening, the sequence where he learns to fly is great, the action is framed better in terms of depicting the power of these beings than many Marvel depictions and the film contains one of only two good character theme's from modern Superhero films.

        It would have been great to see how a sequel could have developed on what worked, away from the growing Snyder excesses that followed. It's a solid first step for me though, I can watch this again much easier than I can Iron Man which has aged a lot for me and is fairly dry and uneventful in hindsight even though it succeeded in legitimising a character that at the time no-one cared for so accomplished more.

        Comment


          #5
          Movie 02 - Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice
          Remembered more for its use of the word Martha more than it being the first line action clash of the Dark Knight and the Man of Steel, BvS was long speculated but rather than be a standalone affair was very much tied into following up the consequences of the events in Man of Steel. The film is the first clear effort to establish a CU structure as well, something that was supposed to lead into two Justice League films but instead somehow blows its load somewhat by introducing Wonder Woman early as well. The film explains many of the complaints levied at MoS but introduced many more such as its characterisation of Lex and the way in which Batman justifies his position on Superman. Superman continues his journey, now public but with worldwide opinion divided on him leading to him feeling doubtful that the world truly wants a hero, that maybe it's too far gone for hope. This builds to the storylines biggest gambit and one that never gets the discussion it deserves, even if it was always going to be reversed, the death of Superman. A bold risk to jump into that storyline in only the second film for the character but it's a moment of self-sacrifice that leads the world to see him as an inspiration of hope and values to aspire to and for him to finally become and be reborn as the final form Superman we all know. There's a lot else to dissect with this one too.



          What went right and what went wrong with the second entry into the DCU?

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Superman Falls View Post
            What went right and what went wrong with the second entry into the DCU?
            Not sure about "right", but I can definitely point to something "wrong" - this was a movie which felt like the entire film was in the trailer. I went to the cinema a few months before and there was a "special extended trailer"-thing, and it honestly killed my excitement for the movie!

            Comment


              #7
              I enjoyed Man of Steel as a cinematic spectacle. Yeah, I liked that about it. As for Dawn of Justice, I was pretty hyped for it based on the Batman/Batfleck/Armoured costume Batman element alone ... but I switched it off after an hour. I NEVER do that with a film, but it was really poor. Was the second half any better? Did I miss any good stuff?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Asura View Post
                this was a movie which felt like the entire film was in the trailer.
                Which is a pretty damning criticism given the trailer.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Dogg Thang View Post
                  Which is a pretty damning criticism given the trailer.
                  I remember it quite well. It gave away nearly everything; even that Wonder Woman was in it - and it showed too much of Zuckerberg-Luthor.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    BvS felt like Snyder was way too in love of Batman. Like he'd taken MoS because Nolan's trilogy had taken Batman off the table for a while. What this film should have done is be a Man of Steel sequel that incorporated Batman, used then as a platform to start a new line of Batman DCUY films. The small sections we get here of Batfleck are my favourite done on screen in live action. They prove that the Arkham style adapts perfectly and it's a shame we won't get that now.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I like the first half of MoS. I think it's a really good telling of Superman. It goes to pot when Zod arrives.
                      As for the rest... Pants.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Movie 03 - Suicide Squad
                        The first film to break from the focus on the DC trinity and instead attempt to bring in several of the villains and background characters in a way where the set up avoids making it feel forced that so many were present. The film continued the darker tone the DCU strove for at the time but on this occasion took more of a ground level anarchic approach to the action and characters to reflect that we were viewing reluctant bad guys instead of saviours. A lot of focus was lost on the poorly received new incarnation of Joker despite him not being much of a presence in the film, much of the rest going on the big screen debut of Harley Quinn which was overwhelmingly well received. Though criticism of the film was vocal it struck a chord with audiences and remains one of the DCU's biggest success stories to date.




                        As the first foray outside of the DC Trinity, how does Suicide Squad factor into your estimation of the DCU a few years later?

                        Comment


                          #13
                          As mentioned in other threads, I have seen up to the point where Batman comes into it. That must be around 10 minutes in and I could take no more. It was interesting watching the trailers because the second trailer went for a completely different feel to the first trailer, like someone in marketing decided they were selling an entirely different film. But from the stories (and what people who watched it said), it seems this went well beyond marketing and that it essentially happened in the film itself.

                          I will fully admit that when I finally decided to give it a go, I was bringing my own baggage with me because I expected it to be absolutely terrible. The minutes I watched didn't sway me. It was edited like someone had accidentally hit the shuffle button and the Will Smith stuff was cringeworthy.

                          Edit: Oh, one more thing even though I can't apply it to the movie because I don't think I got to him in it - Joel Kinnaman somehow manages to suck life from the screen, like some kind of cinematic vampire. I have no idea how he gets cast in things.
                          Last edited by Dogg Thang; 03-10-2019, 08:25.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            To be honest he's not much different in this, Jai Courtney's similar but SS has the distinction of being possibly the one time that he's actually pretty good in the role he's been cast in to the point that it's not too surprising Gunn has brought him back for the second one.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Movie 04 - Wonder Woman
                              The one thing DC beat Marvel to, getting a female led Superhero film out of the gate which is staggering in hindsight but makes sense if the tales of what Feige faced on the issue are true. This film is the first that takes a step away from DCU canon by telling events that are mostly disconnected from the other films even if the tool used to do so comes from BvS. The film is arguably the Captain America of the DCU, taking a difficult to adapt character and doing so via WWII setting. This is a more seriously toned affair as is the norm in this canon but less so than Snyders entries even if there's an obvious lead in from them. This was also the start of the turn around for the DCU as well, both commercially and critically a success.




                              What are your thoughts of this historical based departure for the DCU?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X