That's pretty fucking shocking IMO, Skydance is a MESS.
Jeremy Latcham has an entire evangelical movies producing company. The Ellisons are ready to start their propaganda machine.
lol this is gonna be great. right as ai pops, the ellisons are gonna be rolling out shit-tons of christofascist slop and it'll tank their production companies. do it lol
Can't wait for a Superman origin story
They need to do an anti-woke one for the Ellisons where he protects colonial settlers, federal agents and data centres from evil protestors with molotov cocktails.
they are making another one? they already made one with cavil.
Supergirl's writing was a train wreck. So many baffling things I have to assume studio meddling. The movie otherwise was fine. Actress, fine. Direction, production, special effects, fine. But Supergirl came off hella awkward preaching about not revenge killing. Not because she accidentally killed someone in a rage and felt emptiness or regret. But that she'd lost her home and family to natural causes. Same thing right? And at the end, after all the preaching she gets her hypocritical kill on. No straightforward or intelligible arc as a character. For anyone. Baffling.
Have a 10 minute opening scene with her battling along side Clark. Accidentally going to far not realizing her strength. Then go off soul searching for the rest of the film. Biggest issue fixed. It would still need other tweaks. But then the main character would have a solid arc at least.
Mamoa as lobo though...... No notes.
Supergirl's writing was a train wreck. So many baffling things I have to assume studio meddling. The movie otherwise was fine. Actress, fine. Direction, production, special effects, fine.
This is a distressingly common trend in big budget movies in the last ~10 years or so. Casting directors seem to be doing great; it's been decades since we saw someone straight-up poorly cast, like Clooney as Batman or Julian McMahon as Doctor Doom.
Special effects are a somewhat mixed bag, but that's more an issue of SFX houses not being given the time and opportunity to do the best work that they can. When they're given time and used properly, it's entirely appropriate to say that special effects and CGI are better than ever before.
But writing for some unfathomable reason seems to have taken a turn specifically for the worse. I've heard that writers are being given less time to adjust scripts during filming, and that certainly fits with a pattern I've observed where there seem to be a lot of movies where the script feels like a first or second but by no means a final draft, as if one more final tweak could have taken something from passable to excellent.
Wherever the exact cause, "I liked everything about this movie except for all the things that happened" is a real fucking bummer of an experience, because you can so easily see how the movie could have been great, but just... wasn't.
It wasn't "don't revenge kill", it was "don't become like me".
That's just it though. They didn't really establish that. That was the point I was trying to make. Had they established that, then yes, that would have made sense.
Idk, it seemed exceedingly obvious to me.
Yeah, she spent the whole movie demonstrating how the things she went through led her to bad choices which led her to becoming a person she didn't like. She didn't want to see that happen to others. It didn't mean she had magically been fixed at some point along the way. Traumas often don't heal themselves with just time. Sometimes you really need therapy, and Supergirl spent the whole film running from the therapeutic influences in her life. It's only after everything else that she decides to stop running and come in out of the cold. It's kinda weird that people are ignoring all that and whining about Supergirl's lacking morals.
I wish I and everyone else had gotten to see the movie that you did. Because what we saw was something different apparently. All of that was anything but obvious as far as the movie goes. You largely have to assume that, or the character comes off as unlikable. It would be the only way to rationalize everything that happened.
There is an old adage in movie making. It's a visual medium. Show, don't tell. A lot of movies make the fatal mistake of dumping a lot of lore or information in boring exposition. Somehow this movie did one worse. They didn't even attempt to tell. Just assumed that everyone would rationalize. Yes, the rationalization was obvious. But that's still bad writing.
An extra ten minutes on the runtime for a couple extra scenes and some tweaked dialogue would have taken this from a muddy, confusing mess. Into a solid triumph. I enjoyed the movie. I enjoyed the original Supergirl as well. But the writing did this one in, despite doing Kara better as a character. Was just so sketchy in places.
I wish I and everyone else had gotten to see the movie that you did. Because what we saw was something different apparently
Incorrect.
All of that was anything but obvious as far as the movie goes.
...in your opinion. Which is not shared by several others in this thread who seem to have understood it just fine.
You largely have to assume that, or the character comes off as unlikable
Why do you think the character must meet your definition of likeable for the movie to be good? Don't answer that to me, ask yourself and then think about the answer you come up with.
Show, don't tell.
You not getting what was shown does not mean you weren't shown. The showing occurred and you either didn't get it or are pretending you don't get it because you don't like the message.
An extra ten minutes on the runtime for a couple extra scenes and some tweaked dialogue would have
...been an artistic compromise to satisfy the lackluster attitudes of the lowest intellectual denominator among moviegoers. Plenty of movies to suit that mindset are made every year. Stop insisting every movie be dumbed down to suit you.
Have a nice day. Byebye now.
I understood the movie just fine. It's legitimately the reason I can point out that there was bad writing.
You are arguing against a statement or claim I never made. And there are just as many people here who share my views, whatever that means.
My experience is the same as yours... I just saw this movie a couple of months ago and I am having a hard time remembering anything about it
I remember her on a dirty bender, somehow she got over it... comes back home
Yes, I watched it on Friday on HBO myself. I enjoyed the movie and understood it as someone who read comic books etc, their whole life. But I absolutely understand a lot of people's criticisms about the writing and the overall baffling nature of it.
It's a common enough comic trope that it's not a mystery why so many people are post rationalizing it into the movie. Where it really wasn't. The whole origin story are bit was just confusing too. They didn't even do that for the Superman movie before this. They figured everyone knew it and just went with the character.
It was a well done sequence and overall enjoyable, but it's necessity and placement was just confusing. As it didn't really explain or justify directly any of the things that were going on. Or even tie in to the previous Superman movie. It would have been the perfect point to flashback to an inciting event that sent Supergirl on this path. Not as perfect as just opening with it and not confused drop in mid drunken bender.
yes I would not say it was a disaster by any means and it definitely looked great. I just found the plot weak.
I didn't get that feeling that I understood the character and believed she actually went through an arc. It felt more like she was partied until she was partied out and then went home.
Because Kara said "don't kill for revenge it isn't worth it" without ever establishing a reason for having that worldview through an establishing scene ir even a throwaway line of dialogue? Convictions like that really need to be shown in some way and Kara's actions throighout the movie are of someone who has zero issues with causing death so why would she be so adamant about revenge killing specifically?
The writing for the movie was terrible.
My biggest critique of the movie is that that point was bashed over the head repeatedly. I was genuinely really annoyed at how often they pushed "don't be like me".
I mean that was the issue and they did dance around it several times. But they never brought it up that "directly". And that is what was most annoying about it.
Just sit down and have her explain how she had been there. How she knew from experience. Were left to assume that or read it in as subtext largely. Which makes what could have been part of a great character arc come off as a bit preachy and unearned without that necessary context. Unless you assume that was why. And if you have to make assumptions. Then something is wrong with the storytelling.
That, and the swordsmith's daughter deserved a bit more agency and a small arc as well. Saving Supergirl from the green sun was good. But giving her some minimal fighting or sword skills as well would have been so much better. Turning her from a mostly useless tagalong. To part of a proper adventuring duo. She still could have been a kid in over her head. Just not as much dead weight.
Translation: I wanted the movie to TELL me.
Show would be better, but yes we want to know why she has such a strong opnion on revenge killing, especially since she ended up killing Krem after saying not to kill.
It's not "don't kill" either, it's "don't become like me".
I mean, that's literally the point of a movie.
In the comments under this very post you yourself talked about how movies should show, not tell.
Mamoa as lobo though...... No notes
From the moment he was announced as Aquaman I thought “nah, that braddah is Lobo.” Turns out it’s Momoa’s favorite comic book character and man he’s so perfect. I NEED to see him interact with Jon Stewart.
I don't think this is just a result of Supergirl. I think that film is (more or less) exactly what the director (Craig Gillespie) wanted. It just think something went wrong, Gunn tried to help, but it was too little too late. The film gets a lot right, but it misses in some big moments (as you've pointed out), and ultimately a just fine but not great film.
I think this is a result of pacing and releases. The merger was expensive and Skydance needs money. Putting out one blockbuster a year, and in the case of Supergirl a blockbuster that severely underperformed, isn't going to work for the studio.
The question is, how much rushed crap are we going to get going forward? Hopefully little to none, but I suspect we'll get some rough films. (But maybe some great ones?)
Yeah, I still 100% believe in Gunn as a director. He knows the stuff and can make it work. I agree with a lot of your other assessment too. Unfortunately as the head of the DC EU for whoever owns it now.. To have been this delayed after teasing in Superman and still being as rough as it was. It makes sense Gunn et all stepping down. The question is, did the studio ask? (that would be a mistake) Or did they chose to as a vote of no confidence in the studio or it's owners.
Based on Gunn's statement , it seems amicable.
Reportedly Gunn/Safran reported directly to Ellison post merge. Publicly Ellison said "Keep doing what you're doing". I'm guessing the rest of that statement is "...but we need more." Gunn/Safran and new head Jeremy Latcham have worked together before (on the first Guardians film).
It's entirely possible Gunn/Safran said they want to make films, put Latcham in charge, but that's pure speculation on my part.
I don't expect we'll see another great film out of Warner Bros or its subsidiaries for a long, long time. This decision alone shows how out of touch these new suites are, some how even further out than Zaslav.
Maybe they'll do a white dragon reboot or something, he got a pretty bad rap in peacemaker.
I mean Robert Patrick is a great actor and it was interesting to see that character develop in Peacemaker season 2, so I wouldn't be completely against it...
But more seriously Zaslav had a singular goal, be acquired. He won.
But Skydance, more specifically David Ellison? We know propaganda for sure. Look at CBS. But it's propaganda in order to make money.
Look at the films Skydance, before mega merging with Paramount and Warner Bros, made. Mostly "fine" films. A few great films, lots of entertaining films, a handful of whatever films.
Money is the big motivator here. I think you're right that it will possibly produce a lot of crap. But you need something good, sometimes, to make money. Crap can also make money, but you can't just make crap. (I hope.)
zaslav will do anything for money, even allowing a right wing to take over cnn.
The comic it was based upon had the same issues.
I think maybe you just didn't get the movie.
Think again. I got and enjoyed the movie just fine. That doesn't make it not badly written.
So are they gonna keep going with the universe? Do a reboot? Make standalone movies? What’s the plan
Truthfully we don't know. I expect they'll stay the course. I think Gunn/Safran have a story they want to tell and Man of Tomorrow hopefully isn't the end of it, so they'll tell at least one more to finish that trilogy. Reading Gunn's statement it doesn't sound like he's moving on, just stepping back.
I think we see new projects get launched. Batman is an obvious one, especially because it's been "secretly" in the world for a while. Hopefully Latcham brings in some excellent creatives and can guide the overall universe in a loosely Gunn direction.
I haven't watched a single DCEU flick since Gunn took over (tSS aside). But after courting Gunn I though DC would finally get their cinematic-shit together. Talk about snatch defeat from the jaws of victory
It was a fantastic run of 3 movies. I was very hopeful lmao.
A shame. Peacekeeper was legit good.
Lanterns was great
Yay another reboot
A community about movies and cinema.
Related communities:
No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.