Nerd News: Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor

tn_luthorThis morning I was surprised to read on The ol’ Ain’t It Cool News that Lex Luthor and Alfred had been officially cast for SUPERMAN V. BATMAN. When I opened the story I glanced the name Jeremy Irons and assumed he was playing Luthor. It seemed like an okay but boring choice. It’s hard to imagine him caring about playing another fucking bad guy. When I realized that he was playing Alfred and Jesse Eisenberg was Luthor I coulda done a spit take.

And my instinct was sympathy for the vocal hateful nerd community of the internet. Like “Maybe you guys were right.” As you know, the default internet stance on everything is negative. The nerd community in particular tend to be against most things that exist other than the TV shows Community and Sherlock, most of the Marvel movies (for now, but there will be a vicious backlash in a few years guaranteed) and… bacon I guess. According to the products on the websights, bacon is one of the main things they respect. I’m old fashioned, I don’t think of bacon as something a man puts on his shirt, so alot of times I feel like I’m on the other side from these guys. But for a second when I read this I thought “shit, I know how they feel.”

luthor4For a second. I mean, I was gonna join up. I was gonna buy a clever t-shirt that mashes up Legend of Zelda with BACK TO THE FUTURE, Dr. Who, Breaking Bad, Firefly and Game of Thrones, but drawn in the style of Calvin & Hobbes. Available today only!

I guess I had a picture of the type of guy I thought would play this character. A real intimidating guy. I never liked the goofball Lex Luthors in the previous SUPERMANs. I thought Gene Hackman and Kevin Spacey both had what it takes to play a good villain but weren’t allowed to in those movies. And I assumed this time a guy would be allowed to.

Somewhere deep in the bowels of the MAN OF STEEL comment thread there was a discussion about who should play Luthor. And I forget who it was (let me know and I’ll update this), but somebody suggested Denzel Washington (who much later was rumored as the actor Snyder was trying to get). I loved this idea because although in one obvious way Denzel does not fit the traditional physical characteristics of the character as previously presented (he’s not bald) he really fits what I think is the essence of the character, which is that you have to believe that he’s the smartest guy in the room, that he knows it and looks down on everyone because of it. We would have to get used to a guy who looks different from how Luthor has always been drawn, but he could really represent something important about the character that they didn’t do in the previous movies.

luthor6 (assuming they didn’t have him wear a funny wig and fuck an old lady and have a comedic old timey girl sidekick like they did with Hackman and Spacey)

Obviously Eisenberg doesn’t fit the traditional physical image of Luthor either. He’s probly younger and definitely dweebier than the various ways he’s been drawn. And to me, in this case, that’s a more significant difference than if he was a reasonably fit and grown up black man like Denzel or, say, Idris Elba. But the more I thought about it the more I realized that Eisenberg has that same quality I liked about Denzel: he’s good at playing a dick who’s smarter than other people and has a superiority complex.

I expected Snyder to be more of a comic book traditionalist. I didn’t realize he was in “blow their minds with unexpected choices that are so crazy they just might work” mode (aka The Michael Keaton Precedent). Eisenberg wouldn’t have been my preference, but I can see why he could work as good or better than who I woulda chose. MAN OF STEEL’s approach was to pay homage to the traditional elements of the Superman story (the costume, the Kryptonian heritage, the powers, Lois Lane, Zod) while also finding little unexpected ways to tweak these ideas, often with a modern concept of “realism” in mind (Lois figuring out Superman’s identity immediately, the military not trusting him, the other Kryptonians having trouble adjusting to the powers that he’s had his whole life to develop, Jonathan Kent’s fear of Clark revealing his powers to the world). It would be in this same tradition if asshole CEO Lex Luthor became young genius Lex Luthor. After all, who would be a bigger threat to a real Superman: Donald Trump or Mark Zuckerberg?

From what I understand the businessman Lex Luthor is not even the original character. According to Wikipedia, Luthor started as a red-haired “diabolical genius” who lived in a dirigible and tried to steal earthquake machines and shit like that. Here he is wearing an evil cultist or wizard type robe:


They later gave him an origin where he was a young aspiring scientist who was friends with Superboy but turned against him when he mistakenly thought Superboy purposely destroyed his lab and a robot he made that he treated like his child. It wasn’t until 1986 (in a series also called “Man of Steel”) that Luthor was re-created as, in Wikipedia’s words, “a villain that the 1980s would recognize: an evil corporate executive.” And that’s been pretty much the way he’s been interpreted since then I guess. A businessman and later politician (he became president).


By the way, at first this executive Lex was not a bald muscular guy, or even the fat guy shown above. For a while he had some red hair on the back and kind of a paunch, like this:


So what if Snyder cast Louis C.K.? Would the internet have had to accept this because he looks like in the comics? Is that the most important thing?

I don’t want to make too many assumptions, but I think we all suspect that Eisenberg was cast with THE SOCIAL NETWORK in mind. We know from MAN OF STEEL that there is a “Lexcorp” company already, so this guy is a young innovator (unless they say he inherited the company). If he is indeed playing a Zuckerbergian Luthor then they’ve got elements of the original technological Luthor and the ’80s corporate reinterpretation, but with a little tweak that fits him into the world as it exists 30 years later. In 2014 the most well known CEOs and billionaires are computer genius nerds: Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, before him Bill Gates. (An alternate take could be a Mark Cuban-esque Luthor. But I don’t see why Eisenberg can’t be blowing his top at a basketball game.)

luthor8It’s easy to accept Eisenberg having Luthor’s brain, the only complaint is him not having the same body. But this is the least important part of the character. Luthor is a human, he’s not gonna get in a fight with Superman. He could be Randy Couture, it wouldn’t matter, he couldn’t fight him. If he’s young and scrawny it almost makes him more frustrating for Superman. If Superman tried to do anything to this guy physically he’d look like such an asshole. Plus, I understand Luthor sometimes has a badass female bodyguard (Gina Carano in my opinion), and hiding behind her when Batman shows up will make his smarmy ass all the more infuriating.

luthor10It’s also worth noting that Snyder has a track record of mostly good casting instincts. In DAWN OF THE DEAD he gave Sarah Polley her one Sigourney Weaver-esque strong woman protagonist character. In 300 he gave Gerard Butler, Lena Headey and Michael Fassbender all major roles before the rest of Hollywood had caught onto them. WATCHMEN had a super hero team with no A-listers. Jackie Earle Haley was clearly a master stroke, Patrick Wilson was quite good casting as Chubby Owlman, Billy Crudup was great as Giant Blue Nude, Jeffrey Dean Morgan had a charisma that still too few roles have been able to take as much advantage of, plus Carla Gugino got one of her more complex roles. In SUCKER PUNCH I gotta give him credit for casting Oscar Isaac as the weirdly charismatic villain. He’s great and complex and that was the first thing I noticed him in. And for MAN OF STEEL he found Henry Cavill, a guy I never heard of before, who I think is a great Superman.

In my opinion his one major misstep could be Matthew Goode in WATCHMEN, but considering Goode’s performances in other movies I think it wasn’t really a fault in casting but in how they chose to portray that character. So there is reason to trust that Snyder knows what he’s doing. Let’s just hope Luthor doesn’t wear silver rubber muscles. Or this outfit, in my opinion:


But if it’s important for you guys that he be the same as in the comics then I am willing to accept that outfit, if it fits into the movie they are creating. I will keep an open mind. The hat is pretty cool, I admit.

A WORD ABOUT THE WORD “NERDS”: I know it offends a couple of you when I use it. Like any term used to generalize a group of people (hipsters, bros, douches, bikers, stamp collectors, panty sniffers, candlestick makers) it can promote stereotypes and etc. But also it can be useful shorthand. In my case please understand that I don’t usually mean it as a judgmental or bullying term. The culture has changed drastically since the original nerds dreamed of revenge through sexual assault of sorority girls in the 1980s. The nerds won, they control the culture now. Most relevant in this case: they control the movies. Super hero movies are no longer a niche, they are the big movies now, they have replaced the big action sequels we used to watch in the summers. We all watch these movies so we share this culture. We are all nerds now.

The “nerds” I’m referring to in this post are the people who run and who comment on the movie websights I read (The Ain’t It Cool News, Badass Digest, Slashfilm, etc.) as well as the people I read on Twitter and what not. They are “nerds” because they care about these comic book movies just like I do. Most of them would proudly self-identify as either “nerds” or “geeks” and assert that as people who have read many comic books that they have some kind of ownership over who gets cast as Lex Luthor and Batman and everybody.

It’s obviously important to them, otherwise they wouldn’t obsess over their in my opinion weird interpretations of MAN OF STEEL, for example the widely accepted headscratcher I keep seeing today that it shows “a Superman who doesn’t save people” (even though he clearly saves numerous people throughout the movie and one of the central dramatic conflicts is his insistence on saving people when his father doesn’t want him to). Or the one about “Superman caused massive destruction by fighting a bad guy who was causing massive destruction in the climax and somehow I find this VERY, VERY offensive.” That one is so widespread that I suspect Snyder is using it as a motivation for Batman and Luthor to be against Superman.

luthor1But that’s the thing, this is a sequel to a movie that many of these angry people hated. Most of them hate the work of director Zack Snyder, almost all of them hate the work of writer David Goyer (his name on the three best comic book movies of all time doesn’t count for shit because one of them he was only co-writer).

What I am proposing to you friends is that since I actually like MAN OF STEEL as well as Snyder and Goyer I should get a certain ownership over the sequel whether or not I can present a valid Nerd Card, and even though I had to read the Cliff’s Notes to know some of the history of Lex Luthor. I declare that SUPERMAN & BATMAN: THE CRACKDOWN is for me and I say maybe Eisenberg will work and mind your own business.

I completely understand watching sequels as a completist or for masochistic or overly hopeful reasons, but just like I shouldn’t whine too much about specifics of another TRANSFORMER sequel (because it’s not for me) maybe some of these guys need to let the MAN OF STEEL series go if it hurts them so. Trust me, BATMAN AND ROBIN wasn’t the end of Batman, and SUPERMAN RETURNS wasn’t the end of Superman. Give him another shot the next go ’round, why don’t ya? And let me have this one.

And anyway what if Snyder makes Eisenberg get huge and buff for the movie? Henry Cavill, Jack Hughman, Chris Hemsworth, all these guys got bulked up for their super hero roles. Chris Pratt got rid of his beer gut and got muscles for GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY. What if Eisenberg gets fuckin ripped? WHAT THEN, TURKEYS?

the end

This entry was posted on Saturday, February 1st, 2014 at 2:55 am and is filed under Blog Post (short for weblog). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

149 Responses to “Nerd News: Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor”

  1. I’m with you. Although I am not sure that I agree with you about Z. Snyder having a great track record when it comes to casting. For me, the casting in Watchmen (Jackie Earle Haley & Billy Crudup excluded) pretty much ruined it, especially whats-her-face as Silk Spectre. She looked great but BOY was she all wrong for that character, and with zero chemistry with Nite Owl. Kind of sunk the entire SS/NO storyline IMO, which is basically the emotional throughline of the movie, which is why it didn’t work….

    Wait a second, why am I giving my review of Watchmen in a talkback about Jesse Eisenberg?

    Back on track. I’m willing to give him a shot. #1 reason: they’re trying something new. Who knows what will happen? Could be cool.

  2. I look for the “nerd shit” tag and instead I see “The nerdening of Vern” – wtf

  3. I am 100% excited about the Eisenberg casting – he plays a good, arrogant prick, and if we have to have Luthor as the villain in yet another Superman movie, I’d much rather they try to do something different with him. It’s the first news that’s gotten me really interested in this sequel.

  4. I didn’t like MAN OF STEEL, but you know what? fuck it, I’ll see this anyway when it rolls into theaters two years from now, the Eisenberg casting actually has me curious now

    I just there’s a scene where he steals 40 cakes, because that’s as many as four tens and that’s terrible

  5. A few years ago when Eisenberg came onto the radar, his intelligent, nerdy, quirkiness reminded me of a young Woody Allen. Difference is Woody never did the dark stuff. JE to date hasn’t done dark either. So I guess we’ll see if he pulls it off. JE and Ben A are both left-field choices I think.

  6. I’m not much of a Snyder fan. I hated both 300 and Watchman. But I thought Man of Steel wasn’t terrible. It was kind of mopey, and there were a couple of moments that were laughably bad. But there were also some really cool ideas in that movie as well, and I liked the fact that Snyder changed up his aesthetic (which wasn’t working for him anyway). It certainly didn’t deserve to be on several of the end of the year worst movies lists. And I generally agree with Vern that Eisenberg is smart casting.

    In a lot of online criticism of superhero movies, I find what I like to call the nerd paradox. On the one hand nerds espouse their love of comic books and say that they want the movie adaptations to reflect the true Batman or the true Joker, etc. But they forget that comic books are often melodramatic, cartoony, and campy. (That’s not a criticism, since I love that stuff). So whenever a superhero film includes these elements, like Ang Lee’s Hulk, Superman Returns, Raimi’s Spider-Mans, they all of a sudden get upset and claim that it’s too melodramatic, cartoony, and campy. So nerds want fidelity to the source material so long as the movies aren’t too close to the style of the source material. They want superhero movies without all of that comic book stuff.

  7. I know it was a joke but the idea of Louis CK as Luthor is AMAZING and I would kill to see that. We all love him as a comedian but he is such an under-rated actor. He could do it.

  8. I agree with you about the inevitable Marvel backlash. I don’t dislike them, but it gets tiring when so many prop them up as definitive masterpieces.

  9. What then? If Lex doesn’t have Clancy Brown’s voice, they still won’t be happy!

  10. I didn’t like Man of Steel. However both this and the Alfred choice are such inspired casting that I might see the sequel after all especially since there is a new screenwriter. Irons as Alfred speaks for itself.

    Eisenberg not only has the range to play an entitled manipulative wealthy cunt but he also could play charming and witty convincingly which is key for public Lex who wants to turn the world against Superman. On top of that since Lex has traditionally been 5’9 compared to Superman’s 6’3 it makes a great contrast to Cavill and is more in tune with the mythos since the same amount of height difference exists between the actors.

    I’m also glad that they got a Lex that could grow within the DC movie universe. People tend to ignore that at one point Superboy was friends with a child named Lex Luthor. That was during a 20 year period were some of the greatest Superman stories were written.

    Smallville kinda brought that closer in age dynamic in live action and we all saw how excellent that made Rosenbaum and Welling’s interactions early on in that show. The only thing I hope is that he puts on a bit of muscle. Not to the extent of Affleck or Cavill but enough to show that Lex considers himself not just the pinnacle of human intellect but the pinnacle of human physicality as well. Would be great to see a scene similar to this one:

    The more I think of this casting the more it makes sense. Kudos to Snyder.

  11. I remember when the Straw Dogs remake was announced, someone (Devin Faraci maybe?) suggested Jesse Eisenberg should have been the choice for the Dustin Hoffman part, not a pretty boy in glasses like James Marsden. But in the time since, Eisenberg’s onscreen persona has morphed from sweet, nebbish Michael Cera 2.0 to this arrogant cocky prick (not just from Social Network, but the 1-2 punch of Now You See Me and that viral interview promoting Now You See Me). He suddenly became a guy less likely to be bullied and more likely to do the bullying, and it makes him a fascinating choice for Luthor. (Actually in a few years there should be ANOTHER Straw Dogs remake but with asshole nerds led by Eisenberg storming the house instead of rednecks or hooligans)

    And in a weird way that’s what makes his casting ironic – the presence of the negative, spiteful nerd all over any movie-related website is everywhere. It’s the same thing over again, whether it’s Star Wars, Star Trek, LOTR(after the last two movies), anything DC Comics-related, – nerds flood comments with complaints about every single news scoop, every casting decision, every peek at the costumes, then say they won’t see the movie, brag about how little they give a shit, then see it opening weekend and complain about it some more. I don’t know which is more insane – the fact that this vicious cycle has been going on for well over 10 years now, or the fact that these guys are really convinced they’re NOT going to see the new Star Wars in a theater opening weekend. Shit, we’re all probably going to see the next Transformers in a theater, there’s no fighting it.

    And yes, Marvel’s immunity to all this will totally come crashing down in a few years, and just as it’s apparently cool now to say you hated all 3 of Nolan’s Batman films (wait, what??) nerds will be fighting each other to claim they were the ones who thought Thor 2 jumped the shark or how they hated the Mandarin twist more than their friends.

  12. Vern said this in the other thread.

    “But onthewall, why is that ass-backwards? THE AVENGERS is the single case in movie history where they intentionally set up each character in a separate movie to lead up to the team-up. Why does that now have to be the only way to do it? In the past there have been many movies (X-MEN, STAR WARS, PREDATOR, CITIZEN KANE) where you just meet the characters as they appear in the movie and you are able to figure out who they are. In many cases it has worked well.

    More importantly I think these guys should do everything their own way so they are not aping Marvel.”

    Setting up each character to lead to the team-up worked because you knew the characters and how the actors fit into those roles. This film won’t have that benefit apart from the Superman character. It feels as if WB didn’t have enough patience to do this and just threw together this project (and possibly a similar stand-alone Superman franchise like Nolan’s Batman was under the bus). That’s where I come out on this, and I will gladly eat my words if I am wrong.

    I know I was a big pusher for Cranston to get the Luthor role, but I actually don’t mind this casting. Especially after reading neal’s idea of Lex Luthor = negative, spiteful nerd. Broddie’s comment on physicality is interesting, too. On the TV series HANNIBAL, one of the things that sets Mads Mikkelsen’s portrayal of the titular character apart is that he’s shown as a formidable physical presence (I hope I’m not spoiling when I say he was involved in one of the better fight sequences I’ve seen in awhile). It lends more credence to the idea that he is capable of the heinous things that he is. That could apply itself here as well, especially as the character is now played by someone much younger.

  13. I’ll never understand this business of having opinions on stuff that’s 2+ years away from happening.
    I turn off my tv if I’m watching the news and someone utters the word “2016.”

    Anyway, Vern’s right about everything. Snyder’s casting has always been strong. I hate movie stars; no-names are preferable, but any unexpected roles & great performances (from people whose names I don’t remember or recognize and whose personal information & baggage isn’t a distraction to the filmgoing experience) are welcome, and in his movies they have been plentiful.

    Snyder’s one of the hardest working auteurs, and maybe Jesse EisenNerd™’s personal trainer is about to find out Snyder’s actors are expected to be hardworking motherfuckers, too. I look forward to the breathless updates from AICN about Eisenberg being spotted buying creatine & protein supplements from the GNC on Rodeo Drive.

  14. This does open up some fun script possibilities. Perhaps Luthor could ask Lois Lane to be his “friend,” and there’s a shot of him refreshing his e-mail inbox to see if she’s responded.

    Also there could be a comic book device that produces a clone, and Luthor sneers & says, “Ugh, I hate twins.”

  15. I am a total Marvel fanboy and don’t really care about a DC movie that won’t come out for a long time, but I think all this casting is cool. Snyder is making fun and interesting choices and who knows, maybe they’ll work!

    I only just saw Man O’ Steel a few weeks ago and I liked it. I’m with Vern, I didn’t notice all this “Superman’s a careless murderer” stuff. He is still coming to grips with who he is and Cavill really nailed it with that sobby screaming way he broke Zod’s neck (to save somebody btw).

    So yeah, in summary I think it’s ridiculous (but not surprising) that everybody is judging this movie. Give all these wacky decisions a shot, and at the very least in ten years we’ll be able to say “Hey remember that time Warner Bros. tried to do the Avengers but it didn’t work and Zack Snyder had to move to the mountains?” And no matter what else happens, Irons will nail it as Alfred.

  16. You tell ’em, Vern. Everything about this movie sounds awesome to me. I have been the angry nerd in the past, fretting over creative decisions for movies I wouldn’t see for years to come, but this time I’m just letting it happen. Every time they make a new announcement, the movie just sounds bigger and weirder, and that’s where Snyder lives. I even like that they pushed the movie back a year so they could really dig in and make sure all the parts work. When the Affleck backlash started, I dreaded having to hear the nerds bitch for years to come, but now I’m kind of enjoying watching the nerds squirm. It feels like Snyder’s making the movie just for me, and after a decade of being left out in the cold by those [BATDACTED] movies, it’s nice to get a little love. And if it makes nerds cry, all the better. Their tears are like diamonds to me.

  17. Nerd tears are special. I do enjoy a good nerd outcry that involves actual crying. I’d also like to crush them and see them driven before me and hear the lamentations of their women, but we’re not enemies and they don’t have any women in my opinion. #NerdSlam #RevengeOfTheJocks

    More than anything, I’m heartened at the possibility that, as Broddie’s visual post & Vern’s bodybuilding lingo suggested, this casting choice will do for the nerd community what Michelle Obama is doing for American children with her “Let’s Move” campaign.

  18. There are all sorts of great decisions coming out of this project. I love that they got rid of Goyer and replaced him with a writer. I love the casting of Afflect and Eisenberg.

    I skipped Man of Steel because it doesn’t really look like the kind of movie I’m interested in, but they could get my money with this one if they drop Snyder.

  19. Good day gentlemen,

    I’m a long time Outlaw Vern fan and first-time poster.

    A lot of people hate Smallville, but the fiance and I fucking love Michael Rosenbaum as Lex Luthor. Having Rosenbaum casted as Luthor would have made my day. I’m thinking that Snyder already had a Luthor character with Xerxes in 300, so maybe he might do that again.

  20. Also of note: Irons is an Oscar winner, as is Ben Affleck, Russell Crowe, and Kevin Costner. Eisenberg is an Oscar nominee, as is Laurence Fishburne, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, and Amy Adams (5 times?!?) The fact that a blockbuster/comic book/summer movie franchise has this much acting pedigree/respectability is a pretty amazing achievement already.

  21. I´m inclined to file this nonsense under “I don´t give a shit”. But I find the off-beat casting of Eisenberg and Irons to be interesting choices. Hopefully because of these less than obvious choices they seem to be going for something that is a lot more interesting than casting the kind of actors people expect to see. Casting against type is always interesting and it especially seems that way with Eisenberg. I´ve never seen FACEBOOK-THE MOVIE, but there might be something about Eisenbergs portrayal there that could give the Luthor character a new angle. I am actually really interested in this project now. Not that i wasn´t when Affleck was casted, but now it becomes more and more intriguing.

  22. Someday my nerd wish for an Alexis Luthor will be fulfilled, and you’ll all remember my brilliant prescience. Snyder, with his penchant for Sucker Punching in favor of badass female leads, would have been the guy to make it happen, alas.

    Until then… this Luthor should refer to the Batman vs. Superman rivalry as The Squid And The Whale.

    I know the ARGO writer shares my affinity for stupid inside-Hollywood references.

  23. Oh, Mouth. So naive to think that there isn’t already a cute female analog to every single male comic book character ever created: http://losh.wikia.com/wiki/Alexis_Luthor

  24. I was about to say “except maybe the Punisher” but then I found this: http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060610222421/marveldatabase/images/6/6a/Punisher_2099_Vol_2_1.jpg

    Nerds really just want to fuck versions of themselves with tits, don’t they?

  25. Amazingly I’m with Mouth on this one. When did this become a thing?

    The circle that I grew up in (is it wrong that I still associate comic books, by and large, with teenagers?) was never “into” them. They weren’t “into” very much at all, culturally speaking, on account of where we grew up; seriously, I can’t think of a single “fad” that we had, apart from maybe the WWF – that was what the WWE was called back then.

    But I’ll repeat that first part without the parentheses: The circle of friends that I grew up in was never “into” comic books.

    The interesting thing about typing out that statement is that just by stating a simple fact, I feel as though I’m passing judgement or something. Such is the weight of cultural expectations nowadays. Which seems kinda bizarre to me. Comic books have recently been responsible for some pretty good films and TV shows, as well as some pretty bad ones. They certainly seem to have more of a cultural influence than they did, but where’d all this other stuff come from? The “nerdification”, if that’s not too insulting a term?

    Anyway, as far as I’m concerned, after seeing Hackman and Spacey on screen I have zero interest in seeing Luthor’s character again unless somebody assures me that he doesn’t have two annoying stupid sidekicks and doesn’t live in a sewer. Promise me those two things and my interest might be piqued – although I avoided “Man of Steel”.

  26. Paul – I think the reason Luthor had stupid sidekicks was because they made him look incredibly smart in compariosn. A narcissisitic (stupid fucking word!)behaviour of Luthors part.

  27. “Nerds really just want to fuck versions of themselves with tits, don’t they?”

    if I’m absolutely honest, I think this may be true, whenever I picture my “ideal woman” I basically just picture myself but with a huge pair of titties

  28. Hmm…

  29. I’m a big ole nerd who did not like Man Of Steel (it was my biggest movie disappointment of the year) but Jesse Eisenberg is a good idea.
    He can portray the spirit of modern Lex Luthor (even though that version exists along a Superman that’s not presented in Man Of Steel, so who knows how that’ll change).

    The best news in all of this is Chris Terrio rewriting David Goyer’s script.

  30. When will they finally announce Brit Marling as Supergirl?

  31. B-Man vs. S-Man should feature no more than 3 minutes of Lex Luthor footage.

    And half of that should be in a post-credits stinger.

    Keep him in the background, a mysterious presence like an early Blofeld or Moriarty character, teasing more EisenNerd™ action for the 2018 release MAN OF STEEL 3: REDEMPTION OF THE RETURN OF THE KING OF THE SEASON OF THE DIE SUPERMAN DIE.


    I don’t want to fuck a version of myself+tits, though I suppose I might go gay for a self-lookalike.
    Hmm, hard to say.
    (My ideal woman is darker skinned, though yeah she has my gym habits & can spot me on the bench press while quoting Henry Fielding & quipping in the style of Mark Twain. She never wears jewelry but she always has a nice fragrance and her hair done up nice. Also she sings opera and makes sushi somehow. Also she is wealthy.)

  32. I propose Vern be put in charge of DC comics movies for the following reasons;

    1) Instead of doing ok episodic movies, twice annually, we get a great, large scale, movie every two or three years with the creative team solely concentrating on that film.
    2) Nothing below a 5 on the ACR is allowed unless it’s a necessary stylistic choice.
    3) Wesley Snipes.
    4) John Hyams makes a dirty noir, psychologically heavy Batman film.
    5) Bruce Willis as Commissioner Gordon
    7) A Green Lantern film, based on Emerald Twilight where Hal Jordan goes insane and kills everyone, starring Tom Cruise as Hal Jordan.

  33. Gosling can do dark, he would have been my choice for Batman.

  34. Look you all know I don’t like MOS and its pretentions of emotionality, and we disagree on that. OK.

    But I have to agree with Vern here. Eisenberg’s Luthor would truely be the anti-Superman: Small, skinny, intelligent, sociopathic, self-made (instead of getting powers because of the sun or whatever), you name it. In theory, its genius. He’s a good fucking actor who has one schtick he usually does, but so what? He’s fucking good at it.

    The real question is, can Snyder and his team pull that potential off? That’s the $3 question.

    Weird I thought nerds liked MOS for the most part save for butthurts like me? Yet notice the hostility that BVS has gotten for Affleck, Gadot, and now Eisenberg. Have the geeks really turned against MOS that quickly? Are the DC partisans that dick envy of Marvel Studios? It’s kinda baffling even to me.

    Or put it another way, where was this nerd rage at Marvel for casting Paul Rudd (of all people) as a superhero and probably future Avengers team member? (Not shitting on Edgar Wright or that casting. Just pointing out the Internet hypocrisy.)

    “of the Marvel movies (for now, but there will be a vicious backlash in a few years guaranteed)”

    Vern – Been there, done that already man. See IRON MAN 2, see nerd rage at IRON MAN 3 over the Mandarin, see people criticize those movies for being “too jokey!” now*, and see nerd disappointment at AGENTS OF S.H.I.E.L.D.

    *=Where were those assholes when Hulk slammed Loki like a rag doll? Sheesh?

  35. I agree with George Kaplan.

    Louis C K would make an excellent Lex Luthor.

    Remove the laughter and you have a very icy persona.

  36. Can I rant about another recent comic book movie-related nerd online hypocrisy which I want off my chest? Sorry but this topic really reminded me.

    A few days ago Drew McWeeny wrote a piece bitching about the costumes in the upcoming DAYS OF FUTURE PAST X-Men movie, saying why they’re still using leather costumes and how they don’t follow the comics while Marvel Studios do, blah blah.

    First off, that’s not really true. Where is this anger at Marvel Studios for giving Hawkeye and Black Widow leather uniforms as well? Hell notice the bloggers aren’t exactly pissy at the upcoming Captain America sequel for doing the same with Falcon*, even though his costume was red and white in the comics originally. Hawkeye’s costume in the comics traditionally were blue and purple, but did the Internet lose its shit when they raided the X-Men movie closet for him? Not really. Yet they’re sure upset about Quicksilver’s** look. (the one not to be played by Kick Ass.)

    Or put it another way, do the nerds really think Joss Whedon’s Quicksilver will look exactly like the Quicksilver from the books with the blue costume and white lightning logo? My magic 8-ball says “doubtful.” (God knows I’m not sure how they’ll do Scarlett Witch.)

    Second, why do we still go through this sillyness after all these years? As a nerd myself, I like references and tip of hat to looks and such from the books. For example, I dug that FIRST CLASS actually found a way to allude to the original X-Men uniforms’ yellow scheme without looking pretty silly.

    But in the end of the day, such things don’t matter if the movie sucks. Give me a good compelling, interesting, entertaining story. Give me decent action scenes. I’ll gladly sacrifice comic wanking for a decent picture if given a choice you know? Most rational people do too. Yet we go through this time after time.

    Its a weird-ass ritualism thing, isn’t it?

    *=though to be fair, the Falcon look they’re using apparently was from the Ultimates version which I’m unfamiliar with. I’ll take their word for it.

    **=Then again there’s some logic to that Quicksilver’s look. Yes its stupid looking, but DOFP’s “past” is set in the early/mid-1970s under Nixon. What was happening in music at the time? Glam Rock. David Bowie/Ziggy Stardust, all that. Its very much a look inspired by those times. He’s a punk kid caught up in it. I’m fine with it.

  37. No one had a problem with Black Widow and Hawkeye having leather outfits because they wear those in comics, specifically, the Ultimates. It fit with them being agents of shield.

    No one complains about Cap’s costume in Winter Soldier, because it’s a version of his own outfit when he was running Shield in the comics (plus, he will totally ditch it for his former colorful outfit once he gets away from Shield in that movie for sure).

  38. The picture of Longhair Luthor reminded me of a young Dr. Venture

  39. RRA – it’s not specifically the costumes that’s the issue, it’s that they are emblematic of the overall approach and how the movies relate to the comics. Tom Rothman was thought a lot of comic stuff was dumb and the costumes reflected the fact they were trying to distance themselves from how ‘silly’ the comics are. He even opening talked about how the reason we never saw Sentinels until now is that he thought giant robots were stupid. It’s the same reason we never got to see Galactus in FF.

    Marvel on the other hand are really leaning into comic stuff in a way that most fans never would have imagined a few years ago. If you look at the Thor movies or even the fact that they threw in Thanos, it shows that they’re not afraid to put some of the more ‘out there’ stuff from the comics. Even Jon Favreau publicly talked about how he didn’t think Thor could fit into the same world as Iron Man because of how out there and ‘magical’ he was. But Marvel did it and they made it work. The fact that all the costumes aren’t the same doesn’t matter.

    The issue with Singer going back to using similar costumes as before is that it makes it look like he’s stuck in a place that’s still distancing itself from the comics. While Marvel has been moving forward with how they depict superheros, Singer seems to be stuck 14 years in the past.

  40. Damn, now I really want to see Louis CK as a huge summer blockbuster villain. Preferrably in full I Really Fucking Hate Acting mode.


  41. The comic book nerds seem to forget that not even the comics themselves stay true to “canon”. They’re serials, not the Holy fucking Quran. They reinvent themselves all the time.

    Every so often everything in them changes and adapts to their time. The characters’ backgrounds and origin details change, appearances change, powers change, relationships change, names change, attitudes change. Hell, even the “essence of the character” changes over time. That’s how these characters stay alive and relevant.

    And yet some people still moan about Bay painting flames on Optimus and stupid shit like that, only to accept a few years down the line that those painted flames are now a part of the franchise’s canon. Unless you want to be a purist and just watch those decades-old cartoons for the rest of your life.

    Hell, I do it myself sometimes, but then I remind myself to grow the fuck up and calm the fuck down.

  42. RRA:

    “Give me a good compelling, interesting, entertaining story. Give me decent action scenes. I’ll gladly sacrifice comic wanking for a decent picture if given a choice you know? Most rational people do too. Yet we go through this time after time.”

    I absolutely agree, and that’s the part that I don’t get. I mean, even after “The Dark Knight” was released, there was STILL yelling that Ledger’s Joker was somehow not “authentic”. To which my answer would be: authentic to what exactly? I’ve never read a comic book and I’d seen three entirely different versions of the Joker by the time I was twelve years old. (Hamill, Nicholson and Romero.) If EVER there’s a character that you can have dramatic licence to do whatever the fuck you want with, the Joker would be that character.

  43. …Damn I should really read the other posts before I start replying to something. Knox just said exactly the same thing as I did.

    I would ask this though. Let’s take movies like the first two “B**man” reboots or the two “Thor” movies, all of which I really enjoyed. And while none of those movies are perfect, I have to wonder if some of the criticism that’s levelled against them comes from misplaced fandom rage. Is there a subset of people out there who are fans of the characters but can’t get beyond minor details of their characters that are different in the films – or worse, purely cosmetic details like costumes? Are those people unable to enjoy “Thor 2” or “The Dark Knight” because the batmobile is the wrong shape or Thor doesn’t have the right belt buckle or something?

    Honestly, that’s not even annoying. It’s just kinda sad.

  44. Does Jesse Eisenberg drink Pepsi? Does his sister use Facebook? Herd Rage!

  45. Paul Barrett – But did those costumes ever get in the way of any of those movies being good? No. Did any of them suck because of the costumes? No.

    I rewatched the first two X-MEN movies last year for the first time in probably a decade and yeah you have those costumes which if those pictures were produced today, they would be more quote “faithful.” (Plus bigger budget and better CGI a few better action scenes.) They still hold up, with X2 probably on my short list for greatest superhero/comic book movies ever produced. Dear lord Singer had 10 characters and just as many subplots but that fucker found a way to make it all gel together as a cohesive unit. (while SUPERMAN RETURNS, he couldn’t even deal with one bleh plot. Go figure.)

    But anyway putting those costumes aside, they captured the basic sci-fi essence of X-Men for me. To quote Vern, Jackman’s Wolverine was Clint Eastwood with claws, McKellen’s Magneto was the compelling bad-guy-who’s-kinda-right-about-humanity, Captain Picard was the patriarch and spiritual leader of his little community, etc. (In fact I’m reminded that both McKellen and Stewart both play leaders that you plausibly can understand why their followers to their respective causes would die for their cult leader’s vision.) I wished Cyclops was done slightly better (or had more stuff to do) and that Sabretooth hadn’t been done as a mute savage and let’s not mention that immortally awful line about lightning and toads, shall we? (Who wrote that line? Joss Whedon.)

    Apples and Oranges, approaches they are at adapting these funny books. When both are ripe and not infested with bugs, they’re delicious.

    PB, your complaints are an aesthetic issue. Let me give you a more modern example of that X-Men (or more accurately Nolan) school of thought with the costumes while still being fucking fun and compelling: ARROW. Now to be fair that’s mostly I’m sure because of the TV budget, I mean Bronze Tiger isn’t an actual humanoid tiger but instead a mercenary/hitman with bronze talons as weapons (played by Michael Jai White). They certainly have twisted the Green Arrow mythology (while not abandoning it), I mean Roy Harper is the hero’s partner (well one of them anyway) but this Speedy/Arsenal isn’t the smaller younger red archer remix of Green Arrow like he was in the books. He’s been given super strength by a syringe shot by Brother Blood, a drug which also makes you go crazy apparently.

    Yet such things works! Holy shit it works. I really even dig the tragic arch with Slade Wilson. As a nerd, you know that someday he will become the supervillain Deathstroke. Indeed within the show’s “present day” storyline, Wilson (w/ trademark eyepatch) is now Deathstroke. But cut to the “hero marooned on island” backflashes, he (sans eyepaych) is the hero’s buddy and ally against the assholes trying to kill them, and in this past he’s slowly going batshit nuts (and go heel of course) because he got injected by the same drug that Harper got.

    Paul – Ledger’s Joker for me captured the basic essence of that character which is that he’s compelling/entertaining as hell. Yes he’s evil and diabolical, its just so perversely fun to watch him be insane and evil.

    Knox Harrington – People are always surprised when I inform them that in the Iron Man/Avengers comics I read growing up, Jarvis wasn’t a computer but instead an Alfred-type human butler. The movies rewrote Jarvis, and never once have I heard the Internet complain about that change.

    (I suppose because it was an inspired change by Favreau and his team. Serves the same relationship function as Bruce Wayne/Alfred, except it does tell you about Tony Stark’s character that his closest confidant is one that he pretty much built.)

  46. This is also coming from a filmmaker who only knew how to make Michael Shannon, one of the industry’s most dynamic actors, into a screaming maniac. I like Eisenberg, but I don’t think his actually clever casting will impact this film’s quality.

  47. RRA – The point I was trying to make was that it’s not about the costumes, but how the approach to the costumes in the early X-Men movies was linked to the overall approach of how they tackled the source material. They distanced themselves from the comics, that doesn’t mean that approach is bad but it can end up being limiting. There are ways of grounding super-heros that can work (Nolan Batfilms), ways of differing from the comics while still being imaginative (Man of Steel), but SInger’s approach seems to approaching super-heros in the same way that he did 14 years ago. Superhero movies have changed a lot in 14 years and the kinds of stories they do has changed. Maybe he does have a good story but when the first thing you show looks like something that old people get afraid that the movie will be stale. That’s why people like Drew McWeeny have been complaining about these new costumes, and not other ones.

  48. “The point I was trying to make was that it’s not about the costumes, but how the approach to the costumes in the early X-Men movies was linked to the overall approach of how they tackled the source material.”

    Paul Barrett – First off, in spirit THE WOLVERINE was basically a Clint Eastwood movie but with mutants and set in Japan. Mangold took a 30-40 years old movie plot and still made it work in 2013. (Same with the JACK REACHER people pretty much.)

    In short you (and alot of nerds apparently) want Fox to basically ape Marvel Studios, just like what they’re doing! Chase trends! Dear lord.

    Second, We got a lame movie a few years ago (GREEN LANTERN) which was DC trying and failing miserably to follow the Marvel formula. Look I didn’t care for MOS, but I respect DC and WB for following the basic filmatic blueprint put down by Christopher Nolan originally because more than anything else, it differentiates their product from Marvel. Contrast that with Sony, who I’m sure their upcoming Spider-Man movies will be semi-clones of Nolan and Marvel going forward. Are you excited about that?

    Or hell, take a look at DREDD. In a year of TDKR and AVENGERS and AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, it stood out because (1) the world wasn’t at stake, (2) it was R-rated, (3) it wasn’t made for universal audiences. It’s not a lunchbox movie. Not everybody will like DREDD, but thse who do will love the shit out of it for catering to them.

    DREDD tanked but I would’ve loved to see a slew of low/modest budget R-rated movies set within the 2000 A.D. universe who follow that same basic vibe, though the world’s safety would inevitably be involved because you know how it is. Point is, it wouldn’t be like other comic book franchises out there.

  49. Why should Singer change his approach to the costumes? This is the same franchise he started 14 years ago. It’s the same world, the same characters. It has been established that these people prefer leather jumpsuits to more traditional superhero garb. It wouldn’t make a lick of sense for them to suddenly put on yellow spandex because that’s what’s in favor now. I say keep it consistent. The X-MEN universe is its own thing, and it should stay that way, regardless of what’s fashionable in the greater Marvel U.

  50. I think Eisenberg is a real interesting, out-of-the-box choice. I would have preferred someone older, someone who I can believe has spent his life fighting his way to the top and resents this Kryptonian asshole effortlessly waltzing in and stealing all the glory, but I think you’re right about him being able to nail the intellectual disdain of Luthor. I think it’s a good choice. But then I think back on Snyder’s previous work and I worry how it’s going to be handled.

    I get this vibe from Zack Snyder that he really hates nerds. He just also happens to like dragons and comic books and shit. Look at his interpretation of Ozymandias. In the WATCHMEN comic he was a warm, paternal figure with a devoted fellowing and a huge media empire, like a male Oprah, but in the movie he was a cold, prissy intellectual (we’ll put aside the homophobic weirdness) whose villainy was never in doubt for a second. He turned a tale of murky moral ambiguity into a story of right-wing fascism (yay) versus nerdy liberal intellectualism (boo). The fact that I still like THE WATCHMEN in spite of how badly it misses the point is testament to how good most other aspects of Snyder’s direction are.

    As for the “weird interpretations” in MAN OF STEEL, I don’t want to rehash that again. You’re into stories about two-fisted action heroes who punch out weaselly liberal reporters and think nothing of causing millions of dollars of property damage. I like them too, but that’s not what Superman is to me. There was a recent issue of Superman (ACTION #26) where he fights a giant kaiju monster that is rampaging through Venezuela. He fights the monster and lets everyone think he’s killed it, but he actually takes it back to the Fortress of Solitude and keeps it in a zoo until he can rehabilitate it. He knows it’s just a baby, that it’s scared and lashing out. THAT’S who Superman is to me.

  51. Thanks for your “Nerd” clarification, although I doubt anyone here was ever truly offended. What I find weird is that you continually go to known nerd hangouts like AICN, Badass Digest etc, read the comments and then come back here and defensively respond to them. That’s like voluntarily sitting on an anthill and then acting shocked and appalled when your ass gets bit. I don’t read those sites much, so often I’ll be hearing something for the first time that you attribute to the Offical Nerd Position. Honestly I only hear about nerd movie news if it’s mentioned in my Twitter feed or on an actual news site. In fact your post here is the first I heard about this Luthor/Alfred casting.

  52. CL – I wouldn’t say Snyder hates nerds as much as he’s kinda like Michael Bay in that he seems to despise “smart” people, the experts, the intelligentsia, whatever you want to call them. I don’t get it personally, its a red state thing (or catering to them at least.)

    As for Vern and “Nerd”….he’s an outsider. Even though he and me disagree on MOS, I’m glad he’s willing to go Clint Eastwood on the nerd bullshit at times. This is his website and he’s got the right to go Andy Rooney on us anytime.

    Mr. Majestyk – just a few years ago, I remember when the Internet said that all these funny book movies should follow the Nolan template. (Indeed AMAZING SPIDER-MAN clearly was influenced by that direction*.) Now it’s Marvel Studios. The interesting observation I have is that if Fox and Sony and WB go ahead and do their own Marvel Studios-esque release format with several movies a year and spin-offs and team-up movies out the wazoo, that might end up popping the superhero movie bubble.

    BTW off-topic I enjoyed the new CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER trailer dropped during the Super Bowl. If the first movie was Marvel’s ROCKETEER, this looks like their Jason Bourne/Tom Clancy movie.

    *=Which alot of nerds crapped on anyway. Go figure.

  53. I’m cautiously optimistic about this, mostly because of Snyder’s track record for casting, but also the fact that Eisenberg could really nail the essence of Luthor, and there’s even a version of the character who he’d very specifically fit the mold of. SUPERMAN: BIRTHRIGHT was a new modern take on Superman’s origin for the new millennium, and it sure seemed like it was an influence on MAN OF STEEL. It also re-introduced the idea that Lex Luthor came from Smallville, and was Clark’s friend in high school, but that Lex himself couldn’t fit in:
    this is flashback stuff. We get bald businessman Luthor in the present day parts of the story as well, but you can certainly see how Eisenberg could nail this version. I even noticed at the time that while MAN OF STEEL was flashback heavy, it actually skipped most of Clark’s teenage years, and instead showed him as a young kid and then in college, so there’s a hole there they could be filling in with future movies that Lex could be a part of.

    Irons will be fine as Alfred. My ideal casting would be Charles Dance, but Irons can do a good job. He won’t have cause to overact and he might be a bit more physical an Alfred. It’s funny some people are saying he’s not old enough, when
    1. He fucking is. He’s sixty five years old.
    2. Alfred isn’t even that old NOW in the comics. He’s like in his-mid fifties AT MOST.

    Thanks for being the voice of reason Vern. FWIW, I know I’ve tried to clarify this before, but I don’t take offence to the word Nerd, just you can come off at times to me like you really resent the success that sort of entertainment has at times, partly because of how it’s supplanted traditional Badass Cinema as the go to summer blockbuster fare now, and you seem to mock how serious some people take this silly shit while at the same time take serious (and love) the silly shit that’s got Gunfights and Explosions and Car Chases and ridiculous martial arts and people named Snake and Dutch, and you don’t see any parallels between you having a problem with how PARKER books are adapted and how fans of nerd shit have a problem with it being adapted. But my point is, Geeks/Nerds and um…Actionists(? is there a snappy term for people who like actions movies?)…we’re not so different when we come down to it, and we can all get a bit too close to it at times. And I love you to death man for how you approach this stuff and give it a fair shake on its own merits most of the time, there just seems to be a bit of a disconnect about it when you speak more generally, though I just maybe need to be less sensitive and not concerned with fairness like it’s a fucking political matter being reported or something…

  54. Do you guys really think there will be a Superhero Bubble Bursting, and if so, why do you think certain genres get this treatment while others don’t? Westerns and Ancient Epics certainly seem to have this cyclical nature of popularity, but why do frankly far more generic and repetitive genres(romantic comedies, horror) get to keep being at the same level of popularity? I won’t deny there’s a bit of sameness to Superhero movies at times with so many being origins and having comparable plot synopses(“Cocky privileged douche has a fall from grace, realises the error of his ways, and becomes a true hero in time to foil the evil plans of someone who he considered close and trustworthy”- Am I talking about “Thor” or “Iron Man”?), which is why I wish for the more out there properties to get adapted OR for there to actually be originally created superhero films that aren’t just spoofs of subversions like DEFENDOR or SUPER (which I’m not knocking btw).

  55. Stu – First off, even I’ll admit that MOS casted very well.

    Second, as much as we mock origin stories…when they click, goddamn they’re really fun if you ask me. Yes the redemption angle is frequent, but you know its still around for the same reason cliches are: They still work. Marvel’s DOCTOR STRANGE movie will follow the same Thor/Iron Man route: Arrogant as fuck surgeon gets in an accident, loses the use of his hands. He goes on a journey into magic initially to restore their use and resume his hedonistic lifestyle. Ultimately he becomes the Sorcerer Supreme of Earth.

    Third, I do remember people previously asking if the superhero movie boom was over in 2008…before we got IRON MAN and THE DARK KNIGHT. And again in 2012…before we got THE AVENGERS.

    I’m not saying that it’ll implode finally in the late 2010s. I’m just saying it potentially could. Let me put it this way.

    What is Marvel Studios’ strategy? Origin stories to create franchises and sequels to already successful origin stories, with an AVENGERS movie every few years. That’s the “mothership” mega-franchise, if you will. Hell they’re following that same idea onto TV with their upcoming Netflix TV slate. Luke Cage, Jennifer Jones, Iron Fist, and Daredevil TV shows…and then a DEFENDERS mini-series where they’ll team-up.

    And in fact, a new rumor the other day claimed that AVENGERS 4 would wipe the slate clean and have a new roster of characters made up of characters introduced from Phase 3 and 4. Paul Rudd’s Ant-Man, a redeemed Winter Soldier? Falcon? Rocket Raccoon? Dr. Strange? Black Panther? Who knows?

    WB is planning [REDACTED] VS SUPERMAN, followed (allegedly) by JUSTICE LEAGUE. From there they may or may not do Flash and Wonder Woman movies. Also [REDACTED] you know will get another movie. That shit is certain. So JUSTICE LEAGUE 2, 3, 4, etc. plus those sequels and whatever franchises they can spn-off.

    Fox already has Singer set for X-MEN: APOCALYPSE after DOFP. We’re getting another Wolverine movie. X-FORCE is also planned, with Deadpool and (I’m sure) Cable on that team. And Ryan Reynolds’ DEADPOOL movie is still alive over there, believe it or not. Hell producer Laura Schuler Donner the other day I believe said that she wanted to produce a Gambit movie with Channing Tatum.

    Sony will do more ASM movies (until that shit gets rebooted again for THE SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN) but also we’ll get a Venom film, Black Cat film (I guess), a Sinister Six film, etc. Sinister Six might actually be cool because we’ve never had a supervillain picture before. Imagine say a team of baddies deciding instead of fighting Spider-Man again, they go after Oscorp their employers? Yeah a super-powered heist film, with Ray Charles and Pig Vomit already casted on this team.

    As you pointed out Stu, there is a certain “sameness” to alot of this.

    I think oddly enough the biggest flaw with my doomsday prophecy is that I’ve noticed some of these funny books movies out lately or coming out soon have already tried to shake shit up relatively speaking in terms of genre expectations. You know, try to offer something new. Evolution will let this genre/bubble survive beyond this decade.*

    Both DREDD and THE WOLVERINE didn’t involve saving the world, both in fact were fueled the most honest, original human motivation: Survival. (Not a funny book-based movie, but RIDDICK I would say also belongs in this trend.) TW was basically a Clint Eastwood movie, as I already mentioned.

    The last THOR movie was (to quote Paul, I believe) the MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE movie I wanted as a kid but never got. The first THOR was basically the superhero CROCODILE DUNDEE. The first IRON MAN was Marvel’s BATMAN BEGINS mixed with ROBOCOP. IM3 was basically Shane Black making a Shane Black buddy movie. Edgar Wright’s ANT-MAN has been sold publicly as a heist film, with Paul Rudd the divorced ex-con single dad stealing Michael Douglas’ costume/technology. And hell I forgot to mention GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, which is….you know I don’t really know what exactly James Gunn has up his sleeve with that one. (But I wouldn’t be shocked if Rocket Raccoon stole the world’s heart.)

    Over at DC, JGL is supposed to direct the SANDMAN movie. I really liked those Neil Gaiman comics. More suited for a HBO TV show methinks, but its still awfully good material to play with. I even liked JGL’s directing debut DON JON. I’m looking forward to that one.

    *=Stu, action movies never go out of style. Its just what type of actioneers? Once upon a time, it was John Wayne. Then WW2-era men on a mission films. Then Clint Eastwood. Then your DIE HARD and LETHAL WEAPONs. Then the superheroes. What in the near future render the capes out of business?

  56. I’ve never liked the idea of Luthor being from Smallville and growing up with Clark etc. It’s a wholly unecessary addition to the story and it takes what should be a titanic struggle between two polar opposites and roots it in angsty teenage melodrama.

    As for the superhero bubble, it’s got to burst some time. The budgets keep getting bigger and bigger; eventually a studio is going to have a few flops in a row and go bankrupt. At least, that’s what people keep saying. Honestly I thought people would be sick of this shit ages ago. What kind of things do you mean when you say “out there” properties? Marvel/Disney seem to be dipping their toes into other genres with upcoming superhero films but it’s no surprise they don’t want to experiment too much. These movies cost a fucking fortune.

    Horror has definitely gone up and down in popularity, if you remember there was a pretty big dry spell there in the 90s, plus it tends to re-invent itself every decade or so. Romantic comedies I have no idea about, but both of these genres are cheap to make, so it’s not surprising that they stick around when the more expensive ones fall out of favour.

  57. RRA – You went on a rant about the fact that people like Drew McWeeny were complaining about the DOFP costumes but not the costumes in other movies and called them hypocrites. I tried to explain why it’s not hypocritical to complain about those costumes and not others but all that you seemed to take from it was a bunch of wrong opinions about what kind of movies I wanted to see made. I don’t read much comics myself and I’m more interested in seeing a good movie than anything else.

  58. PB – I complained about some people bitching about costumes and somehow this means the movie will be a disaster, it will suck, etc. (Seriously how many times have we gone through that song and dance online before a movie came out?) I called out on that, because you know maybe we should see the movie* before we write it off and because story/action will make or break a narrative, not costumes. Not as well and thorough as he did, but I basically tried to do what Vern did here.

    You then wrote back about how these costumes are a disaster because they’re symbolic of an older method of making these funny books movies (a method that in this POV is one of disdain for the source material), a stance of which I found trivial. Now you may actually believe that or you were just trying to parse what guys like McWeeny think and make me understand better. But regardless, these two paragraphs sum up our conversation so far.

    *=Hell even [REDACTED] VS SUPERMAN, I hope that’s good. We all do.

  59. CL – were you talking to me about the “out there” comment? I didn’t write that in my post that I wrote for you, or in any other posting of mine lately to my knowledge.

    You are right about Disney/Marvel’s formula and how they’re trying to transplant that to other genres and stories while “branching out.” Will that work? Stay tuned!

  60. I want to go on record to say that I’ve been really cold on the Marvel movies since the beginning. The first half of Iron Man was good, and I actually liked Thor 2. I can’t really remember any of the others at all. Just need to plant my Marvel Hipster Nerd flag here. Man of Steel was alright, really frustrating because I think there is a *great* movie in there somewhere.

    All I know about Lex Luthor is that he’s smart and a bad guy, and gained power through non-comic book ways. Casting an actor that immediately brings to mind how someone could do that in a modern context makes sense. You guys see that Atlas Shrugged movie? I hope not, it was terrible. But, despite being terrible and having terrible source material they stuck way too close to the source material to the point that it became irrelevant and odd. Book was written in like the 50s and is about trains and shit, so a movie in the 2010s should find something different than trains. But it didn’t and was dumb.

    I say this as a wrestling nerd who plays Warhammer: I don’t care about adaptations of any source material I like (short of McCarthy) and want to judge them on their merits. Weirdly, I think it was the Dawn of the Dead remake that really instilled that in me. I figure if you’re going to remake or adapt something you should drill down to what it is about and make it your own, no sense just adapting verbatim. I wonder if people got pissed off when painters did paintings based off of Mozart operas and shit?

  61. Casey – as Vern pointed out in his pieces, there’s been several interpretations of LL. When I was a kid, Clancy Brown on the cartoon program was the super genius/CEO dick. Gene Hackman camped it up as a hustler/criminal. And so forth.

    Eisenberg very well might redefine LL to the point we go “well of course!”

    CL – On the Lex Luthor/Supes childhood friendship stuff, Scott Tipton on his website years ago defended that backstory in arguing that its add tragedy in that Luthor with his great brains could’ve used his genius to cure cancer and AIDS or whatever. But instead he wastes it in his quest for revenge against Supes and take the world and all that.

    I don’t know if I necessarily disagree with you whether that element is needed, but I thought I should share that defense from somebody who liked it.

  62. Speaking of McWeeny, he actually posted an interesting Op-Ed today about Eisenberg/LL:

    “”Here’s what I predict, and I hope the people who hated the destruction in “Man Of Steel,” the people upset about Superman killing Zod, the people who feel like Superman didn’t save anyone… I hope they all go see the sequel… because Lex Luthor is going to speak for them.”

    That’s right. I’m calling it. Lex Luthor is the voice of the section of fandom who hated “Man Of Steel.”

    Lex is going to bring Bruce Wayne into things when he reaches out to him as another person whose business was impacted by the actions of this reckless dangerous alien thing called Superman. And I’m going to bet that Lex is going to be presented as someone who sways a good deal of public opinion to his point of view. I don’t think he’s going to be an overt villain. I think he’s going to be using Superman’s actions to make him into a threat, and I think doing so is going to benefit Lex in every way.””


  63. RRA: That’s what I said too. “That one is so widespread that I suspect Snyder is using it as a motivation for Batman and Luthor to be against Superman.”

  64. I’ve rewatched MAN OF STEEL twice, and each time the complaints about collateral damage get more and more ridiculous. First off, 90% of the damage to Metropolis happened before Superman even got there, because he was LITERALLY on the exact opposite side of the planet (how many alibis can say that?) fighting that robot octopus thing, which if he hadn’t defeated, every single organic life form on earth would have died. So you can’t hold that against him. Then by the time he gets to Metropolis, we clearly see that the people in the Daily Planet have had no trouble evacuating their building, which means the people in the other buildings, who would have had less impetus to stick around, not being part of the news media and all, would have long since gotten out of there as well. Then there is a sequence when Zod and Superman go crashing through an office building that is clearly completely deserted. There are no innocent bystanders jumping out of the way, which is one of the things Michael Bay and other large scale catastrophists love doing in scenes like this to ratchet up the carnage, if that is their goal. When a director shows something once, it is clearly intended as shorthand to imply the larger situation, so it stands to reason that if there’s nobody in this building, there’s nobody in any of these buildings that are getting demolished. In real life, yeah, it’s not that easy. But it isn’t real life. It’s an action sci-fi fantasy melodrama about a guy from space who can shoot lasers from his eyes.

    So let it go, people. Superman didn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people or whatever the accountant’s version of MOS is. He saved the world by sacrificing a few empty buildings. Won’t someone think of the real estate agents?

  65. Yes, though they did have a point though with the Battle of Smallville beginning with Superman tackling Zod through a gas station and blowing up one of the pumps. That was pretty reckless.

  66. It was his first battle, and the guy just nearly killed his mom. I think we can cut him a little slack. Besides, like Zod said, Superman isn’t a trained soldier. He learned how to fight on a farm. Of course he’s gonna be a little sloppy straight out the gate.

    But I guess with gas prices being what they are, one filling station is more important than the fate of the entire planet to some people. Pretty telling symbolism for society’s near-sighted environmental policy if you ask me.

  67. RRA: Sorry, I was talking to Stu in my earlier post. Of course the idea that Lex could save the world if he really wanted to is central to his character, but there’s no need to frame it in a teenage bromance between Clark and Lex. It just needlessly complicates their backstory. Plus it’s kind of dumb.

    Majestyk: Granted I haven’t seen MOS since it was in theaters, but from what I remember the destruction was filmed in a very specific way that imitated real-life disaster footage. Everything about the way the scene is presented frames it not as a thrilling adventure but as a horrific tragedy. Honestly it makes way more sense in context if thousands of people are being killed. And I think Snyder said in interviews that he did mean to imply as such. My problem isn’t that Superman is recklessly punching dudes through buildings or whatever (although I don’t think he went as far out of his way to save people as he probably could have) but that it’s way too big a bummer for a Superman film. At least, the kind of Superman film that I want to see. Obviously you feel differently.

  68. I think owning the destruction at the end of MOS and using it as a motivating factor for Lex is a good idea, so long as it’s handled with a bit of subtlety and not used as a cudgel against critics. Otherwise it’s going to come across as a whiny Bob-Balaban-in-LADY-IN-THE-LAKE style dummyspit.

  69. Dear Mr. Snyder:
    Please cast a dragon again for your new SuperBatmen movie.
    I liked the dragons in your previous 2 movies. Thank you.


    P.S. Who would win in a fight between Superman and Scott Adkins?
    P.P.S. But what if Scott Adkins just found out Clark Kent killed his wife?

  70. It’s EXACTLY what should happen in a Superman movie. Because 1. Metropolis gets creamed like three times a month in the comics and nobody bats an eye. Superman’ll throw a motherfucker through a skyscraper in the middle of delivering exposition. It’s as much a part of the genre as tights and daddy issues. 2. It’s a big-ass modern CGI effects explodorama, and this is what happens at the end of each and every one of them: a city gets leveled. Gotham City got leveled. New York got leveled. Chicago got leveled. L.A. got leveled. Everybody gets leveled. I don’t see why this particular city-leveling gets everybody’s panties in a bunch when just a couple months earlier GI JOE 2 wiped London off the map in a cutaway sequence that had no bearing on the plot. Not just a few buildings. Not half the city. The entire city of London no longer exists in the world of GI Joe. And no fucks were given that day. Because it’s not real. It was a special effect.

    But now that you think about it, actually, I’m glad the damage in MOS was depicted as particularly traumatic and awful. What’s the point of having a Superman if we’re living in a world where shit like this doesn’t happen? That’s what we need him for in the first place. Let Spider-Man handle the mid-level baddies who just want to toss a few cars around. You bring out Big Blue, the threat had better be up to his standards. Only the promise of utter devastation is worthy of Superman’s time.

  71. I can visualize a perfect moment of Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. He’s got that charming, boy genius schtick going and Superman comes along and does something to make him look stupid or foolish and while Lex maintains that fake smile and shrugs it off, you can see the petulant, cruel boy in his eyes and just know he’s going to go off to some secluded room and throw a temper tantrum that will do a psycopath proud, ending with him plotting something horrible and extreme, as if a jock knocked his lunch tray out of his hands and to retaliate he burned said jock’s house down. I think Eisenberg could play that kind of Lex brilliantly.

  72. CrustaceanLove/Vern – its a gold mine creatively speaking, lets hope that team can actually mine it with a pickaxe instead of a spoon!

  73. Crustacean: Well THOR itself could stand to be a little more out there and actually have committed to the Norse Mythology thing more and not kept going back to Earth, but instead they went with “Woah, there! They aren’t Gods! They’re just long living aliens with advanced technology, but who talk like it’s the dark ages and like to fight with swords and hammers and there’s all this weird shit that just seems to happen around them like Thunderstorms for Thor, or Loki being able to use illusions even when he’s been locked in prison and presumably stripped of his technology, and there’s this one guy who can see anyone or anything in the universe he wants”. Honestly I think it would raise LESS questions if they were just Mythological beings.

  74. Majestyk: It’s not that Metropolis was destroyed, like you said that happens constantly in superhero movies and every other month in the comics, it’s the way it was depicted. That’s why people assumed massive carnage and lost their shit. The Superman stories I like are about preventing that kind of massive devastation. I tend to like the sappy Superman stories about hope and triumph and inspiration rather than the angsty ones where Superboy punches the fabric of reality or whatever. I’m a weiner like that.

    Maggie: I can only imagine the tsunami of fanboy rage that will result if they paint their dynamic as “heroic jock vs spiteful nerd”, which I suspect is what is going to happen.

    Stu: Honestly, it never really occured to me they weren’t magical beings. There’s a line in THOR where he says Asgard is a place where “magic and technology are one and the same” which I interpreted as “just go with this, guys”. Saying that they are actual, factual Gods as opposed to magical, God-like beings is just semantic quibbling. Plus it opens a Pandora’s box of theological questions that they understandably don’t want to deal with.

  75. I’m no expert (never read a THOR comic book in my life; couldn’t take all the thees and thines) but I believe the backstory is that these Asgardian guys visited Earth back in Ye Olden Tymes, and their adventures were immortalized in tale and song as Norse myths. It’s not just a weird coincidence. That’s the way one line of dialogue on that one episode of AGENTS OF SHIELD put it, anyway.

    Crustacean: I see where you’re coming from. And honestly, before the movie came out, I was hoping for something a little lighter, too, after being so bored with the —MAN movies. But after seeing MOS, I realized that I’d already seen five Superman movies that were light as could be, with comical villains whose schemes were thwarted handily, and I was actually way more interested in seeing something a lot heavier. It means more for Superman to be a beacon of light when the world is so dark.

  76. I hope in the third THOR movie they delve a little deeper into Norse mythology rather than the generic fantasy in THE DARK WORLD. It would be cool if they adapt the tale of Jörmungandr, the Midgard Serpent. There’s something really satisfying about a regular-sized dude punching the shit out of a giant snake monster (see Hulk in THE AVENGERS for details).

    Mr Majestyk: That’s cool, there’s room in this world for different interpretations. These characters have seen so many changes over the decades that everyone has their own picture of what makes Superman Superman. I think what a lot of people miss when criticising “Nerds” for never being happy is that they aren’t a homogenous blob but a whole bunch of different people who may like the same things but for completely different reasons. You’re never going to make everyone happy and it’s the unhappy ones that bitch the loudest.

  77. Stu – oddly enough McWeeny did claim recently that THOR 3 would center around the Ragnarok storyline.

    You know, the Norse apocalypse.

    I don’t spoil that storyline to those unaware of how Marvel did Ragnarok in the books, but let me give you lot just this one clue: MATRIX sequels.

    I would love it personally if Loki showed off his gender-changing powers.

    Mr. Majestyk – Ancient Aliens, baby! (Why only Vikings and Norse people took them as Gods and not rest of the world, hell if I know.)

    CL – I think its more like a FULLMETAL ALCHEMIST deal where this hypothetical world, instead of building itself upon science and technology, was oriented around magic. Or they’re so advanced technologically that yeah a rainbow bridge would seem magical to us when really its just merely their Autobahn.

  78. Alleged early screening review for THE WINTER SOLDIER, a pretty positive one.

    Big spoiler on the supposed post-credits stinger, which is revealed (or claimed) at the end. Beware!


  79. I don’t like the Marvel Studios movies. I know this because I gave the first wave of them a chance and only liked IRON MAN and some of the CAP movie. It has nothing to do with turning against them now they just didn’t connect with me in anyway so I threw in my hat with THE AVENGERS. I don’t like the X-Men movies. I saw the first 3 and some of the 60’s one since so many sang it’s praises and in the end only enjoyed the X2 while being massively bored by the rest. Naturally that means I won’t bother with the new one.

    It has nothing to do with fidelity to the comics or whatever. Even if I do prefer superheros in their original medium cause it leads to more grandiose and weird storytelling that’s impossible anywhere else. I just found them to be unengaging and uneventful movies that felt generic as fuck. Same applies to DREDD which I finally saw after so many recommendations here. It just didn’t register with me in anyway so I prefer to just read 2000 A.D. if I need a Judge Dredd fix. It’s not because the movie itself wasn’t faithful to the themes of the books (it was at points) it’s just that nothing in it grabbed my attention whatsoever.

    A movie either connects with it’s audience or doesn’t. It’s as black and white as that. I think people need to realize that sometimes those of us who dislike movies based on comic books and read comic book ourselves just dislike the movies on their own merits. Not because they don’t match our own interpretations of these stories which is impossible considering the different variations and remixes that plague a lot of these characters throughout their history. So there will never be a “definitive” take anyway.

  80. It’s just the Asgardians of the comic ARE unmistakably Gods. They’re one of several pantheons (Olympus is in there too, which is how there’s a fun take on Hercules in the Marvel Universe) and there’s a definite supernatural aspect to them, with magic and immortality, resurrection and prophecies and such. They have Valhalla and everything. I just don’t see the point in not doing that with the films. It can’t be for realism, because like I said, it raises too many questions that can be ignored if you go with them being deities. Like for instance it makes Mjolnir a super sophisticated piece of technical engineering which must come with a lot of complicated AI programming which lets it detect “worthiness”(a nebulous trait even in the comics, where SUPERMAN isn’t considered worthy enough) and somehow controls it’s mass/density/gravity enough to stop anyone who doesn’t meet this requirement from being able to pick it up. Plus, what sounds better? Odin:
    1. Changing his son into a mortal man and casting him down to Earth
    2. Stripping him of all his technological advancements and genetically engineering him on the fly to take away his innate* Asgardian strength and durability(which is kinda a bit of personal and moral violation if you think about it) before using quantum physics to open a tunnel across space/dimensions and having him fall through it?

    *I assume all Asgardians are like that. Otherwise a special group of privileged get to juice themselves while the common man has a serious disadvantage

  81. I guess I don’t see how it matters whether they are Gods or pseudo-magical beings with God-like powers? It’s not hard sci-fi, there don’t have to be rational, technological explanations for all their cool shit. Thor basically says as much in the first film. Arthur C. Clarke’s Third Law comes to mind: sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

  82. CL – I agree with you. Not to excuse any logic gaps within that world, but its space opera where such fantasy settings you seem to get a pass for such things.

    Oddly enough STAR WARS (the best space opera ever), George Lucas for the most part did try to bring some logic to his universe.

  83. RRA: There’s some logic in STAR WARS, but Lucas was smart about letting the “rule of cool” overrule nerdy technical minutia. He leaves that to those adorable nerds on Wookieepedia.

  84. The logic of the “Thor” films is not known for its logic.

    Case in point: Thor 2’s “aether”, which is big enough to plunge the universe into darkness, but small enough to fit conveniently into an elevator-sized sarcophagus or Natalie Portman.

    Look, logic be damned, “Thor 2” was one of my favorite films of last year because the protagonists were just so much fun. You’ve got Thor, who gets a pass for combining a serious kingly side with a propensity for hitting people with a giant fuckoff hammer for the fun of it. (If ever there was a winning combination, that was probably it.) You’ve got Skellan Saarsgard, who gets a pass for playing an insane drunkard professor. You get Natalie Portman, who gets a pass for being Natalie Portman. You get space vikings, who get a pass for being space vikings. Etc.

    You can have your Supermans and your Iron Mans (like the world needs ANOTHER set of films about a maudlin billionaire playboy) and your Hulks and your Captain Americas. Give me the guy with the giant hammer, thanks.

  85. Paul – Nevermind that the Aether as a doomsday plot device weapon hyped up by the characters, it was rather useless for the villain when he had it. It shoots tentacles! And…that’s it.

  86. RRA – true, but I can forgive that given that “Thor 2” had one of the best “action finales” I’ve ever seen.

    In fact, the only major criticism I have of the movie is the bad guys. I know “Thor”‘s whole schtick is taking various parts of different mythologies (Greek, Roman, Viking) and mushing them together into one semi-coherent whole; but I think the whole “dark elf” thing was pushing it. (I’d say it was Tolkien-esque, but I don’t think he actually had any “dark” elves, at least not in the stuff that I’ve read of his.) Putting the dark elves in there was just too much dumb for me. Plus they were just so uncharismatic. I think the “Thor” series really needs its Hans Gruber – a villain who just loves the shit out of whatever he does. Loki could qualify if he’s used effectively – although he was one of the protagonists in “Thor 2” for the most part – but I’d rather see an interesting new character come along and fill the role.

  87. But Paul, Dark Elves ARE part of Norse Mythology:
    I was more let down by how completely underdeveloped they were. All they had as motivation was “make darkness rule the universe again” without explaining
    1. what exactly that means
    2. why exactly do they want that
    Apparently they did shoot some stuff explaining Malekith’s backstory, but Marvel had the director take it out.
    I did like the movie, but that aspect and way too much focus on Earth(in a movie that was being sold on the promise of being more Asgard-centric), plus Jane’s superflousness until the very end, kinda spoiled it a bit for me.

  88. The Original Paul

    February 7th, 2014 at 5:29 am

    Stu – woooow. Ok that one threw me for a loop! Agree about the “underdeveloped” bit though.

  89. McWeeny did report sometime back that THOR 3 would allegedly center around Ragnarok, which is of course the apocalypse in Norse mythology. If you want, google up that storyline from the books for how that’s handled with the Marvel version of Norse mythology.

    Oh and Paul Bettany is now Vision. Vin Diesel and Clark Gregg don’t have to be asked anymore whether they’re playing Vision or not. I’m sure they’re pleased.

    Back to Eisenberg, what did you all think of that Latino Review report that Eisenberg’s Luthor’s backstory would be that he started out a teenage gangbanger before of course becoming the CEO we all know. As crazy as that is, there’s an actual logic (and wonderful comic book absurdity) to this notion. I mean Bruce Timm a long time ago described his Lex Luthor as a “cultured thug.”

  90. RRA- I have an inkling of how they did Ragnarok, since it was a part of the beginning of JMS’ run on Thor, but it was clearly a supernatural, mythical thing that I don’t see how you could work with a sci-fi versions of the Asgardians.

    Hopefully we’ll get the all-white look for Vision, or at least something different from that red, green and yellow design that barely works in a comic and would just look bad in live action.

    Latino Review thing is just a rumour, so I dunno if I should really comment on it. But I could maybe see it fitting more like he was a misfit and got into a gang and used his smarts to help them take over some turf or something. Maybe they could be involved in a version of the “arranged his parents death so he could use the life insurance money to start up a business” origin.

  91. Stu – Didn’t a new report today claim Vision looked sorta like the T-1000?

    Remember that rumor I brought up the other day about AVENGERS 4 having a new roster of characters? Not saying I believe that claim fully, but…Vision added to the proceedings certainly adds food for thought on that front.

    Off-topic, but I like that one fan theory out there that the unseen “Clairvoyant” villain on AGENTS OF S.H.I.E.L.D. is actually the Leader. For you non-nerds, he was introduced in THE INCREDIBLE HULK as that scientist penpal of Edward Norton who then had his little nasty accident. I’m sure Marvel had plans for a Hulk sequel at one point where the now-mutated Leader with his super intelligence (and a bigass forehead this side of THIS ISLAND EARTH) would become a Hulk baddie but that got sidelined when TIH’s box-office didn’t exactly demand a sequel.

    Who knows if that’s actually true, but I lke the idea that the Whedons saw that loose plot thread and thought “gee let’s play with this toy since the mothership aint using it!”

    Anyway as a nerd on the Thor front, I want Enchantress*. I also want Beta Ray Bill. I think if done right, Vern would eat up Beta Ray Bill. I mean a menacing-looking alien, he and Thor get into an epic fight which ends up in a draw and BRB is able to lift Mjonir, a stunner of course because only the “righteous” can carry that hammer. I just like that relationship as basically two guys who respect each other only after beating the shit out of each other this side of THEY LIVE and ANY WHICH WAY YOU CAN.

    *=Her sister is actually showing up on AGENTS OF SHIELD later this season, so who knows maybe Marvel is indeed planning for her down the road?

  92. What I’d like to know is: how do they intend to render The Vision properly if he isn’t CGIed? Or will they simply limit that to the sequences where his molecular structure is altered?

    I would like the choice of Bettany more if I didn’t now so closely associate him with the voice of Jarvis (presumably The Vision won’t be making any pit stops at Casa Stark). Still, I’m not complaining. He’s always been my favorite of the Avengers, and while I wasn’t particularly taken by the first movie, sign me up for #2.

  93. AL – here is what the Comic Book Therapy people claim:

    “It has a helmet akin to the Iron Man armor, but it’s designed more like a face than a smooth Stark helmet. The iconic yellow and green are present in the design, but it’s more metallic shades than bright ‘comic book colors.’ They said it reminds them somewhat of the T-100 from Terminator 2 but it’s not as shiny. The yellow metal “liquid” bits seem to light up. This may or may not happen since there are two designs for that section. One lights up the other doesn’t. That’s the only difference. The cape is present, but they say it appears to only “pop out” when in flight mode. The cape sports some similar shades of yellow as the body. The “neck pieces” are the same yellow but they seem to shift positions from “standing” (for lack of a better word) to “flight mode.”

    “Now the only thing that isn’t pretty well decided on is the mask. As of this Monday they weren’t sure if they wanted to rework the helmet/face part of the costume or incorporate Bettany‘s own face. The Marvel execs and Whedon were there earlier this week looking at a few possibilities. They want to make certain that audiences don’t think of Vision as just a colorful copy of Iron Man. That part isn’t finalized, but this is what Vision will look like barring a few very minor tweaks before he steps in front of the cameras. ”


    So….both CGI and live-action? *shrugs*

    Honestly, I like the Jarvis/Vision idea if at the least because alongside Clark Gregg, you have two supporting Marvel players who got promoted to their own spotlight. Its almost like all this shit was planned all along. Well no they weren’t, just happy accidents.

    I think what’s clever about Whedon’s pitch is that audiences already know Jarvis as Tony Stark’s best buddy. Sure Stark hangs around with War Machine and dates that woman that Vanity Fair hates, but who’s almost always with Stark? Who did Stark design and actually (somehow) give it not just a British accent but also that dry British wit that he throws back at his creator?

    Sometimes forgotten with AVENGERS was that Hawkeye and Black Widow were previously seen but they were just the archer and ScarJo in tight leather, nothing more. Whedon gave those two the character development in the first movie, flesh each other out some more despite being in a movie with 10+ other characters. Now with #2, who’s also in that movie? Scarlet Witch, who was Vision’s lover at one point in the comics. Not to be an asshole, but I think its obvious he’ll mine that material somehow to flesh each other out, mostly for SW’s benefit. Then add Quicksilver, and you have that sibling-bond-against-the-world relationship with SW. (Let’s hope Whedon aint borrowing the Ultimates redesign where they were lovers too. Eww.)

  94. Well the villain for Avengers 2 is Ultron, who created Vision to use against The Avengers, so he’ll presumably be a secondary villain. Maybe he gets reprogrammed by Tony and gets the Jarvis voice, or is created in the first place using Tony’s tech?

    And I’ve been calling The Leader as the Clairvoyant for a while. It’d be good misdirection because the “Clairvoyant” name implies he’s a psychic of some sort, but what the Leader actually does is predict probabilities with high accuracy. It’s also interesting because in Marvel Cinematic Universe canon, he’s supposed to be in SHIELD custody, and the people who are working for the Clairvoyant have access to stuff SHIELD would, and the apparent upcoming plot of Captain America 2 is about there being a conspiracy within SHIELD.

  95. Stu – Could the Leader be working with/for Hydra? I guess we’ll find out soon.

  96. The LEGO MOVIE is really good. For something based on a corporate toy it had a lot of heart and soul. Best version of [REDACTED] in any movie to date.

  97. Broddie- the WOM is very good. Can’t wait to see it.

    I just shudder now at the more movies we’ll get based off toys and board games. Whether Barbie or Micromachines or Lincoln Logs, lets just hope they’re more like LEGO MOVIE or CLUE and less like BATTLESHIP or any of the TRANSFORMERS or G.I. JOE movies.

    ~Last year I called a Transformers/G.I. Joe cross-over movie inevitable. I still stand by that.

  98. Who saw the leaked Rocket Raccoon test footage?


    Me likey!

  99. I learned three things from the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY trailer.

    (1) I wanted more badass talking raccoon shooting shit up footage.
    (2) This is pretty much the 2013 Comic Con trailer, just tweaked and more CGI…which is fine because I thought it worked, especially “Hooked on a Feeling” giving it a buoyant “fun” vibe that helped sell it more than anything else as perhaps the most intriguing summer blockbuster movie this year.
    (3) Vern won’t like it.

  100. What makes you think #3? I’m not here to speak for good ol’ Vern, but so far he not just stated several times that he enjoyed every Marvel movie so far (to varying degrees), plus he REALLY liked JOHN CARTER and LONE RANGER, didn’t hate James Gunn’s previous work and most of all, it’s a movie about “a bunch of a-holes”, who have the potential of being each one being damn entertaining and badass characters. So I think there is a good chance of this NOT being the first MCU movie, than he ends up hating.

  101. I learned that someone gave the guy who did SLITHER a lot of money to make ‘MOS EISLEY CANTINA – THE MOVIE’. Which might be no bad thing.

  102. Looks good to me. And it took me a while but I’m sold on there being a talking raccoon. It will be weird when Iron Man has to talk to him but as long as Blade never has a raccoon I’m fine with it.

    Also, it doesn’t look cheesy like that post-credits sequence on Thor 2, in fact it looks like they got better production value than most of the Marvel movies.

  103. CJ – if I remember right Vern didn’t care for the last THOR movie, one of his criticisms being that its “goofy” tone. He also had problems with the tone in IM3. And GOTG will certainly be even goofier.

    With Chris Pratt here, I get the impression that the guy fancies himself Han Solo but he’s actually Jack Burton. Which is both an awesome and terrifying prospect.

    Vern – I’m glad to hear that. Good to know my cynicism sometimes backfires.

    If Marvel and Gunn can nail the spirit of those DNA-written GOTG comics, I want to believe we will have a real winner here. Rocket Raccoon could very well become this year’s Captain Jack Sparrow, the breakout star who steals the show.

    You know what pisses me off though? Looking at that trailer, dammit we should’ve had a NEW GODS movie by now. And at this rate, we’ll never get it. Oh sure the inevitable JUSTICE LEAGUE movie will use Darkseid as a heavy but such a cool world he’s from with other good characters that would get in the way of Supes and Batman kicking ass.

  104. As a self-proclaimed nerd who knows next to nothing about the property, I dug the trailer. It reminded a bit of the TV show FARSCAPE. I was a little disappointed none of the other Guardians spoke in it besides Pratt. I’m also a little confused about WHEN this is set. I assumed it was the future, but people I know are telling me present day…

  105. I liked the trailer. Very much in Marvel house style, with the Whedony one-liners and self-aware skewering of dramatic moments. I was actually charmed by the weird cheapness/goofiness of the post-credits teaser, but I’m not gonna complain because the movie looks more expensive. Needed more Rocket Raccoon, but couldn’t that be said of all trailers?

    Stu: I think in the comics Star Lord is a regular dude from present-day Earth who discovers that his dad was an alien and is subsequently drawn into intergalactic adventures etc. So technically it’s present day, in the same sense that STAR WARS takes place a “long, long time ago”.

  106. Sorry, but I just don’t get the enthusiasm that trailer’s generating across the web, nor why everyone is treating the raccoon like it’s the weirdest, most absurd thing they have EVER SEEN! (OMG!! It fires a machine gun, how AWSUM!) I mean, really? It’s just a talking raccoon, guys. What gives?

    I’m not sold on the comedic tone they’re showcasing, either. Seems somewhat forced, but maybe that’s just how it looks in the trailer. Production values seem to be good, though, so yeah, maybe it’ll all work out.


    FARSCAPE, exactly! Got fond memories of that show, even if it all went kinda downhill towards the end. Hopefully, GotG’s gonna be more like the earlier seasons. Crichton was just the sort of smug arse they apparently want Star Lord to be.

  107. It’s not just that it’s a talking raccoon. It’s a talking raccoon who lives in the same universe as Tony Stark. The context changes everything. You put that same character in a Ben Stiller movie, nobody gives a shit.

    Plus there’s the fact that someone thought it made fiscal sense to give the writer of TROMEO & JULIET a couple hundred million dollars to make the raccoon talk. I can’t wait to see Lloyd Kaufman’s cameo as, like, the emperor of the universe or something. You don’t see this kind of brazen not-giving-a-fuck from a major studio every day.

    I might be more excited for this than THE RAID 2. It’s pretty much a done deal that RAID 2 is going to be awesome, but I don’t know what THE FUCK this thing is going to be. I can’t wait to find out.

  108. I won’t be watching this GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY thing but when it comes to THE RAID 2 I’m in there like swimwear.

  109. CEPE – I think its simple badass juxtaposition, if done in reverse if that makes sense. A talking raccoon that looks cute, the sort of Disney character that maybe you could see children cuddle a doll of at night while watching cartoons of said raccoon deal with a duck with a lisp or moron dog or mouse who wears shorts.

    Then give him a BIGASS gun that looks ridiculous when used by a small mammall, and he mows down people in glee. (Bradley Cooper called him the Joe Pesci of the movie.) Then add to that, his partner in crime is a walking tree. I mean when’s the last movie you’ve seen where a character was described simply as another’s “houseplant slash muscle”?

    (I did like that shot in the trailer where Groot bends over to look at the cops, all sweet and innocent looking while his rap sheet show several counts of GBH. After catching that in the 2nd viewing of the trailer, I just find that hilarious now.)

    I guess its like STAR WARS with Chewbacca. Zero character development in those movies, his personality only expressed through growls and whimpers. (Like R2D2, other characters have to let the audience know the context of what those beeps or growls actually mean.) Yet goddamit we still loved that walking carpet because he is a growling hairy badass. (Not coincidental, notice that Marvel lately in publicity is really pushing the Han/Solo and Groot/Rocket Raccoon parallels.)

    Maybe people are hungry for something STAR WARS-y again? I don’t know.

    Mr. Majestyk – More excited for GOTG than THE RAID 2?!? I’m….shit you just blew my mind.

    Here’s one that should blow yours: If GOTG is a hit, then that means James Gunn has become a hit blockbuster filmmaker and suddenly in demand in Hollywood.

    Yeah I can’t fathom that possibility either.

  110. Majestyk:

    Hey, I can relate to your (and the others’) sentiments, but it’s not like the cinematic Marvelverse is ordinarily so in thrall to reality that the inclusion of a talking raccoon suddenly changes EVERYTHING, is it? I mean, that thing shouldn’t even raise eyebrows after all the irradiated, mutated or obviously alien interlopers that were featured in the previous movies. But what the hell, I’m no anti-procyonite, so I’m not gonna begrudge people their raccoon-derived pleasures. For all I know, the character IS going to be awesome (still would’ve preferred it if Diesel had voiced HIM instead of the tree.)


    I DO understand the way the character’s meant to work, y’know? The juxtaposition? I get it. As I said above, maybe he’s great in the movie, I can’t yet know. I didn’t question Rocket as a part of the movie, or his depiction or anything, but the way all of the internet flipped for the character as if it’s the most abstractly inspired thing ever put on film. Maybe you’re right and it’s a craving for a dose of STAR WARS or maybe people simply like the sight of cute animals dishing out righteous violence. It’s like AVATAR all over again: people continued to rave about the ingenious creativity of the world Cameron had created whereas I just saw a bunch of blue cat people running through a derivative jungle environment filled with creatures only slightly abstracted from their Earth-based counterparts. I guess I’m just inherently negative and hard to impress ;)

  111. There’s some short featurettes out on Rocket and Groot. You get to hear the former talk in his.
    There’s also ones for Drax and Gamora you can view through those vids.

  112. Good for whoever sang that song. If you haven’t popped in pop culture in a while you could always count on the bandwagon jumpers to bring back relevancy.

  113. Broddie – What blows my mind is that allegedly that GOTG trailer got more hits and social media “buzz” than the MOS trailer did within the same 24 hour period when it came out. Rocket Raccoon beating the King of Superheroes? What the hell has happened?

    Of course does social media matter that much? If social media buzz equaled box-office, SCOTT PILGRIM would’ve been a hit. Instead it bombed.

  114. Oh and the GOTG poster is out. Its generic like other Marvel posters tend to be (Why is that?) but the tagline is great: “YOU’RE WELCOME.”

  115. RRA – Somewhere in the world Damien Sandow weeps.

  116. Didn’t “Hooked On a Feeling” get a similar pop culture bump from when it was used for the “Dancing Baby” thing on Ally McBeal?

  117. Broddie – I so wish we could rep each other’s comments!

    Also since Bautista is in this movie…I hope he powerbombs somebody. If not, completely wasted opportunity Marvel!

    Stu – yeah. Some things in pop culture are zombies, they just refuse to die.

  118. All I know is that song has been stuck in my head all week. Mission accomplished trailer maker.

  119. Ah ScarJo is preggers. Good thing she doesn’t have an action movie shooting right now…

    Oh shit.

    (Stunt/body doubles with ScarJo’s mug CGI-ed over the faces, with close-up shots of ScarJo. Keep calm and carry on, Internet.)

  120. The Internet vitrol at the upcoming Fantastic Four movie, am I the only one that’s sorta baffled by it?

    Then again in regards to FF, I have little to no expectations for it. I mean Josh Trank’s movie can’t be worse than the Alba movies or the Roger Corman low budget film that was never released, right? Plus in my opinion, we already have the great Fantastic Four movie in terms of tone and charm and family-of-supers-wearing-matching-uniforms, it was called THE INCREDIBLES.

    I think the most annoying thing to me is people dismissing the Michael B. Jordan casting, how some of them think his Johnny Storm casting is just to “shake things up.” Because you know, he’s black and playing a white comic book character. No consideration put into the idea that maybe Jordan could totally kick ass in that part? I mean remember the same director worked with him on CHRONICLE.

  121. The thing I don’t get is that the movie nerd people I read seem to assume it will be good based on the director. Is he a new Friend of the Internet? I didn’t think CHRONICLE was very good and because of the found footage style it’s hard to know what his bigger movie will be like. But Michael B. Jordan is great so they can cast him as all four as far as I’m concerned.

  122. It’s the same with Colin Trevorrow getting to direct Jurassic World, despite having done only one small indie-type picture beforehand. Everyone seems to be cool with that, too. And he was apparently in the frame to take on Star Wars as well. Weird. I guess he must be really good “in the room” to convince them he’s got the chops to follow in Spielberg’s or even Lucas’ footsteps.

    They have this little infographic in the current issue of Empire, comparing various directors’ first picture budget with their follow-up’s. Man, Ridley Scott went from $900 000 on THE DUELLISTS (which is great, by the way) to $11 million on ALIEN, whereas Trevorrow will jump from $750 000 for SAFETY NOT GUARANTEED straight to $150 million for JW. It’s sorta similar with Gareth Edwards on GODZILLA. That’s some crazy shit. I’ve seen neither SAFETY… nor MONSTERS, but I don’t really see WHAT convinced the studios to give those guys their darling tent poles based only on these tiny pictures. Baffling. Maybe they’re banking on good second unit directors to handle the action and most of the mayhem, 007-style.

  123. Vern – Do they exist? The only things I keep reading about FF is people hating on it. From criticized “babyface” cast and the fact that Johnny Storm has a white sister. (So in a story with a stretching man and orange rock monster, a bi-racial family is what people call illogical.) Some people wanted Sue Storm to be played by a black actress, which would’ve been fine. But I get the sense that some people are arguing that just as another more polite way of bashing the idea of a black guy playing the Human Torch. Oh and Tintin as the Thing is apparently a war crime. (How about those rumors that a woman will play Doctor Doom?)

    Here’s a good question: Why do Marvel Studios don’t get as much as shit on their castings as WB/Fox/Sony do? I have my guesses why but still its strange.

    CEPE – I think its a similar situation with FF, the Internet just assumes that this WORLD can’t be worse than say THE LOST WORLD or JURASSIC PARK 3, which honestly I don’t think deserves as much hate as it does. (#2 however I still have no use for.) Plus I’m sure nostalgia still around for JP helps it.

    Besides hiring indie directors to make your blockbuster isn’t exactly a new trend. Nolan, Marc Webb, Edwards, etc. Since we no longer have the studio systems where a Spielberg could work at TV and then graduate to TV movies and then film, a Spielberg now would’ve started out on indie films. They’re the breeding ground for blockbusters now.

  124. RRA:

    Yeah, but Nolan made MEMENTO and INSOMNIA before taking over, uh, that superhero franchise; he didn’t segue right into it after FOLLOWING.
    Same goes for Duncan Jones, who’d been an advertising guy before MOON, which got him SOURCE CODE and then WARCRAFT. It’s still a steep climb, but not the “rags-to-riches” of Trevorrow or Edwards (although Edwards DID work in TV and SFX before he embarked on MONSTERS. He didn’t come out of nowhere.)

  125. People worship at strange altars. Folks get messy when it comes to ethnic Jesus and folks’ll get messy when it comes to ethnic Johnny Storm. People spend an awful lot of time building their own personal house of cards (not a nod to the Netflix show) and just can’t deal with their perceptions being challenged. And if their vitriol towards comic properties is worrisome, just remember, these people are also registered voters.

  126. Frankly, all of the casting seems so terrible to me that I don’t know how people can focus on just one character. I can’t say I’m really all that up in arms about it, though. At this point I think we should all just take a deep breath and accept that there’s never going to be a good Fantastic Four movie. Then if a merely passable one happens, we’ll all be pleasantly surprised. This is the same method I’ve used to get through the past five or six Pearl Jam albums, and it hasn’t failed me yet.

  127. I like Michael B Jordan and all, but that Fantastic Four cast is straight crazy, it’s hard to imagine what the fuck they’re thinking. Nobody cast looks even remotely like what you might imagine their comic counterpart would need to. And I don’t see how that CHRONICLES guy could possibly make an enjoyable action movie.


    The way I see it, Marvel is pretty much batting 1000 when it comes to making these things, at least recently. Yeah, they took awhile to figure out what they wanted to do with Hulk, but they finally got it perfect, and since the Avengers guys started getting cast, it’s been home run after home run. So, I’m gonna trust them on this one and assume they’re crazy like a fox, they have a plan which is gonna make sense when we see it play out. But I guess I can’t blame people for being a little shocked; it’s genuinely hard to see how this cast could possibly translate into the apparently beloved classic characters.

  128. “Oh my God Mr. Subtlety isn’t 100% down with Michael B. Jordan as Johnny Storm, he’s racist!” Just kidding but that’s basically the attitude of most of the websites I’ve been to. I think we had this conversation before and I think as long as you stay away from AICN, most of the major web stories re: this have been not only screaming to the heavens how amazing Jordan is, but patting themselves on the back for being really really down with this casting. Because if you’re not you’re a racist.

    I personally don’t care as 1) I never read the comics, 2) as RRA said, both previous FF movies were terrible, and 3) Chronicle was pretty good – sure it’s one movie (and Jordan wasn’t really in it enough to make an impression on me) but Trank shows a decent flair for pacing, character development, and action that is hey, at least better than anything in the previous FF movies. My main beef isn’t with the casting at all but the fact that I’m going to have to watch an origin story AGAIN.

    And on a side note, not to pull a bizarro “where’s white history month!?” but Asians are like over half of the world’s population. I think all the hipster bloggers who loudly chant for “Idris Elba for James Bond/Superman/Batman!” every other day, while constantly calling race on someone not 100% down with that idea, would shit their pants if someone proposed making a major franchise character Asian, even though it would more likely reflect the demographics of the worldwide audience, no?

  129. The younger-looking cast would suggest that they are taking inspiration from the Ultimate Fantastic Four comic series, in which the team was much younger and had a completely different origin story.

    I’m more worried about the director’s repeated insistance that the reboot will be “serious” and “not a comedy”. I know he’s just trying to distance himself from the other shitty movies, but I hope it won’t be completely dour and humourless.

  130. CrustaceanLove – when I hear “serious,” sounds like code word for “we’ll be Nolanized!”

    neal2zod – as stereotypical as it would be, I honestly wish for their upcoming Iron Fist TV show, Marvel would turn the hero from white to Asian-American.

  131. RRA – Yeah, hiring indie directors to do big movies has worked well, but this is kind of a new thing to hire a director who has only done a found footage movie. True, he has dealt with special effects and made a more elaborate found footage movie than most. But because he has only one movie and it’s in that style he hasn’t shown if he can handle some of the most basic traditional storytelling techniques. By the time Nolan did BATMAN he had I believe three movies under his belt and it was easy to sense that his sensibilities and style could apply well to something bigger and more mainstream. In this case it seems like they’re taking a shot in the dark, but maybe they know something we don’t I guess.

  132. while I have not seen his first movie, I have a gut feeling that JURASSIC WORLD is gonna blow us all away, that it could like the Snyder DAWN OF THE DEAD, not able to top the original classic but a pretty fucking awesome movie in it’s own right

    however I will say this, I hope the rumor that it’s about a new park (basically Jurassic World is to Jurassic Park what Disney World is to Disney Land supposedly) is true and that it’s not just dinosaurs on the mainland, while that would still be pretty cool it wont be as cool as the other idea

  133. I’m just happy were finally getting another JURASSIC PARK movie, I remember one of the very first things I looked up on imdb when I first got the internet 8 years was “Jurassic Park 4” since I had heard that were making a fourth one but hadn’t heard anything about it in years and sure enough imdb listed it, I was excited but the listed release date of “2008” seemed so far away, if I only knew….

  134. grimgrinningchris

    March 8th, 2014 at 7:12 am

    Speaking of Jurassic stuff… Universal announced that King Kong is coming back. This time at Islands Of Adventure. Seems they are going to split the current island and make it a combination Jurassic Park/Skull Island which could work. No details on the ride itself, but rumors of a combination of the tech from the old animatronic ride and the new 360/virtual Kong portion of the current Hollywood tram tour version.
    Whatever it is, I’m just glad to see the big guy back at Universal. With the closing of Jaws year before last, it seems the last remnants of classic Universal were forever gone.
    Another new resort is being built on site too (in addition to the new one opening this Spring)
    With all the thought and $ Universal is pumping into new ride tech, design and totally immersive environments (ala Harry Potter and the expanded Springfield…) there’s tons for theme park lovers to be thrilled about.
    Now if they’d just do something about their food and add more/better live shows then they could finally really start competing with Disney.

  135. Vern – I guess they really really really liked his pitch? I don’t know what to tell you.

    I mean look at the guys hired to do the upcoming Captain America sequel. Their resume is sitcom TV and an Owen Wilson comedy. No flags that would make you think “hey we should hire them to make our Jason Bourne/political thriller!”

  136. Griff – I wonder if JW might explode as well in part if GOTG puts Chris Pratt on the movie map?

  137. Interesting how on the AMC chat last night, Gunn/Pratt/Feige were all cagey whether Cosmo will be in the GOTG movie or not.

    We all need more telepathic Russian dogs in our lives!

  138. neal2zod – “I personally don’t care as 1) I never read the comics”

    I have read many of the comics including the most acclaimed recent run (Jonathan Hickman’s) where Johnny dies and comes back even more awesome; and I don’t care either. Then again I don’t care about this movie in general at all anyway. Didn’t like CHRONICLE and I don’t watch superhero movies so it’s well off my radar.

  139. Internet debating whether BVS or Marvel will vacate that May 2016 release date (where both currently are set to open on the same weekend) is just so mind-numblingly dumb. Both movies aint coming out the same weekend. C’mon Internet.

    I think WB is more likely to move BVS because more things are at stake for the planned DC Cinematic Universe long-term while whatever Marvel puts out (Cap 3? Thor 3? Hulk?) is just another cog of a machine. I would think head to head, BVS would open #1 but that would be a pyrrhic victory.

    And if Marvel moves, well shit they can just move to April and make all their money before BVS comes to town.

  140. …and people wonder why I stopped following superhero movies.

  141. So did David Goyer rape somebody or something because wow, when did the Internet turn on him so quickly and why? I get the hate at Snyder, but Goyer? He’s got a defendable track record, to say the least.

  142. His dialogue is banal and his plotting tends to be unnecessarily convoluted. He has been a writer on a number of good and even a few great films, but those tend to have good co-writers and directors. (Proyas, Norrington, Nolan, Del Toro, and to a lesser extent Snyder) That doesn’t mean he lacks good ideas — his movies almost always have solid premises and memorable scenes — but his scripts are pretty weak when he doesn’t have a strong collaborator. (Blade Trinity, The Unborn, and most of the flaws in Man of Steel are his kinds of flaws)

    The hate presumably comes because that’s the only thing the internet understands. If something isn’t the most flawlessly amazing thing ever, it much be garbage.

  143. grimgrinningchris – sorry if I’m a little late responding to this, but you mention “Now if they’d just do something about their food and add more/better live shows then they could finally really start competing with Disney.”

    well, I can’t vouch for the food in the parks, but have you ever stayed at the Hard Rock Hotel on the Universal property? and they have a restaurant located inside the hotel called The Palm which is seriously one of the best restaurants I’ve ever eaten at, not only that but they have another restaurant inside the hotel called The Kitchen which is the perfect place to grab breakfast/lunch, so if you’re ever at Universal studios and want to have a really good meal on your trip, I suggest you stay there during it

    I love that hotel so much, for me it’s half the fun when going to Universal, I’m too poor to have ever stayed at any of the REALLY fancy Disney resorts and the ones I have stayed at I like just fine, but c’mon, it’s Hard Rock, there’s a huge poster of Bowie in the lobby and a bust of Mick Jagger nearby, it feels like you’ve stepped into a 1970’s rock album cover, you just aint gonna find that at Disney

    man, I love theme parks but FUCK is it such an expensive pastime, even for a guy like me who lives close enough that I don’t have to fly, I wish I could go more often than I do

  144. The thing about Goyer is that he is pretty much a journeyman. The hate against him is definitely ridiculous, but he IS the kind of guy that gets hired when you want a predictable and safe product. (As mentioned before, the few pieces of true greatness that are attached to his name, really seem to come from his respective collaborators.)

  145. Griff/CJ Holden – You can criticize Goyer, but again….where was this hate rain online before MOS? Hell there wasn’t this much for BLADE TRINITY and that turkey was actually much worse than MOS.

  146. I actually remember that Goyer has been on the “Booooooooooooo”- list of nerds for a while, especially after BLAD3. Everytime he was announced as a writer of any new superhero movie, there was a very loud groan going through the comment sections of the internet. And I guess that people now took the step to downright HATING him, is because JUSTICE LEAGUE is his biggest and “most important” project so far and this time he is accompanied by Zack Snyder, the one modern blockbuster director who out-Bays Michael Bay in terms of style over substance. So there is no truly talented storyteller who will help him out.

  147. Crushinator Jones

    April 6th, 2016 at 2:37 pm

    So Suicide Squad is getting reshoots to lighten it up. RIP DCEU 2013 – 2016. I won’t say you were “too good for this world” – you definitely weren’t – but at least you were trying to give people something that wasn’t a simplistic live-action cartoon.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>