you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Supergirl's writing was a train wreck. So many baffling things I have to assume studio meddling. The movie otherwise was fine. Actress, fine. Direction, production, special effects, fine. But Supergirl came off hella awkward preaching about not revenge killing. Not because she accidentally killed someone in a rage and felt emptiness or regret. But that she'd lost her home and family to natural causes. Same thing right? And at the end, after all the preaching she gets her hypocritical kill on. No straightforward or intelligible arc as a character. For anyone. Baffling.

Have a 10 minute opening scene with her battling along side Clark. Accidentally going to far not realizing her strength. Then go off soul searching for the rest of the film. Biggest issue fixed. It would still need other tweaks. But then the main character would have a solid arc at least.

Mamoa as lobo though...... No notes.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 days ago

    Supergirl's writing was a train wreck. So many baffling things I have to assume studio meddling. The movie otherwise was fine. Actress, fine. Direction, production, special effects, fine.

    This is a distressingly common trend in big budget movies in the last ~10 years or so. Casting directors seem to be doing great; it's been decades since we saw someone straight-up poorly cast, like Clooney as Batman or Julian McMahon as Doctor Doom.

    Special effects are a somewhat mixed bag, but that's more an issue of SFX houses not being given the time and opportunity to do the best work that they can. When they're given time and used properly, it's entirely appropriate to say that special effects and CGI are better than ever before.

    But writing for some unfathomable reason seems to have taken a turn specifically for the worse. I've heard that writers are being given less time to adjust scripts during filming, and that certainly fits with a pattern I've observed where there seem to be a lot of movies where the script feels like a first or second but by no means a final draft, as if one more final tweak could have taken something from passable to excellent.

    Wherever the exact cause, "I liked everything about this movie except for all the things that happened" is a real fucking bummer of an experience, because you can so easily see how the movie could have been great, but just... wasn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 days ago

    Mamoa as lobo though...... No notes

    From the moment he was announced as Aquaman I thought “nah, that braddah is Lobo.” Turns out it’s Momoa’s favorite comic book character and man he’s so perfect. I NEED to see him interact with Jon Stewart.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 days ago (5 children)

    I don't think this is just a result of Supergirl. I think that film is (more or less) exactly what the director (Craig Gillespie) wanted. It just think something went wrong, Gunn tried to help, but it was too little too late. The film gets a lot right, but it misses in some big moments (as you've pointed out), and ultimately a just fine but not great film.

    I think this is a result of pacing and releases. The merger was expensive and Skydance needs money. Putting out one blockbuster a year, and in the case of Supergirl a blockbuster that severely underperformed, isn't going to work for the studio.

    The question is, how much rushed crap are we going to get going forward? Hopefully little to none, but I suspect we'll get some rough films. (But maybe some great ones?)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I still 100% believe in Gunn as a director. He knows the stuff and can make it work. I agree with a lot of your other assessment too. Unfortunately as the head of the DC EU for whoever owns it now.. To have been this delayed after teasing in Superman and still being as rough as it was. It makes sense Gunn et all stepping down. The question is, did the studio ask? (that would be a mistake) Or did they chose to as a vote of no confidence in the studio or it's owners.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago

    Based on Gunn's statement , it seems amicable.

    Reportedly Gunn/Safran reported directly to Ellison post merge. Publicly Ellison said "Keep doing what you're doing". I'm guessing the rest of that statement is "...but we need more." Gunn/Safran and new head Jeremy Latcham have worked together before (on the first Guardians film).

    It's entirely possible Gunn/Safran said they want to make films, put Latcham in charge, but that's pure speculation on my part.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago* (2 children)

    I don't expect we'll see another great film out of Warner Bros or its subsidiaries for a long, long time. This decision alone shows how out of touch these new suites are, some how even further out than Zaslav.

    Maybe they'll do a white dragon reboot or something, he got a pretty bad rap in peacemaker.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    I mean Robert Patrick is a great actor and it was interesting to see that character develop in Peacemaker season 2, so I wouldn't be completely against it...

    But more seriously Zaslav had a singular goal, be acquired. He won.

    But Skydance, more specifically David Ellison? We know propaganda for sure. Look at CBS. But it's propaganda in order to make money.

    Look at the films Skydance, before mega merging with Paramount and Warner Bros, made. Mostly "fine" films. A few great films, lots of entertaining films, a handful of whatever films.

    Money is the big motivator here. I think you're right that it will possibly produce a lot of crap. But you need something good, sometimes, to make money. Crap can also make money, but you can't just make crap. (I hope.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment