Sherlock Holmes II (1908), part of a Danish silent series, is regarded to be the very first full-length ‘sequel’ movie ever in the history of cinema. Given most silent films of the era are considered to be ‘lost’, it is quite difficult to know with absolute certainty, but there seems to be at most one or two ‘sequels’ each year since then. ‘The Fall of a nation’ in 1916 is often touted to be the first Hollywood sequel. They wouldn’t really catch on until the 1970s and 80s when movies like Superman and Godzilla proved to be very profitable for franchising. Today one can barely find a movie that is not a sequel, remake, reboot or spin-off of something else.
You can’t blame Hollywood ’cause it’s fundamentally a business and right now the serial-format is the most bankable. The god-child of this format that has been on the rise recently is the ‘Cinematic-Universe’. It could be characterized as a series of stand-alone movies seemingly happening in the same ‘universe’ with bigger ‘team-up’ movies at periodic intervals that all tell a collective larger story. The fact that they are happening in the same universe is implied with often small references to one another in the forms of ‘name-dropping’ in expository dialogue, sharing the same supporting characters, cameo appearances and smart usage of background settings like posters on walls, newsflashes, product placement of in-universe brands, using characters in high school detention reels etc… which allude to characters, locations and events from other movies. And that ladies and gentlemen, is how you sound like a legit Wikipedia page.
It is fair to say that the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) was the forerunner of this idea and the strongest contestant so far in spite of the various newer universes springing up, or intending to spring up. On one hand, we have the DC Extended Universe (DCEU) of Warner Brothers, the Dark Universe of Universal’s monsters and apparently, a Conjuring Universe too, even though it doesn’t quite follow our earlier definition, all with at least two or three movies released or about to. There are talks of a Sony universe, or as they ‘officially’ called it – The Sony Universe of Marvel characters (SUMC) set to launch with Venom this November. Given how their previously planned, rather ambitious Spiderverse turned out to be, I’d like to see how the SUMC fares, with the absence of Spider-man – its most popular character. I don’t really think that Star wars counts as a shared universe because baring the spin-offs, every movie is essentially a team-up flick. So I guess it is still a typical sequel/prequel series. Same applies to Fox’s X-men series. The individual Wolverine movies were at best a spinoff trilogy. However, with their integration to the Marvel Studios now, and with movies like X Force and New Mutants in the books, it’s going to be interesting to see what comes out of all of it.
While I do love monsters and haunted dolls, my personal bias always lies-in with the superhero genre. Considering SUMC is still a coin in the air, the only worthwhile contenders are the MCU and DCEU. MCU’s success is unparalleled, at least speaking in terms of the money it makes without a sense of fatigue growing about the whole idea. Starting in 2008 with Iron Man, we are now 10 years in with around 20 movies, 6 Netflix shows, 1 on ABC, 1 on Hulu and 1 on Freeform. The MCU is massive. Although the TV shows aren’t as close-knit as the movies, there are still allusions to them happening in the same imaginary world. Given that beyond Spiderman and maybe The Hulk, most of Marvel’s characters were relatively unknown outside the comic book readers’ circle, and the fact that millennials attach a wild sense of nostalgia to DC’s heroes owing to the popularity of their animated series that they all grew up watching, the DCEU seemed like an extremely promising and obvious competition to the MCU. But, um…you know, things happened.
I would like to get it out of the way that I do not discriminate between universes. I like all superheroes. In fact, I’m such a slut for superhero movies that I even liked Spiderman 3 and both the amazing spiderman movies. I don’t wait around for reviews and prebook every one of them. My frame of reference is that if I don’t feel interested enough to watch a particular superhero movie more than twice in its entirety, then it probably was a bad movie for the general public. Watching them for the first time in the theatre, I enjoy all of them blindly. It is worth mentioning that I couldn’t bring myself to watch Suicide squad and the Justice League more than once. If even a super-hoe like me can’t do it, then they have some real problems. Those problems stem both ways, from the studios who treat them as mere business as well as the collective fandom which rejects any ideas that don’t fit in with its existing point of view.
It is understandable that Warner Bros. didn’t want to follow the same approach as MCU did. They meant to launch a direct competitor and they meant to be disruptive and new. With their previous success with the Dark Knight trilogy, it was a wise decision to bring in Zack Snyder while keeping the Nolan brothers tight. I’m all for Snyder’s vision, personally. Man of Steel blew my mind. I couldn’t catch it in the theatre but I have watched it countless times over and over again post the home release and Superman taking flight for the first time and the sonic boom that followed were one of the most awe-inspiring superhero moments shown on screen.
The way I see it, Snyder’s approach to the series wasn’t dark and gritty rather just real. It is reality that is dark and gritty. While the MCU built its own world, it looked like the DCEU wanted to set up shop in our already existing world, with an added planet or two. Don’t any of you feel the only way our world would react to an alien who flies and shoots lasers out of his eyes is with hostility or worship? Every time something extraordinary comes along, man has either readied nukes or built temples. Clark Kent’s dad had a point when he said the world wasn’t ready for him. The fandom was used to a cheerful-bright-blue Superman on paper whom the world loved and perhaps expected to see exactly that on screen as well. What purpose does a filmmaker serve if he’s only delivering what the audience has already seen? These are comic book characters with so many stories already written about them lying around for decades. They’ve been retold in movies, TV shows and animated series. We already had the bright and quippy MCU. DC had to do something new and I believe Snyder delivered.
Pressure waves emanate every time Superman lands a punch and buildings collapse should he trip and fall – the effects felt real and consistent. If he is powerful enough to move planets, then his actions on the said planet get to be catastrophic if not controlled and that’s what happened in the climax of Man of Steel. From the clothes they wore to the paintings in the background, the way certain shots were set and all the obvious saviour/Jesus metaphors in the movie – the symbolism was rich and the movie was very well made. It was art. The opening sequence in BvS – the whole slo-mo gunshot and the pearls raining to the floor (even while describing it, I automatically feel like using ‘raining’ rather than ‘falling’. It just looks so good.) and young Bruce being lifted out of the cave are the sorts of scenes you wouldn’t see in a Marvel movie. Marvel mostly gets creative and artsy for glorifying the hero’s potential (Cap holding Bucky’s helicopter down, Ironman’s armour detaching itself, pulling him out of the debris, reattaching and flying away – how cool was that?) or showing the grandeur of some futuristic building/tech (any time a helicarrier is in the frame, any time Tony builds a new suit, any time Avengers upgrade their headquarters) and not just as art for art’s sakes. Nobody really considers superhero movies as serious ‘films’, they are just money-minters that need to hold the audience’s awe. So I loved that DC chose to put so much effort into all their movies. Marvel goes there only for its key moments in big films. The whole sequence on Vormir in Infinity war was the closest Marvel has come to exhibiting finesse in its filmmaking.
One can’t discuss Snyder vision without bringing up Martha. C’mon it made sense and you know it. “He fights to kill and suddenly stops and changes his mind when he realises their mommies have the same first name? That’s stupid.” Well, of course, it’s going to sound stupid when you put it like that. The ‘he’ here is Batman. A man whose entire adult life is shaped around his parents’ death. Knowing that Superman is beyond just an alien threat, that he is a man too, who loves his mother and that mother is in danger now should be enough to trigger an emotional response, if not a complete change of heart, in Batman. That brawl basically starts off with Superman just showing up and walking into Batman’s booby traps (Heh. Booby.) Until then, all Bruce Wayne knows is that Superman is a powerful, reckless alien, who doesn’t care about collateral damage and needs to be stopped. He doesn’t comprehend why, he doesn’t attempt to have a dialogue with him and learn his story. He saw him bring buildings to the ground and the first time he met him, he asked him if he bleeds. Martha reminded him that there is more to Superman. I think it would’ve worked just as much if Superman had said Mommy instead of Martha. The name isn’t the point here. The person behind the name and the dimension they add to Superman’s story in Batman’s point of view is. I stand by the Martha-moment.
However, Snyder could’ve put more thought into the choreography of the action in the movie. While the intensity of the punches can be felt, while there is a stark difference between Superman’s fall and Batman’s, that is all there is to the action – punches, kicks and falls. Marvel definitely gets all the credit for the heroes finding cool ways to use their powers and how their powers interact with one another in team-up moments.
Just sometimes it feels like Snyder overdoes the symbolism. What’s the point if no one gets it at all? It does generate good buzz about a movie after the initial response dies down when Snyder reveals some new detail in Vero, like phones release new ‘limited edition’ colours months after original launch to get people talking again, but that is it. I personally do not see a problem with the darker route Snyder chose to take. What I do find annoying is that the movies are literally dark. Sometimes it’s hard to tell what’s going on screen ’cause he sets most of the sequences in darkness or dim-lit spots. You can have a grim scene but leave the sky blue, just saying.
While Snyderisms mark the DC movies, weak villains are a recurring theme for Marvel’s. Most of Marvel movies focus on the hero and his character development and the villain he fights is often just to give the hero a challenge to overcome in the end. Ironman, The Incredible Hulk, Antman, Dr.Strange, Black Panther, Captain America have all fought villains who have their exact same powers, but are evil, in their first movies and that sort of shows how bad the hero could’ve been but has chosen not to. The first adversity to overcome is themselves. Ironman 2, he was dying and had to solve his daddy issues; Thor 2, his girlfriend was dying; Winter Soldier, his old time buddy wanted to kill him; Ironman 3, he had to overcome his Avengers-PTSD; Dr.Stange, he had to lose his ego; Antman had to start a new life and take care of his daughter and so on. In all those movies, the actual villain is the circumstance and the person who the hero fights in the climax scene is often just a two-dimensional ‘evil’ character, solely existing to lose to the hero. I believe a really good villain is someone who can make you empathise with his views, who causes the hero to question his own beliefs and who leaves behind a change in his wake after his defeat. In that aspect, I liked Ultron, Zemo and definitely Killmonger. You could feel sad for them and what they left behind will forever stay with the heroes. But beyond that, I can’t even remember the names of most of the villains of the Marvel movies. DC is well set in this area, at least comparatively. In MoS, it made sense for Zod to want his planet back and not care about Earth. It’s like humans cutting forests to make space for themselves. Ares was the god of War and Joker is a chaos-loving sinister maniac – they are not great and are borderline ‘evil because we are villains’ archetype but at least they get under the hero’s skin. Steppenwolf screws it over for DCEU though. Maybe they are all cool in their own aspects in the comics, but as far as the movies are considered DC’s villains, marginally, are better than Marvel’s.
Too much, too soon.
DCEU was late. Man of Steel came out in 2013, a year after The Avengers had taken our breath away. It was almost as if they needed inconclusive proof that this model wouldn’t fail and nothing short of the Avengers could convince them up until then. There exists a long list of abandoned Superman projects and a Batman v Superman easter egg hinted in ‘I am Legend’ that show that WB and DC have always wanted to launch their own set of movies, if not a universe. But it wasn’t until the MCU blew up big time, did Warner Bros. really get on the superhero bandwagon. Where they went wrong was that instead of steadily building up the characters in their universe, they rushed to catch up with the already well-established marvel world that had 5 years of world-building put into it by then. We didn’t mind that they were late, we were just glad that they came. Very glad now that we get to experience both worlds but I guess the people in the boardrooms were focussed more on surpassing the box office that MCU movies had grown to generate. They compared Man of Steel’s success to the Avengers while they should have been comparing it to Iron Man 1. Man of Steel established this world’s Superman. He had just come out to the world. He was still coping with controlling his powers and the world was still coping with a god walking amongst them. And we, the audience were trying to come to terms with this new take on Clark Kent and then came BvS. Batman v Superman is where I started noticing actual trouble.
Batman is another huge fan favourite and his stories have been extensively told as well. So I guess it made sense that DC didn’t go for a solo origin movie like it did for Supes and dived right in but maybe it dived in too deep. It showed a brutal Batman who was losing hope in doing the right thing, who reached out for more extreme measures and was generally in a more sombre mood than the norm is for Batman. However, all this was written in the synopsis of the movie and was never shown on screen, baring that one sad look he gave to the dead Robin’s suit. But then the majority of the audience wouldn’t know shit about what that look meant. Ardent Batman fans would know a number of devastating moments from Batman’s life that all could’ve led to a more cynical Batman but even they couldn’t possibly know which of those moments shaped this particular Batman. There was simply no way of knowing and we had to just hope that a future prequel movie would explain it. This Batman had already dealt with Joker for god’s sakes and that’s too huge a storyline to be not established first before showing the audience its aftermath.
DC could’ve actually done a solo Batman movie but skipped his obvious origins and gone for some story arc which would’ve set up the brooding Bruce Wayne in BvS. No one would’ve gone nuts over him using guns had they just shown them what set it off. Homecoming did it in the MCU – skipped all the radioactive spider bites and jumped straight to establishing the quirks of Tom Holland’s Spiderman and his relationship with Tony Stark. It made for an entertaining movie, gave a chance for the audience to bond with this high-school teenager-Spiderman and understand how Tony saw him and it made the ending of Infinity War that much more powerful. The tension between Tony and Captain was shown in the very first Avengers movie when they first met. They reconciled in a time of need but you could tell their philosophies wouldn’t always coincide. We saw them argue in Age of Ultron, both about the need for a ‘suit of armour’ around the world and how to contain the Sokovia situation. Both cases, the audience could sympathise with both their opinions given they had seen Tony see the entire alien army beyond the wormhole in Avengers, they had seen Captain deal with hydra’s similar plan of stopping threats before they happened, and they had seen their worst fears when Wanda messed with their heads. Civil War was always just waiting to happen in the minds of the audience even before Marvel had announced it. It felt like the natural progression to their character arcs. While people hooted and applauded during the airport fight sequence, there was pin-drop silence throughout the Cap vs Tony fight in the climax. DC skipped through all these character-defining moments and expected the audience to care just as much about Batman and Superman fighting. How is that even fair? Superman was a movie old, we had just met Batman. We were still not so sure why Batman thought taking Supes down was the only course of action he could take. I don’t care if they fight. I never had time to root for them not to fight in the first place. Spiderman was just a movie old in Infinity war too, a movie and a half if you include his scenes in Civil War and yet his death was one of the most heartbreaking scenes in the movie. We all knew that the dusted characters are going to come back and we knew that Superman wouldn’t stay dead too. Doomsday impaling Superman was definitely a surprise, I’ll give you that. I wasn’t expecting them to go there. But his ‘death’ didn’t have the emotional impact that any of the deaths in Infinity war had. It should’ve, isn’t it? That too it was freaking Superman, THE Superman. Marvel retained all its original Avengers, only secondary, newer characters were dusted off and still, that was a harder gut-punch than Superman dying. He is the main character, who was sacrificing his life to save humanity after it had just rejected him. I wonder how powerful that scene would’ve been had it come maybe five movies later. Every muscle in my body clenched so hard when Thanos drove the blade into Tony. Falcon is at best an above average sidekick who was good with quips, and it was sad to see him fall to dust just as Rhodes was calling out for him. Superman’s big screen death deserved so much more.
Big Brother is watching.
Marvel, in spite of being owned by Disney, has its own film department – the Marvel Studio. DC, on the other hand, is entirely at the whim of Warner Bros. Perhaps that’s why DC struggles so much in post-production and Marvel is too scared to show more than a few drops of blood on screen. Marvel suffered too, in the pre-Feige era. Their movies were more constrained around selling merch and had diversity issues but once Kevin Feige took over and Marvel Studios gained more autonomy, they seem to have been faring well, albeit not straying too far away from their established success formula. They did advertise Antman as a heist movie and The Winter Soldier as a political thriller and while they weren’t entirely wrong, those movies weren’t entirely outside the Marvel-prototype either. Even Guardians of Galaxy, with all its rogue-space-cowboys action and nostalgia music or Dr.Strange with its magic and universe hopping, couldn’t really stand apart as something that we wouldn’t expect Marvel to do. The monotony might be entirely on Disney who demand that their movies be child-friendly and toys-worthy. But then, at least, Disney leaves behind the rest of the filmmaking decisions to Marvel Studios, perhaps with the exception of firing James Gunn.
With Warner Brothers and DC, on the other hand, they alone handle the filmmaking process, there is no ‘DC Studio’ who report to WB, there’s just WB. So they get full control over how long each movie is, what goes in and out of the movies and the directors and the cast and so on. This directly results in all the forced AF ‘jokes’ of Suicide squad (or the existence of a Suicide Squad movie at all, in the first place ) and all the deleted scenes of BvS and the directorial fiasco that was Justice League. Patty Jenkins had to fight WB to withhold the No Man’s land sequence in Wonder Woman because they deemed it unnecessary owing to its lack of ‘action’. That scene practically delivers to the audience that Diana Prince is taking matters into her own hand and going full Wonder Woman and shifts the entire course of the movie but ‘executives’ wanted it out because she was just blocking the bullets instead of perhaps letting them flatten out hitting her cornea. (Or bouncing off her breastplate while the shot cut to Chris Pine smirking, pretty sure that would’ve been given the green light as a smart marketing decision). Anyone who’s seen the extended cut of BvS would know just how much was snipped off at the editing floor and how much confusion it brought to the theatrical cut. All that just to bring down the runtime so that they can sell more tickets on a given day. In the case of Marvel, you can find people like Kevin Feige, Louis D’Eposito and so on feature in behind the scenes videos and featurettes talking about the movie with so much passion for the characters and the storylines. These are the producers and executives whose job is to market the movie and you can see that they share the same passion for these as the audience. You don’t see that in WB beyond the actors and directors. Once it moves beyond them, everything becomes a business decision.
Perils of building a Universe.
It takes time to build a universe and someone else had already learnt this lesson the hard way earlier. I loved the first Amazing Spiderman movie. People complained that he kept running away instead of fighting but that’s what I wanted to see. Tobey Macguire’s spiderman too didn’t do anything fancy in the first movie than dodging flying blades and catching falling people. He had just gotten his powers and was learning to deal with it. I really liked the second movie too up until the point where he killed Electro and the goblin came flying down. If you guys remember, in the movie’s trailer there was a scene which showed Harry Osborn notice that Oscorp had kept Peter on surveillance ever since he stepped foot inside the building with the infamous “Isn’t that the question of that day?” moment, which hinted that Peter was more special and Harry was just digging around. But that scene was nowhere in the movie. Instead, the movie was so hell-bent on setting up the stage for future Sinister Six and Symbiote movies that we were dumped with the Ravencroft Institute, Doctor Octopus, all the Sinister Six equipments floating around in the background, Harry’s goblin, the Rhino and the death of Gwen Stacy. I really feel the movie would’ve worked if Spidey’s track followed his fights with Electro and the way his promise to the chief was affecting his relationship with Gwen while on a separate track, Harry investigated the Parker family’s involvement in Oscorp and the spiders with maybe a post-credits scene where he figures it all out and injects himself with spider venom. Screen fades to black as his eyes turn yellow? A third movie could’ve then all been about Peter vs Goblin, which results in Gwen’s death and maybe a post-credits scene which shows Goblin being resurrected in an Oscorp lab surrounded by the sinister six tech lying around. That would’ve made sense, don’t you think? A grieving spiderman hangs up the suit and we see the Sinister Six rule the streets in the next villain movie, and then a Symbiote movie where a newly ‘grieved-out’ spidey struggles to deal with the stronghold the sinister six have over the streets in his absence and falls victim to the ‘power’ the symbiote grants him. A boy can dream.
The DCEU, in a way, suffered from the same flaws. Man of Steel was well done. Apart from a few logos of Wayne Enterprises, the movie was all about Supes. The easter-egging and foreshadowing of a bigger universe went off the rails in BvS though. The entire Justice League was introduced, there was a Darkseid nightmare and a Future flash sequence, all of which seem to lie in the gutter now that Snyder was booted. They set up so much in such a short interval in a single movie, which overwhelmed most of the audience and drew attention and screentime away from the main plot, and they seem to have retconned all the setup as soon as the movie didn’t fare so well. Marvel has its own share of loose ends, yes, (cough… Incredible Hulk’s Brainiac ..cough), but none on such a scale. And it’s usually a bad idea to tease something that wouldn’t make sense until three or four movies later. Not when it juts out jarringly in the middle of the movie. Thanos was teased consistently, in inconsequential post-credit scenes and not as a dream/time travel sequence in the dead centre of the movie. DC should’ve taken more time and drawn out the building of its universe and done it in a much subtler way.
Putting these movies in a shared universe definitely puts a lot more limitations on the stories. There are so many characters and the question of “Oh, what was X and Y doing then instead of helping when Z was dealing with this alone?” is always in the air and as hard as the movies try to explain them, its hard to always know where each of our heroes are and what they are doing. The interconnectedness gets tighter with each passing movie, as the characters interact with each other more. In phase one, they were all standalone movies with just Fury trying to recruit them and being the common thread, in 30-second post-credit scenes. Even after they met one another in the Avengers, the ending of that movie sort of sent them all in their own paths and we didn’t see much interaction throughout Phase 2 either. No one came to help when Iron Man’s mansion was blown up in Ironman 3, Tony didn’t go flying in to minimise casualties when the Triskelion crumbled in the Winter Soldier. Sure he was in New York, and this happened in D.C but these are the kind of improvised reasons that Marvel comes up with to explain these events should someone question them in interviews. Eventually after Age of Ultron, when Tony personally took over the Avengers, things got tighter. Civil War became Avengers 2.5, Falcon fought Antman, Tony mentored Spiderman while Captain took care of detention, Hulk and Thor became space buddies and now it seems impossible to make a complete standalone movie unless they are in a hidden city that no one in the world knows about, far away in outer space or dealing in magical realms that normal humans can’t access. Luckily enough, they are shutting it down before it gets out of their hands by culminating the storyline in Infinity war. This will pave way for more standalones in Phase 4 that can be justified and lets the new directors do their own thing instead of worrying about all these other characters that previous stories have set up scattered around. The TV shows are rather in a sad state though. The Netflix heroes are pretty tight and are doing good. They do acknowledge the events of the larger MCU but don’t let them affect their storylines. They had very much standalone first seasons, a defenders team up, now we have Danny help out Luke Cage for a couple episodes and Misty Knight travel across from hero to hero. They are building up quite similar to the MCU. Agents of SHIELD seems like a sad, neglected half-brother to the MCU. They deal with the aftermath of every MCU movie at the ground level, had their entire premise dissolved by the Winter Soldier and made a whole season out of it, Dr.Strange introduced magic and they ate it up to introduce Ghost Rider and still, not a single MCU movie ever acknowledges this show. At least we had Fury, Maria Hill and Sif for cameos in the first season but even that’s gone now. Cloak and dagger on Freeform made many nods to the Netflix characters, so it will be nice to see them crossover in future seasons. Runaways on Hulu still is uncertain. But it would be nice to see them join hands with Cloak and Dagger.
DC handles the TV shows quite well, by writing them off as their own universe allowing them to do whatever they want. It would nice if they relaxed just as much about the interconnectivity of the DCEU and don’t sweat the little stuff. So far the only ‘standalone’ movies they have made is Man of Steel and Wonder Woman. I’m pretty sure so many characters would’ve cropped up in Wonder Woman too if it was set in the modern day and not when the rest of the League were unborn.
Dealing with failures
The last one, I swear.
Shortly put, Marvel looks the other way while WB micromanages. Ironman came out in April, 2008 and was a smashing hit. Incredible Hulk, later that June and not so much. They went ahead anyway and stuck by rest of the schedule for Phase one. Ironman 2 didn’t open to rave reviews either. Nothing changed. They switched out Edward Norton for Mark Ruffalo and just said this is how Bruce Banner looks older now. Cool. Ironman 3 brought in so much money but did not appease the critics at all. Thor: The Dark World was one of MCU’s weakest links and probably brought the biggest change in the studios with them making Ragnarok so much more goofier than it was intended to be. But that is it. An Inhumans movie was proposed and then shifted to the small screen but beyond that, you can’t see all that many changes in the MCU’s planned schedule of movies irrespective of how individual movies fared.
On the other hand, WB acts like this nervous child with OCD who constantly feels the need to nitpick every inch of its drawing everytime an adult looks at it weirdly. Man of Steel opened to polarised views with many criticising the brooding Superman. The studio tightened its grip on BvS and put Suicide squad under so many reshoots and edits to make it ‘lighter’. Margot Robbie’s performance being commended led to talks of a Gotham City Sirens movie. There were suddenly talks about Suicide Squad 2. They completely revamped the direction and music on Justice League which was supposed to be their first big movie, again to make it lighter. Shazam was brought up and the trailer looks hilarious mostly, with borderline cringe here and there. Man of Steel 2 has been brought up and scraped off more times than we can count. The roller coaster that was the solo Batman movie flushed out Ben Affleck from the role completely. The Flash movie plotlines and directors were changed more times than we can count. Wonder Woman sequel only came into the picture following the first one’s huge success and it still remains to be seen just how different Aquaman is going to be from how he was shown in Justice League. The DC ‘roster’ gets fully changed every few months or so that now there’s barely any excitement when they announce a new movie. Currently, Henry Cavill seems to be out, Ben Affleck is most likely out and there are talks of a Supergirl movie and a new Joker movie that isn’t part of this universe. Fans no longer have faith in any news regarding the DC world that comes from Warner brothers and most have declared this experiment as a failure.
Perhaps they should’ve stuck with Zack Snyder’s ideas and the originally intended roster of movies. MoS and BvS would’ve still had polarized reviews, Suicide squad wouldn’t have been so much rushed, Wonder woman would have still been a massive hit. Flash and Aquaman would’ve come out first with their solo outings. Justice League would’ve been a much bigger movie resolving some of the plotlines set up in BvS. Now the current list of movies that are supposed to come out seems to lay disconnected and subject to change at a moment’s notice. But hey, the ‘S’ stands for hope, right?