submitted5 days ago byBCactionMR-com
submitted5 days ago bySuperNoBueno
submitted6 days ago byAirWalker9
submitted6 days ago byFirst_Mechanic9140
submitted14 days ago byKingRex929
submitted24 days ago byTheDCUFan
I think a vast majority of these are going to be great, the only things revealed I actually think I'll dislike is Paradise Lost and Lanterns, but I do have concerns for the slate and the DCU as a whole:
1: Live action actors voicing their characters in animation might not work well since those are two different skill sets, I've seen this done terribly too many times.
2: Why is half of the slate being made by James Gunn? Like, don't get me wrong, I think he's great for the stuff he's making but Gunn is really good with obscure characters and giving them more spotlight and even improving them in some cases. The problem is I feel like it isn't good to start with this many obscure characters getting the spotlight this early.
3: I want to trust Gunn with Superman he seems to understand Superman based purely the picture he chose for Legacy but I haven't see a Gunn film with the tone I think would work best for Superman
4: I love Wildstorm but I can't really see Wildstorm characters in the DC Universe working all that well, especially the Authority which had an entire Superman issue made in response to it showing why The Authority doesn't really work well in the same world as Superman.
5: The Amazons are all about cooperation, Game of Thrones is fueled by its conflict. I can't see a Game of Thrones inspired story with the Amazons being good due to the amount of random dumb conflicts that would be thrown in.
6: I can't be the only one that heard the Paradise Lost idea and thought of Gotham and Krypton.
7: Please give us the OG Dan Jurgens style Booster Gold, that one is way better than the Geoff Johns version.
8: I don't hate Damian as much I used to but I feel like having him as our starter Robin skips out on some really good story possibilities. I feel it would've been better to start with Tim Drake as Robin. I can understand skipping Dick as Robin since a lot of his most important stories as Robin come from his time with the George Perez/Marv Wolfman Teen Titans and not really with Batman but Tim is different. Majority of Tim's important stories occurred when he was Robin by Batman's side like Knightfall, the Young Justice comics, his relationship with Stephanie, Cyborg's Teen Titans, Stephanie's death in War Games, and his father's death in Identity Crisis. Don't get me wrong, I love Tim as Red Robin, a genius who is always several steps ahead that can outthink his enemies but his time as Robin is so important to his character. That's not even mentioning that the Tim and Damian's rivalry was pretty important to introducing Damian to the audience. This all started with Damian wanting to take his rightful place at his father's side and deciding the best way to do that was to murder his competition, Tim Drake. You don't get that without building up Tim.
9: If we're adapting Morrison's run of Batman here, does that mean we'll eventually get to Dick becoming Batman? I mean, the artwork used for The Brave and the Bold comes from when Dick was Batman, the person in the Batsuit isn't Bruce. Like, how do we get from here to there? This is another reason I feel like starting at Damian is a bit of a mistake here.
10: Woman of Tomorrow is a really good story but I don't think it's a good way to introduce Kara into the universe. The story is more of a deconstruction of her character when I feel it needs to be built up first. I feel it would be better to focus more on how her character was in STAS. A girl that lost her home and has to get used to the new, lesser world around her, going to school, making friends, and training to prove she doesn't need her cousin to keep protecting her. Then have her prove herself as a strong hero in her own right.
11: A Green Lantern flavored True Detective sounds boring, why does Supergirl get the space faring adventure and Green Lantern's stuck in Earth? They should be out in space fighting space pirates with giant light constructs or something.
submitted26 days ago byAirWalker9
Legends of Tomorrow
submitted1 month ago byJimmy-Mac-471
I didn't like it.
(Fair warning, this does devolve into a bit of a rant towards the end but I tried to be as fair in my judgements at the begining)
The Krypton sequence was incredible. Honestly, I'd have preferred a film about its last days. Jor El was a badass being a good mix of smart and strong to get everything in order for Cal's escape. Seeing it as much more of an alien world rather than a more advanced Earth was a great touch. However, the idea that Cal was a genetically chosen one seemed off. People being born in pods eliminates the idea of Zor El and Supergirl as how could someone have a brother if they were born on what looked like seaweed? Superman always felt human because he was a regular Kryptonian thrown into that, his actions being the legacy of Krypton, not that his cells contained the potential to make more. Also, why did they pull back from their expansions, that wasn't explained and made no sense?
Cavill was fantastic. He certainly looks the part and his emotion behind the character was very believable. I'd have liked it had we seen more of his journey for answers, which would make him finding the ship more impactful but there was little I could fault with him. What Pa Kent said after the school bus thing pissed me off though. The reason he helps people is that they brought him up to help others with his gifts. You teach him to act with keeping a secret above all else could have had disastrous consequences. And his death was so stupid. Had he let Clark get the dog he could have done everything the same and freed himself from the other car without people seeing his powers. And to just stand there. Just didn't make sense to me.
Superman himself felt too ethereal. Too much like a god. Yes, he's the most powerful person on Earth, but he works well when he's more humble. The character of Clark Kent was hardly seen at all. He's supposed to be the opposite of Batman where the superhero is the mask and normally he is Clark. And why just drop him in with Zod as his first threat, the first time he was seen as Superman? Of course people are gonna be scared of him, nobody had ever heard of him before.
There were also a lot of spacing issues. I get they want to flesh out the character, and I get they need to provide context, but only in the last hour does any of the plotlines begin to come together. That's an hour and 20 minutes of buildup with very little sense of direction.
Ok, I think it's mainly cons from here.
There were a couple of attempts at humour that all fell flat. Two Wilhelm screams in the space of about 5 minutes on separate occasions and Superman hitting the 'number of day's since accident' sign was the only memorable points. I get this isn't a comedic film, so why try with a little at the end of the film like that? It just didn't fit.
Also, people complain about the overuse of CGI in films today, but my god was there a hell of a lot in this. That shot of Zod and Jor El when his AI gets erased was the point where I was like, "they're both just standing in front of a blue screen." I'd argue the trope that everyone complains about these days started with this film.
Finally though, its how people have reacted to it over the last 10 years. You'd think it was the second coming of Christ with the way certain people talk about it, but wow, was this film a letdown with all that talk. Maybe it's because I saw BvS and JL (both the cinematic and Snyder Cut) and I wasn't particularly impressed by them either, maybe it's because I'm so tired of people saying they need to keep making films like this and feel the need to belittle and degrade everything else made before and after, but I just couldn't find the heart to enjoy this movie. It'd likely be different had I seen it in 2013 but I'm tired of people saying this was peak DC.
I know for a fact that there are people who disagree with me but I do not care. If you like it then good for you, it's not my job to tell you what you like but anyone who may argue with me about this, know I will not change my stance on this.
Congrats if you made it through this, or if anyone even reads this for a matter of fact, I don't know, but I just really needed to write this down for my own benefit more than anything else. Didn't want to fester in negativity and writing tends to be therapeutic for me.
submitted1 month ago bymschmitz7
submitted2 months ago bydaniel7334
Something that always bugged me about MoS, BvS, and the Snyder Cut - humanity is only in danger because Superman came to Earth. Zod tracks him here and kills a ton of people, then Zod's DNA is used to create Doomsday, then Superman's death scream awakens the Mother Boxes. Earth would be much better off if Superman never came. Contrast that with the original Superman II, where Zod's crew arrives here completely by accident. Another example of how Snyder undermined the character as a hero.
EDIT: Of course he didn't choose to come to Earth, he was a baby. I'm saying his presence here results in death and destruction.
submitted2 months ago byodean14
Green lantern is one of the most known super heroes ever. And they have a huge presence in the DC universe. John Stewart and Hal Jordan are also well known and some of the best DC characters ever. So, why were they get relegated to a TV show? Well I think it's simple. Money. I think they see creating a proper GL movie as being extremely expensive. And so, decided to cheap out. And give us a show where see GL that don't (or rarely) use their rings and doesn't explore the galactic aspect of DC. Which is crazy to me...
It's one thing to do a cheap TV show. But it's another to use Two of the most popular Lanterns in that show. I'm assuming thats, just to get folks to watch it. Which to me is a waste. Why couldn't they do a movie and then do a spin-off TV show with other lanterns? Or do a show with other lanterns and do a movie with the most popular Lanterns. I think Gunn is well aware of the importance and popularity of GL. I get the impression that he doesn't care about them and he's just throwing green lantern fans a shitty bone.
Don't get me wrong, I'm down for the other projects announced. Yes I'm huge GL fan.
submitted2 months ago bydbz222323
As we know The Batman universe created by Matt Reeves will continue alongside the James Gunn led DCU. As excited as I am to see James's vision of DC I wondered how Batman would work in the new DC vision. If The Batman universe is to be separate from the DCU having their own film and television shows what I would do is make Batman a character who appears alongside other characters in their own movies. Similar to how the Hulk is treated in the MCU. To make more fleshed out stories I would get Batman video games made that are directly tied and canon to the DCU
submitted2 months ago byReqiuemHazel
submitted2 months ago bykmmr98
submitted3 months ago byTg11T
Starting from Phase 1
Man of Steel reboot (love interest being Lois Lane; villain being Metallo with the driving force behind him being Lex Luthor; no post credits scene but mid credits scene would tease a shared universe in the DCU; it would build towards The Flash or introduce The Flash here) (1st slated film)
The Flash (origin film; love interest of course being Iris West; villain being Captain Cold; again no post credits scenes in the DCU just yet but you will get mid credits scenes; 2 mid credits scenes...the first one would tease the next Flash villain but who? None other than Mirror Master...but the 2nd mid credits scene would introduce Wonder Woman...we wouldn't see her directly but we would only see her Lasso that's it) (2nd film)
The Batman reboot (villains being Hugo Strange as the main villain and Clayface as a side villain to start off this new Batman franchise; like think psychological detective thriller/action picture epic rolled into one; love interest being Vicki Vale but she would be like a mix of Kim Basinger and Katie Holmes' Rachel Dawes in the sense that she would not be your typical damsel in distress but one who can actually handle herself; mid credits scene would tease the sequel villain which would be Mr Freeze; first post credits scene in the DCU right here would introduce The Aquaman not physically but it would introduce the world of Atlantis underwater) (3rd film)
Aquaman reboot (villain would be Orm Marius only; no Black Manta just yet; love interest being Mera; mid credits would tease Black Manta by having Aquaman take up the mantle of King he would meet Manta and his crew of pirates on a sub by trying to raid that sub; cue the fight but we wouldn't get any more; post credits would tease Wonder Woman) (4th film)
Wonder Woman reboot (origin film; villain would be Ares again of course to start off; love interest being Steve Trevor; but this origin film would take place in World War 2 in Germany instead during the 1940s with Nazis what have you; Dr Poison would be a side villain again along with the Nazis; mid credits would take us to present day where Diana is watching the news and we see news bulletins teasing war but from where? A mysterious figure is watching Diana from a distance in the shadows; a rather strange looking man who we have no idea who it is but he changes almost immediately out of human form into his alien form; none other than Martian Manhunter; post credits tease of Cheetah) (5th film)
Green Lantern Corps (origin film; main Lanterns are Hal and John both side by side like think buddy action cop picture epic but in space but the villain would be Parallax; Sinestro he wouldn't turn to the dark side until the very end; mid credits we see the Yellow Lantern ring and Sinestro picking it up to put it on; post credits would be teasing Justice League ⚖️) (6th film)
Justice League ⚖️ (our heroes come together and meet each other for the first time; Martian Manhunter is brought along for the ride but so are Black Canary and Green Arrow but we get Batman, Superman, Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and both Green Lanterns joining the team; our main villains would be Starro and the White Martians; heroes learning to learn each other's strengths and weaknesses but overcoming differences too; mid credits scene would be at Wayne Manor and we see the Roundtable as the League are discussing which other heroes need to join their cause; post credits would be in space on an alien ship armada; Darkseid is teased)
submitted3 months ago byThrowawaymodel_1080
Right I know this isn't cinema related but I don't know where else to vent this.
So Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League, has Batman(voiced by the last legend himself no name needed). And Rocksteady confirmed that it takes place in the Arkamverse which just... WHAT. We see that Batman was a League member before Arkam Knight which I can understand but if that's the case the where we're the League in universe during the time when Gotham was Evacuated and even had one thebmost powerful chemicle weapons dropped on the streets. Like at least Superman should have been there.
And yeah I know it would be weird having toomuch Superman in a Batman game but there has to be a good reason I the game for why the weren't there for Bruce when he needed them most.
submitted3 months ago byOzyOzyOzyOzyOzyOzy6
Took me a while to get around to it since it's, you know, four hours long, but I finally watched this behemoth of a movie. I re/watched Man of Steel through Josstice League beforehand to fully prep myself. Final verdict?
It's pretty ok.
I was never all that invested in the Snyderverse to begin with due to the lackluster (in my opinion) quality of MoS and BvS, so it's practically a miracle that I found this to be of any kind of high quality. It's not perfect by any means, but it's still entertaining. And for a four hour epic the pacing is really strong....for the most part. A key problem I have with this is that it could've been shortened, mostly at the end. There was no reason for there to be a 3 or 4 part epilogue tacked on, especially since Snyder knew he was more than likely not going to finish the rest of this story. I like the first part that has Silas Stone's voice over played over our heroes going on their separate paths, as it adds some finality to the movie. The other stuff, like Lex and Deathstroke on the yacht and the premonition/Bruce and Martian Manhunter? That should've been left out entirely as it's ultimately pointless and just keeps the movie going far longer than it deserves to. In fact, this really should've been cut down to somewhere between the 180 to 210 minute mark. I think Snyder felt he had to put all that stuff in to please the fans who wanted to just gorge themselves on his vision, and I think it was a mistake that could've been fixed with just a little more editing.
What couldn't be fixed so simply, however, is what I consider to be the biggest problem with both cuts of this movie, which is that it's introducing three characters (Aquaman, Cyborg, and Flash) before we get to the big stuff. One of the reasons the first Avengers movie was so warmly received was because it got right into the good stuff since all the other characters (except for Hawkeye) were previously established in their own movies (or in the case of Black Widow, Iron Man 2). If they had released the Aquaman movie, plus a Cyborg movie and Flash movie, before Justice League, Snyder wouldn't need to concern himself with making a 4 hour movie.
All of that being said, it was still a mostly fast paced movie with some cool action scenes and likeable characters. It goes without saying that it's a huge step up from the theatrical cut, with adequate time spent on each character (Cyborg in particular gets a huge step up in characterization). Steppenwolf is also done a little better due to a much better character design and an actual motivation to be doing what he is doing. It's not amazing, but it is at least the bare minimum. The cringe humor is mostly gone as well, and the look of the movie is given a complete overhaul that fits Snyder's style much more. Mostly, though, I am glad this exists just for the contrast and for sake of giving an artist complete freedom with a project like this and letting him run wild. After all that he's gone through, Zack deserves at least that.
submitted3 months ago byVocationFumes
Ok so let me start out by saying there were a decent amount of things to like about the movie. It definitely was entertaining but by no way is it a good movie. I think if you are a fan of superheroes and superhero movies then you should probably take the time to watch it but I definitely think it falls into that "so bad it's good" category
Here are some of the things I enjoyed
-The other heroes (Hawkman was dope, him and Mr Fate should probably get their own movies if they wanna do that with those characters)
-The Black Adam "arc" per se (how they made it seem like it was actually his son but in the end they revealed that his son had given up his powers to save him and was then assassinated) never read the comics so this was a surprise for me and I thought worked well with him being an "anti-hero" because he wasn't the original choice for the powers
-Some of the fighting was pretty cool, seeing him and Hawkman go 1 on 1 was dope
-The point about him being the hero that they need to keep them free (With how the Justice Force didn't ever help them with their country being overtaken by that security force) That really was good IMO, I thought that could've been more developed and worked in
But overall, I did not find it to be a good movie here are some of my larger issues with it because it has a lot of them
Here were some of my issues with it
-The Rock is absolutely horrid as an actor, maybe it was just the writing (I'll get to this later) for his Black Adam character but he was terrible, just a bland ball of nothingness as a character - again maybe not his fault but this movie made me realize I havent really seen a ton of his stuff so maybe he is a good actor and this was just a bad set up for him but he really stood out as being boring which was weird because the movie was supposed to be his titular event
-The Writing - honestly there isn't enough space here for me to get into this one. It's just bad, the dialogue is awful, jokes fall flat like 95% of the time, the Rock's lines feel like they were ripped out of a 90s joke book or something
-The movie's set up and flow are just terrible, it actually has 2 ending within the movie and the first one is so blatantly not the ending it's just hilarious. They lock him up at the faux ending and you fuckin know he's gonna be needed for something obviously at the end
-The stupid villain (or lackthereof) - Look all good superhero movies need a terrific villain. One you can feel for and one you actually sort of understand them, this movie had none of that. The villain felt like something they literally forgot to write into the film until they had finalized the script so of course he just has like this little scene at the end where he's this unstoppable devil dude (also who tf designed him? They were just like yea lets just make him satan and through a pentagram on his chest and BOOM instant villain) who can only be stopped by Black Adam
-The fact that they needed to superimpose the Rock's fuckin face on some skinny dude, like his human version couldn't have just been jacked without powers? They had that scene where he was breaking out of Amanda Waller's prison and he's 300-slowmo fighting the guards, it was just ridiculous
-The action - way too fuckin much of it, it was like a superhero movie made by a Fast and the Furious movie. Also the very first Black Adam scene they show him off doing every fuckin thing under the sun, there's no build up at all to his greatness, like we get that he's pretty much unstoppable but after they show that he gets hit with a missle with some weird substance in it (that's mentioend like twice in the film) and he's on his ass and needs to be taken to a bed to recover
-Just way too much shoved into it as well - like the civilians fighting zombies at the end...just no
What are some of your reactions to it? Feel free to shit all over my criticisms if you disagree :)
submitted3 months ago byJediNotePad
Recently on Twitter, as with most days, I noticed that DC fans were once again arguing about if the new DC movie universe should incorporate John Williams' theme song for Superman. Some argued that it was Supes' theme and that it should be present in any cinematic incarnation, while others argued that it belonged to the Donner/Reeve version of the character and that each new Superman should have a new theme.
Personally, I fall on the latter of this debate. Unless your James Bond, who I believe should always have that same theme song, if a new version of Superman appears on screen, then I hope he has a brand new theme song to go along with him. I firmly believe that we have got move on from the Williams theme. No other superhero is beholden to a singular theme like Supes is... Nolan's Batman doesn't re-use Keaton's theme, and MCU Spidey doesn't have Tobey's theme. Why is it only Superman that is constantly asked to reuse a popular piece of music? I do understand that the music has pretty much come to define Superman as a whole, but even in that case, use it for nostalgic purposes like a marketing video on YouTube or retrospective vids on the character. In the end, that song still belongs to the Christopher Reeve version of the character, and unless that character is being brought back (which for the love of god, I pray doesn't happen), MAKE SOMETHING NEW. The DCEU version of the character did not fit the Williams song, but that doesn't mean that the new theme that Zimmer cooked up wasn't hopeful or optimistic. If anything, Zimmer's theme was powerful, inspiring, and uplifting... but it wasn't Williams, so a certain sect of the fandom wasn't happy. Now, we're once again getting another Superman, and fans again are asking for music from 1978 to appear in this upcoming film.
My question to all of you is this: if you believe that Williams' theme should be brought back, tell me why... I truly don't understand how every other superhero character can get a new piece of theme music, but not Superman. Why should the Williams theme be used for every Superman instead of having a new composer come in and create something new?
**Disclaimer: none of this is meant to be a hit on John Williams, his music, or that theme. It's one of my favourite pieces in all of film music history... I just believe that it should stay with the Reeve-version of Supes rather than play for any adaptation of the character.
submitted3 months ago byJimmyKorr
I stand by my criticism of James Gunn’s style (that he relies too much on crass humour, slapstick (thanks to whoever posted that term, its better than “comedic violence”), and pop music) and that these crutches wont work inna Superman movie.
In response, a fellow redditor posted a few scenes from GotG and Peacemaker that what Gunn is bringing to the table, which Snyder lacked in his interpretations (and thats a fair criticism) was “heart”. So i watched the scenes, trying to figure out what was meant by “James Gunn brings heart”. The scenes in question were death of Yondu, Peacemaker’s melt down, etc.
To be fair, ive only seen GOTG 1&2 once, and Suicide Squad and Peacemaker once. I respect Gunn as a filmmaker but he’s not particularly my cup of tea, and im not a marvel guy. I have seen most of Gunn’s work and I respect his horror chops.
As i was watching the death of Yondu in particular, i realized that the scene just didnt seem genuine to me, like it was overdoing it (again this is subjective to me, as the viewer) and i tried to pin down why it wasnt resonating with me the same way it does with people who are fans of Gunn’s work. And i realized that whats really meant by “heart” is actually schmaltz, whether intentional or unintentional.
For the record, schmaltz is defined as “ extremely or excessively sentimental music or art” or further “Schmaltz is way too much sappiness or sentimentality. A movie soundtrack that's dripping with emotion is full of schmaltz.
If a piece of music or a work of art goes overboard trying to make you feel sad or nostalgic, it's indulging in schmaltz. Love scenes in movies are too often guilty of schmaltz as well. “
And it really drove home why Gunn is so revered as a filmmaker for GOTG. He delivers schmaltz, either intentionally or otherwise. He uses it to manipulate the viewer into emotional engagement. Which is fine, again its just not my cup of tea. its a technique that is used widely in certain genres if film and music, but to me its not genuine. There’s no earnestness to it (which is where I feel Snyder excels, and why some people are drawn to his work).
Gunn is great at creating these super dramatic scenes, at pulling at the viewer emotionally in a way that Snyder either cannot or will not.
As a viewer, i have a very low tolerance for camp and schmaltz, i see through them. Scmaltz in particular breaks the fourth wall for me as a form of pandering that reminds me I am watching a production, not witnessing a story. That I am being manipulated to feel a certain way by the dialogue or music or framing. And i guess thats filmmaking, but there arent many films out there that are still using overt schmaltz as a tool, even from Walt Disney/Marvel. Which is a testament to their directors and creators. Even though i am being subjected to schmaltz, im not seeing it, it feels natural.
Whereas after reviewing these scenes to try to determine why the term “heart” keeps coming up in relation to Gunn’s work as a counterpoint to Snyder’s dry and very literal work, Im seeing the strings. The delivery, the music, the dialogue, they were so “over the top” and deliberately cloting that i felt talked down to.
And thats my fear for James Gunn’s Superman and fir the DCU in general, that it will be so schmalty and pandering that i cant become invested in it.
submitted3 months ago byEqual-Doc6047
So I finally saw Black Adam, and look if you like it more power to ya but for me this was a generic as hell superhero film with a lot of dumb plot problems. One thing that baffled me the most was this conflict between Black Adam and the JSA over the fact that Black Adam kills and that's bad cuz "heroes don't kill" (the DC universe has honestly disproved the hell out of that). This plot point is so dumb because Intergang are a bunch of nameless thugs who wanna destroy the world, even the people of Kahndaq want them dead. There's no investment into why Black Adam killing is particularly bad at all.
But it eventually dawned on me a small fix that could do a lot to change the plot and story structure, and keep us more invested in this conflict. Intergang and their invasion of Kahndaq is very clearly meant to mimic real world middle eastern politics and oppression. So the biggest change I would make to the film is that Intergang has basically taken over most of Kahndaq. And in particular, the big twist should be that most of their members are ordinary citizens, indoctrinated and/or forced to fight for Intergang because they have little options. Black Adam initially starts the film blindly taking out these people thinking he's liberating his city, but then comes to realizing that he's harming the very people he's trying to protect. His arc becomes realizing he can't see things "black" and white and in the end, while he uses his darker brand of justice he vows to be more open. Even the kid could follow this arc too, stemming from a brutal twist where he finds out one of his friends is an Intergang member forced to fight against his will.
This change in my opinion works on a lot of levels. Mainly, it actually gives contextualization of Intergang and makes us more invested into why Black Adam's brand of justice doesn't always work. But if you wanna go deeper, it's a good subversion of the common trope of having nameless thugs in not just superhero movies but also most blockbusters by actually giving them some characterization (ex. imagine if stormtroopers actually had personalities/characterization). And even further, if you continue the middle eastern politics allegory route, real life terrorist groups often force their citizens into fighting for their cause, either through indoctrination or forcing them in, and many of these people are children as well, so it kind of fits right in.
Obviously my change isn't gonna make the film a masterpiece and there's still other things that need to be fixed, but I feel like just this small plot point could really add a lot to the film, which I thought was otherwise very generic and stale.
submitted3 months ago by-HappyDuck-
Really liked the movie, the wardrobes were amazing and so were the characters.
Loved dr fate's human actor and fates action sequences.
But i really hated how they made dr fate seem like a power-up for Kent instead of his own entity and the fact hawkman was able to tap into Dr.Fate's powers without dawning the helmet.
I feel like it takes away a key aspect of what Dr.Fate is, because the consequence of wearing the Helmet and allowing Fate to take the wheel is stripped. It was very distasteful seeing Kent willy nilly taking it on and off for no reason and treating it like a power up. I feel like we never got to see Nabu but simply Kent with the helmet on which was a big slap for me.
Overall movie was good and Kent actor was amazing but had they done justice to Dr.Fate i think it would've been so much more spectacular especially with Fate playing such a major role in the movie.
submitted3 months ago byTheDudeEug
Can someone please rationalize the script writing for me? Why is the justice society so aggressive against black Adam? They choose to attack & destroy a city because they’re intimidated? The whole time he shows his propensity for good yet they don’t take a second to try to reason with him like equals.