Cyborg in Man of Steel 2?

[JME2]

From Comic Book Resources

...Okay, if they're only introducing Vic Stone with the intention of having him become Cyborg in the eventual Justice League film, that's one thing.

But if Cyborg makes a full-on debut in this film...God, this is reminding me of Iron Man 2.

Again, like I said a few months ago, this is exactly what I was afraid of. WB is rushing to cash in on Diseny's success with The Avengers...but they're not willing to play the long game and they're rushing into it as quickly as possible and with minimal buildup.

[Darksider]

Marvel has managed to make the most profitable superhero film franchise in history while their own superhero films crash and burn if they aren't directed by Christopher Nolan. DC and WB are in panic mode right now. There's no way anyone could convince them to do a long game buildup with stockholders and execs screaming at them to "catch up to Marvel. NOW!"

[Crazedwraith]

But if Cyborg makes a full-on debut in this film...God, this is reminding me of Iron Man 2.

To put this in perspective: iron Man 2 introduced all of one extra character for Avengers: Black Widow. And it did it fairly well. Rumours about Superman Vs Batman have the whole damn Justice League cameoing by now. Wonder Women, the Flash, GL...

This is far worse than Iron Man 2

[JME2]

I mean that they were trying to do and set up too much.

It's very ironic that WB Animation had great success carving out a linked and unified animated DCU, but that the studio at large can't do the same for live-action.

[Sidewinder]

I mean that they were trying to do and set up too much.

It's very ironic that WB Animation had great success carving out a linked and unified animated DCU, but that the studio at large can't do the same for live-action.

Making a cartoon is easier than making a live-action film, because the actors' egos are generally on a leash. If you replace a cartoon character's voice actor because he acted up, few people will notice or even care. If you replace a live-action movie character's actor, not only will people notice, the production company's stockholders will ask, "We already spent an obscene amount of money hiring this guy. Why aren't we getting our money's worth?" which may result in the director getting fired and replaced with someone who the actor is willing to work with. There's also the dilemma that comic book movies face, regarding actors, namely, will audiences come to the theaters to see BATMAN, or will they come to the theaters to see ACCLAIMED ACTOR and ACADEMY AWARD WINNER CHRISTIAN BALE... as Batman? Comic book publishers do not want their characters to be in a certain actor's shadow, unless the character is too obscure for non-comic book fans to care about, as was the case with Sylvester Stallone in 'Judge Dredd'.

[Kane Starkiller]

I'm a little baffled as to why everyone suddenly thinks you need a whole bunch of movies to establish relatively simplistic comic book superheroes. Did X-Men need 50,000 movies to establish every single character? Did Watchmen need a 10 year setup for each and every character? To me X-Men was a far superior movie to the Avengers and it had no problem establishing characterization for Wolverine, Professor X, Magneto and even Rouge and Mystique. I mean the line "people like you were the reason I was afraid to go to school as a child" gives more character to Mystique than all of the Marvel movies gave to Black Widow.

Between TDK, TDKR and MOS WB earned 2.7 billion dollars. Man of Steel earned more than any Marvel Universe movie other than Avengers and Iron Man 3 both of which were sequels. I don't see why the bigwigs in WB would be desperate to "rush" the future movies. And I certainly don't want to see useless DC entries like Iron Man 2.

[JME2]

With the X-Men, it was different as none of the characters (save Logan) had their own monthly books.

With something like the Justice League or the Avengers, where the core members have their own, complex myhtologies -- a little trickier.

As I've said before, even the DCAU had trouble with this by the time they finally did the League. Bats and Supes had their respective shows while the Flash and the GLC had been introduced on STAS.

But even then, they had to introduce Diana, J'onn, Hawkgirl, and GL alongside the rest of the team in a 60 minute pilot and it was a delicate balancing act.

[Kane Starkiller]

Oh they can certainly fuck it up. But I don't think this is as dependent on the allotted screentime as it is on the competence of the people making the movie. Opening 10 minute montage of Conan the Barbarian shows us much more about what made Conan the person he is (both mentally and physically) and what kind of world he lives in than entire Phantom Menace does for Anakin Skywalker.

In any case I very much doubt that Victor Stone will have a major role in the movie. Most likely just a glorified cameo.

[Iroscato]

But even then, they had to introduce Diana, J'onn, Hawkgirl, and GL alongside the rest of the team in a 60 minute pilot and it was a delicate balancing act.

Funny you should mention that, I literally watched the pilot for JL last night (I never watched enough of it growing up so now I'm making up for it ). It did cram a LOT of characters into an hour, but I think it just about got away with it.
As for the cyborg news...it comes as another fairly pleasant surprise, as long as WW and Cyborg are both restricted to cameos. Maybe there could be a montage halfway through the film where Bats explains to Supes the effect his presence is having on the world...Cyborg is somehow created via new military technology being developed as a counter to any future kryptonian-level invaders, Wonder Woman could be shown in Themyscira having an increasing interest in Earth thanks to this superpowered newcomer. Devote maybe 5 minutes total to those two and possibly a new Green Lantern, and you have some groundwork for the Justice League movie laid, without it becoming too overstuffed with characters.
How does that sound?

[JME2]

Yeah, I'm fine with that.

[Iroscato]

It could also serve to highlight Batman's role as a slightly older mentor-figure in the film, as he tries to guide Superman into becoming a more responsible demigod.
Hopefully they can fit all that in amongst the punching and explosions and exploding punches.

[Batman]

Small problem-that worked in JL because Clark and me already had tons of backstory from BTAS/TNBA, BB and STAS. There's no mention of me in 'Man of Steel'.

[JME2]

True that.

Honestly, gun to my head...I don't really give a shit about a DCCU for a couple of reasons:

1. Live-action wise, Marvel beat 'em to it -- and Kevin Feige seems to have his shit together for the development.

2. We essentially already got a cohesive multimedia adaptation of the DCU thanks to Bruce Timm and his team at WB Animation -- one that kept most of the actors (barring big ones like the loss of Tim Daly as Supes).

[Batman]

They didn't lose Tim Daly. He was...temporarily unavailable. They did get him back for some of the DTVs. And Newburn wasn't half bad. His 'greasy smear on my fist', 'I wish to heaven that I were the man who killed President Luthor, but I'm not ' and 'world made of cardboard' speeches were awesome. Heck the last made it into a TV Trope.

[Batman]

Not to say I disagree DC so far blew the live action angle outside the Nolan trilogy (and possibly Arrow)-heck I'd argue they blew the animation one given their antics with Beware Me, Young Justice, and GLTAS. The Timmverse was awesome to be sure...but it also was quite a few years ago.

[Grumman]

Some of the Original Movies they've been making have been good. Year One, Under the Red Hood and Apocalypse were great. Public Enemies was pretty good. Superman vs. the Elite was watchable, but it had flaws. Doomsday was stupid*.

* Spoiler

"I will protect Metropolis!"
"No, I will protect Metropolis!"
Then quit fighting in Metropolis, you tossers!

[JME2]

They didn't lose Tim Daly. He was...temporarily unavailable. They did get him back for some of the DTVs. And Newburn wasn't half bad. His 'greasy smear on my fist', 'I wish to heaven that I were the man who killed President Luthor, but I'm not ' and 'world made of cardboard' speeches were awesome. Heck the last made it into a TV Trope.

Yeah, Newburn eventually came into his own, but not having Daly back hurt the character in Season 1.

At least they were able to hang onto Clancy Brown as Luthor -- and as I've said before, imagine the rioting if Conroy hadn't come back as Bats.

[Batman]

I'd probably have qualified as a full size riot all by my lonesome.
And as I've said before I consider Daly to be Clark the same way Conroy is Moi. I just think Newbern gets a lot of grief for the unforgivable crime of not being Tim Daly, and WB/DC for not using Daly when the man was simply already otherwise occupied and thus unavailable so they had to use someone else.

[Iroscato]

Small problem-that worked in JL because Clark and me already had tons of backstory from BTAS/TNBA, BB and STAS. There's no mention of me in 'Man of Steel'.

I don't see that as a huge problem, personally. The success of the Nolan trilogy, which ended just 2 years ago, means the vast majority of the audience are probably already aware of Batman's backstory, or at least a version of it. I personally don't see a need to go over his origin story again, certainly not in a Superman film. Just have him already established, and I reckon 95% of the audience will be fine with it.

[Batman]

At least for me and Clark the audience not being aware of our general backstory ceased to be a problem a very long time ago (well depending on your definition of very long of course-compared to stellar lifetimes, not so long), but in-universe-which so for consists of 'Man of Steel'-I have no backstory. I haven't even been mentioned. I know 'I'm the Valendamned Batman, that's why', but I don't think that's enough to turn me into a mentor figure to the protagonist of a (presumably hoped to eventually turn into a series) movie the prequel of made absolutely no mention of me.
A Batman that is well established enough he can play mentor to Clark and possibly even shoe in the Justice League once the rest of the cast pop out of the woodwork couldn't be arsed to oppose Zod and his minions when they try to destroy the planet? Yes of course I would have failed, but if I had been around as Batman during 'Man of Steel', like hell I wouldn't have tried.

We're essentially household names by now (at least in the US) and you can absolutely tell a story with us in it without having to retell our backstory ( Burton's original 'Batman' essentially did that-yes, the movie eventually tells the story anyway, but it starts with me already being Batman and that works because everybody already knows the backstory), but you're asking the audience to accept an already established Batman, in a position to mentor Clark and possibly the eventual Justice League...when 'Man of Steel' doesn't so much as 'mention' me.'Batman and Robin' and 'Superman Returns' at least had throwaway one-liners hinting at our mutual existence in the respective universes.

[JME2]

And it's confirmed: A JL film will follow MOS2.

Okay, have fun guys.

But I'll be sticking with the MCU.

[Tsyroc]

And it's confirmed: A JL film will follow MOS2.

Okay, have fun guys.

But I'll be sticking with the MCU.

On facebook I was seeing stuff saying that the two films will film back to back to be released a year apart.

[Grumman]

And it's confirmed: A JL film will follow MOS2.

"Zack Snyder to-"

Pass.

[Iroscato]

May I humbly suggest this thread gets made into a general BvS news thread?
Meanwhile, Zack Snyder's Twitter has teased the new batmobile, possibly revealing the full thing tomorrow...Do not click the spoiler if you want to go in cold... Spoiler

[Korgeta]

I'm a little baffled as to why everyone suddenly thinks you need a whole bunch of movies to establish relatively simplistic comic book superheroes. Did X-Men need 50,000 movies to establish every single character? Did Watchmen need a 10 year setup for each and every character? To me X-Men was a far superior movie to the Avengers and it had no problem establishing characterization for Wolverine, Professor X, Magneto and even Rouge and Mystique. I mean the line "people like you were the reason I was afraid to go to school as a child" gives more character to Mystique than all of the Marvel movies gave to Black Widow.

Between TDK, TDKR and MOS WB earned 2.7 billion dollars. Man of Steel earned more than any Marvel Universe movie other than Avengers and Iron Man 3 both of which were sequels. I don't see why the bigwigs in WB would be desperate to "rush" the future movies. And I certainly don't want to see useless DC entries like Iron Man 2.

Why the marvel formula seems to be succseful is that it estabilshes continuity points from the end of each movie (eg: nick Fury showing up) and then tieing all those events over time, which brought up 'The Avengers' and was a huge succses. It's clearly a better approch then one film, two years later sequal with no tie inbetween.

Man of steel owes it's succses to the Nolan hype, but because Marvel can make movies of other characters instead of it's A list, showing it can expand on it's universe and not rely on sequaling certain characters to death.

DC/WB challenge is that they know Batman and Superman is the only reason they have a film franchise because nobody cares for green lantern as a movie, and wonderwoman was even a TV pilot flop. So if there going to cash in they'll have them jump onto the batman vs superman bandwagon and try to promote them from that.

It should be pointed out that man of steel is ranked 10 behind the entire Iron man films, and the lead 'the avengers' has shows why their approach is merited.

http://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=superhero.htm