developing. matt reeves batman movie without afflec and new replacement


im ok with this and john campea is legit. annoying but legit



Yesterday it was revealed by former Collider host John Campea, that if his sources are correct. Current Bruce Wayne and Batman actor Ben Affleck will be exiting Warner Bros.' DC Cinematic Universe following the release of Justice League this weekend.
While talking about the topic yesterday on his showed he teased that he's also been told by his industry sources that Matt Reeves is already in talks with a huge big name movie star to take Affleck's place in his so Batman trilogy he is currently working on.


While Campea held back on his movie podcast show yesterday. He has now revealed via his John Campea Show who director Matt Reeves will replace Ben Affleck with if all goes according to the writer and director's plan.
That is none other than Nightcrawler and Stronger actor Jake Gyllenhaal! A surprising choice of course, but a perfect one upon letting idea sink in. Gyllenhaal has for years been circling a big-screen superhero type role and never jump at one. Could Batman be the perfect fit? We certainly think so.



https://www.eastcoastmovieguys.com/movie-news-and-rumors/2017/11/16/director-matt-reevess-ben-affleck-the-batman-replacement-revealed

Replies

  • I really really really wish they would follow Marvel's plan. It's so perfect. Slowly build a giant cinematic universe. Stop trying to fit 3 movies into one. Just start over. You can even keep the same actors (except Luthor obviously).
    #CloneHelmets4Life...VICTORY!!!! :smiley: "I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere." The more you tighten your grip, CG/EA, the more whales will slip through your fingers (and go F2P or quit).
  • DemonKingBALOR
    110 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    CaptainRex wrote: »
    I really really really wish they would follow Marvel's plan. It's so perfect. Slowly build a giant cinematic universe. Stop trying to fit 3 movies into one. Just start over. You can even keep the same actors (except Luthor obviously).

    well early fan reviews from JL is getting possitive remarks. stay through the credits for 2 after scenes. one leaked already. i wont post it since it is against tos so im hearing flash and aquaman are great in the movie. they say the story is a bit of a mess and the villain is blah but what clicks is the team and charachters
  • DatBoi
    3615 posts Member
    I miss original movies. I live in san antonio where nobody gives a heck about movies so instead of being able to go see The Florida Project, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, or Lady Bird, every theater has 20 showings of motherkitten Justice League. Even the Alamo Drafthouse, which is known for having a general appreciation for good movies is showing nothing but Justice League.

    I dont want to see Part 5 of Phase 3 of Disney’s™ Marvel™ Cinematic Universe™: Thor™ 3: Ragnarok™. I want to see a film that comes from an original script that an artistic individual came up with, not a boardroom full of old, white, sex monsters.
  • DatBoi wrote: »
    I miss original movies. I live in san antonio where nobody gives a heck about movies so instead of being able to go see The Florida Project, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, or Lady Bird, every theater has 20 showings of motherkitten Justice League. Even the Alamo Drafthouse, which is known for having a general appreciation for good movies is showing nothing but Justice League.

    I dont want to see Part 5 of Phase 3 of Disney’s™ Marvel™ Cinematic Universe™: Thor™ 3: Ragnarok™. I want to see a film that comes from an original script that an artistic individual came up with, not a boardroom full of old, white, sex monsters.

    Is there such thing as an original script anymore? Pretty much every movie is a rip-off of something.
    #CloneHelmets4Life...VICTORY!!!! :smiley: "I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere." The more you tighten your grip, CG/EA, the more whales will slip through your fingers (and go F2P or quit).
  • Boo
    4134 posts Member
    CaptainRex wrote: »
    I really really really wish they would follow Marvel's plan. It's so perfect. Slowly build a giant cinematic universe. Stop trying to fit 3 movies into one. Just start over. You can even keep the same actors (except Luthor obviously).

    This exactly!

    DC has seen what Marvel are doing and impatiently racing to compete, but at the same time shooting themselves in the foot. They have tried putting too much story into one movie (which was Marvel's mistake with Spider-Man 3, funny enough Marvel learned from this mistake, while DC ignored the lesson).

    When I heard DC were following in Marvel's footsteps, I thought they would simply raise the Flash and Green Arrow up to movie toons, having already been established in their own TV shows and are familiar with fans. But they did not do this and instead re-cast actors such as the Flash, despite fan upset at the Flash's appearance etc. in Justice League, meanwhile shows such as the Flash and Arrow have turned sour and boring.

    Such a waste.
  • DatBoi
    3615 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    CaptainRex wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    I miss original movies. I live in san antonio where nobody gives a heck about movies so instead of being able to go see The Florida Project, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, or Lady Bird, every theater has 20 showings of motherkitten Justice League. Even the Alamo Drafthouse, which is known for having a general appreciation for good movies is showing nothing but Justice League.

    I dont want to see Part 5 of Phase 3 of Disney’s™ Marvel™ Cinematic Universe™: Thor™ 3: Ragnarok™. I want to see a film that comes from an original script that an artistic individual came up with, not a boardroom full of old, white, sex monsters.

    Is there such thing as an original script anymore? Pretty much every movie is a rip-off of something.

    I just listed 4. The problem is audiences want the remakes and sequels and aren’t willing to support filmmakers with ideas. People want to shove popcorn in their face while blankly staring at a screen crammed with generic eye candy and visuals they recognize. I dont blame film distributors for not giving wide releases to great films if nobody wants to see them.
  • Boo
    4134 posts Member
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.
  • DatBoi
    3615 posts Member
    Boo wrote: »
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.
    Boo wrote: »
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.

    Its easy to blame studios for the garbage we get, but I blame audiences. Why invest a hundred million dollars in a movie that nobody would want to see?
  • DatBoi wrote: »
    Boo wrote: »
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.
    Boo wrote: »
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.

    Its easy to blame studios for the garbage we get, but I blame audiences. Why invest a hundred million dollars in a movie that nobody would want to see?

    Did you see Blade Runner 2049? I hadn't seen it or the original, but a couple critics called it one of the greatest sci-films of all time. I know if flopped money-wise.
    #CloneHelmets4Life...VICTORY!!!! :smiley: "I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere." The more you tighten your grip, CG/EA, the more whales will slip through your fingers (and go F2P or quit).
  • DatBoi
    3615 posts Member
    CaptainRex wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Boo wrote: »
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.
    Boo wrote: »
    No one wanted star wars - not universal, not paramount. But 20th Century thought they would see what Lucas could come up with. I bet Paramount, Universal and all the other movie studios were eating their humble pie.

    Back in the day, some studios, director etc. were able to go against the grain and gamble with something new and exciting to capture audiences.

    Nowadays everyone plays it safe - like you say. Boring.

    Progression and success is born from taking risks. That is why the movie industry these days is simplistic, stagnant and boring. We need a studio to take a risk on something excellent like 20th Century Fox did with Star Wars.

    Its easy to blame studios for the garbage we get, but I blame audiences. Why invest a hundred million dollars in a movie that nobody would want to see?

    Did you see Blade Runner 2049? I hadn't seen it or the original, but a couple critics called it one of the greatest sci-films of all time. I know if flopped money-wise.

    And that proves my point that audiences care more about shallow trash than a well paced, meticulously crafted film. 2049 would have been much more successful if the production had hired some rent-a-director rather than an actual filmmaker like Villenueve. Villanueve stuck to the tone and pace of the original rather than turning it into action schlock.
  • goda say i found JL meh. i was hyped for it to . i can honestly say one time was enough for me
  • goda say i found JL meh. i was hyped for it to . i can honestly say one time was enough for me

    YOU’RE JUST A MARVEL FANBOYYYYYY



    (sarcasm)
  • DatBoi wrote: »
    goda say i found JL meh. i was hyped for it to . i can honestly say one time was enough for me

    YOU’RE JUST A MARVEL FANBOYYYYYY



    (sarcasm)

    har har. jokes aside i really did have high hopes but it was just so eh . i can honestly say i didnt get the same exitment like i did whenthe avengers first came on screen in 2012. i wish they would have pushed it t next year but if they did damned if they do or dont
Sign In or Register to comment.