- Welcome to Batman-Online.com.
Recent posts
#91
Batman Forever (1995) / Re: Cultural Allusions in Batm...
Last post by thecolorsblend - Sat, 1 Feb 2025, 08:24The Batmobile from BF is intended to be a direct allusion to H.R. Giger's work. Basically, when you see the car, you're supposed to think "Giger". That whole biomechanical aesthetic that Giger pioneered.
On a more textual note, Nygma initially faces resistance from widespread adoption of The Box by people who claim that it rots users' brains. Nygma retorts with "That's what people said when the television was invented". Which is true. People really did say that back then. That really happened.
Also on a textual note, the idea of a stalker was less well known back in 1995. But there's really no other way to quantify Edward Nygma's obsession with Bruce Wayne. The darkest example is Nygma hand-delivering the first riddle to stately Wayne Manor. A more irl example is Nygma dressing the same way as Bruce at The Box's release party, wearing the same glasses as Bruce and even sporting a fake mole. You could say BF was a bit ahead of the curve on the stalking thing.
Something 1995-era audiences were familiar with is the notion of "Going Postal" or workplace violence. Back in 1995, the idea of violence randomly breaking out in the workplace was something wide audiences were generally familiar with from news reports. Denis Leary even had a bit about it in his No Cure For Cancer special. Thus, Nygma murdering his boss was something wide audiences had no trouble believing in whatsoever.
Going back to the stalker thing, while it's hardly fair or accurate to say that Steve Jobs stalked Michael Dell, it is true that Jobs felt a deep and intense rivalry with Dell. It's common knowledge. I won't go so far as to say Jobs's rivalry with Dell inspired Nygma's obsession with Bruce. But when Apple's stock price finally exceeded that of Dell's, Jobs thought it important enough to send an email to every employee. It was clearly personal for him. I see SOME connective tissue there. Not for nothing, Apple built an office not too terribly far away from Dell's corporate headquarters in Round Rock. There's a reason for that.
When Two Face busts into The Box release party, Nygma chides him for not providing warning ahead of time. "We could've... pre-sold the movie rights!" This is a bit of a deep cut of Nineties culture. But the only logical way to interpret it is a reference to the growing perception the public had in those days that news was staged at least as often as it was reported.
In other news, therapy was gaining mainstream traction nationwide in the mid-Nineties. It was beginning to lose the stigma it had in previous times. Bruce visiting a psychologist would've been played for laughs in 1966. But in 1995, it's unironic and it's the spine of the film. That's how much views concerning mental health had shifted in the intervening thirty years.
That's all I've got for now.
On a more textual note, Nygma initially faces resistance from widespread adoption of The Box by people who claim that it rots users' brains. Nygma retorts with "That's what people said when the television was invented". Which is true. People really did say that back then. That really happened.
Also on a textual note, the idea of a stalker was less well known back in 1995. But there's really no other way to quantify Edward Nygma's obsession with Bruce Wayne. The darkest example is Nygma hand-delivering the first riddle to stately Wayne Manor. A more irl example is Nygma dressing the same way as Bruce at The Box's release party, wearing the same glasses as Bruce and even sporting a fake mole. You could say BF was a bit ahead of the curve on the stalking thing.
Something 1995-era audiences were familiar with is the notion of "Going Postal" or workplace violence. Back in 1995, the idea of violence randomly breaking out in the workplace was something wide audiences were generally familiar with from news reports. Denis Leary even had a bit about it in his No Cure For Cancer special. Thus, Nygma murdering his boss was something wide audiences had no trouble believing in whatsoever.
Going back to the stalker thing, while it's hardly fair or accurate to say that Steve Jobs stalked Michael Dell, it is true that Jobs felt a deep and intense rivalry with Dell. It's common knowledge. I won't go so far as to say Jobs's rivalry with Dell inspired Nygma's obsession with Bruce. But when Apple's stock price finally exceeded that of Dell's, Jobs thought it important enough to send an email to every employee. It was clearly personal for him. I see SOME connective tissue there. Not for nothing, Apple built an office not too terribly far away from Dell's corporate headquarters in Round Rock. There's a reason for that.
When Two Face busts into The Box release party, Nygma chides him for not providing warning ahead of time. "We could've... pre-sold the movie rights!" This is a bit of a deep cut of Nineties culture. But the only logical way to interpret it is a reference to the growing perception the public had in those days that news was staged at least as often as it was reported.
In other news, therapy was gaining mainstream traction nationwide in the mid-Nineties. It was beginning to lose the stigma it had in previous times. Bruce visiting a psychologist would've been played for laughs in 1966. But in 1995, it's unironic and it's the spine of the film. That's how much views concerning mental health had shifted in the intervening thirty years.
That's all I've got for now.
#92
Movie/TV Series (1966 - 1968) / Re: Holy Batmania (1989)
Last post by The Joker - Sat, 1 Feb 2025, 07:58Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 28 Jan 2025, 22:37If you want to fix the industry (if such a thing is even possible anymore), then it has to begin with rooting out the activists and extremists. After that, you can keep the existing continuity or reboot or whatever.
To tangent, certain DC Comics properties have already been rebooted into unsustainability. Chief among them are probably Superman as well as the Legion Of Super-Heroes if you ask me. I don't think yet another reboot would do either property any favors.
Right. Yet another reboot would be like doing New52 all over again. Only with much lesser returns. Especially since the DC staff has only deteriorated even further than it was back in 2011.
Yes, drastic times call for drastic measures. Heads are going to have to roll, and a severe streamlining would need to be implemented, and probably the most important factor to thoroughly scrutinize is distribution/accessibility. Or the lack there of.
QuoteFor as good as the Post-Crisis Superman might be, I'm truly starting to believe that Crisis On Infinite Earths, as a corrective measure for DC continuity, wasn't a good idea. Same thing with Zero Hour, Infinite Crisis, Flashpoint and every other "continuity fix" DC has ever attempted.
I've had this assessment for a while now, and I like a lot of those stories, and to grow up in the '90's reading Post-Crisis Superman was a treat, but in retrospect, it may have not been worth it. For every "fix", comes a problem. As COIE essentially scrambled Hawkman beyond repair (no matter how many times they've tried to remedy him), and the Legion has never quite been the same since (I think Geoff Johns tried but so much for that when you're rebooting every 3-5 years). I think even John Byrne himself has revealed that he offered to stick to Pre-Crisis continuity when he was brought into DC for Superman, but DC was adamant about the reboot. It is interesting to think how Byrne would have worked out within the framework of Pre-Crisis Superman continuity. The sales were going to get a boost regardless due to his name cache at the time.
Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 21:04As someone who generally prefers old comics over modern, I'd definitely favour standalone or two-part stories over longer storylines. I get why they do multipart stories from a marketing perspective. They can more easily package them into trade paperbacks and release them as 'graphic novels'. But a series of good standalone stories linked by a subtle arc can be just as satisfying to read in TPB form. For example, Strange Apparitions/Dark Detective. Most issues in that run work as standalone stories, but there are also plotlines that unite them into a broader narrative (the Hugo Strange saga, Bruce's relationship with Silver, etc). The Batman '66 comics also comprised standalone stories that were fun to read in a collected format.
Again, this might just be me being an old git who prefers older comics, but if we're talking accessibility then making each individual issue stand on its own merits would offer the perfect remedy to crossover fatigue. I like the idea of a kid being able to pick up a random issue of Batman or Superman and make that comic his entry point into the series. I want that kid to enjoy the one issue he owns so much that he decides to spend his pocket money buying the next issue, and the one after, until he builds a collection that constitutes his Batman or his Superman, without regard for the overwhelming volume of comics and lore that came before.
I've been reading quite a few Silver and Bronze Age Superman comics lately, and while I love the Pre-Crisis version I've got to admit that John Byrne's re-launch was a great way of giving the character a clean slate and creating an entry point for new readers. I've never considered 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' a canonical conclusion to the Earth-One Superman's story, but it does work as a possible final story that draws a line of demarcation before the restart. In retrospect, I wish they'd done that for every major DC character.
I suppose The Dark Knight Returns could be viewed as the Batman equivalent, as Bruce's age in that story roughly corresponds with the Silver Age/Adam West Batman. I don't think TDK is the canonical conclusion to the Silver Age Batman's adventures, but it works as a possible final story. Crisis on Infinite Earths proved to be the final story for the Barry Allen Flash, at least until they resurrected him years later.
Imagine if DC published a line of stories like that now. Each one offering a possible 'final story' for the current versions of DC's greatest heroes, each written and drawn by top industry talent, and each comprising no more than two or three issues. Alan Moore managed to tell an epic finale in just two issues with 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' Today's top comic writers should be able to do the same. They could make it clear that this is the end of the current DCU before everything begins anew with a clean slate. I've fallen behind with DC in recent years, but a bold move like this might just recapture my interest.
What you're suggesting kinda makes me think of what Marvel did several years ago with their "The End" line of books. Chronicling the final adventure of various characters. I think Wolverine had one, and I've read Punisher The End (Garth Ennis), along with Hulk The End (written by Peter David, which made sense, and penciled by Dale Keown, which also made all the sense in the world. As an aside, I thought it was interesting that for Peter David having such a long stint on the Incredible Hulk book, and for getting away from the Savage Hulk for long stretches of time ... that his idea for a final Hulk story would wind up featuring the Savage Hulk for the characters book end).
I guess the same could be applied to DC characters, but it's just a issue with getting credible talent for the assignments...
QuoteOn the subject of streamlining the comics, I was just reading 'The Curse of the Atomic Skull' (Superman: The Man of Steel #7, November 1991), and the main topic on the letters page concerned the fact there were four monthly Superman titles in print at that time: Superman, Adventures of Superman, Action Comics and The Man of Steel. This was back when they had those little numbered triangles on the covers telling you which order to read them in. One fan wrote in saying that it was more like having one weekly Superman title than four monthly. Other fans wrote in praising the fact each of those titles had its own distinct style courtesy of their different creative teams.
This gave me an idea for how DC could streamline their comics while still offering enough work for creators and producing enough issues annually to release multiple trade paperbacks – why not start publishing their comics weekly instead of monthly? British comics were traditionally published once a week or once every two weeks and usually took the form of anthologies, with multiple creative teams working on them at the same time. If American comics adopted a similar strategy, they could have one weekly title for each major hero. Instead of publishing 52 titles a month, how about publishing 12 titles every week. Obviously one creative team couldn't produce multiple issues in so short a span, so you could have at least four separate creative teams working concurrently on each title under the guidance of a single editorial group.
If they were to publish 52 weekly issues a year for each title, then that would allow lots of comic creators a chance to work on the major series. It would also allow the editors a chance to test out new talent. They could reserve 10 of those 52 issues for new writers and artists. If they do a good job, give them more work. If the regular contributors attract a negative response from readers, they aren't locked into lengthy runs and can be moved onto something else. This system would also help promote standalone stories over lengthy multi-issue arcs. Occasionally the editors could give a proven writer-artist team the chance to work on a two or three-part storyline, and use new writers to cover for them while they're working on it.
This system would also be more meritocratic. Instead of a small number of people dominating a particular title with lengthy runs, you'd instead have lots of different people contributing and getting more/less work based on how well their individual issues were received by readers. It might not work, but it would be worth a try just to shake things up a bit.
That approach may work. It could very well work. I guess I'm just more bullish, in just boiling everything down to a absolute bare minimum, stripping everything down to what would largely be considered 'classic iterations' and begin a slow, but methodical, rebuilding implementation. Speaking of old comics, I honestly wouldn't be opposed to adopting a more cartoony art style aesthetic (silver/bronze age is what I'm more or less thinking of) as the 'house style', and see what happens. I don't know, but when you skim around and look at some of the covers back then, as opposed to the more posing style these days, a good many of the comic book covers back in the day were very eye-catching. Which they needed to be, considering comics used to be located at venues as a impulse buy (and they REALLY need to get back to that strategy, like Archie Comics, and not be reliant on the LCS/direct market, which has increasingly proved over the years to be a fools errand).
But yeah, outside of taking a very thorough look at improving distribution substantially (otherwise it's all for not), my preferred directives would be; Splashy covers, engaging stories, easily accessible for readers, and a fun/colorful art style that's charming to look at. Those would be the perimeters that would have to be worked within for the A main line of DC books. Want something geared more towards adults? That would go to the B line LCS/direct market.
#94
Comic Film & TV / Re: The Warhammer Thread
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Thu, 30 Jan 2025, 21:54The average Warhammer fan only knows about 5% of the lore anyway, so don't let that put you off. But the Secret Levels episode is pretty accessible. It's basically just a twenty minute action scene. Some Space Marines are deployed on a hostile planet, fight their way through some low-level soldiers, and eventually have to battle a Sorcerer of Tzeentch that attacks them psychically. There's not much dialogue and the plot's very straightforward. It's more about the mood, action and visuals than lore.
#95
Movie/TV Series (1966 - 1968) / Re: Holy Batmania (1989)
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Thu, 30 Jan 2025, 21:19Whenever I think of a director who might make a good Batman film, it's usually someone that would make a gritty serious movie a la Nolan. It's hard to think of a director who could successfully put a lighter spin on the material. What we really need are some quirky idiosyncratic filmmakers who can do something new with the medium, the way David Lynch or Tim Burton did back in their primes. We need auteurs with unique styles of their own who could breathe life into stale subject matter. Hollywood just isn't producing many people like that anymore. Or maybe there are filmmakers like that around, and they're just not getting the breaks they might've got in previous decades.
I'd like the new Batman director to be an up-and-coming filmmaker that none of us have thought of. Someone who loves old Batman comics and whose talent can surmount the soul-destroying Hollywood machine to produce something unique and special. Another option might be to look outside of English-language cinema. Maybe give an Asian filmmaker a chance. A Japanese or Hong Kong director would make for an interesting pick. Can anyone else suggest a suitable director? Someone who could take the franchise in a lighter direction and not just echo what their predecessors did?
On the subject of streamlining the comics, I was just reading 'The Curse of the Atomic Skull' (Superman: The Man of Steel #7, November 1991), and the main topic on the letters page concerned the fact there were four monthly Superman titles in print at that time: Superman, Adventures of Superman, Action Comics and The Man of Steel. This was back when they had those little numbered triangles on the covers telling you which order to read them in. One fan wrote in saying that it was more like having one weekly Superman title than four monthly. Other fans wrote in praising the fact each of those titles had its own distinct style courtesy of their different creative teams.
This gave me an idea for how DC could streamline their comics while still offering enough work for creators and producing enough issues annually to release multiple trade paperbacks – why not start publishing their comics weekly instead of monthly? British comics were traditionally published once a week or once every two weeks and usually took the form of anthologies, with multiple creative teams working on them at the same time. If American comics adopted a similar strategy, they could have one weekly title for each major hero. Instead of publishing 52 titles a month, how about publishing 12 titles every week. Obviously one creative team couldn't produce multiple issues in so short a span, so you could have at least four separate creative teams working concurrently on each title under the guidance of a single editorial group.
If they were to publish 52 weekly issues a year for each title, then that would allow lots of comic creators a chance to work on the major series. It would also allow the editors a chance to test out new talent. They could reserve 10 of those 52 issues for new writers and artists. If they do a good job, give them more work. If the regular contributors attract a negative response from readers, they aren't locked into lengthy runs and can be moved onto something else. This system would also help promote standalone stories over lengthy multi-issue arcs. Occasionally the editors could give a proven writer-artist team the chance to work on a two or three-part storyline, and use new writers to cover for them while they're working on it.
This system would also be more meritocratic. Instead of a small number of people dominating a particular title with lengthy runs, you'd instead have lots of different people contributing and getting more/less work based on how well their individual issues were received by readers. It might not work, but it would be worth a try just to shake things up a bit.
I'd like the new Batman director to be an up-and-coming filmmaker that none of us have thought of. Someone who loves old Batman comics and whose talent can surmount the soul-destroying Hollywood machine to produce something unique and special. Another option might be to look outside of English-language cinema. Maybe give an Asian filmmaker a chance. A Japanese or Hong Kong director would make for an interesting pick. Can anyone else suggest a suitable director? Someone who could take the franchise in a lighter direction and not just echo what their predecessors did?
On the subject of streamlining the comics, I was just reading 'The Curse of the Atomic Skull' (Superman: The Man of Steel #7, November 1991), and the main topic on the letters page concerned the fact there were four monthly Superman titles in print at that time: Superman, Adventures of Superman, Action Comics and The Man of Steel. This was back when they had those little numbered triangles on the covers telling you which order to read them in. One fan wrote in saying that it was more like having one weekly Superman title than four monthly. Other fans wrote in praising the fact each of those titles had its own distinct style courtesy of their different creative teams.
This gave me an idea for how DC could streamline their comics while still offering enough work for creators and producing enough issues annually to release multiple trade paperbacks – why not start publishing their comics weekly instead of monthly? British comics were traditionally published once a week or once every two weeks and usually took the form of anthologies, with multiple creative teams working on them at the same time. If American comics adopted a similar strategy, they could have one weekly title for each major hero. Instead of publishing 52 titles a month, how about publishing 12 titles every week. Obviously one creative team couldn't produce multiple issues in so short a span, so you could have at least four separate creative teams working concurrently on each title under the guidance of a single editorial group.
If they were to publish 52 weekly issues a year for each title, then that would allow lots of comic creators a chance to work on the major series. It would also allow the editors a chance to test out new talent. They could reserve 10 of those 52 issues for new writers and artists. If they do a good job, give them more work. If the regular contributors attract a negative response from readers, they aren't locked into lengthy runs and can be moved onto something else. This system would also help promote standalone stories over lengthy multi-issue arcs. Occasionally the editors could give a proven writer-artist team the chance to work on a two or three-part storyline, and use new writers to cover for them while they're working on it.
This system would also be more meritocratic. Instead of a small number of people dominating a particular title with lengthy runs, you'd instead have lots of different people contributing and getting more/less work based on how well their individual issues were received by readers. It might not work, but it would be worth a try just to shake things up a bit.
#96
Comic Film & TV / Re: The Warhammer Thread
Last post by thecolorsblend - Thu, 30 Jan 2025, 00:07How accessible is the Amazon thing to people who know zilch about Warhammer?
#97
Movie/TV Series (1966 - 1968) / Re: Holy Batmania (1989)
Last post by thecolorsblend - Thu, 30 Jan 2025, 00:05Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 21:04I like that! Neal Adams on one side, Jim Lee on the other. I'd be happy with either one.
If we're fancasting, who do you like as the director?
#98
Batman Video Games / Re: Batman Game Retrospectives
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 21:30I never played Batman: Dark Tomorrow, but I remember seeing it get awful review scores in gaming magazines back in the day. After watching the following video, I can see why it was so reviled.
#99
Comic Film & TV / Re: The Warhammer Thread
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 21:09A new season of the web series Astartes is coming out next year. Here's the trailer.
The video of the first season that I posted earlier in this thread has been taken down, but here's another copy for anyone who wants to watch it.
The video of the first season that I posted earlier in this thread has been taken down, but here's another copy for anyone who wants to watch it.
#100
Movie/TV Series (1966 - 1968) / Re: Holy Batmania (1989)
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 21:04Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon, 27 Jan 2025, 21:32That specific ingredient was already baked into the cake with Lady Gaga's participation.
This touches on another important ingredient for Batmania – star power. It's no secret that the modern movie star system doesn't work anymore. For the past 15-20 years, the box office appeal of traditional stars has failed to draw audiences the way they used to. Instead its brand recognition and IP that sells tickets these days. But weren't stars an important part of past Batmanias? A big selling point for the sixties TV show was all the famous faces who guest starred as villains. Batman '89 had Nicholson's star power behind it, while Forever's publicity campaign was propelled by Carrey's stardom. And we all know the role Ledger played in The Dark Knight's success. If movie stars aren't the big draw they once were, then that could be another obstacle preventing a new Batmania.
On paper, bringing in a pop star looks like a good idea for attracting viewers. Someone like Taylor Swift or Lady Gaga can attract huge crowds at their concerts, but evidently their popularity doesn't guarantee box office success when it comes to films. Not if Joker 2 is anything to go by. So how can the star factor be recreated in modern cinema? If movie stars can't sell tickets, and neither can pop stars, then who can?
Directors. Or to be more precise, a very select number of directors. People like Chris Nolan and James Cameron. Nowadays their involvement with a movie is a much better predictor of box office success than any actor or pop star. Unfortunately the current business model favoured by big studios, prioritising shared universes and big franchises using a one-size-fits-all approach to style, is not exactly accommodating towards promising auteurs. But if WB could find the next Nolan, a director whose unique and contemporary vision captivates cinemagoers the way Burton's did in 1989, then that might help Batman win favour with a wider and younger audience.
Quote from: The Joker on Tue, 28 Jan 2025, 02:25That's what I'm thinking. It's less about a reboot, but more of a RESET. Bring back the more bronze age approach to storytelling (which would mean setting perimeters like stories being one-and-done, or 2-parters if it's necesssary, ect), and I would apply something of a laid back approach to continuity. Where a villain like Bane wouldn't have to be re-introduced (Want to read his intro for this new status quo? It's all right there in Vengeance of Bane by Dixon and Nolan), and the undertaking to storytelling would be akin to the bronze age/BTAS form. Straightforward, easy to follow, and almost 'comfort food' if you will.
As someone who generally prefers old comics over modern, I'd definitely favour standalone or two-part stories over longer storylines. I get why they do multipart stories from a marketing perspective. They can more easily package them into trade paperbacks and release them as 'graphic novels'. But a series of good standalone stories linked by a subtle arc can be just as satisfying to read in TPB form. For example, Strange Apparitions/Dark Detective. Most issues in that run work as standalone stories, but there are also plotlines that unite them into a broader narrative (the Hugo Strange saga, Bruce's relationship with Silver, etc). The Batman '66 comics also comprised standalone stories that were fun to read in a collected format.
Again, this might just be me being an old git who prefers older comics, but if we're talking accessibility then making each individual issue stand on its own merits would offer the perfect remedy to crossover fatigue. I like the idea of a kid being able to pick up a random issue of Batman or Superman and make that comic his entry point into the series. I want that kid to enjoy the one issue he owns so much that he decides to spend his pocket money buying the next issue, and the one after, until he builds a collection that constitutes his Batman or his Superman, without regard for the overwhelming volume of comics and lore that came before.
I've been reading quite a few Silver and Bronze Age Superman comics lately, and while I love the Pre-Crisis version I've got to admit that John Byrne's re-launch was a great way of giving the character a clean slate and creating an entry point for new readers. I've never considered 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' a canonical conclusion to the Earth-One Superman's story, but it does work as a possible final story that draws a line of demarcation before the restart. In retrospect, I wish they'd done that for every major DC character.
I suppose The Dark Knight Returns could be viewed as the Batman equivalent, as Bruce's age in that story roughly corresponds with the Silver Age/Adam West Batman. I don't think TDK is the canonical conclusion to the Silver Age Batman's adventures, but it works as a possible final story. Crisis on Infinite Earths proved to be the final story for the Barry Allen Flash, at least until they resurrected him years later.
Imagine if DC published a line of stories like that now. Each one offering a possible 'final story' for the current versions of DC's greatest heroes, each written and drawn by top industry talent, and each comprising no more than two or three issues. Alan Moore managed to tell an epic finale in just two issues with 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' Today's top comic writers should be able to do the same. They could make it clear that this is the end of the current DCU before everything begins anew with a clean slate. I've fallen behind with DC in recent years, but a bold move like this might just recapture my interest.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Tue, 28 Jan 2025, 13:51I'd rather Dick, but if it has Damian I guess that is generally familiar enough but different from what has been presented in the past. Bruce being a mentor and father figure is what I want to see again, period. As for the costume, go for the blue and gray. Screw it.
I love the blue and grey batsuit in Keaton's armoury in The Flash. Ideally I'd prefer them to drop the sculpted armour look and go for a simpler fabric, but that might be a step too far for some fans. I'd be content with something like this.
I'd like Damian (or Dick) to be portrayed as the son, with Bruce as the father/big brother, and Alfred as the uncle/grandfather. The three of them should work together fighting crime, while also looking out for each other as a family. We've had enough movies with just Bruce and Alfred. It's time to add Robin to the mix. I also want to see them living in stately Wayne Manor again and not another penthouse.
Another thing I want to see is the return of impressive villain hideouts. In old CBMs the bad guys usually had cool bases that were just as spectacular as the heroes'. Some of those sets were colossal and offered a spectacular venue for the denouement.
The last time I recall seeing an awesome villain base like that was Ozymandias's Antarctic retreat in Watchmen (2009). Bringing back practical sets like these would help restore the cinematic spectacle that separates movies from 'content' on a streaming service.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 28 Jan 2025, 22:37If you want to fix the industry (if such a thing is even possible anymore), then it has to begin with rooting out the activists and extremists. After that, you can keep the existing continuity or reboot or whatever.
Rooting out the activists is an essential first step towards recovery. There's no point treating the symptoms of the disease if you're going to leave the source of the infection in place.