Ray Fisher cast as Cyborg

[Silver Nemesis]

After testing actors over the past couple weeks, Warner Bros. and D.C. have tapped theater actor Ray Fisher for the role of Cyborg in the untitled Batman-Superman pic.

Victor Stone or 'Cyborg,' while not a major part in the Batman-Superman feature, is a member of the Justice League and will become a much more significant role as Warner and D.C. develop more films related to the Justice League universe, sources confirm.

Warner Bros. had no comment on this story.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/batman-superman-cyborg-ray-fisher-1201163390/

[Gotham Knight]

Why doesn't WB just retitle the picture 'Justice League.' Seriously. Why all of this Batman and Superman together hubbub when you just keep throwing more characters at it. I get it, they really want to start establishing a shared universe, but don't think they have a roster strong enough to do solo movies, the proof being that every time they try it (Green Lantern) the results are lackluster. And I can see how pitching 'CYBORG,' the new Blockbuster coming this late November might lose somebody their job, but;

1. Not having faith in Wonder Woman as a solo entity is sad.

2. With regards to being weary of lower tier hero solo movies...

The Guardians of the Galaxy have a movie coming out...its going to print money. Yes it is. Why? Not because it's going to be great, it's because at this point Marvel is thriving on fumes. All it takes is a little manipulation and an overzealous fan base.

[johnnygobbs]

Why doesn't WB just retitle the picture 'Justice League.' Seriously. Why all of this Batman and Superman together hubbub when you just keep throwing more characters at it. I get it, they really want to start establishing a shared universe, but don't think they have a roster strong enough to do solo movies, the proof being that every time they try it (Green Lantern) the results are lackluster. And I can see how pitching 'CYBORG,' the new Blockbuster coming this late November might lose somebody their job, but;

1. Not having faith in Wonder Woman as a solo entity is sad.

2. With regards to being weary of lower tier hero solo movies...

The Guardians of the Galaxy have a movie coming out...its going to print money. Yes it is. Why? Not because it's going to be great, it's because at this point Marvel is thriving on fumes. All it takes is a little manipulation and an overzealous fan base.

To be fair, 'Guardians of the Galaxy' is going to print moment because it will be great as well as the fact Marvel are quite deservedly on a roll.  They're picking the right filmmakers for the right projects and not stuffing everyone into one film without building them up properly to begin with.

If the Green Lantern movie had been half decent it probably would have been at least as big as the first Thor film.  And Wonder Woman has at least as much name-recognition as Iron Man and Captain America.  Simply, Warner Bros doesn't know what to do with its characters.  It lacks the right touch.

[riddler]

STAR labs to be a central setting. DC can't even get their titles back, they remove "batman" and "superman" from their solo films titles yet put them in a film about the JLA.

[Gotham Knight]

Why doesn't WB just retitle the picture 'Justice League.' Seriously. Why all of this Batman and Superman together hubbub when you just keep throwing more characters at it. I get it, they really want to start establishing a shared universe, but don't think they have a roster strong enough to do solo movies, the proof being that every time they try it (Green Lantern) the results are lackluster. And I can see how pitching 'CYBORG,' the new Blockbuster coming this late November might lose somebody their job, but;

1. Not having faith in Wonder Woman as a solo entity is sad.

2. With regards to being weary of lower tier hero solo movies...

The Guardians of the Galaxy have a movie coming out...its going to print money. Yes it is. Why? Not because it's going to be great, it's because at this point Marvel is thriving on fumes. All it takes is a little manipulation and an overzealous fan base.

To be fair, 'Guardians of the Galaxy' is going to print moment because it will be great as well as the fact Marvel are quite deservedly on a roll.  They're picking the right filmmakers for the right projects and not stuffing everyone into one film without building them up properly to begin with.

If the Green Lantern movie had been half decent it probably would have been at least as big as the first Thor film.  And Wonder Woman has at least as much name-recognition as Iron Man and Captain America.  Simply, Warner Bros doesn't know what to do with its characters.  It lacks the right touch.

I agree that DC doesn't know what to do with characters and that stuffing them in one movie from the word go is bad. Same on the issue of GL.

However, while I can say Marvel has had a great run of success. I cannot agree that they've had 'the right people in the right places,' all of the time. I'd say phase 2 in particular has been coasting comfortably off of the rub they got from the Avengers. Haven't seen Cap 2, so I won't say here nor there with regards to its merits, but Thor 2, while not being an atrocity by any stretch, coasted enjoyably, but meekly. You could have traded out Alan Johnson for anybody and gotten the same result. Average and enjoyable. Thor and Cap 1, same deal. Iron Man has been (arguably) mis-stepping since 2. 3 Managed to not be 2, which is about all anybody can really say about it. It's really been the 1 fantastic movie in 4 or 5 that's keeps it relevant. The connected universe helps. The movies get over Big. Not because they are great movies always, but because the Marvel brand is white hot, which is my point. At this point, Squirrel Girl could get over as long as IRON MAN gives her a high five after the credits. Guardians isn't going to be great. It's going to be okay. Then after the 10-min credit roll, Loki's going to walk around the corner and utter three lines and suddenly the roof of theater cracks open.

If you're hot you can't mess it up.

If you're cold you almost can't heat it up.  Enter DC. You can see the panic with each new addition. Is it just now dawning that MoS was 'meh' at best. Maybe all they needed is a post credit button, idk. Of course, I can go on all day about how stupid I think WB was for never putting a 'JLA' clause in Bale's contract. You had a Phenomenon in the TDKTrilogy as much as pains me to say. And that could have sealed the deal on the future. Instead it's throw it all against the wall and watch it sink. They're working harder than they need to. The formula is easy, Marvel laid it out for them.

[johnnygobbs]

Haven't seen Cap 2, so I won't say here nor there with regards to its merits, but Thor 2, while not being an atrocity by any stretch, coasted enjoyably, but meekly. You could have traded out Alan Johnson for anybody and gotten the same result.

Who the heck is Alan Johnson (apart from a UK Labour Party MP), and what has he got to do with 'Thor 2'?

[riddler]

Why doesn't WB just retitle the picture 'Justice League.' Seriously. Why all of this Batman and Superman together hubbub when you just keep throwing more characters at it. I get it, they really want to start establishing a shared universe, but don't think they have a roster strong enough to do solo movies, the proof being that every time they try it (Green Lantern) the results are lackluster. And I can see how pitching 'CYBORG,' the new Blockbuster coming this late November might lose somebody their job, but;

1. Not having faith in Wonder Woman as a solo entity is sad.

2. With regards to being weary of lower tier hero solo movies...

The Guardians of the Galaxy have a movie coming out...its going to print money. Yes it is. Why? Not because it's going to be great, it's because at this point Marvel is thriving on fumes. All it takes is a little manipulation and an overzealous fan base.

To be fair, 'Guardians of the Galaxy' is going to print moment because it will be great as well as the fact Marvel are quite deservedly on a roll.  They're picking the right filmmakers for the right projects and not stuffing everyone into one film without building them up properly to begin with.

If the Green Lantern movie had been half decent it probably would have been at least as big as the first Thor film.  And Wonder Woman has at least as much name-recognition as Iron Man and Captain America.  Simply, Warner Bros doesn't know what to do with its characters.  It lacks the right touch.

I agree that DC doesn't know what to do with characters and that stuffing them in one movie from the word go is bad. Same on the issue of GL.

However, while I can say Marvel has had a great run of success. I cannot agree that they've had 'the right people in the right places,' all of the time. I'd say phase 2 in particular has been coasting comfortably off of the rub they got from the Avengers. Haven't seen Cap 2, so I won't say here nor there with regards to its merits, but Thor 2, while not being an atrocity by any stretch, coasted enjoyably, but meekly. You could have traded out Alan Johnson for anybody and gotten the same result. Average and enjoyable. Thor and Cap 1, same deal. Iron Man has been (arguably) mis-stepping since 2. 3 Managed to not be 2, which is about all anybody can really say about it. It's really been the 1 fantastic movie in 4 or 5 that's keeps it relevant. The connected universe helps. The movies get over Big. Not because they are great movies always, but because the Marvel brand is white hot, which is my point. At this point, Squirrel Girl could get over as long as IRON MAN gives her a high five after the credits. Guardians isn't going to be great. It's going to be okay. Then after the 10-min credit roll, Loki's going to walk around the corner and utter three lines and suddenly the roof of theater cracks open.

If you're hot you can't mess it up.

If you're cold you almost can't heat it up.  Enter DC. You can see the panic with each new addition. Is it just now dawning that MoS was 'meh' at best. Maybe all they needed is a post credit button, idk. Of course, I can go on all day about how stupid I think WB was for never putting a 'JLA' clause in Bale's contract. You had a Phenomenon in the TDKTrilogy as much as pains me to say. And that could have sealed the deal on the future. Instead it's throw it all against the wall and watch it sink. They're working harder than they need to. The formula is easy, Marvel laid it out for them.

So far with phase 2 I found Thor 2 on par with the first one (which do feel is the weak sister with the MCU), Iron man 3 somewhat underwhelming but Cap 2 has totally saved it. Had that one faltered I'd be saying this series is declining. we'll see how guardians goes.

I think one main issue is that DC struggles with how to adapt a comic into a film; the dark knight and man of steel almost seem to be ashamed and hiding that they are basing a movie on a comic book. Even arrow (which I do enjoy quite a bit) seems to try and make it a separate entity from the green arrow.

Now the green lantern movie on the other hand  went to the other extreme. I didn't mind it as much as others but that's likely because I am a big fan of the comics so I can fill in the blanks of what the movie left out. For all it's faults it was the closest DC film to the comics. The problem is that while these movies should be embracing their roots to an extent, they can't assume all the moviegoers read the comics and know the story.


While I'm not going to judge a movie before it goes into principal photography, we may be getting in the worst of both worlds. There's no way they can properly tell origin stories of all these characters in one film so I could see green lanterns mistakes being repeated of assuming viewers will know what they haven't been told. I'm praying that it wont be Nolanized and overgrounded removing all the fun of the film.



I really think this movie should be nixed;
-give man of steel a proper sequel so we can see a regular adventure with Clark kent working at the bugle and fighting a villain
-establish Affleck as Batman in his own film.


at the very least they shouldn't be throwing more characters in at this point; leave the fans wanting more. Do it with only 2 and then if it's successful add in the rest.



Partially why the avengers was so successful is that they set up the universe, I don't think it would have been nearly as successful if it were released in 2008. 

[Gotham Knight]

Haven't seen Cap 2, so I won't say here nor there with regards to its merits, but Thor 2, while not being an atrocity by any stretch, coasted enjoyably, but meekly. You could have traded out Alan Johnson for anybody and gotten the same result.

Who the heck is Alan Johnson (apart from a UK Labour Party MP), and what has he got to do with 'Thor 2'?

Oh, oops. Taylor. My bad.