The first three movies he were directed were fine, more or less.
The fact is, most directors, when given a shitty script, a problematic lead, and a troubled writing process and studio mandates for story, are going to give you a bad movie.
The Flash was a mess long before he got involved. I would point fingers at a lot of people before I got round to him.
The flash with ezra miller served one thing, to bury for good the snyderverse and give way to gunn version of DCU.
At least that Flash is now on Schumacher's universe of Camp Gay weirndess and bat nipples.
As for the new Batman I hear that Pattison was very much interested in playing this universe's Batman but will all depend on wether Reeves say it "makes sense
"
Alright, but setting aside my sardonic personality for a bit, regarding Andrés Muschietti, I will apply some application of the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Batman is more the character finely tuned towards his writing strengths. I don't know.
Self-professed Wild Card who thinks cynicism isn't so bad.Apparently he hasn't talked to Gunn in over a year so definitely haven't gotten any progress on that movie.
It's funny, I've been seeing debates over whether that hypothetical Titans movie gets made will they use Dick or Damian as Robin.
Which I feel like it's more likely to be Dick since Damian is being introduced in Batman Brave and the Bold.
"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."Batman might be Brave... but will he be Bold?
Self-professed Wild Card who thinks cynicism isn't so bad."Ennis, Moore, and Miller have one thing in common regarding their thoughts on superheroes: they're power fantasies that focus more on killing and retribution than saving and rehabilitation. They're pretty much the police with even less scruples and less restraint."
One would think, then, that their answer to that might be to write super-hero stories that are about saving people and rehabilitating villains. But, even though they've written some great stuff, they didn't do that.
Deconstruction can be interesting, but it often comes off looking like the writer demonstrating how clever he/she is rather than an attempt to actually tell a compelling, entertaining story.
The biggest issue about writing deconstructed tropes is you'll ALWAYS'll look like that to some people.
He who controls the present controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.Alan Moore did want people to write superheroes focusing on saving than killing. But people missed the point of Watchmen and focused on the edgier parts. The only thing that ever showed any respect towards his work was the HBO show, and he wants nothing to do with that.
"Everyone’s equal. Same chances of getting hit. Equal in the eyes of the rocket.”
Ironically I remember when the Question read Watchmen and wanted to be like Rorschach when the same's a deconstruction OF the Question himself, so much so Question tell Rorschach to screw himself after fanboying about him earlier.
He who controls the present controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.![]()
I feel like James Gunn is the kind of man to pivot away from misappropriating the darker parts of Alan Moore's works out of context… and perhaps not even touch the stuff that Alan Moore wrote.
I guess that depends on whether or not they decide to adapt Swamp Thing. Moore kinda redefined the character, and I can see a film incorporating a lot of elements from his run.
x3 Rorshach isn't so much a deconstruction of The Question as he is a deconstruction of Ditko's Mr.A—of whom the Question is a watered-down version. Moore also said he wanted to show a vigilante who wasn't a billionaire playboy. Even then, Moore doesn't really portray Rorschach as an objectivist, which is the line Ditko took with Mr.A, but rather as a hard-core conservative with personality issues. The JLU did a great job with it's portrayal of The Question, melding elements of Mr.A, Ditko's Question, and Rorshach as well.
![]()
...I'll be honest, Swamp Thing completely slipped my mind there, Swamp Thing is the one exception I'd make in a heartbeat. You wanna do Swamp Thing right? Research first the run Alan Moore did for the character.
Ennis, Moore, and Miller have one thing in common regarding their thoughts on superheroes: they're power fantasies that focus more on killing and retribution than saving and rehabilitation. They're pretty much the police with even less scruples and less restraint.
Then again Moore's Batman is about rehabilitation. In Killing Joke he starts the story trying to reach out to the Joker and even after what Joker does to Jim and Barbara he still tries reaching again and offers his help. It's just that Joker rejects it. In his Clayface story Batman also ends up offering help to Clayface and delivering it as best as he could, letting him live in peace with the mannequin.
Batman's role in For the Man who has Everything is that of a man going to a friend's birthday party and his role in Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow is trying to help Superman out and then along Robin checking on Krypto, a dog. Moore's Batman was plenty human, much more than Miller's even at Miller Bats' best.
Please remember that, ultimately, fictional works of entertainment are just that.

Director of The Flash, failing upwards.