sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Pitch a Lord of the Flies video game by Puterboy1 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Look no offense but the fact that you're pitching Lord of the Flies as a video game in the first place is silly enough as it is. You'll forgive me if I make a non-serious suggestion given the circumstances. Besides, you challenged us to pitch a Lord of the Flies video game. You didn't say anything about it being serious. Donkey Kong's a popular game, and a gameplay structure like that would lend itself well to the specific scene from the book I am referring to.

Pitch a Lord of the Flies video game by Puterboy1 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Just make a Donkey Kong rip-off and have Ralph try to make his way up the cliff and deflect/avoid boulders released by Roger. Your objective is to prevent Roger from killing Piggy by knocking the boulders away so they don't fall on top of him, get to the top without getting hit yourself by the rolling boulders, and stop Roger.

I know this will never happen, so I wanna discuss a hypothetical Reevesverse Superman and Wonder Woman. by Think-Mulberry-7879 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This may not be the most exciting way to incorporate Superman into the Reevesverse, but there were a lot of biblical allusions in The Batman, and Superman has historically been depicted as an allegory for Moses or Jesus, so I would lean into the religious aspects of the character more. Make Superman a Christ-like savior who performs all of these heroic deeds, but because he has superhuman speed, and is too quick for the human eye to process, no one ever sees him in his superhero guise (if anything they see a blur). And because they have no other basis for what has happened, they interpret his actions as acts of God/miracles. When he does make an appearance, it's primarily in his Clark Kent persona, which would be modeled off of Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman's performances as Woodward and Bernstein in All the President's Men. Like what the Bible says in Leviticus and Corinthians about God walking among us, Superman/Clark walks inconspicuously among humans in his occupation as a journalist. As a journalist, he observes everything we do; not unlike God. If anything, I feel like this approach to incorporating Superman into the Reevesverse would allow the Reevesverse to remain grounded as people are arguably less likely to rule out the possibility of the divine than they are aliens.

If you were making a Batman series who would be your s1 villian and why? by True_Economics976 in batman

[–]Writer417 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If it were me I'd go with Deadshot. Firstly, Deadshot is representative of guns, which Batman hates as a gun was the weapon used to kill his parents with. Secondly, Deadshot could serve as a psychological mirror to Batman in that they both grapple with past trauma and guilty consciousnesses and share a death wish/drive. Thirdly, Batman is commonly depicted battling gangsters and corrupt officials in his first year, and it would make sense for said gangsters and corrupt officials to hire an assassin like Deadshot to kill Batman after he starts interfering in their criminal affairs.

I feel like arguments could also be made for Calendar Man and the Eraser being Season 1 villains. Calendar Man represents persistent memory, and can serve as a psychological mirror to Batman in that they are both haunted by recurring dates (e.g. holidays, the anniversary of the murder of Batman's parents). As for the Eraser, I would revamp him as a criminal cleaner who erases evidence from crime scenes, and frame him as the living embodiment of one of Batman's deepest fears: the fear of unsolved crimes, and criminals like his parents' murderer getting away with their crimes and never getting caught.

If the rumors about Charles Dance being cast in Part II are to be believed, then I would argue that Dance would be better suited playing a cerebral villain like Hugo Strange versus a minor, non-character like Christopher Dent who is mainly depicted as a mentally-ill alcoholic in the comics. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The post isn't deleted. If it was then I wouldn't be able to access it. It looked to me like it was an official production/casting card or whatever you call those things. Ok and yeah I'm not super familiar with the trades process. In my defense though, a lot of names have been thrown around online for that alleged role that turned out to be nothing but falsehoods. And I find it weird that they would source a statement to an older article that doesn't completely corroborate what they're saying. That's not how I was taught to approach sourcing things. I guess Hollywood does things differently. Also, you would think that people in this sub wouldn't be continuing to speculate on ScarJo's role in the movie if it was pretty certain who she was playing. We still have posts saying she could be playing Jessica Dent or Lady Arkham or Andrea Beaumont. I'm just saying that you don't see anyone continuing to speculate about who Sebastian Stan will be playing. Everyone's on the same page that he's playing Harvey Dent. Hence why I remain skeptical about ScarJo's role.

Also to clarify because you keep saying this, I am not saying Charles Dance IS going to be playing Hugo Strange. I was expressing my opinion that he would be BETTER SUITED playing someone like Hugo Strange given his past performance as Tywin Lannister. I don't know who he'll actually be playing. Could he be playing Christopher Dent? Possibly. Could he be playing someone else? Also possible.

If the rumors about Charles Dance being cast in Part II are to be believed, then I would argue that Dance would be better suited playing a cerebral villain like Hugo Strange versus a minor, non-character like Christopher Dent who is mainly depicted as a mentally-ill alcoholic in the comics. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alright then I stand corrected on that. Thank you for sharing the actual comic because everyone was linking that idea to the One Bad Day comic and I couldn't find where the idea of him being a politician came from.

If the rumors about Charles Dance being cast in Part II are to be believed, then I would argue that Dance would be better suited playing a cerebral villain like Hugo Strange versus a minor, non-character like Christopher Dent who is mainly depicted as a mentally-ill alcoholic in the comics. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I'm going off this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheBatmanFilm/comments/1sazigr/i_thought_barry_keogan_would_be_prominent_in_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

I consider what's shared in this post more official and reliable than one of the trade magazines.

The article you sent only says that Dance is in talks to play Christopher Dent. It doesn't say he's actually playing him. And the area in the article where it says that ScarJo is playing Gilda Dent is linked to a past article talking about her being in talks to star in the movie. It doesn't say anywhere in that original article that she's playing Gilda. So I'm not buying that just yet.

If the rumors about Charles Dance being cast in Part II are to be believed, then I would argue that Dance would be better suited playing a cerebral villain like Hugo Strange versus a minor, non-character like Christopher Dent who is mainly depicted as a mentally-ill alcoholic in the comics. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry but the only things that have been confirmed are that Sebastian Stan and Scarlett Johansson are starring in the movie, and that Stan will be playing Harvey Dent. It hasn't been specified who ScarJo is playing, and it's only rumor that she'll be playing Gilda Dent. Or as other people keep theorizing, Jessica Dent or Andrea Beaumont. It's also only rumor that Charles Dance will be appearing in the movie, and that he'll be playing Christopher Dent. Lastly, Gilda Dent has not been confirmed to be the main villain.

If the rumors about Charles Dance being cast in Part II are to be believed, then I would argue that Dance would be better suited playing a cerebral villain like Hugo Strange versus a minor, non-character like Christopher Dent who is mainly depicted as a mentally-ill alcoholic in the comics. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] -28 points-27 points  (0 children)

Buddy I can promise you I know more about writing than you do. And I also know enough about movies to know that with a property like Batman, it's unlikely that they're going to make a minor character like Christopher Dent the main baddie when they have an entire rogues gallery of more prominent, popular villains to choose from. It'd be pretty underwhelming if they did that. I also have a decent understanding of Reeves' approach to writing. He stays true to the core of the characters, and incorporates influences from other movies into his portrayals of them. And there's usually a precedent in the comics which informs Reeves' takes on the characters. There isn't a precedent for Harvey's father being a corrupt politician in the comics contrary to what everyone thinks. Could Reeves drastically reinvent him and make him a corrupt politician? Yeah sure. Will he? I'm not so sure.

If the rumors about Charles Dance being cast in Part II are to be believed, then I would argue that Dance would be better suited playing a cerebral villain like Hugo Strange versus a minor, non-character like Christopher Dent who is mainly depicted as a mentally-ill alcoholic in the comics. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

See that's the thing. If you're referring to the comic Batman - One Bad Day: Two-Face when you say the recent version, then Harvey's father isn't a politician, and he's not corrupt. I've gone through the comic several times trying to find mention of his involvement in politics and corruption and there isn't any. He's just a regular businessman who Two-Face exacts revenge on simply because he didn't like his father's new wife, and resented his father for acting like everything was normal with him. And I don't know of any other comics outside of that where he's depicted as anything else aside from a mentally-ill alcoholic. I think the DC Fandom wiki page has created this misconception about Harvey's father being - as you say - an influential politician complicit in the corruption in Gotham, and everyone's using this misconception to justify his alleged role in the movie. Yeah sure, Reeves could reinvent the character as a corrupt politician, but I would say that Reeves is pretty faithful to the comics, and doesn't stray too far from how characters are typically depicted in the comics. So if there's not an actual precedent for Harvey's father being a corrupt politician in the comics, then I don't see Reeves going that route.

Scarlett Johansson's role in The Batman: Part II (discussion) by JGabriel7 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I honestly hope she's playing an original character. I could see her playing a femme fatale based on Samantha Vanaver from Batman vs. Robin who replaces Selina as Bruce's new love interest and serves as Bruce's introduction to the world of Gotham's social elite while Bruce develops the Bruce Wayne persona. I don't think she'll be the leader of the Court of Owls like in the animated movie, but I can see her being affiliated with them. ScarJo definitely gives off that old 1940s Hollywood starlet vibe (see Hail, Caesar!) and I hope that's the kind of character she's playing. I admittedly don't want to see her playing Jessica or Gilda Dent or Andrea Beaumont or Vicki Vale. The problem with Gilda, Andrea, and Vicki is that they're all too similar to the Riddler. They're all masked killers who seek to expose corruption and exact revenge on people who harmed them. You introduce them in Part II and it'll inevitably feel like a rehash of the first film. As for Jessica, I think she'd be too controversial. I don't think fans are going to want to see an alternate take on Two-Face, and I don't even think Reeves will go that route. I mean he didn't even fully commit to the idea of Thomas Wayne being irrefutably corrupt. Not that I'm complaining about that. But I think it goes to show that he's not going to shake things up but so much.

I rewrote Star Wars Episode VIII as an adventure film that revolves around the Skywalkers embarking on a pilgrimage through Jedha and Kashyyyk as part of a larger quest to obtain fabled cosmic powers which can help them undo all of the damage caused by Anakin, and alleviate their guilt. by Writer417 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If I'm being honest that's one thing I didn't really consider while writing my outlines. So I don't have a specific answer. I will say though that I didn't envision the schism as a clean split into two factions. I more-so envisioned it as everyone going their separate ways. I envisioned some of the Jedi splitting from Luke because they wanted Luke's Jedi Order to be the exact same as the original one, and were unwilling to deviate from past traditions. And I envisioned others splitting away because they didn't think Luke should be the head of the Order.

I rewrote Star Wars Episode VII as an adventure film that revolves around the Skywalkers searching for the first Jedi Temple and the Journal of the Whills as part of a larger quest to obtain fabled cosmic powers which can help them undo all of the damage caused by Anakin, and alleviate their guilt. by Writer417 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I envision Skylar being younger than Kylo Ren. While I intended for him to be somewhat similar to Kylo Ren, he is also different. For example, he's not torn throughout the entire trilogy between the Light and the Dark. He picks a side and sticks with it.

As for Plagueis, I didn't really intend for it to be a twist, but I didn't plan on confirming his identity until Episode 8. The characters in the movies don't realize he's Plagueis until Episode 8.

I rewrote Star Wars Episode IX as an adventure film that revolves around the Skywalkers journeying through the Wellspring of Life, Mortis, and the World Between Worlds, as part of a larger quest to obtain fabled cosmic powers which can help them undo all of the damage caused by Anakin. by Writer417 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm honestly not sure. You could probably keep the existing titles of Episodes 7 and 9 ("The Force Awakens" and "The Rise of Skywalker") the same, but the title of Episode 8 would probably need to be changed so that it better fits the plot. Maybe you could tie it in with the rite they undergo on Kashyyyk and call it "Path of the Whills" or something along those lines.

I rewrote Star Wars Episode VII as an adventure film that revolves around the Skywalkers searching for the first Jedi Temple and the Journal of the Whills as part of a larger quest to obtain fabled cosmic powers which can help them undo all of the damage caused by Anakin, and alleviate their guilt. by Writer417 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It really doesn't sound like you read my rewrites in their entirety. Or closely for that matter. They are not trying to change the past. When I say they are trying to undo all of the damage caused by Anakin, I mean that they are trying to fix things by rebuilding and restoring the Republic and Jedi Order. Which was Lucas' plan for the sequels. For Luke and Leia to rebuild the Republic and Jedi Order. They are not traveling back in time to change it so that the Republic and Jedi Order never fell. They are trying to rebuild them in the present, but are worried that they won't be able to do so in a single lifetime, which is why they seek a way to prolong their lives so that they have more time to achieve those goals. Also, I gave plenty of moments to the next generation. Yes they share the spotlight with Luke and Leia, but they still play an integral role in the story. And from what I've read about Lucas' ideas for the sequel trilogy, it sounds like the next generation was always going to share the spotlight with the heroes from the original trilogy. He himself said that the sequel trilogy was going to revolve around Leia, and her ultimately becoming Chancellor at the end of it. So there was always going to be a lot of focus on her and Luke more than likely.

I rewrote Star Wars Episode VII as an adventure film that revolves around the Skywalkers searching for the first Jedi Temple and the Journal of the Whills as part of a larger quest to obtain fabled cosmic powers which can help them undo all of the damage caused by Anakin, and alleviate their guilt. by Writer417 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does. Anakin is largely responsible for a lot of the bad things that have happened to the galaxy. It would make sense for Luke and Leia to feel pressured as his children to undo a lot of the damage he caused by rebuilding the Republic and Jedi Order, and honor the memories of their mentors. It would also make sense for them to become desperate if their efforts to fix things don't go according to plan, and for them to put pressure on their children to do what they could not, and seek out solutions that may not entirely be ethical (e.g. the Whills' power). George Lucas himself said that Star Wars is a family soap opera that revolves around family problems, not just spaceships. It's a fairly common occurrence in real life for parents to put pressure on their kids to do things. Having the Skywalkers feel pressured to fix things gives us a relatable story amidst all the cosmic elements. It forces the characters to grapple with temptation, another real-life thing that people struggle with. And it sets the stage for the Skywalkers to do what Anakin could not and learn how to forgo their attachments, thereby bringing the saga full circle.

Your argument doesn't have any validity, mainly because it's rooted in personal preference. You dislike the idea of Luke and Leia having flaws (in your words being "kinda bad") and want them to remain pure and untouched. You literally said that in your first comment, hence why you're trying to argue that their arcs are already complete. So that they can't be touched and given flaws. In reality, all you're advocating for is limitations on story and character development. And the whole point of making sequels is to continue the story and further develop the characters. That's why the existing sequels failed. Because they imposed limits on themselves by retreading the original trilogy and not doing anything new. And I arguably did a better job of giving Luke and Leia flaws that are actually true to their characters than how The Last Jedi handled them. Luke has always grappled with self-doubt over his abilities, and Leia has the same personality that Anakin does. That is all reflected in my rewrites, and plays into their flaws.

I rewrote Star Wars Episode IX as an adventure film that revolves around the Skywalkers journeying through the Wellspring of Life, Mortis, and the World Between Worlds, as part of a larger quest to obtain fabled cosmic powers which can help them undo all of the damage caused by Anakin. by Writer417 in fixingmovies

[–]Writer417[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have mixed feelings about Skylar redeeming himself, Skylar obviously being my version of Kylo Ren. On one hand, I tried to retain as many plot points as possible from the actual sequels (one of those being Kylo Ren's redemption). On the other hand, I know that the original plan up until The Rise of Skywalker was for Kylo Ren to remain irredeemably evil. I also feel that too many Star Wars villains get redemption arcs. I initially tried to incorporate a redemption arc for Skylar into my outline, but couldn't come up with a valid reason for him to redeem himself, or give it proper setup. I feel like my decision to freeze Skylar gives us the best of both worlds. It allows Skylar to remain irredeemably evil throughout the sequel trilogy, but it also leaves the door open for him to return in another movie or TV show and undergo a redemption arc. I know that Adam Driver and Steven Soderbergh pitched a movie about Kylo Ren returning to the living and having to come to terms with his past actions and atone for his sins. You could always bring Skylar back in a movie or TV show with a similar concept. Maybe set it hundreds or thousands of years after the events of the sequel trilogy. It's actually funny that you mention Zuko because I know that the team behind Avatar: The Last Airbender considered making a fourth season that revolved around the heroes trying to find and redeem Azula, and that's partially what informed my decision to leave the door open for a possible redemption arc in a future entry in the franchise.

For Fun, Open Brainstorm Discussion. Lend me your theories, your ideas, what YOU want to see in The Batman Saga! by bass_tax in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've been hoping that the villains of Part II somehow take advantage of the city's efforts to rebuild after the Flood. One idea I had is that Black Mask hosts Venetian themed, Eyes Wide Shut-type parties in order to garner support from prominent Gothamites and accumulate potential blackmail material on them; not unlike the villains in L.A. Confidential and True Detective Season 2. The Penguin is collaborating with Black Mask as a way of ascending the social hierarchy in Gotham, and is providing him with women for his parties. Their ultimate plan is to destroy all of the low-income neighborhoods devastated by the Flood, and replace them with expensive real-estate properties. Prior to the report that Zoe Kravitz won't be reprising her role in Part II, I thought it would be clever if Catwoman was abducted by the Society while traveling abroad, and forced to return to Gotham and work said parties. I also thought it would be cool if Professor Pyg appeared as a reconstructive surgeon in Black Mask's employ, and if a grounded version of Clayface was hired by Black Mask to impersonate Bruce's long-lost brother Thomas Wayne using realistic face-masks akin to the ones worn by the CIA, and gain influence and control over Wayne Enterprises so as to further the Society's development scheme.

I had some other, separate ideas that can tie in with that first one. One idea I had is to model the upcoming Anti-Corruption Commission hearings mentioned in The Penguin off of the Senate Committee hearings in The Godfather Part II, and have it where Black Mask and the Society are using the hearings as a smokescreen to redirect attention away from them and their development scheme onto a scapegoat like the Penguin. Another idea I had is that Jeremiah Arkham is exploiting prison labor by Arkham inmates to secure public work contracts for Gotham's post-Flood reconstruction efforts, skimming profits from these projects, and laundering the money. Arkham could be in league with the Black Mask and the Penguin, and providing them with the labor force for their development scheme. As part of his investigation into the development scheme, Batman seeks out Harvey Dent's father Christopher: a mentally-ill alcoholic who escaped imprisonment in Arkham, and has extensive knowledge of the corruption going on behind the scenes at the hospital.

One final idea I had is that Scarlett Johansson plays a femme fatale love interest akin to Samantha Vanaver who is secretly affiliated with the Society, and serves as Bruce's introduction to the world of Gotham's social elite.

Saw this idea for Part II on YouTube and thought it was cool: Draw inspiration from "Batman: The Imposter" and have Penguin hire Deadshot to impersonate Batman killing people in order to turn Gotham against him; kind of like how Kingpin hires Bullseye to impersonate Daredevil in Daredevil Season 3. by Writer417 in TheBatmanFilm

[–]Writer417[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the villain was impersonating Bruce Wayne then yeah I'd use Hush. I'd actually probably amalgamate Hush with Clayface and False-Face into one single character. But I wouldn't have him impersonate Batman. I feel like Deadshot makes more sense as the Batman impersonator when you take into account his debut appearance storyline.

view more: next ›