MAN OF TOMORROW: James Gunn Reveals Comic Book Inspiration For Brainiac And Why He Didn't Cast An A-Lister

@KyoShiRo330 - Matey, please can you post the link to where Affleck said this?

@FinnishDude - This erasure of Idris Elba is crazy.

And don't forget Glenn Close was in the first Guardians.

@KyoShiRo330 - stupid.
Yup, Gunn's days sure are numbered it seems...what, with all the projects that are coming out under his umbrella.

please.

@lazlodaytona - lololol

@mck13 - Matey, cultist” or not, you’re just tossing buzzwords instead of looking at the actual [frick]ing numbers.

Creature Commandos going to YouTube doesn’t mean flop, it [frick]ing means WBD is pushing reach, the same tactic HBO used with Game of Thrones [frick]ing pilots.

Peacemaker wasn’t a flop either; it was one of Max’s highest engagement shows during Season 1. You may not like Season 2, but that doesn’t rewrite the [frick]ing metrics.

And Superman at $615M for a reboot with a completely new cast, new universe, and no Batman, Joker, Aquaman or Wonder Woman [frick]ing support?
In today’s [frick]ing post-pandemic climate?
That’s not a flop, that’s a [frick]ing foundation.

Studios care about trajectory, not nostalgia for 2019 [frick]ing ticket sales.

Gunn isn’t trying to recreate Marvel; Marvel tried to recreate Gunn.
Guardians defined the tone that half the MCU then copied for a decade.

The DCU is doing something different:
Character-first, long-term, slow build, no [frick]ing reliance on celebrity bandaids.

You don’t have to love the choices, but pretending every shift in strategy is “failure” isn’t analysis, it’s [frick]ing coping.

And the crazy part?
We’re only one movie in. The actual DCU hasn’t even [frick]ing started yet.

@McMurdo - Hey matey lolol.

@THEKENDOMAN - That's great. But it is still "The Marvel Blueprint" since most of the Marvel characters are played by relatively unknowns or B-listers who played the character and became A-listers.

Or do you really think Hemsworth, Holland, Hiddleston, Olsen, Pratt, Renner or even Evans were household names before Marvel? And RDJ was an A-lister in the 90's but no one wanted to hire him before Iron Man. So, even he came back to the A-list because of Marvel.

So, while your heart's in the right place, the way you are using it to differentiate and as a bullet against Marvel is just not gonna work.

@THEKENDOMAN - I'm not sure why you think they are going for stunt casting or saying casting celebrity for cameo is a bad thing. For a multiverse movie, were they supposed to get some random guy? They did that with John Krasinski and I'm actually pissed about that since he could have actually been a good Reed. Every other guy though? Ex-Marvel actor.

Yes, they tend to get the A-listers for antagonist roles. What's wrong with that? The only A lister main lead I can think of in recent times is Pedro Pascal. Care to name a few others?

Are you pissed on that one guy for that one movie and dishing it out on the entire MCU? Or are you pissed they have different other universes to pull characters from like the Sony and Fox universes and dishing it out on MCU?

I agree, Gunn's choices to save bucks before the movie is released will help the movie make a bigger profit even if it doesn't do great numbers like it did with Superman but that doesn't mean, Marvel should just recast people since they have become A-listers after joining the MCU. DCU is in its infancy and building good will take a whole lot of time especially since the disastrous SnyderVerse so these tactics are good. But once it hits a decent zone, even they will fall under the same umbrella. Secret Wars will mark MCU's 20years so its really unfair of you to say they are only going for A-listers when most of them have only become A-listers after doing this for a while.

These are two types of collaborations we are talking about, one where a underdog goes against someone seasoned so people can root for the underdog when goes toe to toe and eventually wins, another where people of equal caliber are shown together so that no one upstages each other but still manage to create lasting impact. Neither are bad, it all works depending on the project and instance. Even someone like Holland who was quite new at that point, delivered something very nice in Infinity War even though he was surrounding by great talents.

That was a movie where so many A-listers were there, each of them giving their best and having scene-stealing presence yet the underdog also got the chance to shine through. And that movie itself is a great example why both can work depending on the project and instance even in the same movie.

But, its still smart for Gunn to save bucks early on since movies in theaters are pretty much dead right now so playing for the long game is the best move.

@THEKENDOMAN - They are on their multiverse phase so cameo are a given even if they don't serve the purpose to the character themselves, they serve a purpose in showing us that the alternate universe has people filled with characters we know about. Which after those specific cameos, now gives us a legitimate build up to Secret Wars without people thinking "how did that fox character come into this movie."

And, if they had done a lot with those fox characters then their presence in Secret Wars would be in the lines of "Eh, we already got that before in DS2." They had to use them to expose us to the multiverse without using them too much that upcoming movies will suffer for it. These kind of build ups are what Marvel were known for during phase 1 to 3 as well. Only difference is, too many projects and too much streaming content made people lose their interest, excitement and hype anyway.

They are still true to that but times have changed and people don't have that much patience for the C-list as they had for the previous B-list heroes. It just didn't resonate. They did push for new heroes and actors but people just want the old ones back. At least for Marvel. It's true for DC as well but instead of pushing for full projects, Gunn is sprinkling them elsewhere. Something Marvel has done previously as well but right now the legacy heroes are mostly dead or MIA so fans are not interested.

In anyway, for Marvel, this will pay off soon enough.

There's two things though. Nicholas Hoult is an A-lister and sometimes its good to have a few to give the hero a sense of threat but I'm not against the Brainiac casting in anyway. Secondly, your words reminds me of this.

"Part of the Marvel-ization of Hollywood is... you have all these actors who have become famous playing these characters. But they're not movie stars. Right? Captain America is the star. Or Thor is the star. I mean, I'm not the first person to say that. ...it's these franchise characters that become a star."

And that's just not true. Those characters are only stars because of the people who played them. Even if Joker is beloved, Jared Leto proved the character portrayed in a way that doesn't resonate with audience will not become the star and rip off a Star's power as well. You will counter that, Leto should be the reason, they should have gone with an unknown but that's not the reason why it failed. The characterization was the problem not the actor's ability. I don't blame any of the actors for the mess of DCEU, they were all good actors, except Gal perhaps. And going with unknown actors would have only put the DCEU in the graveyard sooner. In fact, the only reason that universe ran that long was cause of the stars attached to it which should be evident after what terrible things were done to the characters of Superman and Batman.

The SnyderCult would be dead before it was born if those stars didn't do the heavy lifting for that mess of a universe.

The best thing that can happen is when good actors get to portray parts that are depicted and characterized nicely. It could be an unknown or already established A-lister, it doesn't really matter.

@FinnishDude - Lmao Gunn's fanboys are delusional. Stallone alone is an A lister and nobody's want to play in his goofy ass universe. That's it.

And yes, having A lister is important for any blockbuster. If you don't understand why it's on you. Is it fair? Should it be important? No, but it is what it is tho.

And you are right for TSS, but how did this turn out box office wise? Lmao.

@THEKENDOMAN Dude, Gunn is literally making Marvel movies but at DC. Even the ones he didn't direct look like cheap GoTG knock-offs.

Also the link: https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/ben-affleck-never-direct-dc-movie-under-james-gunn-1234819884/

@KyoShiRo330 - TSS was an at home theatre same day release Ofcourse it didn’t blow up. Theatres were struggling at that point. That being said that got Gunn the job as head of the DCU so I’d say it worked out pretty good lol
As for big A list stars. The first guardians movie lacked any real A listers and it blew up like at the box office and pretty universally loved