The Immoral Problem With The Flash
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 сер 2023
- The Flash has been one of DC Comics fan favorite superheroes since his inception in the 1940's. Though after countless comic books, tv shows, and cameos, it seems a truly great movie surrounding The Flash never got any traction. Hope's were high for Ezra Millers feature length The Flash film, but upon it's release it seems the DCU still has a long way to go in order to make a truly great Flash movie.
#theflash #batman #nerdstalgic
Sources:
vocal.media/geeks/warner-bros...
www.hollywoodreporter.com/mov...
www.slashfilm.com/900037/gran...
collider.com/the-flash-andy-m...
www.gamesradar.com/the-flash-...
www.slashfilm.com/1319787/tha... - Розваги
They really dropped the ball on this one. Instead of wasting the budget on CGI characters especially when it’s questionable of deceased actors, they should’ve reused footage from the actual shows and movies to portray the multiverse while paying homage the actors. Could’ve had Christopher Reeve’s iconic smile to the camera from space. Also should’ve had the other two actors that actually played the Flash. If Grant and John weren’t available then just reuse footage. Titans did something like this.
Or just spend money reshooting the movie without a creeper/criminal
@@Dan55888 That’s a moronic decision to make from a business standpoint. Ezra Miller is literally in every scene of the movie aside from flashbacks and they already had to shoot additional scenes for younger Barry. Movie was shot before Ezra Miller became controversial. Can’t increase the workload just because one guy committed crimes. WB though should’ve put a formal statement out though that Ezra Miller will not return in films for the foreseeable future.
@@Dan55888after spending 250 mil??? Stop it lol
@@Drifter1989They could have just canned it like they did Batgirl for the write off. That was a mostly done movie without a controversial individual in the lead role.
@@ryanduty4237 They could’ve but guess they honestly had faith in turning a profit.
"CGI death mask" is a great way of putting it. This movie almost single-handedly justified what the actors & writers are striking for
exactly
Actually the whole point of the story isn't just to let go. Like it was stated the whole point is not every problem has a solution. It means somethings you do have to accept but you should still not try to let go until you have tried. Trying in vain of something that is inevitable us whats bad. It's not just to simply accept a tragedy... it'd more nuanced. Thus the studio isn't at odds with it'd own message
@@cotacachi12did you even read his comment? Dude didn’t mention the movies story at all? What are you on?
Por que?
It's scarily prescient. The timing was absolutely perfect.
Can you imagine if they had gotten all the cameos they wanted? Trying to have a serious discussion about mortality and the acceptance of defeat while Caesar Romero’s just laughing his head off in the background?
To be fair, probably would have been a more interesting commentary on the subject than what made it into the movie
@@Maniacbobwhat why
🤣🤣🤣
Cesar Romero was in there
What a disaster it was. Warner Bros should have polished the cgi at least. It's a nightmare to watch the cgi. The Reeve's cameo was disrespectful.
The flash looks like a plastic action figure at times. It’s embarrassing for a 200 million dollar movie.
The plot is 10x worse
@@ComicXanz 200 WHAT!!?
The CGI took me out of the movie mindset within the opening scene with BatFleck
How was the cameo disrespectful? I have yet to have someone explain why other than the fact he was dead, if his family is okay with it, who tf are we to say if it was in good taste or not
Its really shameful to see what WB and Adam Mouschetti did to the Flash and his legacy. Combine that with Ezra Miller's criminal record and this film was already ripe for disaster.
Get ready, because Mouschetti is also directing the new Batman: The Brave and the Bold movie in Gunn's and Safran's new DC movie universe.
sucks to see untalented directors get such big projects... Muschietti had already shown his lack of vision in the IT movies, he should be an assistant director instead of being a head of projects
@@Rubiecat Hmm. I greatly enjoyed the first IT movie, but I found part 2 to be quite mediocre and schlocky. I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that franchise, but after The Flash, I am very concerned about him getting big projects like these...
@@El3ctr0Lun4 I agree with you that part 1 showed potential, but as you say part 2 did not live up to any of it. And with the choices made in The Flash I am now firmly convinced that that guy does not have what it takes to be the head of a creative project, he is not able to come up with creative ways to get around obstacles like budget, time constraints, etc. to tell the story that needs to be told in an entertaining and artistic manner. People like that need to remain on technical jobs, under the supervision of the ones who have actually creative minds.
It was actually Zack Snyder who hired Ezra
That single clip of Christopher Reeves pretty much sums up studios like Disney and WB just a conveyer belt of the same movies getting less good with each release
*Reeve.
It will forever blow my mind that they made a flashpoint movie without the reverse flash.
Also, if they wanted cameos, they could have had gal gadot and Jason momoa in the Atlantis/Amazonian war, as well as having gentry cavill and superman. I think it would have been pretty cool to see him get the Captain America First avenger treatment where they put his likeness on a small guy.
Also, if they really wanted Keaton, he could have been Thomas Wayne
but they didn't as it wasn't supposed to be one
Ain't they did the reverse flash, but it's ezra himself on different timeline instead of eobard thawne
Its worse because the reason why flash has 2 origen stories (his parents dying and getting supepowers in a lab accident) is because he did have a family until the reverse flash quite literlaly retconned his flamily from existence after he was created
Flash is simply incomplete without him
Yeah, I was so confused, I kept saying. Flash has an orgin story, flashpoint already exists as a story why are they making it this, why isn't this a flash movie?
Ezra Miller's disturbing behavior and the PR to cover up his alleged crimes so that he could play a superhero is pretty immoral...
that's where I originally thought this was going
That's what I was expecting
It's sad so many people idolize and look up to these braindead immoral and criminal hollywood propagandist people
He was hired for the role way before his crime spree
@@meowmeow9617can never agree agree with comments, huh.
It seems likely to me that we'll have a spate of these movies where we have tons of cameos or even starring roles of dead or de-aged actors over the next years but I think that once the novelty passes the occurrence of them will diminish in favour of either real or completely digital actors. So all we have to do is survive another like 6-7 years of these abominations and then things will get better.
Huh, kinda like how there was a period where almost every movie needed to be 3D. Now it’s just seen as a cheap gimmick to increase ticket price and you don’t see it as often 🤔
No because this film flopped VERY badly
I hate to break it to you, but first we'll have to endure the impending cinematic AI nightmare. Studios already don't pay artists, why wouldn't they use computers instead? It's a shame, as an AI will fundamentally never be able to create real art.
@@pajamaman2989 I think you're probably right but I think that's why studios are going to start developing entirely digital or AI actors. With dead actors there are technically still likeness rights involved unless you get long dead actors who for a lot of audiences will have lost their cultural value. So it would be cheaper and easier to build someone from scratch, someone whose public image you can completely control. People can't discover your actor abuses their spouse or dressed up in black face one time of their entire existence are fabricated by you. To be clear this will not make for good art, good acting, or good movies, but it could make for good business and profits and Hollywood studios care about little else.
@@Maniacbob Great points. I just hope that moviegoers realize all of this to some degree and start boycotting films which are obviously artistically bankrupt. It's already started with the recent abysmal box office returns of movies like The Flash, Indiana Jones 5, etc.
It's amazing to me that a modern superhero film was having its big emotional scene of the hero realising his mistake and knowing the sacrifice he has to make, and then it goes "Here's Nic Cage in a Superman suit btw".
Be like if during Spider-Man's sacrifice scene in No Way Home it cut to de-aged 90s Leo DiCaprio dressed as Spider-Man.
Isn't this what the SAG strike ultimately boils down to?
SAG strike has nothing to do w this mess.
This was written and shot a solid year before the strike started.
It's more so about residuals in a mostly streaming landscape and the AI scanning and replacing actors is just a part of it.
@@dragonrana88 the SAG strike has a lot to do with those sorts of issues, and the Writer’s Guild also has significant concerns about AI (in that case, it is more about AI replacing screenwriters, but this is still the only chance they have to do anything to stop it, or at least slow it down.)
You’re pretty much just hit the nail on the head on l why SAG is striking right now. Studios want to own the rights to Peoples likenesses so that they can digitally re-create them as many times as they want without compensating or getting approval from the talent.
I think this is a time when legalities will need to catch up to what is possible. I think it will become more and more common for public figures to specifically lay out how their estates can use their image after death. If they have no problem with it, and their estate/the studios follow their wishes, I don’t think it’s immoral, even if is bad from a storytelling perspective(ie used as a cheap nostalgia cash-in).
I still get choked up seeing Christopher Reeve. He was my Superman when I was a kid, and is THE REASON why I became Superman (then later DC in general) fan. I hate what happened to him, even though I love what he did with it. Emotions all over the place that I'm never ready for when I see him again.
I sincerely doubt that George Reeves had anyone to give permission for him, at least not anyone who actually knew him in life and would know his feelings about it, and considering that he killed himself (believed to be at least in part because of his career went post-Superman), it just feels so gross to resurrect him like that. Brandon Routh and Tyler Hoechlin were right freaking there, they didn't have to bring back a dead guy in these circumstances. If they truly had Christopher Reeves's family permission then I am okay with that one bc he a) did not literally kill himself and b) he embraced Superman throughout the rest of his life after so it didn't feel like something he might have hated if he were alive and his family actually knew him enough to know his feelings about it.
Well you see... they would have had to pay Routh and Hoechlin for their cameos. It's cheaper to use dead guys without their or their families' consent.
@@El3ctr0Lun4Yes, but that doesn’t justify it.
@@tcsa872 I know.
Looking back on it, yes I see your point and will agree that a line needs to be drawn. It really isn't okay to be using them like this especially if they had some controversy with the character. Old footage would be better if you're trying to show respect to them. I will say at the time I saw the film, I did smile for a moment with the cameos because it was just nice to see their likeness. I even laughed when Nicholas Cage appeared because it was a version of Superman who never saw the light of day and it was cool to see him for that brief moment on screen
given the cameos didn't do much it probably would have been better to use stock footage.
If they had, I doubt anyone would complain. At least not as much as this
@@autobotproductions1244 it also probably would have saved wbd a bit of money.
While I largely enjoyed the movie, this is the textbook case for the creative issues the actors and writers are striking to keep control over. Plugging in elements from existing films and art to remix them into something new is a tool, not a business model. It should only be done with consent of those artists and include sufficient reimbursement
I love it when Flash said "Come on Barbie, let's go party" and Barbie starts to go party earning $1 Barbillion dollars. Truly one of the flashin moments of all time.
The fact that DC reached Bale YET AGAIN just to use his character to get more people into this film, tells me that they don't care or respect the legacy that these actors left in these characters
Yeah,I’m so glad Bale didn’t show up here,because TDKR was (in my opinion) the almost perfect conclusion to the trilogy,and also glad they didn’t deepfake his face somewhere.
The sad thing is that you need to be a huge dc fan or do a deep dive into dc lore to know who those cameos are
"When does it become amoral?"
We crossed that line already.
Doesn't the movie even end with Barry Allen going "eh never mind" and still changing the past to save his dad, then changing the timeline to have George Clooney as Bruce Wayne? The movie can't decide if it's trying to teach a lesson or not.
Ever since I saw that scene for the first time, I’ve been saying that instead of using AI to bring dead actors back to life (which I though was in very bad taste especially with George Reeves’ cameo), I really wish they could’ve used older Flash actors for cameos instead. Whether it be Grant Gustin, John Wesley Shipp, Kyle Gallner, Michael Rosenbaum (just say that the reason why he is a cartoon is because it’s a different universe and therefore it looks different), and last but not least Rod Haase (especially considering he is the first person to play the Flash in live action, plus also for shits and giggles because his basically the Flash to Adam West’s Batman).
I believe this is a major milestone for continuity and maintaining canon that should not be wasted.
You, sir - are a philosopher. Your videos always offer fresh perspectives as food for thought
When I saw you uploaded, I was here in a flash.
I think it depends on the deceased actor's wishes. If not known then it falls on their family or whoever is in charge of their estate. Lacking that, they should be a legally obligated waiting period before their likeness can be used. Maybe when there couldn't possibly be anyone left that knew them. Robin Williams handed over the rights to his name, signature and likeness to a charitable organization and restricted the use of his image for 25 years after his death.
A Grant Morrison Flash movie would have been a sight to see.
In an alternate universe, the Flash made a tasteful use of cameos from dead actors and actresses. Somewhere, it’s a good movie. Unfortunately, it’s not for us.
In an alternate universe it adapts the source making one of the best hero movies in live action
I think studios will try and I think people will hate it. It'll be a mixed reception and controversial subject for as long as it's considered an option.
They even considered not releasing the movie at some point
@@Zombiesnyder13I wish they didn't
The only good things in this movie were Michael Keaton and Sasha Calle as Supergirl
I hope DC retains her and gives her a movie
Yeah,her and Michael Keaton’s Batman were the only good things about the movie,but honestly that isn’t enough to grant Supergirl her own movie,and the dceu is too damadged,so Im’ glad James Gunn is starting things over,although keeping gal Gadot as Wonder Woman is a bizzare choice.
One of your best videos yet
The Superman cameos should’ve been Tom Welling and Brandon Routh with Helen Slater and the Nick Cage one can stay. The Batman cameo should’ve been Val Kilmer. That way it would be honoring actors who are still alive while serving the same purpose in the story.
7:05 - Holy s***, you just described the exact situation I've been stuck in for at least the last decade.
Here I was thinking about a dismemberment of the corpse of this movie, and what a surprise it was to find about a much deeper, scariest idea.
(insert flash joke about being early)
I love this video, great story-telling, you guys do story-telling for pop-cultures like no other. It's always very fun!
I usually roll my eyes when the "CGI BAD!" people claim that completely serviceable CGI characters "look like they're from a video game", but that might be true with the CGI we're seeing here. It looks like they're not even using subsurface scattering on the skin, it looks so plasticky. Which is weird, since movies have been using this tech for years, and even recent video games have used it. It smacks of corner-cutting, they're ditching anything that will take too long to render.
Thanks for covering the ethics around using CGI and AI imagery of deceased actors. Also liked how your incorporated Christopher Reeve's thoughts on Hollywood greed. The CGI multiverse scene felt like an attempt by Warner Bros' to replicate the successes of MCU and Sony's Spider-Verse.
I LOVED Keaton in the Flash and I‘m so happy he got to be Batman again!
2 minutes of bad character renderings aside, this movie was f*ckin AWESOME! Ezra nailed it hard enough for me to legit forget I was seeing the same actor on-screen several times throughout the movie, though Grant really should have made an appearance
havent watched the movie. didnt know they did the Nic Cage cameo. but that was actually kind of fun to see. damn it! they've got me right where they want me...
The CG looks better in this video than it did on the big screen in 3D
You still watch feature films in 3D?
@@Geeksmithing superhero films
I went to see this movie because of Andy Muschietti
I love when horror directors make superhero movies
And despite everything that caused it to bomb, I had a really good time watching it
I think Muschietti did a great job, and I'm really looking forward to see his take on the DCU's "Brave and the Bold"
Well he did a horrible job, the editing alone is atrocious, the plot is nonsensical and the script is that of a 12 year old banging toys together and calling it an adventure
Yeah I also enjoyed it very much.
Give it 5-10 years and almost everybody who dissed it will say they like it, just like it happened with TMNT 2014, Super Mario Bros 93 and Amazing Spiderman
Man that was a brilliant point about dissatisfaction and the multiverse movies
7:15 what movie was this scene from?
I love the Sandlot reference!!
Go PF Flyers!!
Im sure there will be a James Gunn cut like how JL got a Zack Synder one.
I still hope we get a Flash vs Rouges movie some day
Great video.
that barbie line almost made me leave the theater
I genuinely thought that was just a fake online due to the success of the Barbie movie
I doubt it.
1:30 which song is this? I have heard it somewhere else. I need the name.
While I've liked some of your videos, this is the First I've Liked. Kudos.
Great vid. I didn't watch the film I'm thinking of just cutting off WB altogether. It really bothers me how many people do not see the problem with it, let alone see it as the evil it is. Even as an isolated incident this goes way over the moral and ethical lines. Should be considered criminal imo.
Unfortunately as long as there are still braindead fans who do nothing but consume and get their nostalgic dopamine fixes then this will continue the way you pointed out. I'm not typically a cynic, but I can't see this resolving itself soon. Best case, Hollywood will take smaller steps every few years towards it until it eventually collapses
This is an amazing video
5:45
Oh, man. Reeve was not just right when he said that. He was more than right.
What they did was beyond disrespectful.
This episode was way heavier than expected. Great though
As someone who grew up with George Reeves Superman and Adam West's Batman, I loved these nods at the end of the movie. Also seeing Christopher Reeve and Helen Slater together in a scene was wonderful, seeing that we never got that back when their movies were made. I don't think what Christopher Reeve said when he was young necessarily should be set in stone, as many of us change our minds with age. That said I also don't think your prediction of totally CGI'd movies would work. These nods were nice, but we generally wouldn't want to see whole movies of them , when we can watch the reruns, and there are exciting new young actors to look forward seeing. I just saw the mini series Hollywood and was pleasantly surprised to realise one of the main actors from that will be the new Superman.
1:20 Hey, Rick and Morty!
The person who served as reference for the likeness of Jay Garrick was editor Jason Ballantine.
It is a great video because it is nothing I expected it to be. Still, pretty immoral as you said when you think about it
It’s depressing…When the Nic Cage scene came out, I felt sad.
All in all, it’s up to the actors to explicitly state to not have their likeness used in a Will
Great movie. Wish i had seen it in the theater, but i watched it on max.
It was a movie about nothing. DC could have saved millions of dollars and just tweeted "We are starting our universe over. With all new actors."
That was the only purpose of this movie. I liked Supergirl, but that was it.
Christopher Reeves would probably been disgusted at the fact that they have a perfectly good superman (aka Henry Cavill) sitting there and Warner Bros decided to say Nah We want you again. He would have hated the fact that the character wasn’t allowed to evolve beyond his likeness.
*Reeve.
I fully agree with you - and not just Cavill, but also Brandon Routh, Tyler Hoechlin, Tom Welling, Dean Cain, and the two Superboy actors are all alive and well - why not reach out to any of them? By the way, Cavill does show up in one of the cameos.
And Ed Wood caught holy Hell why?😂❤
1st big mistake, no Grant Gustin Flash, I honestly feel if he had shown up to give the speech to Ezras flash (who met him briefly in the CW show) about whatever you do it must happen I think it would have had a harder impact (like 1 spiderman stopping another from making a mistake). DC dropped the ball with the CGI cameos, I can handle Keaton, Clooney showing up in person and although I would have liked to seen Melissa Benoist as supergirl it would not have fit for the way her CW show Supergirl was portrayed so the new actress playing a vengeful Supergirl made perfect sense. Spiderman No Way Home worked because the actual actors reprised their roles and of course the perfect multiverse comic movie Into the Spiderverse, sure spider pig was always a stretch but they made it work against the odds and across the spiderverse went even more crazy but still did it properly somehow.
You want to be in a movie, don't complain!
2:47 isn't the John Ship Flash canonically dead?
The biggest problem with the flash as a character himself is that his powers aren't definitive. That leaves audiences questioning if he's got this power and that why didnt he use it. In the movie you see him running really fast and saving children but its nothing really interesting because we know he's fast. In the entire movie we never really get to see him fully use his powers even though he's strong enough to take on Zods soldiers. But all he does best is push people. The writers just created a character that when they wish is a God and other times is useless.
I hated how they never capitalized on the two times the flash killed the kryptonians. I thought that was going to lead to something but nope they just drop it all together and then dark flash comes in for like a minute and then dies. I swear DC had to be lying when they said this movie was good. This movie was so unsatisfying, the dark flash character could have been so much better but he feels wasted. Supergirl was also wasted and she was the stand out character.
Agreed, I think they would've benefited from giving Flash an origin movie, and then showing him mastering his powers throughout his movies and other appearances. So he's not a god
@@vice2versa the problem is they didn't know what movie this was. Was this a Batman movie, Supergirl movie, or maybe was it a Zod movie?
I can see why Andy is directing Batman Brace and The Bold. Those batman scenes were so dope.
When talking about posthumous permission. It usually is falls to the current estate owners (family members, lawyers, aka whoever currently receives residual / royalty payments) sometimes this is seen as selling out the artist examples include Bob Marley, Keith Haring, Basquiat. Selling merchandise the original artist probably would not have approved while alive.
The Congress, the Robyn Wright story is a movie that kept me on the edge of my seat because we STILL don't know what we are going to do with a world that dies around us with a child we made that archives us as we are now, and shares it with the world for as long as we nurture the child (technology).
When can we just smile at a hero again?
Problem I've always had with Flashpoint.
"I went back in time to save my parents."
...Proceeds to spend no time with them at all.
That and how saving his parents equates to multiverse going crazy with people's lives being completely changed or nonexistent
No one ever questions this
@@ninjanibba4259 I believe it's less that Barry went back to save his mum and more that he went back at all. Breaking the timeline and whatnot.
@@WalkerRileyMC
But how tho, that's the confusing part
@@WalkerRileyMCit doesn’t make sense though since he already went back in time in JL.
I really hope AI is a Furby, but unlike Fubies, AI has found a place in many forms of Art and even Corporate reporting and communication development. Its here, I just hope we use it more sparingly.
When it comes to Christopher Reeves, I defer to John Glover. He worked with Reeves on Smallville. He said Chris loved Supes & would have wanted to be included.
The other actors mentioned though? Yeah, bit weird.
6:42 not fair. Nobody wanted this!
2:40 - Already a 10/10 video
Probably nobody remembers this but back in the late 80s early 1990s there was a commercial for the gap had Audrey Hepburn dancing around and I think there was a swiffer commercial around the same time and had Jim Kelly pushing one around. Or maybe it was Carrie Grant drinking a Coke. Remember to clearly and it might’ve been several different companies that were doing similar commercials at the same time. In any event, that was the first time that we had this debate about resurrecting dead celebrities to play parts in your movies.
And I think where that is ultimately going to lead, is that a person will have to have a copyright on their own physical appearance, which they, or there a state, will lease out to entertainment companies.
A bigger problem for me is not so much the use someone’s appearance. I mean they have resurrected dead doctors for episodes of Doctor Who on a number of occasions and no one seems to mind that. I think the bigger problem is that these Resurrection, as well, not act like their inspirations did. Christopher Reeve brought a zillion, tiny nuances and quirks to superman, and anybody impersonating him through deep fakes, and CG is not going to be able to bring that stuff to the screen because ultimately, every actor is an individual and every actor brings, a piece of them selves to the wrong. You can put Andy Serkis in a McCabe suit and have him driving a replica of Cary Grant but it’s not going to ask or feel like Cary Grant even if it looks absolutely positively like him and sounds like him. And these realistic simulations, driven by unrealistic performances, are going to erode the reputation of the legitimate work that those people did. So for instance, right now we think of Cary Grant has carry grants, but eventually when he’s showing up in American pie XXVII and crap like that people are ultimately not going to remember him for his classic movies, and they will only remember him for being the crazy guy who crashes his hang glider into the girls dorm.
Reeve's quote perfectly describes the mandoverse
Deep, “Not Every problem has a solution” 😂🎉
The family of some actor from the past is going to take legal action, ask for the money, and it's going to be a big money which will make studios make this straight in this regards
I think if the actors give permission for their likeness to be used then it’s ok; if not, then it’s not
I wondered about the application of this tech a while back, specifically for actors who went before their work was done. What would Bruce Lee think about completing “Game of Death,” for instance, using a CGI version of himself to finish the missing scenes. Would it be macabre and immoral, or completing a work of art the artist wanted finished?
I feel like cgi is only getting worse and worse in time
Remember 2008 Iron man?
That movie was more than a decade and a half ago
Yet movies nowadays have cgi worse than ones in the 90s
And no the visual effects don’t change that
it's becasue those old movies had like, acutal sets, and actual props, and CGI was used just for things taht needed it
Like in iron man, the armor actually existed as a costume, or at least the helmet, and the cgi armor was made based on a real existing model; plus the cgi was usually added over scenes filmed in acutal sets, and not green screen, making it not look fake by being placed in a real setting; the only scenes that are total cgi are the ones impossible to do with real poeple (and coincidentally also tend ot be the ones that hold up the least well.)
@@TheAuthorStudios what's stopping movies from doing the same instead of slapping cgi to literally every problem
I feel like the whole industry is too reliant on cgi now,rather than using it sparingly for stuff that is necessary,they use it to replace sets,and even replace actors.
@@powdereyes2210 it's just easier to overwork CGI artists than acutally putting in effort to make great VFX
Just like how it's easier to do whatever the fuck they're doing in conteporary hollywood than acutally putting in effort to make a good movie.
7:44 Umm.. yeah, I'd like to see that. I'm not seeing the issue here.
I love this movie!
I feel like the writer and actors did a stellar job. The CGI elements really distracted! I agree with many people they should have used pre-filmed or re-filmed footage to show time passing, rather than 3D models.
What does a feature film mean? 0:27
The worst part is that flash didn't even learn his lesson.
Honestly I don’t think the cameos are inherently the problem. My theater went nuts at the Nicolas Cage Superman scene, in a good way. It’s more like Flash walked into the AI debate at the worst possible moment and no one wants to see anything else about it.
True honestly
Zack Snyder fumbled the casting with Ezra Miller, Gal Gadot and imo Jason Mamoa.
Jason isn't a good Aquaman he's passable. He will be a bloody fantastic Lobo.
You can see Jason plays the same role in Aquaman, Fast X, See.
Lobo doesn't need to be act
I met Jason Momoa in person, he is WAY more of an asshole than some may believe.
I met him signing stuff (after waiting in line for about an hour, and paying way more than any other actor there, including Brent Spinner) and he was a dejected asshole with a posse of super strict security making sure no one damn took a picture of him while in line.
Meanwhile Joe Flanigan and Jewel Staite were wonderful and allowed selfies and talked super friendly to me for a fraction of Momoas inflated ego. This was either just before of after Aquaman came out.
He is not the chill Hawaiian you think he may be
@@Dan55888 Sorry for your experience. He probably just had a bad day. Everyone has a good day or a bad day.
But that also proves my Lobo part.
sounds like he would have wanted improved quality, as evidenced by a few films with better sequels than the cash strapped superman films and its producers, but overall, sounds like estates would say, yes for a price to likenesses that don't tarnish the rep.
Holy shit. I didn’t realize they had done all this. What a nightmare.
Till now I thought that was actually Teddy Seer.
i mean wasnt someone going to make a movie with cg james dean?
Thx
Their families obviously gave permission. Like they did for Tarkin in Rogue One. Also, Jay Garrick was played by the movie's editor. He confirmed it is his face in an interview.
And I'm sure they're well compensated for that, however that's beside the point. The point is that they have no authorization from the people portrayed because *checks notes* they're dead.
@@arkhe1n107 its not beside the point. its not Immoral when the family gives permission. I'm sure they if anybody knew whether or not the person would have been ok with it. The reason the video doesn't mention family permission is cause then the video would lose its point lol.
George Reeves has no living family members nor an estate who could’ve authorised it. So who exactly did they get permission from?
@jamiedeakin3362 and even so, as the previous commmentor mentioned the families would be heavily compensated. So if warner bros bigwigs showed up to your doorstep and said "hey heres a million dolars to use your dead father's face in a terrible movie?" Of course theyd say "yes, sir." Is that really moral?
George Reeves died childless 64 years ago and he had no siblings. They likely had nobody to even ask, so they didn't. And if they did ask? They asked someone tangentially related who didn't know or care about the guy and any wishes he might have had.@@theresurrection6561