On September 21st 2020, Microsoft purchase Bethesda Softworks and its parent company ZeniMax Media in a massive $7.5 billion dollar deal that has the potential to reshape the video game landscape. Due to the massive deal, Microsoft now owns acclaimed game studios like Arkane Studios (Dishonored), ID Software (Doom), Machine Games (Wolfenstein) and Bethesda Studios (Elder Scrolls and Fallout), all of which create multiplatform games that regularly release to critical and commercial acclaim. Microsoft and Xbox have been criticized for its lack of first party games (in comparison to its competitors Nintendo and Sony) but the purchase of Bethesda and its parent company could rewrite this narrative and push more consumers toward the Xbox platform. Will the massive purchase help Microsoft sell its new Xbox consoles this fall?
One factor that would need to be accounted for would be that most or all of the games are non-exclusive to the Xbox, which would affect how many new Xbox users come forth. – J.D. Jankowski12 months ago
It seems like Elder Scrolls and other massive games will be on PS5, but they will also be included Day 1 on Gamepass, which is Xbox's Netlfix-like feature. So Xbox owners who have the subscription will get them for the cost of subscription rather than the likely $70 price tag. – Sean Gadus12 months ago
The Mandalorian Season 1 has been a huge critical success for Disney . One of the key factors for the series’s success was the lack of prior Star Wars knowledge that was necessary for viewers of the series. The series was largely accessible to new audiences who may have never watched Star Wars film before, though it still contained many references and connections for long time Star Wars fans. For season 2 (which debuts October 30th), there have been many rumor circulating that the series will include characters from other Star Wars books and animated series. Rumored among the cast include characters from The Clone Wars and Rebels like Mandalorian warrior Bo-Katan and former Jed Ahsoka Tano. While these characters are popular among Star Wars fans, their appearances may required more complicated explanations/exposition for those who have only watched The Mandalorian. Should The Mandalorian remain largely separated from other Star Wars stories, or it should it integrate characters from the wide Star Wars universe, at the risk of losing some of what made the first season so refreshing and distinct?
This is a pretty interesting topic. Unfortunately, I can't see this discussion ever being anything more than an opinion piece. There will always be an argument for including characters from the extended universe of Star Wars or simply creating a new character for Mandalorian. If you write on this topic it would probably be best to write about the pro and cons to either choice. And use criticisms fans have had for either decisions to support your arguement. – Blackcat13012 months ago
While the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) is an ongoing, expanding film series, the original characters from Phase I remained key characters throughout the past ten years of film. In Avengers: Endgame, some of the major original characters completed their narrative arcs including Iron Man and Captain America. With the departure of Robert Downey Jr.’s Tony Stark and Chris Evan’s Steve Rogers, the MCU will need other characters to play a larger role in the overall narrative. Which new or existing characters will serve as the narrative focus for future phases of Marvel films? This article could discuss potential candidates for new corner stones of the MCU, as well as which characters have the most pressing character arcs that need to be resolved.
This is a really interesting topic to discuss considering the fact that Phase II is still nascent. With MCU being the biggest money churning franchise in history, an exploration of the possible future direction the universe may take and how it copes with audience fatigue while managing to still keep things fresh and interesting would make for an intriguing read. – Dr. Vishnu Unnithan1 year ago
I am an enormous fan of this topic, as it is something I wonder and have many thoughts on. There are so many different ways to go, but I think there are some characters that were given just enough potential to represent the MCU. – Abie Dee1 year ago
Far From Home sought to tease that Spiderman might fill that void - in that he was Iron Man's protege - but I think it will depend largely on how some of the new entries into the universe perform. Let's not forget that Steve Rogers grew into his lead. His first stand-alone movie was not that well received and in comparison to Iron Man he was pretty boring. Iron Man's strength came from RDJ's personality and acting. I think the next face will need to be along the same lines - a compelling character with a really strong actor behind it. – MidnightSunrise1 year ago
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a huge public health topic that has affected many facets of human life this year. One of the entertainment industries most affected by the virus has been the video game industry, which is a global, interconnected industry. A variety of conferences (like E3 and GDC) have been cancelled or postponed, cancellations of major E-Sports events and even game delays (Virtuos Studios recently delayed the Switch Port of Outer Worlds) due to complications related to the virus. Other thoughts would be to explore how Coronavirus disease will impact the production release of Next Gen consoles that are currently on the horizon.
Great topic. If I were writing an essay on it, I don't think I'd be able to resist somehow bringing at least references to at least one video game about epidemics or infestations. – JamesBKelley2 years ago
Oh, so timely. Love it. I think it would also be interesting to see if there have been any other big events in recent history that have impacted the video game industry -- natural disasters, other crises, etc. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but it would be interesting to see if there's any point of comparison. Definitely want to read this! – Eden2 years ago
This would be a good topic to write about. – OkaNaimo08191 year ago
In addition to the cancellations, I'm interested in hearing how playing games has changed in the face of COVID-19. Who's playing more, or less? Who's discovering new games? What do gaming audiences want now? Why? – Stephanie M.1 year ago
The 2017 film Justice League had a troubled production history, with the film undergoing major changes before and during production. This resulted in the theatrical release being very different from how the film had been envisioned by its original director Zack Snyder. For more than two years many fans (and some of the film’s stars) have campaigned for Snyder (using #ReleaseTheSnyderCut) to create a version of the film that more closely aligned with his original vision which include unused villains like Darkseid. In May 2020, HBO and Warner Bros. announced that "The "Snyder Cut" would be an exclusive to the new HBO Max streaming service and the project will launch sometime in 2021. This version will reportedly cost $20–30 million to complete with special effects, editing, and other revisions. Is the Snyder cut a positive thing, allowing a creator to finally realize his true vision in some way and an admittance that the studio made a mistake with the original. In contrast, could the Snyder Cut demonstrate that movie studios are listening too much to a vocal group of fans about a film that even with significant revisions may not fully satisfy its audience? Lastly, would Warner Bros. have allowed the Snyder Cut to be created in a time period where they didn’t have a massive streaming service (HBO Max) to promote/sell to consumers.
"Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn)", was released on February 7th to generally favorable reviews, but the film has failed to fallen well short of its box office projections within its first week. The female lead and female directed D.C. films has been a long anticipated film and is one of the first comic book films to have an all female team (Harley Quinn, Huntress, Dinah Lance, Renee Montoya, and Cassandra Cain). Despite the film’s similarities to a film like Deadpool (both films have an R-rating, with a narrator who is known for irreverent humor and fourth wall breaks), it is unlikely the film will even approach the box office success of that film or a more serious R-rated film like 2019’s Joker. Despite similarities and common links to other popular properties, why hasn’t "Bird of Prey" been more successful with audiences?
Good question. One angle you could take is that audience and critic tastes clearly differ. Rotten Tomatoes review metrics can show this. Go from there after that. – J.D. Jankowski2 years ago
Good question. From what do have been hearing is that Bird of Prey isn't the Bird of Prey fans are familar with.
It's okay for film makers to take liberties with the source material but if they are to really make it work they still need to make it recognizable.
One big red flag is that the protagonist is Harley who doesnt exist in the Bird of Prey comic. When I heard the title of the movie I thought it was going to be about canary after all she is a member and she is named after a bird for goodness sake.
second red flag is that the film is after suicide squad that was a failure.
The final red flag is that it was promoted as a feminist film and had an all female cast. Now there is nothing wrong with a feminist film, however there has been a big backlash towards feminist films in the past few years.
I never did watch the movie but I knew it was doom to fail. The only reason why I know this is by a bit of research. – Amelia Arrows2 years ago
Disney launched earlier this week (11/12/19) and reportedly had 10 million subscribers in the first 24 hours of its availability. This number is expected to continue to grow over the next few weeks. How will the streaming landscape be affected by Disney ‘s release? What effect will Disney have on Netflix and the upcoming HBO Max? Will Disney push these companies out of the streaming business? Will Netflix and HBO Max be forced to adopt new strategies to entice customers? The article would speculate/analyze how Disney is changing the streaming landscape and business.
Todd Philips’s Joker film is the most talked about film of the fall. When the film premiered, some critics lauded it as a masterpiece while others expressed dissatisfaction and outrage over the content within the film. With Joker passing $900 million dollars at the box office, it is apt to discuss the factors that contributed to the film’s success. With this in mind, did the controversy and outrage circulating around the film provide easy/free marketing for the film and bring attention from mainstream media outlets that otherwise would have spent less time covering and discussing the film?
Fix some of the minor grammar errors please. I think this topic is definitely relevant and has room for debate since we can easily list other controversial movies that did NOT gross successfully at the box office (looking at you Last Temptation of Christ) as a means of providing counter examples to show the movie must have had other factors involved in its success. – Will Nolen2 years ago
A good topic, but there are some errors. "Philip's" --> "Phillips's" "the factor" --> Should this be "the factors"? – Emily Deibler2 years ago
I feel like the controversy absolutely would have made it more popular. There is the old saying "any publicity is good publicity." – Debs2 years ago
I think I it's absolutely a topic worth exploring as we are all affected by the media around us in multiple ways both great and small. However, to explore this further you would need to expand upon other factors that would have sparked a major market interest: Todd Phillip taking a huge tonal shift away from the likes of The Hangover Trilogy, a strong a popular IP getting a solo outing, the inevitable comparison that is always rife with a new iteration of the Joker as a character not to mention a film that was marketed as a breath of fresh air in an otherwise heavily formulaic genre and industry. Something different was to be said with this film whether good or bad and I think these factors made it a popular talking point and a must-see for many people regardless of the conversations surrounding it. – CAntonyBaker2 years ago
Daniel Craig will soon be suiting up for his fifth and final James Bond film, titled "No Time To Die", set to release spring 2020. The film will reportedly see Bond retired in Jamaica (a familiar spot for the Bond series and original author Ian Fleming) at the start of the film. Presumably, Bond is reluctantly called back for one last mission. With this being Craig final Bond film, changes are on the horizon for the massively successful and long enduring franchise. Rumors have long been floating around the internet that the next bond may break gender or color barriers with the casting of the next 007. After Craig’s final film, will the James Bond producers make ambitious changes to its iconic character, or will chose to continue the series’s status quo?
If we're going to see a Jane Bond, then I demand to see a Marty Poppins! – Amyus2 years ago
I have a feeling that they will go hard in one of two directions. In one they go even darker and more gritty than they have before, OR they decided to go goofier and more comedic. Either way I will be right there watching. Great idea! – tredmond2 years ago
I think it'll be interesting to compare it to the Mission Impossible series where you have multiple directors of varying backgrounds using an established IP to experiment and tell a new story. Obviously exploring the potential casting decisions is a hot topic right now but what would a James Bond film look with an expressive and experimental director aiming to turn the genre on its head? – CAntonyBaker2 years ago
I don't think James Bond will be as relevant anymore. He'll just be another action star/spy like John Wick or Jason Bourne, no longer as unique. With the #MeToo movement and political correctness, his character would also be more different than it was in the 60's and 70's. Maybe better, but not as distinct.
And no, I don't believe he should change genders. It's James Bond. 007 as a woman isn't James Bond. People watch 007 because he's a man. I feel a gender change would lose more people. Better yet, do a different agent - you don't need a female 007.
Given the fact that he's been a racist at least once and was written as white, it probably also wouldn't be a good idea for him to change races. I wouldn't be against it, but it wouldn't make sense. – OkaNaimo08192 years ago
The release of Todd Phillips’s Joker film is imminent. With Joaquin Phoenix in the title role, the film received honors and praise at the Venice Film Festival. Though the film has been generating controversy for its content, the film is projected to have an opening week of about $80 million dollars when it debuts on October 4th. This is a massive projected gross for a R rated film. Will the critical and potential commercial success of stand alone (and more mature) films like Joker influence the direction of Warner Bros. and D.C.’s future films?
I notice that you write about Batman quite consistently. But, this new chapter in the scheme has definitely caught my attention. I watched with awe at Cesar Romero in the 1966 TV series, Jack Nicholson in 1989, and the role that brought me back into the mix, Heath Ledger in 2008. Don't see why this highly anticipated depiction would disappoint. I would like to see a good block of writing on Heath Ledger's outstanding and highly acclaimed characterization. – L:Freire2 years ago
I think this is a valid question to ask and unless this movie somehow becomes a stunning flop (which, let's be honest, is unlikely) then I think it will have a major impact on future D.C. films. Taking in the poor reviews for Suicide Squad and other D.C. films lately, it appears that D.C. definitely wants to go in a more artsy and niche direction, something that previously hasn't existed (at least to my knowledge) for comic book adaptations. I think D.C. has been criticized a lot for its inconsistency in regard to the tone of their movies, and this new Joker movie may solve that problem for them. – BakerQ2 years ago
Thanos was a break out character from Marvel’s Avengers: Infinity War. Despite being the villain/avenger’s enemy of the story, the film treated the mad titan as a pseudo protagonist. Thanos must go on his own "hero’s journey" to attain his ultimate goal and achieve his dreams/desires. This was an unusual choice for a villain, but was effective in many ways, with critical time spent developing/examining the characters powerful (if twisted) worldview. With this in mind, it is important to examine how Thanos is treated in Avengers: Endgame, Infinity War’s follow up, and to discuss whether Thanos is further developed or if the character now takes the more stereotypical/traditional "villain" role within the narrative.
I think it’s important to note how in Endgame, there was no other way but for Thanos to be the traditional villain because his actions had already occurred, thus giving the Avengers a little more advantage because now instead of him risking everything, they had to do the same even though they win in the end. So his role made you think that no matter the outcome, sacrifices and death had to unfold – AccordingtoJazz2 years ago
Thanos has a long history in the original Marvel comics universe where he has moved from out and out villain, to a more tragic figure, even to hero (or anti-hero). It would be interesting to hear more on how the movies drew from this history. – AlephZeroHeroes2 years ago
Electronic Arts’ handling of the Star Wars franchise has been notoriously troubled. With controversies ranging from loot boxes for both Star Wars Battlefront games to the closure of Visceral games (working on a first person adventure game with Uncharted writer Amy Hennig), the corporations have been criticized for its mishandling of one of the world’s most prolific brands. The recently revealed Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order, a first person action adventure game set in the years after Revenge of the Sith, has brought excitement to many Star Wars and video game fans. With this in mind, will this be the Star Wars game fans have been waiting for? The article could analyze gameplay/demos released so far, information discussed by the developer, and the listed influences for the game to help explain why Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order has so many fans excited about Star Wars video games once more.
Interesting topic. Since footage from trailers and demos rarely reflect actual gameplay seen upon release, I think it might be interesting to see whether the game's hype stems more from the footage we've received or whether it's more rooted in the Star Wars brand and not the specifics of the game itself (i.e., are Star Wars fans just excited for ANY quality Star Wars game at this point that they're willing to overlook possible red flags like early access or special additions that cost more, usually for superfluous content like cosmetics). That being said, it might also be worth noting that while the initial release of EA's biggest Star Wars game to date, "Battlefront II," was dampened by complaints about the game's initial lack of content and its lootbox controversy, "Battlefront II" is now considered a successful game and liked by the majority of the gaming community. This has only come after over a year of updates and patches, so it might also be worthwhile to discuss whether Fallen Order will strive to be ready on launch day (a rarity in contemporary game publishing), and how not being ready at release will affect its reception. – CulturallyOpinionated2 years ago
Streaming services are changing the way we view media. There are currently several key streaming services (Netflix, Hulu,) and some currently planning services/recently launched services (D.C., Disney). What are the benefits and downsides of streaming services, when compared with traditional cable or broadcast television? Compare the benefits and downsides of both styles of media consumption and creation.
One of the most interesting topics relating streaming services, particularly services like Netflix and Spotify, is that these companies are pre-revenue. Just last year, Netflix spent almost 10 billion dollars on content, which is even $2 billion more than they originally intended to spend. Spotify is the same way. They’re spending large amounts of money to gain access to more music, while also trying to grow their subscriber base. Neither of these companies are making money. They are playing the long game. They know in 10 years they’ll have so much content that they won’t have to spend billions of dollars each year—they will already have a ridiculous amount of entertainment to offer new subscribers. I think this is a great strategy, and it definitely benefits the consumer. We are lucky enough to live in a golden age of TV, where high quality programs are being released left and right. Netflix and Spotify are the pioneers of the streaming industry, And I can’t wait to see what each company has in store in the future – shanethewriter2 years ago
One of the benefits of streaming services is most definitely the convenience. There's nothing like the feeling of booting up the Netflix app and watching a movie/show you are invested in from the comfort of wherever you are. There's also the exclusive content that can't be seen anywhere else because other networks didn't want to invest in it. The biggest downside is that nothing lasts forever on a streaming service, not even the exclusive shows produced in house. Netflix's most viewed shows are licensed shows like Friends and The Office, but Warner Bros owns Friends and NBC owns The Office, two networks that have their own streaming services in the works and are currently trying to take those shows off Netflix. Netflix exclusive shows like Sense8 or One Day at a Time, the type of shows that aren't offered anywhere else get canceled because of the lack of viewership. Marvel shows that were Netflix exclusives like Daredevil get canceled because of the emergence of Disney+. There's also the fact that there are a lot of streaming services in the works where it'll get to the point of being just another of cable television – cbo10942 years ago
One of the benefits of streaming services is easy accessibility. Traditional cable and broadcast television could only be accessed in the one place. At home, in the lounge or the bedroom, or wherever the TV was. Streaming services can be accessed only more than one device, including more than one portable device. Should you have a lengthy break between meetings/classes but not too lengthy that you can leave the building? Whack on the next episode of the show you're binging. The biggest downside to streaming services and in particular to that easily accessible aspect is the addiction that comes along to it. There is virtually no effort in starting a new TV show or movie and that can sometimes distract some from the real work they need to do. – olivialocascio2 years ago
I think that although the convenience of streaming sites is a benefit, it can also be a disadvantage. With so much convenience humans become lazy. Instead of having the fact that there is nothing interesting on TV at a particular time to encourage us to go do something active, we always have an excuse to sit and just watch a screen. – HannahTurner2 years ago
Streaming services, even ones like Amazon Prime Video who still use advertisements, are the next step in the evolution of the television medium. It allows for more personalization of the viewing experience: namely, letting the viewers choose what they watch instead of programming it for them. More importantly, it allows for more controversial, hard-hitting content which the old corporate controlled system prevented. I just wrote a paper on Rod Serling’s legacy in television and censorship. I agree with him that artists shouldn’t be dictated by corporations. They are two different worlds. – KennethMay2 years ago
A downfall of streaming is definitely the issues of acquiring content. The best example I can I think of is Spotify’s spotty content; unfortunately you can’t get every single album or single on Spotify, especially movie albums. This promotes users to spend money on another subscription to somewhere like Apple Music or going out and purchasing the album or single physically or digitally; in some cases purchasing isn’t an option either, creating a rift for the streamer. – roraruu2 years ago
here's a helpful podcast by freakonomics about this for whoever takes this on: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/spotify/ – emaglio2 years ago
Yesterday, after much speculation and rumors, Google announced "Stadia" its streaming only platform designed for gaming. Looking at the announcement that google made, the article would examine the pros and cons of Google’s approach to gaming. This article could examine streaming benefits and downsides, the integration of other technologies (Youtube will be built in to the platform) and the potential benefits and downsides for consumers and developers.
I'm surprised that "Stadia" isn't receiving more attention on this platform because the technology is poised to impact several aspects of video game entertainment: playing games, streaming games, watching others play, purchasing games, jumping into other streamers' games mid-play, immediately finding walkthroughs, and many more. I know that one of the main drawbacks being heavily discussed is the potential for lag and latency with cloud streaming, but I don't personally know the specifics regarding the technology and specifications needed to run it smoothly. I do hope someone with more information and understanding of the technology will take on this topic because if it is successful, it's certainly has the potential to change the landscape of video games in some dramatic ways. – Aaron2 years ago
With Google's recent Stadia E3 Presentation, there is a lot more information to add to this potential article. Could also include the ideas about xCloud and Bethesda talking about their cloud capabilities as well. – JagoCarithian2 years ago
With the recent announcements that The Punisher has been cancelled and Jessica Jones will air its 3rd and final season soon, what will happen to the characters featured in all of Netflix’s Marvel shows? There is an agreement that Marvel cannot use the characters until 2 years after the cancellation of the shows. When those two years are up, will we see these characters reappeared for Marvel’s films or the Disney Streaming Service, or will these characters be completely rebooted?
My name is leonard, I’m from New Jersey, I want to share my testimony on how I became a real vampire. Yes, I always wanted to become a vampire because it has always been my desire to be one. And I search links and websites, I even took the risk and search on the dark web, that moment in my life was like a dream come true, There I finally get learn more about it as well, and it was all amazing to me that were i saw a comment and say contact mrs maria and I get instant responses, I followed the terms. I gave a try and it really works out for me, today I’m living testimony, Contact via email: [email@example.com] in a space 3 days, I got a vampire blood which was sends to me via courier, give it a try and share your own testimony the way i just did thanks and good luck. – benleonard0993 years ago
As reported, the rebooting of X-Men is not on the MCU's agenda for a long while. I would think that if the rebooting is an option they are considering we would have to wait longer than 2 years.
On a side note, I am happy that they are at least releasing Jessica Jones season 3. It is a personal favorite for -better- female representation and I'd hate to see it end just like that. – hazalse2 years ago
Last week it was announced that the development of Metroid Prime 4 for Nintendo Switch would be completely scrapped due to quality concerns and restarted with Metroid Prime Trilogy developer Retro Studios. The game joins a long line of games have that went through multiple versions and studio changes. This includes monumental failures like Duke Nukem Forever (moving game studios and engines multiple times), or the acclaimed Fall Out 3 (move to Bethesday Studios and completely overhauled). This article could examine the successes and failures of these drastic moves and the merits of changing studios/starting over from scratch.
Another interesting thing to consider in this is player access to these lost files and whether they decide if they were worthy of being further developed. For example with Bethesda, the Elder Scrolls is notorious for cutting fully developed questlines, options, etc. Players later overhaul these as mods and in some instances, people harass the developer for cutting this content. – Pamela Maria3 years ago
EA is one of the biggest, if the biggest video game company in the world. The company has an exclusive 10 year deal with Disney to make AAA Star Wars video games. Their run has been marred with controversy and critical disappointment. The 1st Battlefront game was launched with a limited amount of content, which drew negative attention from many critics and fans. Battlefront 2 was mired with an enormous loot box/micro transaction controversy, which contributed to disappointing sales (compared to EA’s expectations). EA also cancelled and closed Visceral Studios and its Single Player Action and Adventure Star Wars Game, an idea many fans were excited about. There is now a rumor that another Star Wars project has been cancelled. Why can’t EA make Star Wars, one of the most profitable brands in the world, reach the massive heights that many expected in terms of sales, game output, and critical reception?
Aquaman has been incredibly successful since its release. While many analysts and critics were skeptical of its chances at success, the film has done incredible business, being the repeat number one at the box office for 3-4 weeks. The film is now DC’s most successful film overseas and has the potential to be a billion dollar films (sits at around 800 million currently). What qualities or circumstances have helped make Aquaman so successful, compared to the lackluster Justice League (which was both critically and commercially disappointing for many fans and critics).
It is probably one of those instances when people are more interested in an origin tale than an ensemble of superheroes with no background. – AthenDawn3 years ago
Aquaman as a sole hero versus a group of them (Justice League) might matter regarding success. This may be related to the the way a story develops on the screen--it may be easier and more enjoyable to follow one rather than too many heroes. – Joseph Cernik3 years ago
This is just my own observation of the two films.
Prior to Aquaman, I would always say that I would choose to watch Justice League over Batman v Superman. BvS was a film that took itself too seriously and lost its comic-book quality. And also, (unless you watch the extended edition) character motivations are questionable. Justice League had a very problematic plot and its special effects were absolutely awful-- but it was able to have fun. That scene when Flash tries running behind a newly revived Superman? EPIC. But it was also a film that could not decide between being serious or comedic and shifts in tone were jarring to say the least. This could also be because of the sudden shift in directors, Snyder to Whedon.
Aquaman seems to have a good balance-- the only faults that I saw it have was that it was too long and the inclusion of the Black Manta plotline was not necessary since the more obvious concern was Oceanmaster v Aquaman. Also the special effects are beautiful.
Wonder Woman still reigns as the best DCEU movie for me, but I would probably place Aquaman as second or third. – FabiAlejandra3 years ago
I think the star power and marketing had a huge effect. Jason Mamoa has the looks, and even better, he's charismatic, so people will want to watch him. The movie was also marketed as being more silly and not taking itself as seriously as the other DCEU movies. I haven't seen it so I don't know how valid that is within the movie's context. I'm personally a little surprised by Aquaman's success just due to him being a joke in pop culture and most people disregarding him as an actual, or at least useful, superhero. However, considering the success of modern blockbusters, especially with the MCU and DCEU (financially anyway), I'm not surprised general audiences gravitate towards a movie that features a CGI fest of people riding sharks and fighting a war underwater. It's a perfect film for popcorn spectacle and escapism. China apparently also had a lot to do with the movie's box office success. – ImperatorSage3 years ago
The very short panels first introduced the Wayne’s murder nearly eighty years ago. Despite the changes in comics and society since that time, the core foundation of a murder in an alley by a criminal has remained unchanged. Why has Batman’s origins remained the same while so many heroes have their origin stories and past drastically changed?
Touch on also the appeal of the orphaned child - a very strong trope in children's literature and quite common in origin stories. – SaraiMW3 years ago
Good topic! I guess it comes down to the result of the murder - would he have ever become Batman if he hadn't experienced such tragedy? I also think it shows he truly is a hero. Where others are mutants or born gifted, what makes Batman a hero is his reaction to tragedy and the attitude he adopts. He's a hero because he uses his trauma to protect others, rather than just standing by and watching criminals hurt others. You could maybe even talk about new supers vs. older supers (in relation to the movies): do the morally questionable actions of Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool really allow him to call himself a hero? Or is he just a mutant? Since when did the lawfully good attitude of Batman become irrelevant to what it means to be a superhero? Are the characteristics of an individual even part of what makes them a hero anymore? – Gemma Ferguson3 years ago
It could be helpful to address how spin offs have also taken the origin for granted and built upon the character based on that. How does a movie like Batman Ninja (2018) fit into this mix? – Kevin3 years ago
The second Fantastic Beast film, The Crimes of Grindelwald, will be released in November 2018. Prior to release, the film has been stirring up fan surprise and controversy. The final trailers revealed that Nagini, Voldemort’s famous snake companion, would be featured as a character in the film (a female women who is slowly devolving into a snake until the effect is permanent). In the past few week, it has been rumored that a young Professor McGonagall may appear in the film. This is an event that may directly contradict Harry Potter lore established in prior Potter stories and world building. Will the fantastic beast series, once thought as a spin off/relatively unrelated prequel, totally alter our perception of the Harry Potter franchise, re contextualizing the entire chain of events in the world’s most famous book series?
No, I don't think that the harry potter franchise will change our perspective for understanding that matter and the case could be different to it. – susandaigle233 years ago
I feel like it might be, in a way! if youre a superfan of harry potter or either it might not, but I have only ever grazed the novels and watched the films and in my opinion I feel like it changes some aspects, but it is a prior different story only with a few connecting points as it is in the same universe – ambermakx3 years ago
More has been revealed with the release of the film so I feel like it's a perfect time to discuss this topic as we prepared for Fantastic Beasts 3! – Sean Gadus3 years ago
It really depends. The writing could simply go with an approach where it is loosely connected to the harry potter franchise or it could alter things greatly, granting a new understanding of the story. – JeremiahUkponrefe3 years ago
Now, here's an interesting question. As a fairly recent Potterhead, I love the lore we have and would always like to know more. But sometimes, enough is enough--isn't it? I haven't delved into the extra-canon stuff, simply because I think seven books was enough for me. But then again, if you're enjoying a fictional world, does it ever have to end? I'm torn and would like to see what others think/how a writer tackles this. – Stephanie M.3 years ago
I don't think the new series, the Fantastic Beasts, would change our perspective of the Harry Potter franchise because these two series are of the same wizarding universe, it's just the matter of different time period. I thought the Fantastic Beasts serve the previous stories... – HuiyangHu3 years ago