Justice League: News and Speculation - Part 2

[Whiskey Tango]

Not bad for a brand new studio that started off by using their own character rights as collateral in order to get a $500 million dollar loan to finance their first two films.

WB throws a lot of money at the wall, but aside from Nolan's Batman flicks, nothing seems to stick (hello Green Lantern!). All the budget in the world didn't help that one.

What can we take away from this lesson, kids? Money isn't everything, and WB should proably consider investing in some Christopher Nolan clones.

[Destructus86]

The problem I have with how all of this is being handled is that the studio is trying to get that Avengers success that Marvel had without the work of releasing movies for all the individual heroes first to establish them. That rushing could cost them big time.

[Whiskey Tango]

Originally Posted by Destructus86

The problem I have with how all of this is being handled is that the studio is trying to get that Avengers success that Marvel had without the work of releasing movies for all the individual heroes first to establish them. That rushing could cost them big time.

Exactly. It's like they want to go straight for the billion dollar payday while skipping all the set-up work. But hopefully it'll work out.

[Crazymaverick]

Originally Posted by Destructus86

The problem I have with how all of this is being handled is that the studio is trying to get that Avengers success that Marvel had without the work of releasing movies for all the individual heroes first to establish them. That rushing could cost them big time.

That may very well happen, but let's look at it in a little more detail. Does WB really need to follow the Marvel route for this particular version of Justice League?

We are reportedly dealing with 5 main characters; Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern and Flash. Three of these characters have had major motion pictures (Supes, Bats and GL) and the general public by and large knows/recognises Wonder Woman.

All that leaves is The Flash, and his deal is not so hard to get right off the bat for someone new. He runs fast. REALLY FAST. The End.

As far as character depth/development is concerned, that can be done through the course of the movie in much the same way as it was done in 'The Avengers'. Bruce Banner, Natasha Romanoff and Phil Coulson were almost completely redefined from their previous appearances and Clint Barton was a clean slate. They were all developed on the fly, but by the end of the second act the audience knew every character's deal and were ready for the big finish.

I don't see how it has to be any different for Justice League. They can even throw in a flashback or two a la Captain America.

[Zionite1]

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

That may very well happen, but let's look at it in a little more detail. Does WB really need to follow the Marvel route for this particular version of Justice League?

A JL movie doesnt have to have leadup.It just is easier to execute and more of an event with leadup.

Here are the negatives of the no leadup summarised.If you read my first post I detailed them.Youd also note that I said the Origins are not the problem.In fact they can be handled easily.

NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 1:
The appeal of seeing JL movie without solos-Bats and supes
The appeal of seeing JL movie with solos-Bats,supes,flash,GL,WW.
Jl has less of an apppeal without solos.Doesnt mean it will fail just mean it wont succced as much as it wld with solos.


NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 2:
The other problem the spinoff approach has is establsihing the various mythologies of each hero in the same universe with one go.
For example Establishing Wonder woman mythos(fantasy) and Green lantern mythos(sci fi) in the same universe and having them interact normally.

NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 3:
Jl movie following the spinoff approach has to Get all characterisations right in one go and seeing as they cant use solo leadins as template like the avengers did,this will be more difficult. It also has to establish the foundation for each of the 4 spinoff franchises correctly otherwise they cant be made

NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 4:
They have the risk of being seen as a superhero team(Fantastic Four,Xmen) instead of being seen as a superhero team up(Avengers) without Solos.

[Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by GREEN =w= DAY

Aronofsky directing a Batman reboot with an Arkham tone would make me VERY happy!

Yep!

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

Then maintain your focus long enough to read this post. Don't tune out now! I know you can do it!

Batman Begins - Production Budget: $150 million
Superman Returns - Production Budget: $270 million
The Dark Knight - Production Budget: $185 million
Green Lantern - Production Budget: $200 million
The Dark Knight Rises - Production Budget: $250 million

Average production budget - $211 million.


Iron Man - Production Budget: $140 million
The Incredible Hulk - Production Budget: $150 million
Iron Man 2 - Production Budget: $200 million
Thor - Production Budget: $150 million
Captain America - Production Budget: $140 million
The Avengers - Production Budget: $220 million

Average production budget - $167 million.


They're not even in the same ball park.

(Source: boxofficemojo.com)

Furthermore, even though I'm a DC fan, I don't think less of Marvel. They're just different in my eyes that's all. The budgets and size of their movie efforts however, is just a matter of cold, hard facts.

And that was my point in case you missed it again.

So four of the five on DC's budget list is Batman and Superman...Three of those are from Nolan's trilogy. Established known quantities vs. Marvels lesser known characters like Iron Man and Thor (at that time). Nice comparison there.

See how Batman's budget went up from Begins to Rises? See how Iron Man's went up from the first film to IM2? I'm sure I don't have to explain the reason for this....Now factor into the equation that Marvel didn't have Disney's backing when this whole enterprise started out and it's all the more impressive. Thor's budget was more then respectable for a relatively unknown property. It turned out to be a solid hit, so a likely increase in the budget for the sequel will happen, not to mention a definite bigger bang at the box office. That seems like a great model for brand building from my perspective, as opposed to throwing 200 million at an unknown quantity like GL. They are different.

[Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

This is not any run of the mill tent pole flick. This is not even any average superhero flick. This is the Justice League. Not 'The Avengers' where half of their roster is comprised of non powered or barely enhanced characters.

Four of the top five Justice League characters require major special effects done on a groundbreaking level. All of this and much more requires a budget, the size of which would make Kevin Feige wet his pants.

And while we're on the subject, the Marvel strategy couldn't have pussyfoot it's way to The Avengers more if it tried. They played it completely safe by making incremental movies, the last two not much more than prologues to The Avengers.

The size of their budgets, or lack thereof, speak for themselves.

Yep!

On point...good post!

Another reason why this rist JL film will only feature 5 core JL members.

Adding in MM, Aquaman and Hawkman and with their CGI/SVX needed to cause the budget to skyrocket.

[Crazymaverick]

Originally Posted by Zionite1

A JL movie doesnt have to have leadup.It just is easier to execute and more of an event with leadup.

Here are the negatives of the no leadup summarised.If you read my first post I detailed them.Youd also note that I said the Origins are not the problem.In fact they can be handled easily.

NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 1:
The appeal of seeing JL movie without solos-Bats and supes
The appeal of seeing JL movie with solos-Bats,supes,flash,GL,WW.
Jl has less of an apppeal without solos.Doesnt mean it will fail just mean it wont succced as much as it wld with solos.


NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 2:
The other problem the spinoff approach has is establsihing the various mythologies of each hero in the same universe with one go.
For example Establishing Wonder woman mythos(fantasy) and Green lantern mythos(sci fi) in the same universe and having them interact normally.

NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 3:
Jl movie following the spinoff approach has to Get all characterisations right in one go and seeing as they cant use solo leadins as template like the avengers did,this will be more difficult. It also has to establish the foundation for each of the 4 spinoff franchises correctly otherwise they cant be made

NEGATIVES OF NO LEADUP-NO 4:
They have the risk of being seen as a superhero team(Fantastic Four,Xmen) instead of being seen as a superhero team up(Avengers) without Solos.

You make some valid points.

I guess it all boils down to execution. It's definitely a harder row to hoe without a lead up.

But in the right hands, it may not be as big a factor.

[Crazymaverick]

Originally Posted by SoNicRaDiATioN

So four of the five on DC's budget list is Batman and Superman...Three of those are from Nolan's trilogy. Established known quantities vs. Marvels lesser known characters like Iron Man and Thor (at that time). Nice comparison there.

See how Batman's budget went up from Begins to Rises? See how Iron Man's went up from the first film to IM2? I'm sure I don't have to explain the reason for this....Now factor into the equation that Marvel didn't have Disney's backing when this whole enterprise started out and it's all the more impressive. Thor's budget was more then respectable for a relatively unknown property. It turned out to be a solid hit, so a likely increase in the budget for the sequel will happen, not to mention a definite bigger bang at the box office. That seems like a great model for brand building from my perspective, as opposed to throwing 200 million at an unknown quantity like GL. They are different.

This is not about DC vs Marvel, inspite of my admittedly pointed posts.

This was just about the fact that DC movies have had larger budgets and probably will in the future (if the box office performances are good) too.

This was just to illustrate the size and scope required to execute a Justice League movie properly.

All of this coming back to the point of why WB is being hesitant will pulling the trigger on the greenlight. The higher implied risk due to a higher implied budget.

[Crazymaverick]

Originally Posted by Dark Knight

Yep!

On point...good post!

Another reason why this rist JL film will only feature 5 core JL members.

Adding in MM, Aquaman and Hawkman and with their CGI/SVX needed to cause the budget to skyrocket.

Thank you!

Even though in retrospect, I might have overreacted a little there.

[Zionite1]

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

You make some valid points.

I guess it all boils down to execution. It's definitely a harder row to hoe without a lead up.

But in the right hands, it may not be as big a factor.

Actually it would still be a factor in the right hands but the right hands wld execute it nevertheless.

If you notice most of the Problems with a Justice league Leadup can be solved with extremely good writing(Better writing than the Avengers is needed) and planning neither of which WB has assured us of - so I see no reason to be overtly optimistic.

[Crazymaverick]

I'm not denying that at all. It may very well end up being a giant clusterf**k!

We'll just have to wait and see.

[jmc]

Iron Man 2 was a $200 million film? What the hell did they spend the money on exactly? Certainly wasn't the script that's for sure.

[Crazymaverick]

The VFX were definitely on a much larger scale that's for sure.

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

This is not about DC vs Marvel, inspite of my admittedly pointed posts.

Believe me, I'm not that guy. Although I don't have many DC comics in my collection aside from a few Batman essentials, I've enjoyed many of their films and animation properties. I look at the big picture here, DC's success can only help the genre as a whole, which I want to see get better and better for MANY more years to come.

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

This was just about the fact that DC movies have had larger budgets and probably will in the future (if the box office performances are good) too.

This is very debatable imo. Prior to the Disney acquisition I would have agreed.

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

This was just to illustrate the size and scope required to execute a Justice League movie properly.All of this coming back to the point of why WB is being hesitant will pulling the trigger on the greenlight. The higher implied risk due to a higher implied budget.

So just how much do you think WB has to spend on a JL film? $250 m seems more then reasonable for me to start out.

[Crazymaverick]

Consider the fact that they spent $250 million on 'The Dark Knight Rises' and probably as much, if not more on 'Man of Steel'.

The gauntlet has been thrown by Marvel with epic scope and success of 'The Avengers' so WB has to at least top that.

Taking all of that into consideration, I'd say we were looking at a $300 million budget. At least.

As far as the Disney acquisition goes, I'm sure it will boost the budgets somewhat, but they are going all in for the Star Wars franchise as well.

So I'm not sure how thin they can spread themselves with about two or three movies (from each franchise) coming out every year.

[mclay18]

Originally Posted by Crazymaverick

Taking all of that into consideration, I'd say we were looking at a $300 million budget.

At least.

That's not going to happen. WB might overspend, but they're not going to sink that amount of money just on the movie alone. They might spend an additional $100M on marketing and distribution, but $400M total for one unproven movie?

Not possible. WB is a business, they'll look at saving money by hedging their bets and reusing concepts and scenes from previously developed JL projects. I guarantee that if this JL ever makes it to the screen, it will use costume designs and scenes from the aborted Justice League: Mortal. They'll exercise those sequel clauses to maintain certain actors, as well as a safe-but-not-too-pricey director.

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

The Avengers was only 20 million more then IM2 according to Box Office Mojo. I think it could definitely be done for 250 m. I guess a 300 m budget is possible out of the gate, but I'd be surprised. The pressure it would have to recoup that investment would be insane.

[Lencho01]

WB is just seems to be really scared to take any larger "risks." It's like they're coming up with any possible excuse not to make JLA.

Marvel at least had a plan and stuck with it even if things didn't go so well for them (TIH). They knew (correctly) that the appeal of a group of superheroes would trump the success of failure of any one superhero on their own. Thus, Avengers on its own merits made more than TIH, Thor, and Captain America combined.

So, I don't really see how MOS bombing (which I doubt will happen) is some sign to just drop any plans for JL to happen when they say they plan releasing it (or even later than that). But, I've always thought after JLM not happening and the success of Nolan's films, WB would just stick to trying to making billion dollar-making films for each separate character whether they're in the same universe or not. Same goes for any non-DC film they make since they don't only have to worry about comics stuff like Marvel does.

[Crazymaverick]

Originally Posted by mclay18

That's not going to happen. WB might overspend, but they're not going to sink that amount of money just on the movie alone. They might spend an additional $100M on marketing and distribution, but $400M total for one unproven movie?

Not possible. WB is a business, they'll look at saving money by hedging their bets and reusing concepts and scenes from previously developed JL projects. I guarantee that if this JL ever makes it to the screen, it will use costume designs and scenes from the aborted Justice League: Mortal. They'll exercise those sequel clauses to maintain certain actors, as well as a safe-but-not-too-pricey director.

Originally Posted by SoNicRaDiATioN

The Avengers was only 20 million more then IM2 according to Box Office Mojo. I think it could definitely be done for 250 m. I guess a 300 m budget is possible out of the gate, but I'd be surprised. The pressure it would have to recoup that investment would be insane.

Don't forget that WB has been splitting the cost with Legendary Pictures ever since Batman Begins. By that estimate they will need to spend $150 million (each) on Justice League rather than $125 million for 'The Dark Knight Rises'.

So in the end a $300 million (total) production budget is not so outrageous, all things considered.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Originally Posted by Reel

June 19th, 2015 is provisional release date........

According to Cosmic Book News. AKA disregard.

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Originally Posted by mclay18

That's not going to happen. WB might overspend, but they're not going to sink that amount of money just on the movie alone. They might spend an additional $100M on marketing and distribution, but $400M total for one unproven movie?

Not possible. WB is a business, they'll look at saving money by hedging their bets and reusing concepts and scenes from previously developed JL projects. I guarantee that if this JL ever makes it to the screen, it will use costume designs and scenes from the aborted Justice League: Mortal. They'll exercise those sequel clauses to maintain certain actors, as well as a safe-but-not-too-pricey director.

Yeah, with the additional marketing costs it would be crazy

[Crazymaverick]

Originally Posted by Lencho01

WB is just seems to be really scared to take any larger "risks." It's like they're coming up with any possible excuse not to make JLA.

Marvel at least had a plan and stuck with it even if things didn't go so well for them (TIH). They knew (correctly) that the appeal of a group of superheroes would trump the success of failure of any one superhero on their own. Thus, Avengers on its own merits made more than TIH, Thor, and Captain America combined.

So, I don't really see how MOS bombing (which I doubt will happen) is some sign to just drop any plans for JL to happen when they say they plan releasing it (or even later than that). But, I've always thought after JLM not happening and the success of Nolan's films, WB would just stick to trying to making billion dollar-making films for each separate character whether they're in the same universe or not. Same goes for any non-DC film they make since they don't only have to worry about comics stuff like Marvel does.

It's just a matter of risk mitigation and fiscal responsibility.

And really, if the report is true, we're looking at a 5 month delay for the greenlight.

That's not too bad at the end of the day.

[Tony Stark]

This idea that Marvel skimped on budgets is a myth. Everyone knows the public figure of $220 million for Avengers is not right. With the marketing costs estimated at over 100 million it was likely over 320 million for the budget. Everyone knows studios always fudge on the budget for the publically released numbers.

What will make a good Justice League movie is a good script, a good director, and trying to be themselves.

As someone mentioned before Green Lantern is the perfect example where spending money means nothing. The Batman films were successful because of good actors and screen writing not budget. Batman Begins had a modest budget and it was a huge success. It's pretty much right in line with what was spent on IM1, Thor and Captain America.

Green Lantern and Superman Returns are some of the worst examples of irresponsible film making, run away budgets and out of control directors. All GL had to show for it was a creepy looking CGI costume, and Superman Returns with a stupid shot of a bullet hitting Superman's eye. Having a huge budget doesn't mean jack, unless you want your film going down with the likes of Heaven's Gate or John Carter.