"DC Comics storms the film world"

[Ipodman]

I rather DC take it one step at a time and listen to fan feeback, rather then go all-out like Marvel did back in 2000 onwards... (Hulk! Daredevel! Punisher! Ghost Rider! etc)

As for the 3D annoucement... I would sit through a 3D movie in cinemas, but i dont see myself buying a 3D TV jsut to watch 3D movies at home

 

[FlawlessVictory]

All Warner Bros Tentpole Movies Will Be Released in 3D

Posted on Thursday, March 18th, 2010 by Peter Sciretta

Warner Bros will be releasing five movies in 3D in 2010 and nine movies in 2011. Alan Horn announced at ShoWest that all the studios tentpole movies, superhero films, and big special effects releases, will be distributed in 3D. He called it the new standard for the company. And yes, he was clear that this includes all of the future DC Comic Books films. That means that the new Superman and third Batman will be released in 3D.

Horn also spoke out against the criticism of converting films to 3D in a post production process. He said that “in our opinion, conversion to 3D doesn’t lessen” the 3D experience. And he said that audiences will decide when Clash of the Titans is released in 3D in a couple weeks. We were shown 7-10 minutes of footage from the post-converted Clash, and I have given my preliminary thoughts here.

​

​

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/03/18/all-warner-bros-tentpole-movies-will-be-released-in-3d/
​

​

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Warner Bros Hopes To Fill Harry Potter’s Void with DC Comics Movie Adaptations

Posted on Thursday, March 18th, 2010 by Peter Sciretta

One of the other notable things Warner Bros head Alan Horn said at the ShoWest presentation today involved how the studio hopes to fill the void that will be left by the studio’s most successful franchise. After Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II hits theaters in July 2011, that will conclude the biggest box office franchise in cinema history. How does Warner Bros hope to fill the hole left by this profitable series?

Here is the quote from Horn:

“As we ease out of Harry Potter, we hope to bring you the excitement of the DC [Comics] Library!”
​

It isn’t clear if that statement is just wishful thinking or if actual plans are under way to greenlight new DC Comic book adaptations. We know that The Green Lantern is currently shooting and is set for a June 2011 release, and development of a movie adaptation of The Flash has been ongoing. We also know that Warner Bros wants a sequel to The Dark Knight, and is trying to get a Superman movie into production before they loose the rights to the character.

​

​

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/03/18...otters-void-with-dc-comics-movie-adaptations/
​

​

 

[FaT_tONle]

Figured... so much for WB's other, endless properties outside of DC.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea i have nothing against 3D movies myself. sure it works when it done right. but i agree not all movies need to be full on 3D treatments and all that. But hey if i dont want to see it in 3D i dont have to. Plently of theaters in my area play films in 2d too.

 

[The ?ion]

I don't think the public will give a **** about a Spidey reboot that revisits the high school years this soon with a new cast. Obviously there is a large fanbase and the teen demographic, but I don't see it doing much more than 50% of say SM2's box office. At least Raimi's team would have kept the public's ears and eyes attuned for one more film, IF they had a good story, which they obviously didn't. People will have the same reaction they had with TIH.

That is an interesting assessment. It is true that The Incredible Hulk did not really perform up to expectations, but it did do what it sought out to do. It refreshed the credibility of the Hulk franchise in the public eye. In all honesty, it really needed that. The original Hulk film just mishandled the character and got pretty poor reviews. More importantly, The Incredible Hulk was a means for Marvel to reacquire their own license for the purposes of creating a shared universe (hence the cameo at the end).

As for Spider-Man, it has an entirely different situation. Sony still has the Spider-Man license for film and television. So where as Hulk was Marvel Studios rebooting the franchise because they reacquired their own license, Sony is rebooting their own franchise and canon. All of the Spider-Man films have been successful, each more successful than the last (Spider-Man 3 is still the second highest grossing superhero film at over $820 million). Many suspect that Sony is making this reboot as a knee-jerk reaction to the success of The Dark Knight, but it is hard to tell. There is no need for Sony to reboot the franchise. They simply want to reboot it. Still, I do like some of your insight on the matter. We shall have to see how the public reacts.

 

[The ?ion]

I rather DC take it one step at a time and listen to fan feeback, rather then go all-out like Marvel did back in 2000 onwards... (Hulk! Daredevel! Punisher! Ghost Rider! etc)

As for the 3D annoucement... I would sit through a 3D movie in cinemas, but i dont see myself buying a 3D TV jsut to watch 3D movies at home

That is the thing. Marvel didn't go all out in those days. They merely licensed their franchises out. Marvel has not been a comic company (meaning strictly comics and toys) since 1996. Their entire business model shifted to being a character driven entertainment company. So they specialized in licensing their characters for outside media use. This is why you had so many Activision games that featured Spider-Man and the X-Men. This is why more Marvel based cartoons cropped up. All of the movies were the result of Marvel's licensing practices at the time, rather than their own personal decisions.

That is why they decided to form Marvel studios. Once it was proven that their properties could bring in huge bucks in film form, they decided to film their movies on their own so that they would get more than a licensing cut. So you can't blame Marvel for movies like Hulk, Ghost Rider or Daredevil.

If other studios are as cooperative as Universal was with the Hulk license, then you can expect Marvel to reboot those franchises and bring them more in line with fan expectations. But if companies hold on like the leeches they are, then we are probably doomed to endure a few more stinkers like Punisher Warzone.

In the mean time, Marvel is doing what they can with properties that they haven't licensed out, such as Iron Man, Thor and Captain America.

On that note, that is what truly separates Marvel from DC. Even though Warner Bros has licensed some of their properties to other studios (e.g. The Spirit), most of their film production has been in house. They control the cohesion and flow of their own films. It does make things more depressing, because that makes Warner Brothers the more blamable entity as far as their flops are concerned, but if they are truly taking notes from Marvel Studios, then we can expect them to really amp up their efforts and do things right. Assigning Nolan to produce the next Superman, as well as getting things rolling with the new Green Lantern film, show how serious they are. I am tired of only seeing Batman and Superman movies being all we get from the DC superhero stable. I say bring on the hero films from the DC stable.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea it would be great to have things totally under one house again for marvel to see how with full control by marvel would turn out. hopefully it will happen in the next few yrs.

 

[The ?ion]

Well, Universal worked with Marvel Studios to give them their license back for Hulk. Nobody else has returned rights though. With Disney being the big guns behind Marvel, I imagine it won't be long before Disney makes moves to reorganize their intellectual property licenses.

I know that Disney is currently restructuring their video game operations, starting off with Epic Mickey for the Wii. With their recent acquisition of Marvel being driven by the success of Marvel Studios film projects, I can only imagine that like their video games, Disney plans to do a lot more in-house work when it comes to movies.

It will be interesting to see what Marvel Studios is capable of once they get their hands on Spider-Man, Ghost Rider, The Punisher, Daredevil, Fantastic Four and the X-Men (the current licenses that are spread around to the likes of Fox and Sony).

What puzzles me though, is the general audience tolerance limit for franchise reboots. I already feel like Warner Bros. is pushing its luck with Superman, since Returns was already a partial reboot. While reboots can help get a franchise back on track, I feel that there is also a risk for confusion. Well...I guess we will have to wait and see what happens.

 

[Docker2.0]

I rather DC take it one step at a time and listen to fan feeback, rather then go all-out like Marvel did back in 2000 onwards... (Hulk! Daredevel! Punisher! Ghost Rider! etc)
As for the 3D annoucement... I would sit through a 3D movie in cinemas, but i dont see myself buying a 3D TV jsut to watch 3D movies at home

No offense but when did WB listen to fans concerning it's properties?! They only got Batman right after numerous tries. And other than Batman and Superman,they really haven't released anything major from the DCU. All this crap about WB/DC doing quality over quantity and listening to the fans is bs. I'm happy we are finally getting a GL movie but it's long overdue. And as much as I want to GL to do well, if it doesn't do well, WB has noone to blame but themselves. I've said numerous times that they should expose JLA or many of their characters more in cartoons or tv shows moreso than what they do. Batman and Superman both have had a lot of tv and cartoons for the past decades but we have yet to see GL's rogue gallery or even WW and Flash's to the depth that we have seen Bats and Supes.

 

[Webhead2006]

probably so but it will probably still be a few yrs from now before fox/sony marvel characters get back to marvel/disney. But lets get back to dc here. i hope we will finally be seeing good things from dc films and i cant wait to see what really happens after green lantern.

And yea i totally agree i personally rather see the likes of a spidey reboot and a FF reboot handled under marvel full control. So then they can be added within the marvel studios film unvierse and all that. Plus i agree we dont want to see reboots to often.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

I've said numerous times that they should expose JLA or many of their characters more in cartoons or tv shows moreso than what they do. Batman and Superman both have had a lot of tv and cartoons for the past decades but we have yet to see GL's rogue gallery or even WW and Flash's to the depth that we have seen Bats and Supes.

well, the animated movies were a good start and they plan a new GL movie and an animated series. And we'll soon hear news about the Flash movie.

 

[The ?ion]

I've said numerous times that they should expose JLA or many of their characters more in cartoons or tv shows moreso than what they do. Batman and Superman both have had a lot of tv and cartoons for the past decades but we have yet to see GL's rogue gallery or even WW and Flash's to the depth that we have seen Bats and Supes.

What about all of the direct-to-video DC animated feature films that explore individual characters or the Justice League? What about Smallville? It has introduced the Legion of Super Heroes, The JSA, Martian Manhunter, Green Arrow, Black Canary, Cyborg, The Flash etc. There was the Justice League animated series that ran from 2001 until around 2006 (between JL and JLU).

It isn't like Marvel does something other than ****e out Spider-Man and the X-Men. Even now, there is Wolverine and the X-Men and Spectacular Spider-Man. The only reason Iron Man got an animated series, was because of the success of the film.

 

[Docker2.0]

What about all of the direct-to-video DC animated feature films that explore individual characters or the Justice League? What about Smallville? It has introduced the Legion of Super Heroes, The JSA, Martian Manhunter, Green Arrow, Black Canary, Cyborg, The Flash etc. There was the Justice League animated series that ran from 2001 until around 2006 (between JL and JLU).

It isn't like Marvel does something other than ****e out Spider-Man and the X-Men. Even now, there is Wolverine and the X-Men and Spectacular Spider-Man. The only reason Iron Man got an animated series, was because of the success of the film.

It wasn't until last year or was it this year that both WW and GL got their own animated films. While JLA did showcase some people in the DCU, Batman and Superman seem to always be showcased no matter what. Batman's cartoon, The Batman just ended and how long was it before they got a relaunch? In a matter of months with Batman: The brave and bold. While I applaud Smallville for giving Green Arrow some exposure, the show is basically still about Superman. Flash has argubly the best rogue gallery in the DCU but unless you follow comics closely, you won't know that because he really hasn't been exposed.

And as far as Marvel not exposing anyone besides the X-men and Spiderman, in the 90's the Hulk, Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Silver Surfer, and the Avengers(poor version of them) all had cartoons so Iron Man didn't just get a cartoon because he had a great movie. Heck Black Panther has a cartoon out now and he's almost a 3rd tier character. There really hasn't been to many DC cartoons in the past couple of decades that were not Batman or Superman related. Hopefully with GL that will all change.

 

[Docker2.0]

well, the animated movies were a good start and they plan a new GL movie and an animated series. And we'll soon hear news about the Flash movie.

No I agree with you. I'm a huge GL fan and I'm hoping that this is the start of something big. I loved First Flight and I will be the first to see GL in IMAX when it hits theaters next year but I just wish DC/WB would have exposed the character more because I've been saying for years that GL is a gold mine waiting to happen.

 

[The ?ion]

It wasn't until last year or was it this year that both WW and GL got their own animated films. While JLA did showcase some people in the DCU, Batman and Superman seem to always be showcased no matter what. Batman's cartoon, The Batman just ended and how long was it before they got a relaunch? In a matter of months with Batman: The brave and bold. While I applaud Smallville for giving Green Arrow some exposure, the show is basically still about Superman. Flash has argubly the best rogue gallery in the DCU but unless you follow comics closely, you won't know that because he really hasn't been exposed.

And as far as Marvel not exposing anyone besides the X-men and Spiderman, in the 90's the Hulk, Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Silver Surfer, and the Avengers(poor version of them) all had cartoons so Iron Man didn't just get a cartoon because he had a great movie. Heck Black Panther has a cartoon out now and he's almost a 3rd tier character. There really hasn't been to many DC cartoons in the past couple of decades that were not Batman or Superman related. Hopefully with GL that will all change.

Hulk - Two Seasons
Fantastic Four - Two Seasons
New Fantastic Four - One Season
Iron Man - One Season
Avengers - One Season

The only long running shows for Marvel, have been X-Men and Spider-Man. Each of their shows had longer runs, with the exception of Spider-Man Unlimited, which also got cancelled after a brief run. Also note, when I was referring to Iron Man, I meant the new Nick Toons series. Not the awful 90s cartoon. Marvel's animated legacy is pretty trashy compared to Warner Bros. Plain and simple.

Justice League lasted four seasons. Superman TAS lasted three seasons. Batman TAS lasted four seasons. Batman Beyond had three seasons. Heck, even Static Shock got four seasons. Lets not forget Teen Titans, which had three seasons as well as Legion of Super Heroes (two seasons).To be fair, DC has had plenty of failures as well (Swamp Thing and the Zeta Project come to mind), but it isn't as if their DC cartoons are unpopular or reliant solely upon Batman and Superman.

At least no more so than Marvel relies on Spider-Man and the X-Men. Because Lord knows that their other animated works didn't leave much of a legacy. And Silver Surfer...really? Not even a full season (13 episodes). Sure Marvel might give their characters a chance, but those chances are so poor, that they might as well not have happened. At least Warner Bros. had success while they showed off some of their non mainstream heroes.

 

[Docker2.0]

You are missing the point entirely! Who the freak are Swamp Thing and Zeta?! I mean I know them but the general audience doesn't. For those guys to have cartoons before GL, Flash, WW, or even Green Arrow is embarassing. And you are saying SS cartoon sucked(which it did fyi)but at least it had one. Again, most of the cartoons you just named were Superman or Batman heavy so for you to say that WB/DC doesn't rely on Supes or Bats is someone in complete denial.

 

[The ?ion]

Static Shock was a spin off, but it had its own cast of villains and supporting characters and rarely featured anyone too mainstream. An appearance by John Stewart and Sinestro was one of the bigger moments, but much of that cartoon revolved around its own issues. As for Swamp Thing, he had two theatrical movies, a long running television series and the Fox cartoon. I think many people are familiar with the character. He may not be that popular, but he is better known than say...Man-Thing (a movie which I can't even bring myself to watch).

Anyways, your argument is that Marvel does a better job of promoting their characters through the use of cartoons and film and that simply isn't true. In film, yes, Marvel certainly rose to the occasion by licensing their franchises en' masse. But in terms of animation, Marvel has no real presence other than X-Men and Spider-Man. When people think about Marvel cartoons, chances are they will think about Spider-Man 1967, Spider-Man TAS or X-Men TAS. Maybe they will think about X-Men Evolution, but ultimately, they will wind up thinking about Spider-Man and the X-Men.

Try and round up ten regular people who watched the Silver Surfer cartoon or the old Iron Man cartoon. You will be hard pressed. On the flip side, tons of people watched Batman, Justice League, Static Shock, Superman etc. And like it or not, most Justice Leage episodes did not revolve around Batman or Superman. They really did an excellent job of showing off a lot of different characters, because they knew it was their only opportunity to do so. So while Marvel may have more shows for a specific character, DC has the better track record for longevity and promotion of its characters. This is why we are getting a Jonah Hex movie this year. That is ballsy. When Marvel starts putting out a Dr. Strange movie, we can revisit this conversation. And no that awful direct-to-video one doesn't count.

 

[Docker2.0]

Dude you are turning this into a Marvel vs DC thing when I'm not doing that! All I'm saying is that DC/WB should put out more cartoons in the DCU with their major characters other than Superman and Batman. At least Marvel did go beyond their cash cows with Spidey and the Xmen and had numerous other cartoon properties. Were they good? Depends on who you ask(but mostly negative)but they did go outside of Spidey and the Xverse. That's all I'm saying. OH! I'm also saying GL, WW, Flash, GA, and other should have had their own series years ago.


I don't know how to say it any clearer than that.

 

[The ?ion]

My apologies. I did not mean to make this descend into dreadful fanboy debate territory. I was merely going off of your argument, since you said that Warner Bros should be more like Marvel in the promotion of their other franchises. I understand your sentiment, but I do not feel that it was a good comparison, because I do not feel that Marvel has done much to really promote their non-mainstream properties.

I concede to your point that they do have more character specific franchises, but I feel that granted the failure of these cartoons, that it is hard to say that they are truly successful in what you say they are; the promotion of their other franchises.

Now where I would agree with you, if you brought it up, is the realm of video games. DC may be king of the roost in terms of cartoons with longevity and popularity, but their video games have been less than desirable. I am glad that Warner acquired Midway's assets as well as Rocksteady. Maybe now we can get some decent games. Heck, maybe now we can have games that don't involve Batman or Superman.

So I agree with your over all point that DC needs to do more over all to promote their franchises, I simply don't agree with the part of your argument that refers to cartoons.

 

[Docker2.0]

Well if you want to get technical, Marvel has promoted more of their franchises than DC. Fantastic Four was ok.......but it did have 2 movies and a couple of cartoon series. My gawd, you have no idea how pissed I am that GL doesn't have a cartoon series!!! I was pissed when they announced another freakin Batman cartoon(Brave and the Bold)when Flash and GL haven't had their own series. I can't stand WW but I wouldn't mind her having her own series just to get out of Supes and Bat's cape.


FYI: I'm drinking so I may be going off the deep end but at least you know why I'm doing it.

 

[The ?ion]

Well, Flash did have that television show in the 90s. There was that live action Justice League pilot. Warner Bros recently announced the new Green Lantern CGI television series that is being produced by Bruce Timm. So there is hope yet.

 

[Webhead2006]

personally i enjoy watching anything from both companies and all i hope for is something that turns out good. And is something fans can enjoy. I do agree on the most part dc has been better with cartoons over marvel. Where as marvel has been a bit more sucessful(to a degree) at getting live action films going over dc.

 

[Octoberist]

Well if you want to get technical, Marvel has promoted more of their franchises than DC. Fantastic Four was ok.......but it did have 2 movies and a couple of cartoon series. My gawd, you have no idea how pissed I am that GL doesn't have a cartoon series!!! I was pissed when they announced another freakin Batman cartoon(Brave and the Bold)when Flash and GL haven't had their own series. I can't stand WW but I wouldn't mind her having her own series just to get out of Supes and Bat's cape.


FYI: I'm drinking so I may be going off the deep end but at least you know why I'm doing it.

Yeah, i agree that Marvel did a better job at just..making Marvel based cartoons repeatedly in the 90s, so it captured the general lexicon. I really believe that even if they sucked as cartoons (besides X-men and Spiderman) at least they were visible in the public's eye.

Not to say DC didn't do it with Superman and batman, but they kinda failed to capitalized on their other characters in the 90s. and it wasn't until Justice League when they actually woke up.

With DC Entertainment now, i just hope it'll grow and grow where it can give Marvel a beat down.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I got agree with Dock and others... as to why are Marvel's B listers so much more marketable and ingrained into the pop culture than DC's B-listers at least up until now. It's not just Spiderman, Hulk, and X-Men (which is a pretty big universe in of itself). Iron Man and FF have been staple characters that are instantly recognizable as well, to a slightly lesser degree. Okay WW is probably the one poster girl superhero, which not many girls look up to in the first place because there aren't a lot of girls that are fans of superheroes let alone heroins. But yeah, DC has really dropped the ball by not moving away from the two poster boys. They will continue to milk Bats and Supes for another decade with this Superman reboot on the horizon. Don't be suprised if they slip Batman back into the mix shortly after Nolan steps down. Or Smallville reaches its 20th season before we get Flash in live action. Just **** like that that has to irk you if you are a DC guy. If GL does poorly even if it's as good as Iron Man, there have to be serious concerns that must be addressed as far as long term solutions. I think WB will go forward with Flash and WW eventually as long as they turn a decent profit with GL, but probably only to set up a JLA movie at that point, and once again feature you know whos...