Did Warner Bros. Miss The Point?

[Crook]

3/4 of the people here need to read this about 5 times over:

"We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it,"

Let's not jump to silly conclusions.

 

[Lobo]

It'll be really interesting to see how Green Lantern and the Superman reboot turn out

 

[DarkSuperman]

It'll be really interesting to see how Green Lantern and the Superman reboot turn out

GL seems to really be on track and Grant Morrison and Geoff johns seem to have a good idea how superman needs to be rebooted. Hopefully the WB will get them involved instead of trusting film makers with no understanding of the characters beyond the amount of money they can make.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/08/1...erman-movie-franchise-comic-writers-chime-in/

“The idea was to make an American Christ figure, but what they centered on was his weakness,” Morrison said. “They made him more a lamb of God, rather than give us a real powerful Superman. They had too many scenes where he’s being kicked to the floor, and that’s not Superman. Superman would get up and fight.”


So these comics book writers are getting up and fighting too. Both Morrison and Geoff Johns have pitched the film studio on how to reboot Superman — properly reboot him, as if “Superman Returns” didn’t even happen.

“I told them, it’s not that bad,” Morrison said. “Just treat ‘Superman Returns’ as the Ang Lee ‘Hulk.’”


“‘The Hulk’ has proven the audience will forgive you and let you redo the franchise,” Waid said. “You can reboot from scratch.”

Morrison’s idea was a more “tight and concise” take on his “All-Star Superman,” so you’d see Superman address his mortality. And Waid suggests they take a look at his hard reboot, “Superman: Birthright.” But Brad Meltzer also has an idea that could work as the basis for the character, based on research for his upcoming “Book of Lies.”

 

[SPIDERMAN117]

Idk But does WB just go what is bringing in the money?

Lets wind the clock back to Batman Returns.......people complained that it was to dark and blah blah blah.....Then Batman Forever comes around and since they went the more lighter route it was a more succesfull film but we know what happend after that.......


Now The Dark Knight is a some what dark film.....and that brought in the money making it WB's most successfull film.....

So now does is WB going to be taking the "Darker" route with whatever films they come out with?

At the end of the day for them its about the money......not about sending a message

 

[DarkSuperman]

At the end of the day for them its about the money......not about sending a message

To Quote Yoda "That is why you fail"

You hit the nail on the head, the problem is that they think about money first instead of making these movies correctly. In order to make them how they should be you must first analyze these characters then translate what makes them popular in the first place to the big screen.

No one understands how this works better than comic book writers themselves. You wouldn't adapt a book without the authors input, neither should you do a movie without guys who know what's what about Superman. Singer doesn't fit the bill. that line about Returns being about old boyfriends coming back really irritated me...

 

[DieSmiling]

I don't think so. I take the "dark" notion to mean they want to make serious, gritty, dramatic superhero movies rather than lighter, comedic superhero movies, which personally, I will always prefer. I doubt they'll all end up being super dark and tragic like TDK.

 

[TheVileOne]

I think The Incredible Hulk isn't that great of an example because it didn't do much better at all.

BO receipts were identical for 2008 and 2003.

Reading all this about how WB wants to vamp up the superheroes they own and make their films "darker" because of TDK just reminds me of what the comics industry did after TDKR. TDK had themes and messages, and wasn't just violence for the sake of darkening it up. Also, not every character fits the darkness inherent in the Batman story. Superman stories deal with a lighter, most nostalgic tone. The Flash and Hal Jordan should also, I believe, have a lighter feeling, if simply because of their characters. This is not to say they cannot be deep or even be dark in their own ways -- but they do not and should not (in my opinion) be as dark as TDK.

I agree, and from the general reading of the article, it feels like these executives aren't really getting why they are working. Iron Man was nowhere near as dark or violent as Batman, but it was still major success. Spider-man films as well.

Yes we want these movies to be serious. But it's more we want them to be taken seriously and treat them with the respect they deserve. So many people still feel as comic characters they are not deserving of respect as true literature and what not.

Basically Green Lantern or Flash should not look like Dark Knight.

Also at the end of the day, I think a large part of the reason why the successful ones are really successful is because they are faithful to spirit and essence of material.

The Dark Knight was really nothing more than really what a Batman movie should look like and be. But that's for BATMAN.

 

[MagicPrime]

I have no doubts that a "dark" Superman movie would work. However the villain should be the darkness. Use Darksied, his dark foreboding presence would over shadow the entire movie. But despite everything, Superman remains the light, the beacon of hope.

That would be an awesome superman movie.

 

[The Major]

There are different levels of darkness, too.

Not all darkness has to be pitch black like TDK was. Imitating that on a franchise mean to be bright and upbeat like Flash could backfire. They need to inject some darkness in those films but in moderation which doesn't distort the property into something which goes against its very premise.

 

[terry78]

What constitutes dark, and what constitutes the source material being treated with respect? You take something like Fantastic Four, while it was critically impaled, the source material did get that goofy at times. The only thing was if Doom's origin was more accurate it would have been a much better movie.

 

[The Major]

What constitutes dark, and what constitutes the source material being treated with respect?

Dark is dark. Depressing story lines, characters questioning themselves, being suicidal, pondering life's meaning,characters dying, people being murdered, betrayal etc.

Only all darkness is the same.

Flash comics can be dark, too. Zoom forcefully aborted Linda West's baby in front of Wally then made him watch it in a continuous loop during Johns run. It's still not as depressing as TDK.

You take something like Fantastic Four, while it was critically impaled,

For many good reasons.

the source material did get that goofy at times.

It does get goofy at times. The goofiness isn't what the franchise is about, though. It definitely doesn't overwhelm it and is done much better then the movies. Watch The Incredibles, that's what FF should have been like.

The only thing was if Doom's origin was more accurate it would have been a much better movie.

I disagree. His origin was far from the only thing wrong with him.

When Doom shows up in the comics the FF **** bricks because they know he'll cause some damage. He's a guy who put Franklin in hell! He made a bargain with demons to turn the love of his life into magic armor after he convinced her he'd stop being a super-villain to settle down with her. He's tortured Johnny by making him feel the burn of his flames constantly. He's the inspiration for Darth Vader!

He isn't an unimpressive Norman Osborn clone with mutant powers.

 

[DarkSuperman]

Only all darkness is not the same.

Flash comics can be dark, too. Zoom forcefully aborted Linda West's baby in front of Wally then made him watch it in a continuous loop during Johns run. It's still not as depressing as TDK.

I think I just referenced that incident. I remember reading that part with my mouth open! It was just so incredibly sad...then this shining beacon of light came through in the form of Uncle Barry and together they managed to undo the miscarriage. That was bad ass.

They definitely need that sort of darkness in these movies, but make sure at the end that the light over comes it and shines through.

 

[The Major]

DS:

Agreed.

 

[Octoberist]

GL seems to really be on track and Grant Morrison and Geoff johns seem to have a good idea how superman needs to be rebooted. Hopefully the WB will get them involved instead of trusting film makers with no understanding of the characters beyond the amount of money they can make.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/08/1...erman-movie-franchise-comic-writers-chime-in/

That's why I love MTV.com and not the channel; They have great articles.

And I'm so happy that comic book writers are finally allowed to pitch ideas at Warners.

 

[jmc]

I think The Incredible Hulk is that great of an example because it didn't do much better at all.

BO receipts were identical for 2008 and 2003.



I agree, and from the general reading of the article, it feels like these executives aren't really getting why they are working. Iron Man was nowhere near as dark or violent as Batman, but it was still major success. Spider-man films as well.

Yes we want these movies to be serious. But it's more we want them to be taken seriously and treat them with the respect they deserve. So many people still feel as comic characters they are not deserving of respect as true literature and what not.

Basically Green Lantern or Flash should not look like Dark Knight.

Also at the end of the day, I think a large part of the reason why the successful ones are really successful is because they are faithful to spirit and essence of material.

The Dark Knight was really nothing more than really what a Batman movie should look like and be. But that's for BATMAN.

Being true to the original of the comic character does play a part, but it's it's not the main reason for success, it's the story in general. I think what they mean is using a more mature approach to the character, not necessarily making them all dark and depressing, there's a new audience out there now that The Dark Knight has brought in, it brought in people who've never seen a Superhero film before, it shows you don't have to cater for teens and 20-something men to make a heap of cash. I'm doubtful anyone is suggesting making a GL that's as dark as TDK, but like was mentioned in the article they will push it as far as the character will allow it, each character is different, so you're going to get different results for each character, the general audience wants superhero films with some edge because up until TDK the genre hadn't really evolved, this could be the evloution of the superhero film into a credible film genre, and it will be for the better.

 

[DarkSuperman]

That's why I love MTV.com and not the channel; They have great articles.

And I'm so happy that comic book writers are finally allowed to pitch ideas at Warners.

Ditto.

And honestly, it should have been this way from the jump.

 

[Saint]

Yes, they did miss the point. They should be treating the properties seriously, but this sounds like they want to stuff "darkness" where it doesn't belong. A "dark" Superman? Ridiculous.

Warner's problem has always been that they think they can paint all comic book characters with one brush. Zack Snyder once commented on this, saying the WB sees all comics the same way, and seemed to expect 300 to be a Fantastic Four movie. I was worried this would happen when The Dark Knight was a success: that wouldn't realize that TDK succeeded because it was an appropriate and well done approach to the character; their rudimentary analytical skills would tell them 'Hey, it's dark, and it's good, therefore dark must be good and all our movies should be dark!"

As I said: they should take all these properties seriously, but not all are "dark." I hope this was simply an unfortunate choice of words, and they meant “serious” rather than “dark.”

 

[Octoberist]

I also think that the WB execs are talking from their collective arses, but I think it's really up to the people that they hire for each property.

But saint, you're right: WB needs an open mind. Again, it has been reported that now they are meeting with DC and comic book writers with the movie projects. Hopefully, they can influence WB in a good way.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

Hopefully, but it will be difficult. How many times were you successful in influencing your boss?
Robinov seems to suffer from shortsightedness. Wasn't Batman begins dark nearly as the Dark Knight? Did it have the same success at the B.O.?
And Iron Man? It had a lighter approach to some heavy themes like terrorism and weapons and still was more successful than Batman begins and most of the comic-book movies.
Were the Spider-man movies dark?
And regarding the Superman reboot, I'd dare suggest watching the Incredible Hulk BO to see that a reboot with more action doesn't imply more money earned.

 

[The Major]

Spider-man's movies did have very dark moments. Spider-man throwing the Pumpkin Bomb at Harry which gives him amnesia and enjoying it, Harry forcing MJ to break up with Peter, Spider-man's second fight with Sandman, the burglar's death in the first Spider-man movie, Norman threatening to drop a carriage full of kids and MJ over a bridge, Octavius' wife's death.

 

[terry78]

The issue with comic book movies is that it's sometimes hard to skirt that line between goofy fantasy and dark gritty nightmare fuel. Writers have taken both of these tones with pretty much every comic in existence, and the trick is trying to find the balance.

 

[terry78]

The issue with comic book movies is that it's sometimes hard to skirt that line between goofy fantasy and dark gritty nightmare fuel. Writers have taken both of these tones with pretty much every comic in existence, and the trick is trying to find the balance.

 

[Webhead2006]

The dark comment was taken a bit to strong from what i was reading its more about the world and universe the characters are in and not about the characters themselves.

 

[DarkSuperman]

I also think that the WB execs are talking from their collective arses, but I think it's really up to the people that they hire for each property.

But saint, you're right: WB needs an open mind. Again, it has been reported that now they are meeting with DC and comic book writers with the movie projects. Hopefully, they can influence WB in a good way.

I agree with both you and Saint. I thought that too, that ultimately it will be up to the people they hire. Marvel has been super lucky or smart depending on how you see it to hire people who LOVE their respective characters.

Raimi GOT spidey and thus UNDERSTOOD how he should be handled. Same for Fav and Iron Man. I don't know if Nolan loved Batman, but he sure as hell understood him. These things ultimately translate into good film making because they won't do dumb things like giving characters kids just because...so yes, ultimately it depends on who they hire.

Hopefully, DC can find their Raimi, Favreau, or Nolan. Whoever they may be.

 

[The Guard]

This sounds to me like they get it. When you strip everything else away, when done right, compared to almost every other type of story, superheroes ARE pretty dark. Think about it. It's a dark concept tonally: one man (or woman or robot) standing against impossible odds, sacrificing, making difficult choices, in what tend to be very intense and conflict riddled situations.

That doesn't mean there won't still be hopeful elements, themes and some humor in these stories.

Quit panicking.