Did Warner Bros. Miss The Point?

[terry78]

A good example of what to look for is what Favreau did....he made Iron Man fun to watch in and out of the suit...something that other movies do lack at times. Often we're counting the minutes until the alter ego dons their costume so we can get more action in these types of flicks, but Tony Stark just being Tony Stark was just as much fun for audiences on his own.

 

[jmc]

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.

So True.

 

[DarkSuperman]

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.

Nope, nope...this is the perfect time to panic. Better now then years down the road and hundreds of millions spent on another Superman that doesn't go right. It's our responsibility as the comic community (You know the ones who give a damn) to correct these corporate types and prevent them from raping our heroes in the attempt to cash in on the superhero phenomenon while it's still popular.

Here's a little article I agree with.

I agree with DC wanting to copy the Marvel model of having introductory superhero movies - for say, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow and The Flash - before teaming them up ("Justice League" sounds like it's been postponed for a good decade), but I think Robinov first needs to realize that not all the superheroes exist - well, they do, but you know what I mean - in the same world as Batman. That's a different beast. Some superhero films (like Marvel's "Iron Man" for instance) are meant to be light, fluffy and fun.

http://www.moviehole.net/200815051-brandon-routh-dumped-as-superman-2

See, there's a lot of us who know how to read between the lines when it comes to this studio speak. When they say Darker they mean darker. They say what they mean and mean what they say. Period.

This is the precise time we need to be vocal about that we will and will not accept from another Superman film. Hell, post your thoughts on the WB's forum if they've got one. Send emails and letters, just make your voice heard.

Superman needs us to save him now...

 

[jmc]

^ I love the irony in the above post and the user name. t:

 

[DarkSuperman]

^ I love the irony in the above post and the user name. t:

Hah! I didn't realize!

 

[Webhead2006]

As i and a few others have said robinov's dark comment was taken a bit out of context. Its just going to be the world/universe the characters are in are dark and the characters themselves not being dark like batman.

 

[DarkSuperman]

^
We'll see...

 

[Webhead2006]

Yea we just have to wait and see which dc films are announced to be going, then their writers/directors and then all that.

 

[ray243]

A dark superman film does not mean superman is dark per see...I can simply mean superman is the sole light among the darkness.

The film should be a dark film that become brighter due to superman's action.

The polar opposite of the dark knight.


Superman should the one that

'LIGHT UP THE DARKNESS'

 

[Captain Planet!]

Yes, they did miss the point.

 

[LazloSpeeker]

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.

This makes sense, for most of the main heroes have a dark and troubled past.

Of course, the most EMO character of all time is none other than Superman-Prime:


This friggin' nutball is basically the given cause for all the character changes and such in the DC universe. I also think he destroyed and entire universe once in one of his temper tantrums.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

Here's my 2 cents. I think this 'dark tone' is the way to go, even with Superman. It doesn't mean Superman himself will be 'dark', but the villain or situation Superman finds himself in will be.

 

[The Major]

It's to bad Spacey was Luthor in SR. He'd have made a great Post-Crisis Luthor.

 

[terry78]

I will give Raimi credit for making Spider-Man 1 family friendly, yet at the same time having enough death and despair in that movie to balance it out. It was something I would take my little cousins to, but it was disturbing enough to be faithful to the Goblin stories of the books.

 

[DarkSuperman]

Just let comic book writers give their input PLEASE! Superman Birthright and All Star Superman Rock.

 

[The Major]

Just let comic book writers give their input PLEASE! Superman Birthright and All Star Superman Rock.

Input that is taken seriously.

Not being listened to by WB would be a waste of time.

 

[Raiden]

Like others have said, I don't think making the DC heroes dark is the key to their success. TDK is dark because Batman is dark in the comics, and if you want to be faithful to superheroes like Superman, WW, GL, etc. like TDK does then you don't make all of them dark. However, what's encouraging is that WB now recognizes the potential of their DC heroes, and now made a committment to start bringing them to the big screen. Superman reboot news surprises me, but I think with Marvel's willingness to make reboots like TIH and P:WZ, WB understands that reboot isn't a death-toll of the franchise, and audience are willing to accept them.

 

[Jawn]

Also, like others have said -- whether we've taken their words out of context or not, we should still speak out now while we can. I'd rather WB see these ramblings and say "Those idiots took what we said out of context" than have us not speak out and end up getting a film that misses the mark and potentially kills a franchise.

 

[terry78]

It's obvious a lot of Hollywood-ites do go on message boards and lurk, and sometimes they do get their suggestions from stuff we mention on here, so I would suggest being careful saying **** like, "dude, comic movies NEED to be darker and grittier", etc.

 

[DarkSuperman]

I just came across this article at moviehole.net and not only did I find it hilarious, but right on the money where The WB is concerned. It's a tad long, but worth the read. Check it out, my fellow Superman-Lovers.

http://www.moviehole.net/200815071-caffeinated-clint-24808

I actually hope - and only for one reason - that the numbers on "The Dark Knight" start to drop now. It's given the brother's Warner a bigger serving of head than Jenna Jameson usually hands out. As a consequence - you may have read - The WB's Jeff Robinov is now planning to kick-off production on a whole slate of other superhero movies - that's fair enough, but get this - films that will be as dark, blooding, depressing and coloured black-and-purple like "The Dark Knight". And yes, that includes "Superman". Jovial Clark Kent himself. Happy-go-lucky Superdude from Space.


Hmmm. Gives new meaning to the term "Tone Deaf", right?
Anyone else want to see "Superman : The Black Avenger" - the story of a despondent alcoholic reporter who by night wears a dark blue costume to escape his demons? **** no! "Superman" is light, fluffy - - - and every other word you'd usually use to describe Kristen Bell. I know only half of you liked "Superman Returns" - but c'mon, at least that was "Superman". It was fun. Sure, it had dramatic moments - all of the "Superman" movies have - but for the most part, it was a big-screen comic-book come to life. That's how it should be. Robinov's new "Superman" film sounds like it's going to be "The Crow" without the numerous obvious cuts.


So here's what they're doing : They're letting everyone involved in "Superman Returns" go. They're bringing in a whole new cast - that includes a new Superman; let the ****in' elongated search begin. Again! - and a new director. They're rebooting the franchise.


So here's what could also be happening : They're making Lois a crack ****e. They'll have Lex Luthor be a shiny-noggin'd rapist that's hell-bent on catching the Man in Tights merely because captain muscles busted him with a goat. They'll have Superman **** the open end of a bottle to the tune of some Nick Cave tunes. They'll have Jimmy Olsen hang himself after it's discovered he's been secretly filming stories for a tabloid news show.
Yeah, I want to see that about as much as I want to see that new Pamela Anderson reality series. Not one bit. Where's the fun in a ‘dark' "Superman"?
OK, so "Death of Superman" and all those other - can't think of any right now? Did one have Superman butchering a Nun for her cloth? - dark "Superman" comics worked but you gotta work on your audience a little bit before you serve up something like that. You've also got to pad such a movie with enough light stuff that the dark stuff doesn't have them stopping off at the hardware on the way home for rope. It's OK for "The Dark Knight" to inspire the odd self-inflicted hanging, but not "Superman" - that series isn't about that.


I don't think Jeff Robinov knows the character. The last cartoon he probably watched was "Fritz the Cat". It clearly wasn't "Superman" or "Green Lantern"... or "Justice League". I don't blame him - he's not a virgin, he's acne-free and comic-con doesn't give him wood, so why read comics? Well, it's his job. ... now more than ever. One "Harry Potter" is gone, Warner are going to go Superhero crazy. They have to. They'll need their tent-poles. (We all have to do inane things for our job Jeff - Heck, I have to watch Denise Richards' show for my job sometimes too. I even have to sit through whatever direct-to-video release Jonathan Schaech is putting out any given week. You need to bury himself in a basket of comics, watch some Saturday morning cartoons, and start ****in' Lynda Carter).


Obviously money's the driving factor here - Robinov thinks that "Dark Knight" worked because of the "dark" tone it carried and so obviously every other superhero movie they do from here on out should carry the same "dark ****" tag. Fair enough... but wait. It ain't the way to go. Wanna know how you'll help make these other superhero films into global success stories like "Dark Knight"? You stick as close to the source material as you can, you hire the best director for the job, you cast the right person (think outside the box if you have to) in the lead role, and you make sure audiences get their money's worth. If you put the audience first, the dollars will follow. The "College Road Trip" school of filmmaking went out with last week's recyclables.


Good luck and God Speed. And please keep Nicolas Cage away from Superman. We will hope for the best!

I have to say I agree.

 

[The Major]

DS:

I agree, as well.

 

[Crook]

My god, almost that entire article was a laughably exaggerated b***h-fit. Talk about taking a sentence and completely running with it.

I understand the need to keep the integrity of the character, but people are overblowing the hell outta this. There is nothing wrong with inserting a dark tone into the narrative. Any Superman fans knows the mythos is filled with it. All the classic stories, in one way or another have a dark aspect to it. Look no further than the character's damn origin. If that ain't heartbreaking and an emotional downer, I don't know what is.

You just have to keep Superman himself and Metropolis in general, to be free of the circumstance. They key is presentation of the film. Once you see screens and footage of this film looking too similar to TDK, then the boards can go in a riot. Otherwise, calm the hell down.

 

[DarkSuperman]

DS:

I agree, as well.

I particularly LOL at the Lynda Carter comment...I'd do that for free. t:

 

[jmc]

It seems obvious that fans are somewhat hesitant to take some risks, like it or not, The Dark Knight was a risk, it brought in new audiences, one that soaked up the more mature approach to the Superhero genre. The problem I think some fans have in seeing is that sticking to the source material is not the only factor in what made TDK a success, it was an all round well crafted movie that didn't follow the traditional formula of not only superhero films but of blockbuster movies in general, it was different and it reaped rewards. I think WB are putting the audience first, by treating them like adults, a 'dark' Superman film doesn't mean black suit and depressing characters, it could mean anything from more threatening villains who push Superman to his absolute limits, to greater discovery of who the man is. There's no reason a Superman or Green Lantern or whoever can't have greater depth and darker themes, to say there's only one way to interpret a character is absurd, the characters source material is not some sacred scripture, people have to be open to interpretation otherwise it all becomes stale and will only appeal to the fan base.

 

[The Major]

jmc:

The source material isn't scripture but it shouldn't be ignored totally. It's the blue print of the franchise itself. Without it they're just making a new project up with a stolen title.

It's important for the film makers to understand as much of the the franchise they're adapting as possible, respect it and use what works while keeping the spirit, making it recognizable and creating a good adaption.

If something won't translate into a film there should be a pretty damn good reason for it and the changes have to make sense and be better for the franchise overall.