does anyone besides me have no faith?

[Orin]

I've always thought JL should have remained nothing more than a fanboy dream. There's still no guarantee that there will even be solo films post a successful JL, WB may decide it's not worth spending millions on separate film series' for the other characters despite a successful 'introduction' to the public and concentrate only on future JL films, why risk money on 3-4 untested franchises when you can save money by doing one series?

Of course, there's no guarantee that there will even be solo films post a successful JLA flick. But what's your point? There's no guarantee without a Justice League movie either. Like i said, it seems pretty obvious that the only two characters WB has faith in are Batman and Superman. So what's the problem with us finally getting all the other heroes on big screen by finally having them appearing in a movie with these two characters and INCREASE THE CHANCE for their solo-flicks on the way? I mean, it's nice that you'd prefer solo-movies with all these characters and stuff and that you have a exact idea of how it should happen. But if you really want to see these flicks happen, maybe you should try to think about what's realisticly got to happen, that THEY will even consider it.

Anyway, i think we've reached a point here were everboy has made his point of view very clear. In my opinion, in my last few postings i've stated pretty resonable arguments for what i'm saying , so i'm just going to let tem stand for themselfs. And as much as i want to say something to the points that The Major stated, it's pretty much the same stuff that has been brought up a hundred times before and to which i've said something almost as often...

 

[TheVileOne]

I would rather not see them at all if the circumstances of Justice League were true or the case.

 

[The Major]

Orin:

Unlike JL solo films can be ignored and tried again at a later date.

With JL they're putting all their eggs in one basket. They couldn't get a WW film going when they had Joss Whedon writing the screenplay. Even their last Superman flick failed. JL is a project that's much more risker and more complex then either.

If it fails then what?

They not only lose JL but all solo films even indirectly tied to it are dead for who knows how long. Ten years? Twenty years?

 

[Venom'sDad]

Either way, it a risk. There is no gaurantee that solo films are less risky. I just think WB needs to carefully map out exactly what their intentions are, and stop doing $hi+ on a whim.

 

[The Major]

Either way, it a risk. There is no gaurantee that solo films are less risky.

They're actually less risky. If one fails they can just continue with a seperate hero or two simultaneously. They can even go back and do a new version years later.

JL won't be harmed by it.

JL messing up means huge long term consequences to JL solo characters and the JL franchise itself.

I just think WB needs to carefully map out exactly what their intentions are, and stop doing $hi+ on a whim.

I agree.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Then they need to wait until Bale finishes his trilogy on Batman.

And if Nolan pulls a Singer?

Who cares if Marvel gets it Avengers released before Justice League?

They should be more concerned about quality then whether their ego will be bruised if Marvel manages to do what they couldn't.

Avengers being released early would even give them a chance to see what methods worked and what didn't to avoid future mistakes.

Because if Avengers has a returning cast and a proven director attached WB is not going to be able to match it under any circumstances... why would you go up against that? And with the way things are shaping the two studios might target the same summer if they wait. WB is foolish if they want to be held in that shadow... Avengers as it appears to be shaping out... will blow Miller's JLA out of the water... and it will look even worse if they haven't made any improvements to the current production they got going with JLA while releasing the movie even closer to Avengers

It does make sense. They can't rush high profile projects like this or they'll risk turning it into X-men 3. Unlike most movies they produce the expectations are through the roof due to batman and Superman, possibly Wonder Woman, in this movie. While it offers more rewards if they succeed it also puts them at more risk critically. There's also the burden of killing off potential solo franchises if it fails. For what? A terrible big budget movie that makes DC's biggest icons into jokes? It would be Batman And Robin all over again. only a much bigger loss since they'll lose any future profits with the spin-offs and hurt the solo characters if they want to someday but without any ties to Justice League.

I agree... but I am speaking from the studio perspective... not my own... and if I am WB I am feeling my DC properties are in shambles at the moment... and they are... I need to get something out DC related... and I am not throwing all my chips into the table at a speculative third Nolan installment. If they target 2010 there is plenty of time to get it done... and even if they wait till 2012 and Avengers is only due out in 2013 or 2014... it will still probably be the same deal... no Bale regardless and definitely no Routh an a lot of other no names... might be no better than we got now.

Have you read any comics of these characters? WB has no clue what a goldmine they're sitting on with the DCU.


Justice League has literally hundreds of great characters they could explore in movies or tv.

Your right... give GL and Flash an animated series... and then do live action movies once the GA gets familiar with the characters... how did Spiderman and X-Men get so popular even before the films? Those toons helped a lot

They aren't as well known or popular as Superman, Batman or WW, of course, but that doesn't mean the potential isn't there. The Justice league cartoon has already given many of them exposure. The Trinity weren't always the icons they are today. They started the same way. The difference is WB isn't bothering to give them a chance. Making bad adaptions like catwoman or Steel doesn't mean the concepts are useless. It just means they didn't bother to give them the care they reserve.

If Catwoman had the quality casting, direction, script etc of Batman begins it would have been a hit. Or it could have had a chance at least.

Since we already got JLA cartoons and there are credible characters attached to that... then they might as well map out a JLA trilogy... if I had it my way I'd release GL and Flash cartoons and build a small fan base with the kids... and then down the road... ten years from now... I'd do a JLA trilogy... we'll have enough Marvel films to keep us entertained till then... if you are a Marvel fan at least... DC doesn't need to go head to head with Marvel... imagine the day we have JLA movies/DC character solo movie, Avengers movies/character solos, Superman, Batman, Spiderman, X-Men, etc movies all in one summer... that is OVERKILL... the GA will be sick of comic book films no matter what studio they come from... WB needs to bury their comic film ambitions and stick with Batman (try and get that Nolan third)... maybe reboot Superman in 2012 instead of a JLA movie... that's how I'd do it... but its pretty unrealistic to ask WB to be patient when it has already waited for over twenty years to attempt at getting these characters live action films... that's why if they are serious about a JLA... do it now... or by 2012 latest. At least by then we might have a better cast but its no guarantee.

 

[The Major]

And if Nolan pulls a Singer?

They already have two successful Batman films. The third Nolan flick will make money even if it fails. It'd be similar to Spiderman 3.

Because if Avengers has a returning cast and a proven director attached WB is not going to be able to match it under any circumstances... why would you go up against that? And with the way things are shaping the two studios might target the same summer if they wait.

They're going to face Avengers eventually.

Going against it at this stage is just asking for trouble.

Do they seriously think between that time and now they'll have the best JL movie they can get? I doubt it.

They need to know how JL works. What makes it important. Why everybody loves these characters. Then make sure they can put this on screen.

They couldn't be more off that.

They need to take baby steps for JL.

Until they're at the same stage Marvel is they're setting themselves up for failure.

WB is foolish if they want to be held in that shadow...

They'd be even more foolish to risk damaging several franchises at once just because they can't take the fact Marvel does a better job at the super-hero films then they do.

It's not exactly a secret, anyway.

They should remember what happened with SR vs X-men 3. Only this time positions have reversed.

Avengers as it appears to be shaping out... will blow Miller's JLA out of the water... and it will look even worse if they haven't made any improvements to the current production they got going with JLA while releasing the movie even closer to Avengers

Avengers will blow Miller's JLA out of the water with the current project.

They should be learning from Marvel. Paying attention. Rushing ahead will just make them look like even bigger fools.

It's clear JL isn't salvagable at this point. They can pick it up again once their super-hero properties are in better shape.

Improving JL doesn't necessarily mean it has to go ahead asap.

I agree... but I am speaking from the studio perspective... not my own...[/quote]

Okay.

and if I am WB I am feeling my DC properties are in shambles at the moment... and they are... I need to get something out DC related...

Then they should focus on small low risk DC franchises.

The properties are in shambles due to mismanagement.

and I am not throwing all my chips into the table at a speculative third Nolan installment.

Unless they're only making Nolan's third Batman film that year they're not throwing all their chips on it.

That said Nolan's Batman sequel has a better chance at success then their current JL.

If they target 2010 there is plenty of time to get it done... and even if they wait till 2012 and Avengers is only due out in 2013 or 2014... it will still probably be the same deal...

That assumes they know how to use the JL property to its potential. With quality from top to bottom.

WB has utterly failed with the current JL film. They were lucky it didn't get into theatres as is.

They can't even get Superman to work on screen. They have no clue how to execute WW in her own film. This will only be made worse in a ensemble where she'll have less time on screen.

no Bale regardless and definitely no Routh an a lot of other no names... might be no better than we got now.

They're going to have to audition better actors and actresses then what they're doing now.

Casting random unknowns for difficult characters to execute and some who are well known iconic figures is just asking for a disaster.
they should at least get unknowns who have done similar roles before. The trinity will be the hardest to cast. Especially Wonder Woman. Surely they can do better then a supermodel with few acting credientials on her resume. Unless she pulls a Tricia Helfer WW's going to be underwhelming at best, a joke at worst.

Your right... give GL and Flash an animated series... and then do live action movies once the GA gets familiar with the characters... how did Spiderman and X-Men get so popular even before the films? Those toons helped a lot

I really like that idea. But you're missing WW. They need to reinforce the fact they have a female character who's just as good as the male characters.

Since we already got JLA cartoons and there are credible characters attached to that... then they might as well map out a trilogy... if I had it my way I'd release GL and Flash cartoons and build a small fan base with kid... and then down the road... ten years from now... I'd do a JLA trilogy...[/quote]

I like it.

we'll have enough Marvel films to keep us entertained till then... if you are a Marvel fan at least... DC doesn't need to go head to head with Marvel... imagine the day we have JLA movies/character solos, Avengers movies/character solos, Superman, Batman, Spiderman, X-Men, etc movies all in one summer... that is OVERKILL... the GA will be sick of comic book films no matter what studio it comes from...

They should make sure not to over do it. Seperate the films over the years.
Make low level teams, like Outsiders and Justice Society, that have characters who won't have solo movies.

It can be done.

All it requires is patience and timing.

Make sure they don't get to many their super-hero films in one year.

They could even market some of them as non-superhero. The genre has many sub-genres within it. Not everything is capes and masks. Blackhawk and Sargent Rock could be a WWII action films, Spy Smasher could be espionage, Booster Gold could be comedy etc.

WB needs to bury their comic ambitions and stick with Batman (try and get that Nolan third)...

I disagree.

They need serious practice making super-hero films. They'll never do it right if they just rely on Batman.

Not all super-hero films need to big budget blockbusters or films. Do direct to DVD, live action tv shows only do it better then previous attempts. They should even get DC involved. DC knows more about the franchises then the suits do. Marvel's had success with this.

Not everything needs to be high profile. They don't need to risk so much if they don't have to.

If a low budget barely known DC property fails they learn what went wrong, expectations won't be that high for it and the public doesn't care. They have a hit and it'll be a new franchise to use.

maybe reboot Superman in 2012 instead of a JLA movie... that's how I'd do it...

Agreed.

but its pretty unrealistic to ask WB to be patient when it has already waited for over twenty years to attempt at getting these characters live action films...

Patience is what they need to learn.

The entire film industry has plenty of films that can take decades to come to fruition. Why be quick with the super-hero licenses? All that means is we get subpar, badly cast movies. No-one wins. It takes more then money for JL to work.

They end with nothing and for what?

 

[Visionary]

Well, also i woudn't go that far, of course there comes certain a risk with it. But not trying at all doesn't do anything better either. And it really shoudn't be that hard to do a enjoyable JLA movie, that people will come to see. It dosn't have to match all the close-minded ideas of us fanboys to be successful, you know?

But since they obviously don't have the balls to do that, maybe a successful JLA movie would be the prove they need to finally see that these characters have tons of potential and people want to see them, too.

True, I'd rather they take a risk with JLA first than another Superman film.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I disagree.

They need serious practice making super-hero films. They'll never do it right if they just rely on Batman.

I didn't mean it like that... all I was saying was 2009 is pretty much a lost year... they got Potter to save them in 2010... no need to get out a huge scaled DC project like JLA... so either they got BB3 in 2011 or JLA... I am hoping they go BB3... best case scenario is that they work in a MOS movie in 2010 with a smaller budget... get BB3 out the next year... maybe do Batman vs Superman in 2012 or even JLA with Bale and Routh... but they should do a WF movie if it is cheaper and I would have more confidence in that personally. Then do GL and Flash movies there after OR start a JLA trilogy from scratch in like 2015 with a new cast... that way they could do direct to DVD movies and cartoons in that whole time to get the other character's names out there... that's the way to do it. Plus I think Bale and Routh would be more keen on working with each other alone in a WF movie since both can have more screen time. Plus you can use the money you'd be paying actors (GL, Flash, WW, etc) on guys like Spacey... and maybe a big time name for Talia instead of TEENesa Palmer... plus Singer and Nolan would be more likely to stay put and co-produce or remain involved in a WF rather than a JLA... would look like:

2010 MOS
2011 BB3
2012 WF
2015 JLA
2018 JLA 2
2019 JLA 3 (Back to back)

THAT'S having patience...

 

[ClarkLuther55]

Well, also i woudn't go that far, of course there comes certain a risk with it. But not trying at all doesn't do anything better either. And it really shoudn't be that hard to do a enjoyable JLA movie, that people will come to see. It dosn't have to match all the close-minded ideas of us fanboys to be successful, you know?

It's hard to make a movie that people will respect and want to see sequels of.

People will initially see lots of crap that can be put on screen. They don't listen to critics, and they aren't up to speed with all the buzz the way fanboys are. People went and saw the FF movie. FF made money, so the studio made a sequel with the same lame cast, writers, and director. But people weren't fooled again.

A bad movie will ruin the characters' chances for the better part of the next decade, if not more. Not doing the movies at all if they can't be done right is better IMO, because that at least leaves open the possibility of the WB getting its act together and making a good movie.

 

[jmc]

^ I'd rather wait ten years for solo good films than be served a half arsed ensemble film and be told by WB to call it ice cream.

 

[The Guard]

X3 was not subpar because it was rushed. Rushing had little to do with why that movie was lacking in some areas. That was a script/tonal issue. Dragging production out longer wouldn't have fixed anything that was wrong with it.

I love how some of you seem to think WB can just make solo superhero movie after solo superhero movie, as if it's just that simple. Apparently BATMAN BEGINS, SUPERMAN RETURNS, THE DARK KNIGHT, CONSTANTINE, 300 and WATCHMEN is somehow a bad "result" for comic book movies over a four or five year period of time. As far as I'm concerned, they have good reason to wonder if movies like THE FLASH, GREEN LANTERN, etc, will succeed, given the performance of SUPERMAN RETURNS under a very respected director. They have good reason to be less than confident about massively budgeted movies about lesser characters succeeding.

 

[Spade]

To be fair, it was their fault for having hired a director that only identifies with Superman in the alien aspect.

 

[The Major]

I didn't mean it like that... all I was saying was 2009 is pretty much a lost year... they got Potter to save them in 2010... no need to get out a huge scaled DC project like JLA... so either they got BB3 in 2011 or JLA... I am hoping they go BB3... best case scenario is that they work in a MOS movie in 2010 with a smaller budget... get BB3 out the next year... maybe do Batman vs Superman in 2012 or even JLA with Bale and Routh... but they should do a WF movie if it is cheaper and I would have more confidence in that personally. Then do GL and Flash movies there after OR start a JLA trilogy from scratch in like 2015 with a new cast... that way they could do direct to DVD movies and cartoons in that whole time to get the other character's names out there... that's the way to do it. Plus I think Bale and Routh would be more keen on working with each other alone in a WF movie since both can have more screen time. Plus you can use the money you'd be paying actors (GL, Flash, WW, etc) on guys like Spacey... and maybe a big time name for Talia instead of TEENesa Palmer... plus Singer and Nolan would be more likely to stay put and co-produce or remain involved in a WF rather than a JLA... would look like:

2010 MOS
2011 BB3
2012 WF
2015 JLA
2018 JLA 2
2019 JLA 3 (Back to back)

THAT'S having patience...

I'd love to see a Nolan/Singer, Routh/Bale S v B movie. No doubt they could do a good job on it.

Make sense to do the JL as a trilogy back to back.

The only problems is I don't see th JL films being at any less risk, even with Routh and Bale on board, and WB being willing to go all the way to give it the quality it deserves. It would be better if the studio was willing to give it the respect LOTR got but they aren't there yet.

That's why they should focus on the solo films for a few years before tackling JL. They don't have the proper mindset for it.

As I said before if they can't get something like Wonder Woman working on her own film they're not going to put anywhere near the effort for her in an ensemble cast.

She's the kind of character who is very difficult to write. Even veteran comic writers have trouble with her. They think any random screenwriter can do a script to give her and the lesser JL members justice when they have Superman and Batman around? Even the latest script had Batman as a major player with Talia.

He's had numerous live action films to flesh out his character. Same with Superman. The rest will have nothing unless the movie is a success. Which is far from certain.

The script they unofficially greenlighted, it was furthur along enough that they auditioned many actors and began making sets in Australia, didn't even have the JL enemies in it!

Just a former Justice Leaguer turned evil (Max Lord), the daughter of Batman's enemy's (Talia) and obscure villains from a high profile comic event that Batman originally made who act like Sentinels (OMAC's).

None of these are in the JL rogues gallery. Superman got Luthor and Zod, Batman got most of his enemies on screen. Why is his not occuring with the JL? It's not like they don't have good villains to pick from.

 

[FaT_tONle]

The BM vs SM movie is just wishful thinking on my part... but I am tired of people saying they should copy Marvel when its obvious they aren't going in that direction... if you ask me... Marvel's approach is WAY harder than even LOTR approach... because the budget will gradually rise and rise for solo sequels until the point where they'd need an astronomical budget for Avengers... they shouldn't do live action solos of GL and Flash before JLA (We agree to disagree). You go the lord of the rings approach... and do a JLA trilogy... and make spinoffs from there... or just make one massive JLA movie and then do spinoffs there after... but the Marvel approach is probably nothing but an afterthought for WB... heck I'd be suprised if Marvel got even 4/6 actors from the solos returning for an Avengers movie... not going to be easy.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

X3 was not subpar because it was rushed. Rushing had little to do with why that movie was lacking in some areas. That was a script/tonal issue. Dragging production out longer wouldn't have fixed anything that was wrong with it.

I love how some of you seem to think WB can just make solo superhero movie after solo superhero movie, as if it's just that simple. Apparently BATMAN BEGINS, SUPERMAN RETURNS, THE DARK KNIGHT, CONSTANTINE, 300 and WATCHMEN is somehow a bad "result" for comic book movies over a four or five year period of time. As far as I'm concerned, they have good reason to wonder if movies like THE FLASH, GREEN LANTERN, etc, will succeed, given the performance of SUPERMAN RETURNS under a very respected director. They have good reason to be less than confident about massively budgeted movies about lesser characters succeeding.

WB exec: "Well hell, if Superman can't be a huge blockbuster then just imagine the results for other superhero solo projects".

Not an exact quote but I imagine that's what they are thinking. However, that line of thinking is somewhat flawed. They gave us a Superman movie that had a Maury Povich who's your daddy storyline with a superhero who just lifts things. Did they really think that would make a massive amount of money? Because if they did, then they are idiots.

A Superman movie was not made that used the character's fullest potential (both in story and use of other characters) so its not fair to judge other potential superhero movies based on Superman's "failure". They have to realize that they didn't deliver the best Superman product they could have. Had they done so, and the movie still "failed" then I would be willing to understand their reluctance in adapting other superhero solo projects.

 

[The Major]

X3 was not subpar because it was rushed. Rushing had little to do with why that movie was lacking in some areas. That was a script/tonal issue. Dragging production out longer wouldn't have fixed anything that was wrong with it.

Rushing didn't exactly help the situation. It just made it worse.

I love how some of you seem to think WB can just make solo superhero movie after solo superhero movie, as if it's just that simple.

You seem to think that making solo movies is an impossible thing to accomplish.

It can be done. WB just has to be smart at executing them. There are numerous advantages with solo movies that an ensemble like JL doesn't have.

They will give the GA time to know each hero before JL hits. That means when JL is made they will most likely get a better idea of what the character is like instead of going in blank.

They're adding more risk with this, too. JL isn't X-men. X-men was always a team from the start. JL is about individual heroes coming together. Each who have their own seperate history.

If it fails they've just tarnished about five potential franchises before they even got started. With the added effect of hurting an already weakened Superman franchise and messing with their successfully rebooted Batman franchise.

What happens next?

They'll just make Batman films for the next ten or twenty years.

Apparently BATMAN BEGINS, SUPERMAN RETURNS, THE DARK KNIGHT, CONSTANTINE, 300 and WATCHMEN is somehow a bad "result" for comic book movies over a four or five year period of time.

Constantine doesn't really match. It's like Catwoman. They changes so much of the premise it may as well have been called something else. WB may as well have just adapted the Dresden Files.

Wasn't 300 a success? It's not even a super-hero film.

Watchmen doesn't count since it hasn't been released. No-one knows whether it will fail or not.

Begins was a critical success. It got enough money to warrant a sequel. Nothing bad about that.

As far as I'm concerned, they have good reason to wonder if movies like THE FLASH, GREEN LANTERN, etc, will succeed, given the performance of SUPERMAN RETURNS under a very respected director.

A respected director isn't the only problem. What if said director doesn't "get" the property? Or makes a version which the public doesn't like such as Singer?

What if the cast sucks?

This simply means they need to spend their money wisely and hire directors who can work with less but make a film look more expensive then it actually is. Like Joss Whedon or Robert Rodreguiz.

They could even focus on smaller ideas for the lesser films, too. Have them more Earth based with GL in the first picture. With just one bad guy. If it does well enough to get a sequel then explore other planets.

Generalising super-hero movies over one failure isn't a good idea. Superman isn't like Green Lantern isn't like Wonder Woman.

Superman Returns didn't stop Hellboy or Spiderman succeeding did it? Because they're seperate concepts which were given respect by the studios who made them.

Every film is unique in their execution. SR proves that WB can't depend on the name on the title for instant success for a truly great movie.

They have good reason to be less than confident about massively budgeted movies about lesser characters succeeding.

Making a team movie with iconic and complex characters isn't exactly any better.

Batman and Superman were lesser characters once. They didn't become icons over night. In the past WB thought they were worth the risk.

It doesn't help that WB doesn't give the lesser characters the same respect or class that those two properties have. That may have something to do with lesser characters failing.

I'm sure they know all about Batman and Superman but does WB have any clue about the personalities and histories of WW, J'onn, GL or Flash?

Their inflated budgets don't make it any easier. It doesn't matter how much a cash a movie has if the studio making it is executing it badly.

 

[thegameq]

Great responses.

Fantasy films in general have always suffered because they tend to be very dependent on having the proper creative vision to fully bring the material to life. We all know way to many fantasy films that were destroyed because of the creative choices that were used to bring the material to life. These are the products that just feel incomplete, half-assed or just wrong.

All the more reason why it is usually critical that the team behind such films have a true understanding of the material and not just a passing, for the moment, interest in the material. It clearly affects the outcome and it shows in the overall quality of the product.

Justice League, like X-men, FF, Avengers is simply an enormous undertaking, that any attempt to "down-size" is going to cause the project to fall way short of the on screen potential. It's been said before and it still holds true for most of the grander comicbook properties. Justice League requires a work up on par with the LOTR and SW franchises.

That said, such a work up is an undeniable risk, with most at stake being the loss of millions of dollars. But moreso, the risk of causing cascading damage to the credibility of any characters involved in the franchise--if not moreso comicbook films in general. As proven by films like Transformers, general audiences can be fickle. Sad thing is, the same people who applaud Transformers will later complain about the "dumb" films being made by H-wood.

It would be interesting to hear what was Peter Jackson's pitch to WB regarding his trilogy. Then again, his vision was such an obvious fit for LOTR it was a no-brainer. No doubt such a clear an obvious vision made the pitch all the easier.

The "Greek Gods" angle Miller has expressed sounds interesting, but I'd like to hear or see more. My guess is that it's more of a reference to the larger than life, above and beyond nature of the JL. The young JL angle on the other hand I detest not only because it just doesn't fit, but because it's clearly a business ploy.

I wonder what approach Marvel is taking for the Avengers? I see Avengers moreso along the lines of the SW or Indy Jones franchises; un-abashed fantasy and adventure. It is what it is.

As always, the old fan standby from the 80s still rings true: "If you're not going to do it right, don't do it at all." Sad thing is, all the technical capabilities to get these properties right abound. If only studios could get the talent and vision right.

 

[The Guard]

WB exec: "Well hell, if Superman can't be a huge blockbuster then just imagine the results for other superhero solo projects".

Not an exact quote but I imagine that's what they are thinking. However, that line of thinking is somewhat flawed. They gave us a Superman movie that had a Maury Povich who's your daddy storyline with a superhero who just lifts things. Did they really think that would make a massive amount of money? Because if they did, then they are idiots.

He didn't just lift things in SUPERMAN RETURNS. He lifted a CONTINENT, an AIRPLANE and a SPACE SHUTTLE, flew at incredible speeds and did some great maneuvers while doing so.
He also used his Heat Vision and Superbreath. He also walked into a hail of bullets and had them bounce of his chest.

And since when do people have a problem with Superman lifting heavy things? I mean, I get that he didn't punch anyone, but *****ing about his power usage in SUPERMAN RETURNS? Come on.

In a lot of ways, Superman just lifted things in SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE, and the film made a ton of money. Granted, it was an origin movie, and the first really ambitious superhero movie ever...

Still, the powers Superman used had nothing to do with why people didn't attend the movie in droves.

SUPERMAN RETURNS, while not reaching Superman's full potential, was nontheless an interesting, relevant story about The Man of Steel, with several huge action sequences and fantastic effects. If I'm WB, I'd be wondering why it didn't make much money, too.

I'm guessing it's because SUPERMAN RETURNS was a bit too "boring" for most people. Too much story, not enough continuous action, I.E something like BATMAN BEGINS or SPIDER-MAN. If people did see it, then most didn't go see it again.

A Superman movie was not made that used the character's fullest potential (both in story and use of other characters) so its not fair to judge other potential superhero movies based on Superman's "failure".

You can easily make that argument about almost any superhero movie franchise out there on some level.

They have to realize that they didn't deliver the best Superman product they could have. Had they done so, and the movie still "failed" then I would be willing to understand their reluctance in adapting other superhero solo projects.

It's irrelevant that it wasn't the best Superman product that could have been delivered. It was a pretty good product as a film. It was a huge movie, with huge, epic action sequences and plenty of drama and humor to boot. And it was about Superman, and it wasn't exactly panned at the box office, either. And people didn't go see it in droves. You think it's because the general public gives a crap about how faithful SUPERMAN RETURNS was to the mythos, or that Superman wasn't fighting Braniac? I sure don't.

Rushing didn't exactly help the situation. It just made it worse.

How so? The script is what it is, the effects clearly weren't all that effected, and FOX wanted Cyclops marginalized regardless of Marsden's schedule. In what specific manner did "rushing" the production of X3 actually hurt the end product? Would Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg have suddenly sprouted amazing talent if they waited another six months to a year?

You seem to think that making solo movies is an impossible thing to accomplish.

No I don't, and I never said that. If WB was a comic book studio, and didn't have to make TONS of other movies in other genres, it would make sense to see two, three superhero films a year come out from them. But since they've already got HARRY POTTER, the Batman franchise, and numerous other franchises and one shot films slated, it's not as simple as going "Ok, in 2010, we're gonna have GREEN LANTERN, WONDER WOMAN and THE FLASH".

Let's be honest with ourselves. While solo efforts delve deeper into individual characters and their individual mythologies, the Justice League roster does not consist of characters that you have to "get to know" before JLA film will work. These are iconic, easily relatable characters.

People went into X-MEN blank. Think anyone came out of that not knowing at least the basics of what each character was like?

They're adding more risk with this, too. JL isn't X-men. X-men was always a team from the start. JL is about individual heroes coming together. Each who have their own seperate history.

How do you figure the risk factor changes? The concepts are still a team of individual characters.

If it fails they've just tarnished about five potential franchises before they even got started.

BATMAN & ROBIN didn't kill the Batman franchise. I doubt WB would forever abandon all plans for Green Lantern, The Flash and Wonder Woman if a JLA movie failed (which is highly unlikely).

With the added effect of hurting an already weakened Superman franchise and messing with their successfully rebooted Batman franchise.

How would JLA be messing with the Nolan franchise?

What happens next?

They'll just make Batman films for the next ten or twenty years.

Try four. I don't expect WB to be making Batman films after the third movie.

Constantine doesn't really match. It's like Catwoman. They changes so much of the premise it may as well have been called something else.

They changed the character's hair color and nationality. Yeah, that's a big change, but other than that, the movie was fairly faithful to the source material. And it was a good flick, and people ate it up. I would call it a success on WB's part.

Wasn't 300 a success?

A huge one.

Watchmen doesn't count since it hasn't been released. No-one knows whether it will fail or not.

Does anyone actually expect WATCHMEN to fail?

Begins was a critical success. It got enough money to warrant a sequel. Nothing bad about that.

I'm not talking about movies that were bad. I was being sarcastic. Pointing out that WB's comic book/superhero movie output over the last several years has been fairly impressive in most respects.

A respected director isn't the only problem. What if said director doesn't "get" the property? Or makes a version which the public doesn't like such as Singer?

What if the director does get the property?

What if the cast sucks?

What if it doesn't?

This simply means they need to spend their money wisely and hire directors who can work with less but make a film look more expensive then it actually is. Like Joss Whedon or Robert Rodreguiz.

I don't think that's going to work with a project like this. This aint SIN CITY. This is THE JUSTICE LEAGUE.

Generalising super-hero movies over one failure isn't a good idea. Superman isn't Green Lantern who isn't Wonder Woman.

Which is why they're set on making JLA to feel out the public's feelings about these heroes.

Superman isn't GL or WW. Exactly. I would say that over the majority of the last 50 years, Superman is far and away the most popular and iconic superhero in the world. GL and WW aren't even close to his level of popularity.

So if a close to $200 million dollar Superman film performs less than impressively when it's the first one in decades, what is WB's incentive to throw $170-200 million into Green Lantern and Wonder Woman projects?

Superman Returns didn't stop Hellboy or Spiderman succeeding did it? because they're seperate concepts which were given respect by the studios who made them.

SPIDER-MAN is a different case. SPIDER-MAN clearly has a massive built in market: Children. Now, I suppose Superman could have, and that's likely where WB made a misstep in their film production.

I loved HELLBOY, but HELLBOY cost a THIRD to make of what SUPERMAN RETURNS did. And it made it's money back, but it wasn't such a huge success at the box office that you can call it a smash hit.

HELLBOY cost $66 million. It made $99 million worldwide. A decent performance, but not a massive hit on any level. If anything, DVD sales are what made HELLBOY 2 a reality.

Every film is unique in their execution. SR proves that WB can't depend on the name on the title for instant success or a truly great movie.

True. Which is exactly what I'm saying.

I'm sure they know all about Batman and Superman but does WB have any clue about the personalities and histories of WW, J'onn, GL or Flash?

I'm pretty sure someone inside WB does. But does most of the public?

I mean, I want to see other heroes get movies as much as any of you, and I want to see a JLA movie. I wish there was an easy answer to all this. But clearly there isn't. And I don't really blame WB for that at this point. Maybe if THE DARK KNIGHT is an enormous hit...

 

[CrazyDavey]

All this JLA talk just makes me think of one thing. Just let Bruce Timm handle this film. He'll make it right.

Ya, I know he's an animated producer, but I'm sure he could do just as good with live action. He knows the source material very well, and I'd probably worry less about the movie if it was in his hands.

 

[FaT_tONle]

He didn't just lift things in SUPERMAN RETURNS. He lifted a CONTINENT, an AIRPLANE and a SPACE SHUTTLE, flew at incredible speeds and did some great maneuvers while doing so.
He also used his Heat Vision and Superbreath. He also walked into a hail of bullets and had them bounce of his chest.

And since when do people have a problem with Superman lifting heavy things? I mean, I get that he didn't punch anyone, but *****ing about his power usage in SUPERMAN RETURNS? Come on.

In a lot of ways, Superman just lifted things in SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE, and the film made a ton of money. Granted, it was an origin movie, and the first really ambitious superhero movie ever...

Still, the powers Superman used had nothing to do with why people didn't attend the movie in droves.

SUPERMAN RETURNS, while not reaching Superman's full potential, was nontheless an interesting, relevant story about The Man of Steel, with several huge action sequences and fantastic effects. If I'm WB, I'd be wondering why it didn't make much money, too.

I'm guessing it's because SUPERMAN RETURNS was a bit too "boring" for most people. Too much story, not enough continuous action, I.E something like BATMAN BEGINS or SPIDER-MAN. If people did see it, then most didn't go see it again.

You can easily make that argument about almost any superhero movie franchise out there on some level.

It's irrelevant that it wasn't the best Superman product that could have been delivered. It was a pretty good product as a film. It was a huge movie, with huge, epic action sequences and plenty of drama and humor to boot. And it was about Superman, and it wasn't exactly panned at the box office, either. And people didn't go see it in droves. You think it's because the general public gives a crap about how faithful SUPERMAN RETURNS was to the mythos, or that Superman wasn't fighting Braniac? I sure don't.

You got to be kiding me dude... SR was the best it could have been? That's just not accepting the facts... WB hired the wrong man... that's all there is to say... and when you do that... you MORE OFTEN than not... end up with a pretty average product at best... and for that investment... SR's effort can be simply described as "meh"...

 

[The Guard]

You got to be kiding me dude... SR was the best it could have been? That's just not accepting the facts... WB hired the wrong man... that's all there is to say... and when you do that... you MORE OFTEN than not... end up with a pretty average product at best... and for that investment... SR's effort can be simply described as "meh"...

Yeah, I didn't, at any point, say that SUPERMAN RETURNS was the best it could have been.

 

[Showtime]

I don't think the problem with Superman Returns was the action, it was the type of action. The action became redudant and didn't escalate into the 3rd act. The plane sequence was the biggest and best action sequence in the script, and the later sequences although eye pleasing, did not surpass that sequence. I think with a supervillian and supervillian action towards the end, the movie would have been better rounded.

 

[strikezone89]

i dont think this movie is even going to be made

 

[Docker2.0]

All this JLA talk just makes me think of one thing. Just let Bruce Timm handle this film. He'll make it right.

Ya, I know he's an animated producer, but I'm sure he could do just as good with live action. He knows the source material very well, and I'd probably worry less about the movie if it was in his hands.

I said the same thing. The way dude handled the animated series, he shouldn't have any problem doing the live action movie, as long as he doesn't go OC on us.

You got to be kiding me dude... SR was the best it could have been? That's just not accepting the facts... WB hired the wrong man... that's all there is to say... and when you do that... you MORE OFTEN than not... end up with a pretty average product at best... and for that investment... SR's effort can be simply described as "meh"...

x 2000! I went in wanting to like the movie but was constantly looking at my watch, wondering when this film will be done.