Favreau/Marvel takes a little jab at WB/JLA

[Webhead2006]

yea i see that working for marvel schedule for films. But yea for these kinds of teamup films u probably want to go with non big stars for captain america and antman, and thor so they can easily sign them for avengers so they would be spending their big bucks to keep norton downey and jackson in.

 

[BobJM]

Jason Lewis for Captain (known, but not A-Lister)
Karl Urban for Thor (same deal as Lewis)
Ant-Man, I was thinking Peter Sarsgaard. I dunno, it just seems to fit and he's not a big star either.

 

[kedrell]

Plus if you have Ant-Man you'll also need the Wasp, so add another paycheck to the total. I prefer Marvel's approach, but neither is without risk. I'll say this though, Marvel has much more faith in their characters than the WB execs have in DC's.

 

[Webhead2006]

Yea i agree with you there. U think they would have been doing wonder woman, flash, and green lantern films now since the superhero movie craze started but no they just keep doing supes and bats.

 

[BobJM]

Wasp (Selma Blair, I'm thinking) would be a main character in the Ant-Man film, obviously.

 

[Mister J]

Yea i agree with you there. U think they would have been doing wonder woman, flash, and green lantern films now since the superhero movie craze started but no they just keep doing supes and bats.

WB did make turn attention to getting something done with those properties, but the results were pathetic.

• Joss Whedon spinning his wheels and coming up with jack for more than a year and a bought period piece that nothing came of for Wonder Woman;
• a rejected script by Goyer that was apparently "too dark" and Shawn Levy name being mentioned with nothing to show for Flash; and
• some dumbass proposed 'zany comedy' with Jack Black for Green Lantern.

They couldn't develop any worthwhile treatments for any of those characters, so the obvious response is to get giddy over a vehicle that combines them all, in a separate continuity than your two existing superhero properties, while tossing in a few more heroes (just for fun) and to put that on the fast track. The script they got could have been amazing, but the synopsis (if accurate) that we got wind of didn't really make it seem so. I have a hard time putting faith in WB to get this right, given that this is the most ambitious project that this genre probably could see and WB's recent history with these characters.

 

[jmc]

Yea i agree with you there. U think they would have been doing wonder woman, flash, and green lantern films now since the superhero movie craze started but no they just keep doing supes and bats.

In spite of how good those characters are, WB are just to scared to risk spending $100+ million on theses characters because they're untested. Although both have taken blows both past and present, Bats and Big Blue will always get preferential treatment. Warner owns these characters, they can do what they want, DC can't do squat.

 

[Yellow Cyclone]

i think WB's biggest problem isn't how it's developing its material but WHO it's allowing to do so

if marvel fails, at least it can blame itself

WB should throw their crap over to DC. i mean who better to understand the characters/stories than the freaking creative teams?

i'm sure it wouldn't take much (if any) to get geoff johns to write a GL movie. epicness, pretty much confirmed. instead we get a bunch of suits in a room trying to find the "next hot thing" to star so they can save money


(marvel) comic fans slightly suffer too, b/c better competition puts everybody on their A game, and maybe stuff like blade3/ff2/etc would get better standards before they're greenlit

 

[TheVileOne]

It makes a lot more sense in terms of logistic. A lot more sense then what Marvel is doing. Don't misunderstand me, I would love a Justice League with top-notch actors and to use the cast from Superman Returns and Batman Begins. But it's not a ridiculous aproach and one is asking for trouble.

For Marvel, all that needs to happen for everything to go to hell is for Sam Jackson, Downey Jr, Ed Norton or the guys that will play Ant-Man, Thor and Captain America in solo-movies to say no, be commited to other movies or to ask for to much money.

Marvel is playing it very risky, with really high stakes. They are going all-in and the cards they have is not top-notch. I really hope they succeed, but their aproach is not one that makes big sense.

WB is doing it a lot easier for themselves. They can cast actors that have free timeslot and not asks for too much money. Marvel can not do that, they must find a timeslot where all the cast is free to do it. And they need the money to pay their stars.

WB is playing it safe, Marvel is not. But if Marvel succeds they get a bigger win, but the odds for a Marvel movie is much smaller then the odds for a Justice League movie.

But I hope we get both movies, I really do. But the point is, what WB is doing is making a lot more sense.

How does that make sense?

Like them or not, for three X-men movies they managed to get the same cast for all of them including the most prolific leads. So if Fox can do it, why can't Marvel?

The Justice League projects, how is it playing it safe? If its a disappointment like say Superman Returns how does that help all these potential spin-offs.

No one here has also compentently explained how the Green Lantern issue should be handled.

Why the hell would they use John Stewart in JL if Green Lantern is supposed to be a spin-off but they turn it into Hal Jordan instead?

 

[Dotten]

Like them or not, for three X-men movies they managed to get the same cast for all of them including the most prolific leads. So if Fox can do it, why can't Marvel?

You made my point. Ask yourself if they would manage to do that if they made solo-movies with Wolverine, Storm, Cyclops, Xavier and Magneto before they made X-Men. By making Justice League first they make it a whole lot easier to make sequels.

It's not like we have not had around nine movies about the two biggest heroes in the Justice League already.... And they are using the two biggest known superheroes in the world to introduce the others.

You will not find others then americans to go watch Green Lantern, because no one knows who those guys are. But everybody will know who Green Lantern is after watching him throw some punches alongside Batman and Superman. WB wants to gross worldwide, not just in the US with their WW, GL and The Flash movies.

Think about it, it makes perfect sense.

The Justice League projects, how is it playing it safe? If its a disappointment like say Superman Returns how does that help all these potential spin-offs.

Because they tried to make solo-movies first and failed with that aproach. So now they should start over with new solo-movies? C'mon, if one wants a JL movie this is the last chance to get it within 10 years. Bale is not interested and SR underperformed. WW has long been in development hell and they dare not go that route considering the failures of movies with female superheroes in the lead.

Why try to redo a failure? Why make it so bloody hard? They tried the solo-aproach, it failed. So now they try it the other way around. Can't blame them and it makes perfect sence. When you touch the plate and get burned, then you don't go arount touching the plate again.

Why the hell would they use John Stewart in JL if Green Lantern is supposed to be a spin-off but they turn it into Hal Jordan instead?

It could be a prequel for all we know. Not a hard thing to get around for a creative team.

 

[Webhead2006]

Thats what i was thinking if the flash and green lantern films are spinoffs, gl could be a prequel film to justice league. Or they can say john is off in another sector of the universe and hal is the new earth gl.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Thats what i was thinking if the flash and green lantern films are spinoffs, gl could be a prequel film to justice league. Or they can say john is off in another sector of the universe and hal is the new earth gl.

Yea, but the whole point of JLA was to introduce the GA to specific characters to then carry on their adventures in solo films. The GA is supposed to be introduced to that character in JLA and then have their interest piqued enough to want to see them again in a solo movie. It makes absolutely zero sense to have a Stewart GL that the GA may grow to like and have interest in only to have a completely different GL in the solo film. This does not serve the purpose that WB execs said the JLA film is set up to do.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea but who knows whats going to happen yet.

 

[Wally West]

How does that make sense?

Like them or not, for three X-men movies they managed to get the same cast for all of them including the most prolific leads. So if Fox can do it, why can't Marvel?

The Justice League projects, how is it playing it safe? If its a disappointment like say Superman Returns how does that help all these potential spin-offs.

No one here has also compentently explained how the Green Lantern issue should be handled.

Why the hell would they use John Stewart in JL if Green Lantern is supposed to be a spin-off but they turn it into Hal Jordan instead?

The Gl issue is kinda a no brainer. More than likely john stewart's inclusion in the JLA is to bring some diversity to the team. I'm fine with that, I no longer see John Stewart as a token character, JLU raised his profile to younger viewers who don't read comics and don't remember Hal from the superfriends, and most importantly showed that his character has potential if handled properly.

This leaves out Hal Jordan who is obviously a popular character.

Obviously, Hal and John can exist within the same continuity, they have apeared in JLA comics numerous times fighting along side one another. All we have is rumors to this point, but I wouldn't be surprised if John makes an apearence in the film, maybe his involvement in the JLA could lead the gaurdians to apoint an additional protector of Earth's sector - Hal. Who's to say that John won't die in one of the JLA films, then you have a character from the solo films to take over. Who knows there are tons of ways it could work. It just makes thier new film universe that much bigger.

Why not have the best of both worlds and feature Hal in the solo films? It's a situation that should make everyone happy, instead it's just another excuse for people to *****.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

The Gl issue is kinda a no brainer. More than likely john stewart's inclusion in the JLA is to bring some diversity to the team. I'm fine with that, I no longer see John Stewart as a token character, JLU raised his profile to younger americans who don't read comics and don't remember Hal from the superfriends, and most importantly showed that his character has potential if handled properly.

This leaves out Hal Jordan who is obviously a popular character.

Obviously, Hal and John can exist within the same continuity, they have apeared in JLA comics numerous times fighting along side one another. All we have is rumors to this point, but I wouldn't be surprised if John makes an apearence in the film.

Why not have the best of both worlds and use Hal? It's a situation that should make everyone happy, instead it's just another excuse for people to *****.

Yea, but Wally, don't you think it's contradictory of WB for them to release JLA under the premise that these characters would be introduced to the GA who will then segway into solo films, only to have the solo film feature a different character then what was featured in JLA?

 

[Wally West]

Yea, but Wally, don't you think it's contradictory of WB for them to release JLA under the premise that these characters would be introduced to the GA who will then segway into solo films, only to have the solo film feature a different character then what was featured in JLA?

Yeah...but this is GL not Clark Kent or Bruce Wayne. It's different. There is only one Superman, there is only one Batman - There are an entire army of GLs spanning the galaxy. Why not feature another famous GL in additon to John. They are including both Barry and Wally, why not John and Hal?

 

[Webhead2006]

yea maybe we get a mention that john isnt the first earth gl and hal is off in another sector during the events of the movie.

 

[Wally West]

^^Yeah I was just thinking that too. In fact it would be awsome if Hal had a cameo in the funeral scene.

 

[Webhead2006]

Yea that would be neat, if the death-flashback script is what we are getting.

 

[Wally West]

Yeah, they'd also have to cast Hal before JLA's shooting is finished...so I'm not counting on it at all. But it would still be cool.

I wonder if the league dispands at the end of the film...since they may be going thier seperate ways and apearing in solo films. That could be cool, you could feature some characters in solo films and then make a sequel to JLA where you have an alien invasion (Darkseid ) that brings the team back together. A threat that would be big enough to justify needing two Green Lanterns...

 

[TheVileOne]

You made my point. Ask yourself if they would manage to do that if they made solo-movies with Wolverine, Storm, Cyclops, Xavier and Magneto before they made X-Men. By making Justice League first they make it a whole lot easier to make sequels.

The point people is saying you can't line-up all these actors for multiple movies like AVENGERS. I'm saying you can. Since Marvel is handling all of these and they are planning ahead, I'd say it's a lot more possible than the detractors believe.

Also a lot of these characters were established as solo characters before Avengers and they've made big marks as solo characters. Now I'm not saying the solo movies will all be huge hits, that remains to be seen. But JL just feels 100% misplanned.

It's not like we have not had around nine movies about the two biggest heroes in the Justice League already.... And they are using the two biggest known superheroes in the world to introduce the others.

So what's the rush to do it in the midst of a strike? Seems rather ridiculous to me. If people love The Dark Knight that kind of spits in their faces to release a movie a year later saying this is the new Batman you should watch.

You will not find others then americans to go watch Green Lantern, because no one knows who those guys are. But everybody will know who Green Lantern is after watching him throw some punches alongside Batman and Superman. WB wants to gross worldwide, not just in the US with their WW, GL and The Flash movies.

That idea might work, but they aren't even planning to use the same Green Lantern in the spin-off movie. That's why this is so flawed and stupid.

Think about it, it makes perfect sense.

I don't see it at all.3

Because they tried to make solo-movies first and failed with that aproach. So now they should start over with new solo-movies? C'mon, if one wants a JL movie this is the last chance to get it within 10 years. Bale is not interested and SR underperformed. WW has long been in development hell and they dare not go that route considering the failures of movies with female superheroes in the lead.

How? Batman Begins didn't fail. Superman arguably did. Catwoman failed, but I don't see where the merit is.

It makes no sense to me that they are doing JL to help jump start solo movies but still doing solo movies that are SEPARATE! THAT MAKES NO SENSE. I don't see how JL is supposed to jumpstart SuperMax for that matter or a GL film with a different JL. Makes no sense.

Why try to redo a failure? Why make it so bloody hard? They tried the solo-aproach, it failed. So now they try it the other way around. Can't blame them and it makes perfect sence. When you touch the plate and get burned, then you don't go arount touching the plate again.

WHERE did it fail? They didn't try solo films for Wonder Woman, The Flash, Aquaman, Green Lantern, etc. If Batman Begins was a failure why are they doing The Dark Knight. You aren't making sense.

And if Batman Begins was a success why ruin it by trying to mess up the succcess for that movie?

It could be a prequel for all we know. Not a hard thing to get around for a creative team.

If audiences accept John Stewart as JL and love him as Green Lantern, and if GL is supposed to be a spin-off jump started why are you so sure that audiences will quickly accept it?

The Gl issue is kinda a no brainer. More than likely john stewart's inclusion in the JLA is to bring some diversity to the team. I'm fine with that, I no longer see John Stewart as a token character, JLU raised his profile to younger viewers who don't read comics and don't remember Hal from the superfriends, and most importantly showed that his character has potential if handled properly.

But you are saying that in JL his function is to be THE TOKEN BLACK CHARACTER ("bring diversity to the team"). Sure John Stewart can be a supporting hero and GL in JL but he's not able to carry the GL movie by himself? Sorry that does not compute.

This leaves out Hal Jordan who is obviously a popular character.

But if GL is to be a spin-off and JL establishes John Stewart why is John Stewart suddenly not good enough to carry GL by himself? If kids know him and like him as much as you say from his profile being raised on JLU?

Obviously, Hal and John can exist within the same continuity, they have apeared in JLA comics numerous times fighting along side one another. All we have is rumors to this point, but I wouldn't be surprised if John makes an apearence in the film, maybe his involvement in the JLA could lead the gaurdians to apoint an additional protector of Earth's sector - Hal. Who's to say that John won't die in one of the JLA films, then you have a character from the solo films to take over. Who knows there are tons of ways it could work. It just makes thier new film universe that much bigger.

GL reportedly is supposed to come out as a spin-off film from JL NOT a JL sequel. So unless that changes there goes that theory.

Why not have the best of both worlds and feature Hal in the solo films? It's a situation that should make everyone happy, instead it's just another excuse for people to *****.

You are avoiding the issue instead of addressing it. Movie audiences are different than comic fans.

 

[Wally West]

But you are saying that in JL his function is to be THE TOKEN BLACK CHARACTER ("bring diversity to the team"). Sure John Stewart can be a supporting hero and GL in JL but he's not able to carry the GL movie by himself? Sorry that does not compute.

I don't know where you got that crap about "John not being able to carry a GL film by himself". I never said that. I never even said that I didn't want John to be in the solo films. I said I could see the logic in using both characters. If I had my way John would star in them, and hawkgirl would be the costar. But unlike you I realize that movie studios don't exist to make what I want happen. And unlike you I don't have a problem with two GLs, I do prefer John, but it isn't that big a deal to me. We're getting Hal in the solo films. That's just the way it is, and I'm O.K. with it. Hal's cool too, I grew up with Hal so I'm fine with it. But just because I'm O.K. with them using Hal and can even see some logic in the choice doesn't mean I'm against John. The bottom line is you can have two Gl's in the same continuity that's the point I was trying to make, as long as they use either John and Hal and not Jack Black I'll be happy.

 

[TheVileOne]

I don't know where you got that crap about "John not being able to carry a GL film by himself". I never said that. I never even said that I didn't want John to be in the solo films. I said I could see the logic in using both characters. If I had my way John would star in them, and hawkgirl would be the costar. But unlike you I realize that movie studios don't exist to make what I want happen. And unlike you I don't have a problem with two GLs, I do prefer John, but it isn't that big a deal to me. We're getting Hal in the solo films. That's just the way it is, and I'm O.K. with it. Hal's cool too, I grew up with Hal so I'm fine with it. But just because I'm O.K. with them using Hal and can even see some logic in the choice doesn't mean I'm against John. The bottom line is you can have two Gl's in the same continuity that's the point I was trying to make, as long as they use either John and Hal and not Jack Black I'll be happy.

But they proposing to do Hal in the solo film. Why would you do that if its John Stewart in JL and GL is supposed to be a spin-off?

You aren't really explaining or addressing it other than that well it will be John and Hal. Then you say the solo films will just have Hal. It doesn't work that way with moviegoing audiences who don't know anything about these characters like you guys say.

 

[Ike E Bear]

Why can't John be a co-star in Hal's solo film, linking the franchises?

It's true that the general public is going to have a harder time following some of these heavier aspects of continuity, but I don't think it will be that big of a problem.

With today's audiences I think it was a tougher sell to try to get people to accept a Superman movie that was a sequel to movies that were 30 years old (Superman Returns) than a movie that contradicted some of what they had already been shown (Batman Begins).

The biggest problem here is proximity of time, as Justice League might be followed by solo films sooner rather than later. Still, I think the film makers can manage those concerns without too much hassle.

It's not likely 99 per cent of movies we go and watch don't effectively introduce BRAND NEW characters. Hell, George Lucas even started a franchise with Episode IV ...

As for different actors portraying the same character ... it happens every day of every year with the works of Shakespeare. I liken Superman and Batman to Hamlet or Romeo or even James Bond. The characters themselves are bigger than the actors in my mind. If they create good, relatively faithful depictions of those characters then I don't care about too much else.

Also, film and television creators recast characters all the time (how many girls played Kitty Pryde in the X-Men trilogy). I don't think this is an insurmountable problem. Personal preferences aside, I just want to see good actors in such roles. Shrug.

 

[TheVileOne]

Why can't John be a co-star in Hal's solo film, linking the franchises?

WHY? And how the hell is that supposed to work? If it's a SOLO movie why make it a GL team-up? That's not how these movies work.

Once again you aren't addressing the issue at hand. They aren't saying this is GL John and Hal team-up! They are saying this is GL spin-off from JL starring HAL JORDAN. Something is NOT computing here.

It's true that the general public is going to have a harder time following some of these heavier aspects of continuity, but I don't think it will be that big of a problem.

Why? And if they really like John Stewart (hypothetically), why screw that up and kick him out of the solo movie? Especially when doing this usually ends in failure or lower BO. Switching the main character or starring role that is.

With today's audiences I think it was a tougher sell to try to get people to accept a Superman movie that was a sequel to movies that were 30 years old (Superman Returns) than a movie that contradicted some of what they had already been shown (Batman Begins).

But then you have JL that contradicts what the audiences love (Batman Begins and hopefully Dark Knight), and then do it again with Green Lantern. By your own logic these are tougher sells.

The biggest problem here is proximity of time, as Justice League might be followed by solo films sooner rather than later. Still, I think the film makers can manage those concerns without too much hassle.

How if these are such tough sells? Batman was successfully relaunched so why make a movie that YES will contradict it?

It's not likely 99 per cent of movies we go and watch don't effectively introduce BRAND NEW characters. Hell, George Lucas even started a franchise with Episode IV ...

These aren't brand new characters though. Batman and Superman sure as heck aren't.

As for different actors portraying the same character ... it happens every day of every year with the works of Shakespeare. I liken Superman and Batman to Hamlet or Romeo or even James Bond. The characters themselves are bigger than the actors in my mind. If they create good, relatively faithful depictions of those characters then I don't care about too much else.

There's a big difference between Shakespeare and tentpole comic book movies.

Even with Bond, the best Bond actors or the favorites are the ones who played the roles for years and years and were recognized for BEING Bond. The same actor played Superman for about a decade and to this day people still only see that actor as the definitive Superman, and IMHO no one has surpassed Reeves performance on film (or TV) as Superman. Luthor I'd say is still open for improvement.

People like familiarity with these characters, and they like seeing a performer as that character.

At the end of the day, there is only ONE Captain Kirk, and only ONE actor that OWNS that role. And that actor was NOT in Just My Luck, and he's NOT named Chris Pine.

Also, film and television creators recast characters all the time (how many girls played Kitty Pryde in the X-Men trilogy). I don't think this is an insurmountable problem. Personal preferences aside, I just want to see good actors in such roles. Shrug.

No one saw X-men 1, 2, or 3 because of the different actresses who played Kitty. If someone new suddenly played Prof. X or Wolverine, there's no way you can argue that there would NOT be a stigma.

Currently I applaud Marvel for planning ahead, and if they pull it off, I will applaud them even more. So I hope it works.