How should they handle "Justice League" going forward?

[Lantern Venom]

Definitely this. I found Miller's performance entertaining but he wasn't Barry Allen.

The issue wasn't just Miller. There was just something a little off about the way Barry was portrayed. It's understandable that he was written as a novice, but he came off like a timid sidekick who had to be spoon-fed on how to use his powers. That's not a good starting point for an eventual solo film.

 

[writer0327]

The best thing for WB/DC to do is strike while the iron is hot. Greenlight MoS2 and JL2 before the end of the year with 2022 release dates. Right now, the MCU has nothing officially announced past SM:FFH, so I wouldn't wait for them to start announcing their Phase 4. Now I know DC has been guilty of talking up a whole lot of films and not making them, but I think their track record is looking way way up since WW and AQM, and there is a ton of hype and positivity surrounding Shazam. They have incredible buzz surrounding Matt Reeves' Batman and Gunn's Suicide Squad right now, so why not just keep the momentum going? Get your 2022 release dates locked in before Marvel does.

 

[Flash525]

The best thing for WB/DC to do is strike while the iron is hot. Greenlight MoS2 and JL2 before the end of the year with 2022 release dates. Right now, the MCU has nothing officially announced past SM:FFH, so I wouldn't wait for them to start announcing their Phase 4. Now I know DC has been guilty of talking up a whole lot of films and not making them, but I think their track record is looking way way up since WW and AQM, and there is a ton of hype and positivity surrounding Shazam. They have incredible buzz surrounding Matt Reeves' Batman and Gunn's Suicide Squad right now, so why not just keep the momentum going? Get your 2022 release dates locked in before Marvel does.

God no, that would be awful. Considering the issues they've had getting directors and a script for the likes of Flash, Cyborg and GLC, for them to greenlight MoS2 and JL2 for 2022 is just setting themselves up for failure. They need to move forward with caution where these films are concerned. The next Superman film needs to be as successful and as well received as Wonder Woman and Aquaman, as does a Justice League sequel. Anything less than that, and they might as well just not bother. They're not going to be successes if they're rushed.

 

[metaphysician]

God no, that would be awful. Considering the issues they've had getting directors and a script for the likes of Flash, Cyborg and GLC, for them to greenlight MoS2 and JL2 for 2022 is just setting themselves up for failure. They need to move forward with caution where these films are concerned. The next Superman film needs to be as successful and as well received as Wonder Woman and Aquaman, as does a Justice League sequel. Anything less than that, and they might as well just not bother. They're not going to be successes if they're rushed.

Indeed. Rushing things to "strike while the iron is hot" is a huge part of how they got into this mess in the first place. WB needs to carefully measure their risks until they actually establish their footing.

What does this mean, in practice:
1. No Justice League movies for the foreseeable future. Don't even bother scheduling them.
2. Greenlight an Aquaman sequel.
3. Wonder Woman 1984 isn't out yet, but go ahead, greenlight a third movie, that's a safe enough bet.
4. Both Batman and Superman are in desperate need of restoration. Batman is further along in getting a new movie. Focus on that, and leave Superman to wait until after "The Batman" is released.
5. Don't do another Superman movie until you are absolutely sure you have a workable, appealing revival concept.
6. I won't *quite* say "Cancel everything else", but. . . do no more than *one* risky new property every year or so. This year, its Shazam. If you've got three new projects on the burner, pick *one*.
7. "Risky" in this context means "Not a continuation of an established successful series". Everything other than Wonder Woman and Aquaman is risky. Yes, even Batman, after the mess of the prior effort.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Indeed. Rushing things to "strike while the iron is hot" is a huge part of how they got into this mess in the first place. WB needs to carefully measure their risks until they actually establish their footing.

What does this mean, in practice:
1. No Justice League movies for the foreseeable future. Don't even bother scheduling them.
2. Greenlight an Aquaman sequel.
3. Wonder Woman 1984 isn't out yet, but go ahead, greenlight a third movie, that's a safe enough bet.
4. Both Batman and Superman are in desperate need of restoration. Batman is further along in getting a new movie. Focus on that, and leave Superman to wait until after "The Batman" is released.
5. Don't do another Superman movie until you are absolutely sure you have a workable, appealing revival concept.
6. I won't *quite* say "Cancel everything else", but. . . do no more than *one* risky new property every year or so. This year, its Shazam. If you've got three new projects on the burner, pick *one*.
7. "Risky" in this context means "Not a continuation of an established successful series". Everything other than Wonder Woman and Aquaman is risky. Yes, even Batman, after the mess of the prior effort.

Agree with every word!

 

[Boy Scout]

I don’t think a Batman movie is at all a risk at this point in time, but I agree with everything else he said.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I guess it's down to how you interpret 'risky'. I don't see a Batman solo losing money, but I don't think it's guaranteed it'll do the kind of numbers WB might expect.

 

[metaphysician]

I guess it's down to how you interpret 'risky'. I don't see a Batman solo losing money, but I don't think it's guaranteed it'll do the kind of numbers WB might expect.

Pretty much this. Batman, as an icon, is not going to go away or be hurt. . . but an incautious reboot runs the risk of the general audience kind of going "meh" to this particular incarnation, and waiting for the next time around. Besides, even if its not objectively risky, its probably better to act as if it were anyway, and put the kind of effort you'd put into carrying out a new risky franchise. You'll get better results.

 

[DerekLake]

Indeed. Rushing things to "strike while the iron is hot" is a huge part of how they got into this mess in the first place. WB needs to carefully measure their risks until they actually establish their footing.

What does this mean, in practice:
1. No Justice League movies for the foreseeable future. Don't even bother scheduling them.
2. Greenlight an Aquaman sequel.
3. Wonder Woman 1984 isn't out yet, but go ahead, greenlight a third movie, that's a safe enough bet.
4. Both Batman and Superman are in desperate need of restoration. Batman is further along in getting a new movie. Focus on that, and leave Superman to wait until after "The Batman" is released.
5. Don't do another Superman movie until you are absolutely sure you have a workable, appealing revival concept.
6. I won't *quite* say "Cancel everything else", but. . . do no more than *one* risky new property every year or so. This year, its Shazam. If you've got three new projects on the burner, pick *one*.
7. "Risky" in this context means "Not a continuation of an established successful series". Everything other than Wonder Woman and Aquaman is risky. Yes, even Batman, after the mess of the prior effort.

I think this is smart, though I think it’s a little unrealistic. They’ve got a Joker film, a Harley/BOP film, a Suicide Squad film and a New Gods film in the pipeline at various stages. There’s no way they’re going to stick to one new series a year. Right now their strategy seems to be prioritizing low budget films and hoping they overperform. That gives them more room to manage risk, especially if the films remain somewhat disconnected.

It does mean that properties like Superman are probably high risk for WB, because he’s proven to be difficult for WB to get right and he kinda requires a high budget (though perhaps Aquaman indicates that doesn’t have to be the case.) Properties like Green Lantern Corps, and I assume New Gods, would similarly be high risk given GL’s last film and the New Gods concept. In that case, yes, it’d probably be smart to spread out these higher budget films, and to take their time with them.

With Superman, they should probably also weigh the question of whether or not it’s worth it to stick with the current version or reboot, though my sense is that they are waiting on a director to sign on and make that decision for them, similarly to Reeves with his Batman.

 

[metaphysician]

I think this is smart, though I think it’s a little unrealistic. They’ve got a Joker film, a Harley/BOP film, a Suicide Squad film and a New Gods film in the pipeline at various stages. There’s no way they’re going to stick to one new series a year. Right now their strategy seems to be prioritizing low budget films and hoping they overperform. That gives them more room to manage risk, especially if the films remain somewhat disconnected.

It does mean that properties like Superman are probably high risk for WB, because he’s proven to be difficult for WB to get right and he kinda requires a high budget (though perhaps Aquaman indicates that doesn’t have to be the case.) Properties like Green Lantern Corps, and I assume New Gods, would similarly be high risk given GL’s last film and the New Gods concept. In that case, yes, it’d probably be smart to spread out these higher budget films, and to take their time with them.

With Superman, they should probably also weigh the question of whether or not it’s worth it to stick with the current version or reboot, though my sense is that they are waiting on a director to sign on and make that decision for them, similarly to Reeves with his Batman.

I mean, they can have a pipeline. Just. . . space things out enough that each movie has room to succeed or fail without having three future movies that critically depend on that movie, already in filming at the time. While I think the Joker movie coming out later this year is a bad idea that will end poorly, at least it isn't inextricably tied up with how Shazam does. . . and to the best of my knowledge, none of the immediate future movies are especially dependent on how Joker does.

 

[2kt09]

It does mean that properties like Superman are probably high risk for WB, because he’s proven to be difficult for WB to get right and he kinda requires a high budget (though perhaps Aquaman indicates that doesn’t have to be the case.)

I was jumping over the moon that the budget claimed to be in the 160s, but apparently the final estimate is around 200m.

 

[Avs21]

I don't understand how JL2 or MoS2 in 2022 is rushed. MI:7 was announced last month for release in 2021 (MI:8 in 2022)
and SS2 will also be released in 2021.

Wait 10 years for the next JL is way to long.
It should be released 2022-2024 there is no reason to wait any longer.

Cyborg won't get a solo movie but I doubt WB will ditch the black hero if they do JL2.

But why make JL2, MoS2, Flash, GLC, New Gods or Blue Beetle when you can do a Trench movie

 

[Iceman]

The best thing for WB/DC to do is strike while the iron is hot. Greenlight MoS2 and JL2 before the end of the year with 2022 release dates. Right now, the MCU has nothing officially announced past SM:FFH, so I wouldn't wait for them to start announcing their Phase 4. Now I know DC has been guilty of talking up a whole lot of films and not making them, but I think their track record is looking way way up since WW and AQM, and there is a ton of hype and positivity surrounding Shazam. They have incredible buzz surrounding Matt Reeves' Batman and Gunn's Suicide Squad right now, so why not just keep the momentum going? Get your 2022 release dates locked in before Marvel does.

But JL came before Aquaman and after WW so it's not a run of successful films just yet. I think if we get 3 consecutive well-received films WB's confidence will grow significantly. There's nothing I want more from them than a proper JL film but I don't think it's realistic just yet.

 

[Flash525]

But JL came before Aquaman and after WW so it's not a run of successful films just yet. I think if we get 3 consecutive well-received films WB's confidence will grow significantly. There's nothing I want more from them than a proper JL film but I don't think it's realistic just yet.

WB shouldn't be focused on having a good run before they take another look at Justice League though. They should focus on Justice League if and when the time is right. Not before.

Marvel had a plan. They (seemingly) knew exactly which characters they were going to start with, and they knew they wanted to bring them together for the Avengers. WB didn't do that. They did Superman, then it was straight into BvS not having introduced anyone else. WB should have done one of two things; either a self contained JL story, unassociated with Henry's Man of Steel, or they should have focused on building (at least) two more of the six first; we'd at least have had half the team as established by then.

I'd love nothing more that a working Justice League, because (dare I say it) I think if they get it right, it'll have the potential to surpass the likes of Avengers, but at the moment, they're not there, and I'd hate for them to get a good run only to ruin said run with (another) premature Justice League sequel that does poorly.

The singular problem I have now is that if they focus on their solo films, and world-build around then, it (may) be trickier to bring them all back together down the road.

 

[metaphysician]

I don't know, I feel like it *shouldn't* be too hard to focus on solo movies without foreclosing future crossovers. Just tell their writers/directors "your world is a bigger world, don't act like your character is the only thing special in it, and don't blow it up". OTOH, maybe that's a harder limitation to put into practice than it sounds.

 

[Flash525]

I don't know, I feel like it *shouldn't* be too hard to focus on solo movies without foreclosing future crossovers. Just tell their writers/directors "your world is a bigger world, don't act like your character is the only thing special in it, and don't blow it up". OTOH, maybe that's a harder limitation to put into practice than it sounds.

That's a problem with giving a director too much creative freedom. They can go overboard. That's not to say that Jenkins or Wan have, Jenkins especially hasn't as Wonder Woman has remained self contained, and short of a single island, there's not much more to tell. With Aquaman though, there's a big world down there. It's all good and well that they've [until now] kept to themselves, but if the planet is ever under threat again, and the Atlantian armies don't show up at all (when Arthur does) you've kinda' got to ask the question as to why.

If Atlantis had been a single city underwater, you could argue that it's simply not large enough, but we've seen just how vast the oceanic counterpart to the DCEU is now; there's millions of them down there, if not a few billion. Not exactly something that can simply be overlooked.

 

[Binker]

First thing: call it JLA

Second thing: well its just where they want to go in regards to where they came to where they are now. Do you go for JLA vs Injustice League/Legion of Doom, or do you follow up New Gods if its out by that time, and do JLA vs Darkseid?

And then a related question is do you rebrand the Legion of Doom idea into something else? Have another movie.

 

[BatmanBegins05]

First thing: call it JLA

Second thing: well its just where they want to go in regards to where they came to where they are now. Do you go for JLA vs Injustice League/Legion of Doom, or do you follow up New Gods if its out by that time, and do JLA vs Darkseid?

And then a related question is do you rebrand the Legion of Doom idea into something else? Have another movie.

Re-brand The Legion of Doom into the Secret Society or the Injustice Society.

 

[unholyrevenger]

It's simple. Don't do it. If people want something don't try and give it to them because you can never live up to the expectation people have for it. Instead make something people don't want but put in the effort to make them care about it.

 

[Boy Scout]

Or you could just do a good job. That works too.

 

[unholyrevenger]

Or you could just do a good job. That works too.

Yeah, like Venom and The Last Jedi.

 

[metaphysician]

Given how hard a collapse in sales Last Jedi suffered, its not exactly evidence for your case. Sure, it made a ton of money, but that big a drop and that poor of legs? Bespeaks that marketing and name got people to watch the movie, and then they hated it.

Can't really argue against Venom being crap that inexplicably sold well, sadly.

 

[Aldebaran]

Pretty much this. Batman, as an icon, is not going to go away or be hurt. . . but an incautious reboot runs the risk of the general audience kind of going "meh" to this particular incarnation, and waiting for the next time around. Besides, even if its not objectively risky, its probably better to act as if it were anyway, and put the kind of effort you'd put into carrying out a new risky franchise. You'll get better results.

Batman is an icon, however you can't over do it, audiences can tire out watching the same character over and over again. Same goes for superman. Can't understand why fans keep asking for a Man of Steel 2. It would be the 10th or 11th superman movie in 40years. Better to give these two characters some rest, let WW & AM have their run and make most of it. Exploit the success they had and the demand out there for them. Can't even understand why DC is wasting time and resources with suicide squad 2.

 

[thebatfan5194]

I think they should try JL again in like 2023/2024, almost 7 years out from the first, and by that point the team roster should be slightly different so you can have an excuse for reintroduction of the "forming a team" idea.

 

[DerekLake]

Batman is an icon, however you can't over do it, audiences can tire out watching the same character over and over again. Same goes for superman. Can't understand why fans keep asking for a Man of Steel 2. It would be the 10th or 11th superman movie in 40years. Better to give these two characters some rest, let WW & AM have their run and make most of it. Exploit the success they had and the demand out there for them. Can't even understand why DC is wasting time and resources with suicide squad 2.

Which Superman movies are you counting?

Supes 1-4, Returns, MOS-JL... that’s not a lot, especially given the gap between those first four and the rest. I agree, they shouldn’t necessarily rush into a reboot. But it’s not like anyone has come close to exhausting Superman as an IP. Sure, if they just try to adopt the same failed approach (with the same two villains) as the past four films, then yeah, it’ll get old very fast. But Spider-Man’s recent success demonstrates that general audiences can tolerate seeing much of a popular IP, if it’s done well.

Bottom line, if Marvel can succeed at pumping out three movies a year for the past decade, then WB can put out some of its own.

I think they should try JL again in like 2023/2024, almost 7 years out from the first, and by that point the team roster should be slightly different so you can have an excuse for reintroduction of the "forming a team" idea.

I think that’s a decent timeframe, but a lot of it is going to depend on WB finding a director willing to make a JL film. And if they do, it’s not guaranteed they would simply use the current Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Shazam or others. My guess is that any new JL film would likely use whatever roster the director wants — so, more like what they were going to do with JL Mortal.

Personally, I’m partial to a proper Justice League 2, because I think there was some good potential for a great sequel. But I guess that’s up in the air now that Ben Affleck is officially out.