No new DC movies until 2015?

[Chromatics]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/11/no-new-dc-movies-until-2015

Not sure if this is news that has already been said on here, if so mods you can go ahead and lock the thread. Otherwise, thoughts on this?

 

[Rockstar]

Yup. This is true.


Now that Nolan has left and declined to produce the DC films, all the upcoming projects have no producers or creative teams attached.


WB is aiming for Justice League in 2015. That seems to be the one project of priority.


I forsee a trainwreck in the making.

 

[8Diagrams(WU)]

yeah since Nolan isnt going to godfather anything they literally have nothing in the bag. Its a shame.

 

[Da Games Elite]

This is bad. Really bad. I'm a huge Marvel fan, but this is unfair. It's like DC doesn't care that Marvel is has a monopoly on the superhero genre. By the time DC steps up to the plate, Marvel would have done what no other studio has done before: established a massive shared universe, and shown that they can keep it together for multiple films, weaving a massive story arc over 11 films! 13 if they end up making the Amazing Spider-Man canon with the MCU through some deal with Sony, like Avi Arad is hinting at.

In two years, DC will release one film (Man of Steel), but Marvel would have released 7 films (The Wolverine, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, X-Men First Class 2, Captain America 2, and the secret Marvel release)!

 

[Brawl]

All project leaders that head the DC division should be fired for malpractice. I mean did they really put all their eggs in the Nolan sack and then look stupid as he walked off with their eggs?

 

[TheBat812]

So they're just skipping 2014? MOS comes out in 2013.

 

[Art Damage]

The thing is unlike Marvel Studios, DC doesn't HAVE to make movies. DC Entertainment has other ways it tries to keep it's properties in the public eye through merchandising and the animated movies...where as Marvel Studios as a whole was created to produce feature films. Hence why now DC wants to put all their eggs in one basket with a Justice League film since the one gamble they did have with Green Lantern last year bombed.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

This is bad. Really bad. I'm a huge Marvel fan, but this is unfair. It's like DC doesn't care that Marvel is has a monopoly on the superhero genre. By the time DC steps up to the plate, Marvel would have done what no other studio has done before: established a massive shared universe, and shown that they can keep it together for multiple films, weaving a massive story arc over 11 films! 13 if they end up making the Amazing Spider-Man canon with the MCU through some deal with Sony, like Avi Arad is hinting at.

In two years, DC will release one film (Man of Steel), but Marvel would have released 7 films (The Wolverine, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, X-Men First Class 2, Captain America 2, and the secret Marvel release)!

You do realize DCE has no say in anything, right? DC is owned by WB, and WB has the final say in every decision.

DCE is not Marvel Studios.

 

[Da Games Elite]

You do realize DCE has no say in anything, right? DC is owned by WB, and WB has the final say in every decision.

DCE is not Marvel Studios.

They have a limited say, but WB makes the final word, yes. Just redirect my comment to DC/WB, then. The point is that it's still stupid no matter who is directly to blame.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

i have no idea why they're dragging their feet, other then the fact that they are wb, and with the exception of nolan's bats, they haven't gotten **** right(with dc properties)

if we have to wait till 2015 for lobo, just stick a fork in them. by the time they get around to it, spidey might actually be in disney's hands, and who knows what an avengers film with him in it would do.

they're like bick benedict in "giant".

 

[DoomsdayApex]

They have a limited say, but WB makes the final word, yes. Just redirect my comment to DC/WB, then. The point is that it's still stupid no matter who is directly to blame.

It's sucks, no doubt, but if it were up DCE we probably would have seen a JLA adaptation a long time ago. WB unfortunately calls all the shots however, and WB just isn't as involved as Disney and Marvel Studios are in the superhero genre.

 

[The Guard]

How is this news?

We already knew that nothing specific had been greenlit. People are acting like this is a surprise. And it's not like Chris Nolan makes big budget superhero movies quickly, either.

 

[ClarkLuther55]

Sigh, once again they're rushing into a Justice League movie with no real appreciation of the fact that the JLA is an All-Star team of established heroes. There's no artistic vision at the WB when it comes to adapting DC heroes for the big screen. It's all rushing into things, and superficially copying what worked for someone else.

"The Avengers was a huge success! We need a Justice League movie ASAP! Chris Nolan is a great director! He should godfather and produce everything!

Typical WB. And while they once again rush toward a Justice League movie in order to mimic The Avengers, they're completely disregarding what worked about Marvel's strategy. Each of Marvel's solo films built up to the big team-up. The Avengers had lots of hype because people had been anticipating it for four years.

Marvel's strategy wasn't just about synergy and hype though. It was about risk management. Not every movie is a huge success - not even in Marvel's awesome streak. The Incredible Hulk was the Hulk done right, and well received by the audiences that saw it...however the audience wasn't all that big. Likely because the Hulk was a poisoned brand after Ang Lee's weird and disappointing 2003 movie. The Incredible Hulk was a marginal performer at the box office, but that didn't hurt the overall Marvel/Avengers brand because they just shifted their attention to every other hero in their stable. Then The Avengers came out (naturally riding on Iron Man's success) and REDEEMED the Hulk in the public's eyes.

Rush out a Justice League movie and screw it up...and suddenly Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, etc. are ALL damaged goods. Putting all of your eggs in one basket is stupid. Pinning all of your hopes on Nolan godfathering everything is kind of sad.

At least they won't be stupid enough to hire scrawny geek character actor (Jay Baruchel) as their big bad, or a model in the midst of taking acting lessons (Megan Gale) as Wonder Woman this time around. I hope.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Yeah, it'll bomb. They put years of work into the Avengers. It had a lot of legs to stand on.

The only sturdy franchise DC has is Batman. Everything else has failed or underperformed. Hope for their sake Man of Steel delivers.

 

[SauceBoss]

Yeah, it'll bomb. They put years of work into the Avengers. It had a lot of legs to stand on.

The only sturdy franchise DC has is Batman. Everything else has failed or underperformed. Hope for their sake Man of Steel delivers.

And the only thing that Marvel has going for it is the first Iron Man movie. Avengers is nice to look at. But it lacks any kind of depth known to man. I was the only one of my friends that seen ALL of the previous movies, and they just felt in the dark at times because there was nothing built up. It was the cheesiest thing that I have ever watched. Literally the only thing it had going for it was Iron Man.

I'm not a DC fanboy either by the way. I'm not on either side. I'm on the side that likes watching good movies, reading good comics, playing good games, and I don't care who makes them.

So what, DC skips a year? Better than a rush job.

The fact is that, DC has been adapting comics to film since what, a decade or so before Avengers even existed on pulp? (Superman and the Mole Men, was the first). Ever since, DC has been plopping out hit after hit, after hit. No not all were as good as the others and That last Bat flick from Joel was terrible. Steel was bad for the fact that it wasn't able to be Steel.

For those who don't know. Steel was being developed as a Spin-Off of the Superman movie that was supposed to come out, but never did that was to be based on the death and return of Superman. Eventually Steel came out ahead and Superman never seen the light of day. Not wanting to lose what they already put in, Steel was cut, chopped, hacked, and hammered, until it became what we know today.

DC also has a handle on some of the best video games of the century, has a bit of a monopoly on live action t.v. (Birds of Prey, Smallville, Human Target, Arrow). Not to mention a firm and lasting hold on animation... Where Marvel animated projects last what, a season? two at best? Every year it seems there is a new Spider-Man cartoon, Iron Man cartoon, and Avengers cartoon. Sure most of DC's animated ventures are Bat related, but they hold.

So I wouldn't bother trying to compare if I were you, whatever way you want to look at it, objectively, DC comes out on top.

---

Now before you people start jumping on me using money to backup the fact that Avengers was great, let me reiterate that Money does not equal quality. People generally see a movie for a couple reasons... One, they were already into the source material. Two, The talent attached. Or Three, Advertisement. It is impossible to go see a movie because it's good. Maybe a second or third showing, sure.

And I'm not trying to degrade the fact that it was technically stunning, funny, and beautiful to look at. The issue is, that's all it was. Some of the action was choppy, and nothing happened for the first half of the movie.

 

[SauceBoss]

OH, and I wish you would all stop it with the DC should do exactly what Marvel did. If they DO follow the Marvel Strategy, Marvel fanboys will make fun of it for not trying something else.

Here's the thing... Movies are about Marketability. Avengers wasn't built up by accident. They made independent movies to test the waters and see how the characters would work on screen, no other reason.

DC... doesn't have to do that.

See, not everybody going to see a comic film is a fan of the comics, they just want to see a flick. So let's say average movie goer has a choice between seeing a hypothetical film featuring all of Marvel's characters orrrr a hypothetical film featuring all of DC's characters. Who will win out with an average filmgoer based on marketability? DC has more established villains, has had a more continuous presence in media, even their support cast is more well known than a lot of the Marvel heroes.

There really is no need to build up to something bigger... start with a bang, and prove that it only gets bigger from here.

Yeah, the Marvel approach is great.

Iron Man was amazing... let's make an underperforming comedic sequel.

Remember that one Hulk movie? Let's forget that happened and go again, and then forget that happened and go again, again.

Remember that underwhelming and generally negatively reviewed Fantastic Four series? Let's take the Human Torch and give him a second chance.

So you have these four heroes who were established in very separate worlds, with different rules, and different visions, so what do you do? Give the reigns of their team-up to somebody else. Not to mention somebody who's generally a t.v. writer/director... and beyond that, he's a t.v. writer/director who's series' get cancelled like clockwork.

So really, their strategy was called a shot in the dark. All films were cool to watch, but out of the what, six movies comprising "phase one", only two of them had anything remotely resembling substance.

 

[Minus Shock]

To touch on SauceBoss' later point. The fact that a 3D movie made tons of money isn't terribly surprising. I would be willing to bet if you looked at total tickets sold and compared it to the ticket prices from 2008 Dark Knight would still have beat it.

The unfortunate part is. Studios don't care about good movies or good stories, Transformers is evidence of that. Studios thrive on monetary successes.

I think the Avengers ONLY worked so well because pretty much everyone had seen at least Iron Man and probably Thor and Captain before hand.. likely not Hulk, but oh well. If Avengers came out with out the setup then yeah I personally wouldn't have enjoyed it as much. Now That's not a bad thing. In a way it's kind of brilliant. Avengers served almost like a sequel to five movies, which are all also getting their own respective sequel. It's almost double dipping but kinda not at the same time.

People know Batman better than any other hero out there. To me this is fact. The reason Avengers was tricky is because Iron Man Thor and Captain American weren't known well enough by the general audiences. Hell some of Marvels most recognizable characters aren't even owned by Marvel, they are owned by Sony and Fox. People know Superman better than most. I would say that Wonder Woman would be the ONLY additional movie needed before hand honestly. People have an idea of Green Lantern and just because that movie wasn't great at least they get the fact that the ring is powered by will, etc. So who does that leave? Flash? Probably Green Arrow considering the awesome obsession with archers lately. Martian Manhunter. Possibly Cyborg? Maybe Aquaman?

Fact is that DC IS in a better place to jump into a JL since two of the characters are two of the biggest characters around. Whereas with Marvel their main characters were relatively unknown by the general audience. DC had a successful JLA show, at least one JLA movie. Batman Lego 2 has all the heroes in it. Think about Marvel. They have still YET to have an awesome video game. Their animation division has been in the crapper since the 90s. Their comics need a venn diagram to follow anymore. And lastly I think it would be BETTER to not copy Marvel step for step. They are taking a ballsier approach that is for sure but hey, as a great man once said ""you sometimes have to go in what appears to be the wrong direction to discover all the possibilities, and that without exploring those possibilities you can never do anything truly exceptional". That man was Chris Nolan.

 

[Octoberist]

at least there's a date of some sort.

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

Well Man of Steel's coming out next year, but of course, that's the only DC superhero that Nolan's been "godfathering" for production...

 

[chiefchirpa]

On the positive side, superhero films over-saturation averted.

For one measly year.

 

[SauceBoss]

Let's not say Marvel hasn't had any good video games. That would be a terrible lie. Recently, ALL of there games have been the same though. Ever since X-Men Legends, ever single game has been the same. Legends 2, Fantastic Four, Fantastic four 2 MUA, MUA2, X-Men Destiny... Hell even there new MMO is the same, a game where you can switch characters on the fly, and do the dungeon crawl thing.

But before Arkham Asylum came along with, Spider-Man 2 had all the credit for inventing the great comic game. Before that, Marvel had mixups with Capcom twice (Where as MK vs DCU tanked... the new DC game looks cool though), Streetfighter once, X-Men took on Apocalypse in a great Arcade game, Captain America and The Avengers was a good game, and don't forget the Spidey games, Maximum Carnage, and Separation Anxiety. Spider-Man has had a good track record.

Thats not to say DC didn't. The Batman games were challenging, and the Returns game was one of my favorites for the SNES. Teen Titans had a couple good outings on the GBA, but then you get into JLA Task Force, or EVERY Superman game ever. To date, the best Superman game yet is DC Universe Online.

What I'm getting at is that until modern day, Marvel had a foothold on the games industry, while DC killed it with Film. The fact that DC is actually taking their time now instead of pumping out sequel after sequel (Which is what these Marvel movies are even if Iron Man isn't a main character in the others, they are SHIELD movies) bodes well. For me at least.

My one criticism for DC if I have to give them one, is their lack in caring about other characters. I'm not a huge fan of a lot of their mainstays, but I'd love to see a Flash movie, or even Captain Marvel (Just for Black Adam). I would even settle for a couple of the big name animated DC flicks going to theater, they are good enough. The best thing about them is they aren't CG heavy. I don't like Pixar are Dream Works having a monopoly on the animated crowd. I want animated comic characters dang it. I remember going to see Mask of the Phantasm in theater as a kid, and it blew me away. Not everything has to be CG, and not everything has to be 3D. I hate 3D, and I hate how it sucks people in. Only time I've ever liked it in a theater was for UP

 

[jmc]

The desire to make good superhero films has to come from someone at the top at Warner Bros, the situation isn't comparable to Marvel where the company exists purely for superheroes and have a leader in charge determined to produced good films, the issue is I don't think that person is on their board at WB. They are a movie studio first and foremost and those in charge are always going to be looking at the dollar signs before quality of the film or whether it's a faithful adaptation or whatever. I've said it before, they got lucky with Nolan, Batman being the biggest comic character on film at the moment is down squarely to him.

 

[Jochimus]

Yawn. Nothing new there.

At this point I think WB'd be better off just doing BRAVE & THE BOLD as their next DC film franchise - that way they can create and expand a live-action universe and still keep their precious Bat-cashcow front and center - instead of trying to bum-rush themselves into trying to compete with Marvel.

 

[shallbecomeabat]

I think it is a huge problem, not only for DC movies but also for DC comic books in general. Movies are the biggest PR your line of comicbooks can get. Over here in europe, most comicbook readers are getting recruited by the movies, since we don't really grow up reading 'em as most americans do. Marvel is already huge over here, because of the movies and almost no one I know reads DC. Here are only two type of comic fans: Marvel fans and Batman fans.
DC has to get their stuff together.

Yawn. Nothing new there.

At this point I think WB'd be better off just doing BRAVE & THE BOLD as their next DC film franchise - that way they can create and expand a live-action universe and still keep their precious Bat-cashcow front and center - instead of trying to bum-rush themselves into trying to compete with Marvel.

I love this idea by the way. It would be a different approach then Marvels, but could work really well.

 

[Da Games Elite]

To the people who think that the superheroes of DC need no introduction, this is untrue. Batman and Superman are well-known, but I don't think the general public knows much about the other heroes. They recognize Wonder Woman, but know virtually nothing about her. They know the Flash exists, but that's the extent of their knowledge. Most people didn't see Green Lantern, and, if they did, they got a lousy idea of what the character was like.

The five Marvel films before the Avengers built up to the team up. It introduced the egos, explained what the characters were like, etc. Sure, Iron Man was great, but I'd say all the superhero films had good qualities to them. Thor and Captain America are really fun movies, and the Incredible Hulk felt like what the Hulk should be. Iron Man 2 is better after seeing the Avengers, in my opinion. It all still works, though. They accomplished something different and new.

With DC jumping into the Justice League, they're just going to force themselves to develop at least five heroes at once--introduce at least three--and that's not an easy feat. The Marvel Method won't work for DC because the characters are different...but at least introduce them.