Official Justice League Status Update Thread

[Crook]

Only if it's done at the same time is it awkward. The solo films needs to be given the same sized canvas as BB and TDK and not be limited as what Marvel are doing, ie the characters need their own environment and their own rules to get the best out of the character.

What prevents this if a JL film is made? Were Hulk and IM not films suitable for the characters' environment?

The problem then is intertwining those multiple environments, to me that is the awkward part, hence why I think it's best JL remain a separate franchise and have it's own canvas to draw on.

What exactly is the problem? The environments don't clash with each other since it's understood they are all within the same universe. The comics and cartoons have proven time and again there is no such issue. Awkward would be having the characters of LOTR suddenly go on in an adventure inside the Death Star. That's a clash of environment, tone, and style.

If the solo films follow a certain guideline that would plausibly place all of them within the confines of the same universe, I see no reason why problems should arise if these worlds were to brought together for a film.

 

[jmc]

What prevents this if a JL film is made? Were Hulk and IM not films suitable for the characters' environment?

Hulk and Iron Man were very standard superhero films with similar tone and feel, they were safe films, the risk is if they continue making the same type of film with different costumed characters in the lead Marvels films could become stale very quickly. The last thing I want WB to do is give us 'stock' superhero films. If you go TDK route with the DC characters, giving each their own unique universe, each with different tone and feel and direction, you give the character the best possible chance of bring something new and unique to the screen, the downside however is that it becomes harder to then merge the characters together without it looking forced.

What exactly is the problem? The environments don't clash with each other since it's understood they are all within the same universe. The comics and cartoons have proven time and again there is no such issue. Awkward would be having the characters of LOTR suddenly go on in an adventure inside the Death Star. That's a clash of environment, tone, and style.

The medium is the problem, it's about interpretation so environments do clash, say for instance someone wants to make a more family friendly action adventure Flash film, how do you then merge that with Nolan's Batman or an epic fantasy based Wonder Woman or a Sci-Fi based GL? It's not as easy as saying they're all in the same universe, what if each film style, tone and environment is vastly different from the others? How then do you merge 4-5 different characters from different universes together? Your LOTR and Star Wars comparison is a good one, and it does apply to this situation too. Just because it's a DC universe in comic doesn't mean it needs to be a DC universe on film.

If the solo films follow a certain guideline that would plausibly place all of them within the confines of the same universe, I see no reason why problems should arise if these worlds were to brought together for a film.

Why should we restrict the characters by giving them the same guidelines? Doing that we're potentially preventing doing something unique with that character all because it doesn't fall within guidelines. This is essentially what Marvel are doing at the moment and I'm not a fan of it, there's no real freedom to try different tones and styles. If we have no guidelines, then we're free to do pretty much anything we want with each character and not worry about 'the rules' as it were. All I want is what's best for the characters, I want kick arse solo film first and foremost, if that means not having a JL film is the same continuity then so be it, it's a sacrifice I'm ok with.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Yeah I agree with jmc... imagine DC churning out all these superhero flicks on top of all the Marvel films being released these days??? It's not worth it IMO... if WB's goal is a Justice League movie, after they resign Bale for BB3... WB HAS to make sure Bale is on board for Justice League. Otherwise what is the point in doing all these solo films when they'll end up being lost in the "just another comic book movie" genre? Even if WB goes the safest possible route... I find it hard to believe Flash, WW, and even GL will be much better than IM and TIH in terms of quality... and I don't think they will make as much money because Marvel has better known characters, coupled with the fact that DC has gotten off to such a late start, coupled with the fact that superhero films may get VERY old VERY quickly at the pace Hollywood is at right now... I mean WB needs to be careful. They need the same actors... and they need Bale before they make even another move forward... they can come back to GL and WW and Flash at any time. Rebooting Superman serves no purpose unless they have plans for an integrated JLA movie. Recasting Batman would kill the commerical appeal beyond belief though... I don't care what DC fans have to say about that. The movie would suffer BIG TIME with new actors. The point of crossovers is to retain the same actors... that's the only way it works without being complete cheeze...

 

[Crook]

Hulk and Iron Man were very standard superhero films with similar tone and feel, they were safe films, the risk is if they continue making the same type of film with different costumed characters in the lead Marvels films could become stale very quickly.

That's Marvel's problem. I was referring more to giving these characters their own field to work with. As in a developmental arc, a supporting cast, their own city, facing against classic villains, etc. That's what a solo film provides as opposed to an ensemble.

The last thing I want WB to do is give us 'stock' superhero films. If you go TDK route with the DC characters, giving each their own unique universe, each with different tone and feel and direction, you give the character the best possible chance of bring something new and unique to the screen, the downside however is that it becomes harder to then merge the characters together without it looking forced.

Uniqueness is not mutually exclusive to diversified and separated entities.

The medium is the problem, it's about interpretation so environments do clash, say for instance someone wants to make a more family friendly action adventure Flash film, how do you then merge that with Nolan's Batman or an epic fantasy based Wonder Woman or a Sci-Fi based GL? It's not as easy as saying they're all in the same universe, what if each film style, tone and environment is vastly different from the others? How then do you merge 4-5 different characters from different universes together?

It would seem to be a copout, but the simple answer is "they just are". People know WW, Batman, Supes, Flash, and GL co-exist. Especially comic book fans who have been exposed to continuous cross-overs for the better part of the comic book reading life.

As for tone; it can be generalized. I'll take your example of GL, since he would seem like a polar opposite of Batman. By tone, I meant the approach in how the character is to be adapted towards film. Obviously, certain elements are dictated by the mythos. GL is inherently gonna be more lighthearted in comparison to the dark world of Batman. That's fine to represent. It would not contradict anything simply because of the characters' nature.

But, if the material is presented in a very tightly written and epic scale in the same vein as TDK, then the two worlds are plausible enough to co-exist. Take a look at the first two Terminator films. Delved heavily into sci-fi, but the dark and gritty nature almost cancels out the fantastical elements that some would consider too silly.

If the film were to overtly display a style and tone greatly differing from the "norm" of the DC Universe, then yes I would agree it'd be hard to unite. Like say if a film used green-screen ala 300, while everyone else used real locations. Or if a film is ridiculously kid-friendly, with several winks and nods to the audience. When all the other films could be Oscar contenders.

Your LOTR and Star Wars comparison is a good one, and it does apply to this situation too. Just because it's a DC universe in comic doesn't mean it needs to be a DC universe on film.

When somewhere down the line you're planning to converge all the paths into one, then it's a necessity.

Why should we restrict the characters by giving them the same guidelines? Doing that we're potentially preventing doing something unique with that character all because it doesn't fall within guidelines. This is essentially what Marvel are doing at the moment and I'm not a fan of it, there's no real freedom to try different tones and styles. If we have no guidelines, then we're free to do pretty much anything we want with each character and not worry about 'the rules' as it were. All I want is what's best for the characters, I want kick arse solo film first and foremost, if that means not having a JL film is the same continuity then so be it, it's a sacrifice I'm ok with.

You misinterpret what I mean. You're talking as if guidelines are immediately negative to the productions. Am I gonna say it's alright for execs to say "Flash cannot be a relatable guy, GL has to be brooding, Supes has to be dark like Batman, etc"? No, of course not.

But if the rules are:
The cities must all look like they were set on-location
the canvas for the film should strive for an epic masterpiece
avoid stories that come off as cookie-cutter
cast actors that bring gravitas to the film
never break the 4th-wall

I will absolutely advocate that. I will refer to the comics again. Each solo title or arcs that feature the characters have their own unique manner to separate themselves from the rest. Different. But at the end of the day a JL story still works to bring them together.

Even if WB goes the safest possible route... I find it hard to believe Flash, WW, and even GL will be much better than IM and TIH in terms of quality...

It's unfortunate you think that way. GL's script review has already received massive praise from publications that have read it. It's only a matter of whether the director can successfully translate that to life. I have no doubt that film has every possibility of demolishing TIH and IM simply because it doesn't sound like it will be "safe" and assembly-produced.

and I don't think they will make as much money because Marvel has better known characters

300 and IM proved that recognition and popularity don't mean squat.

coupled with the fact that DC has gotten off to such a late start, coupled with the fact that superhero films may get VERY old VERY quickly at the pace Hollywood is at right now...

That's all thanks to Marvel for churning them out like crazy, and not putting out enough quality material. With the success of 300, IM, and TDK, the comic book craze isn't going anywhere. The films that will fail will be the ones that don't stand out apart from the crowd or do anything to change the genre.

Rebooting Superman serves no purpose unless they have plans for an integrated JLA movie.

No purpose? The franchise is a goldmine in itself. Easily the franchise that would rake in huge amounts of cash if he were done to the audience's taste. The guy has the most superpowers at hand, he just needs to be utilized so the people can be in awe of him again.

Recasting Batman would kill the commerical appeal beyond belief though.

That depends on when a recast would occur, and if the guy is good enough for the role. I don't believe Bale is the only person to play the part, nor the only one capable of garnering a fanbase.

I don't care what DC fans have to say about that. The movie would suffer BIG TIME with new actors. The point of crossovers is to retain the same actors... that's the only way it works without being complete cheeze...

I would agree with this.

 

[Evil Twin]

I disagree completely. A film only works if it's successful on its own terms, not because it piggybacked on half a dozen prior successful films. Christian Bale could sign up for JLA and it could still stink. A good approach can succeed without Christian Bale. Heck, sometimes showing the origin of everything is a less successful approach. I liked Star Wars better before we got Darth Vader's origin.

And really, I wish people would quit pretending that having the origin of everyone is necessary for a JLA film. You're not going to get a Martian Manhunter film before JLA. You're not likely to get Aquaman either. The Avengers is likely to come out before Ant Man. Watchmen isn't going to delve into the secret origin of The Comedian or Nite Owl. And there's no need to, as their origins aren't relevant to the story at hand. How is the origin of WW relevant to a JLA film? Or the Flash? Why should JLA have more storytelling restrictions placed on it than X-Men, Watchmen, or Avengers? Heck, they made Lord of the Rings before The Hobbit.

Powers are trivia. Character traits are what's important and that can be introduced with standard storytelling.

 

[FaT_tONle]

It's unfortunate you think that way. GL's script review has already received massive praise from publications that have read it. It's only a matter of whether the director can successfully translate that to life. I have no doubt that film has every possibility of demolishing TIH and IM simply because it doesn't sound like it will be "safe" and assembly-produced.

It might do better than TIH... but IM??? No chance... GL will already be overlooked by IM2. And it will probably be the sandwich film between IM2/Thor unless they do a winter release which they won't. It is another TIH in terms of box office at best. Maybe a little more... maybe a little less.

300 and IM proved that recognition and popularity don't mean squat.

Can DC fans stop comparing IM and Hulk to characters like GL and FLash... seriously... if you want to argue that they are both B-listers for Marvel/DC respectively then fine... but if we are going head to head??? Just stop... please stop... . And that's before Marvel made a single film this century.

That's all thanks to Marvel for churning them out like crazy, and not putting out enough quality material. With the success of 300, IM, and TDK, the comic book craze isn't going anywhere. The films that will fail will be the ones that don't stand out apart from the crowd or do anything to change the genre.

Yeah the genre is here to stay... but at what point will fans no longer see the difference... GL is a bit different... but I fail to see how characters like Flash and WW would distinguish themselves. I mean with characters like Spidey and DD out there... Flash will just end up confusing audiences... and WW is too similar to Superman/Captain America... and she's a chick. It will turn a lot of people off.

No purpose? The franchise is a goldmine in itself. Easily the franchise that would rake in huge amounts of cash if he were done to the audience's taste. The guy has the most superpowers at hand, he just needs to be utilized so the people can be in awe of him again.

As proven by SR... you are nuts... NUTS... if you think a reboot done this soon will relaunch a successful multi-picture solo franchise.

That depends on when a recast would occur, and if the guy is good enough for the role. I don't believe Bale is the only person to play the part, nor the only one capable of garnering a fanbase.


I would agree with this.

True... but to me it's going to end up being another Batman Forever if they recast... they will go back to a light tone and will gear it to kids and families. JLA would be a camp fest if Batman is not handled properly. Plus Bale is the most bankable star and has been a poster boy for WB over the last few years. The film might still make decent cash... but I think it could easily be a camp fest... especially if the other solo films are mediocre.

I disagree completely. A film only works if it's successful on its own terms, not because it piggybacked on half a dozen prior successful films. Christian Bale could sign up for JLA and it could still stink. A good approach can succeed without Christian Bale. Heck, sometimes showing the origin of everything is a less successful approach. I liked Star Wars better before we got Darth Vader's origin.

You don't think Avengers will pretty much be an origin film? No we won't get origins to every new character but still... it looks like they are going Ultimates with it... and that's an origin.

 

[BATZARRO WWD]

I disagree completely. A film only works if it's successful on its own terms, not because it piggybacked on half a dozen prior successful films. Christian Bale could sign up for JLA and it could still stink. A good approach can succeed without Christian Bale. Heck, sometimes showing the origin of everything is a less successful approach. I liked Star Wars better before we got Darth Vader's origin.

And really, I wish people would quit pretending that having the origin of everyone is necessary for a JLA film. You're not going to get a Martian Manhunter film before JLA. You're not likely to get Aquaman either. The Avengers is likely to come out before Ant Man. Watchmen isn't going to delve into the secret origin of The Comedian or Nite Owl. And there's no need to, as their origins aren't relevant to the story at hand. How is the origin of WW relevant to a JLA film? Or the Flash? Why should JLA have more storytelling restrictions placed on it than X-Men, Watchmen, or Avengers? Heck, they made Lord of the Rings before The Hobbit.

Powers are trivia. Character traits are what's important and that can be introduced with standard storytelling.

I require an emoticon where a character rubs his eyes in disbelief. You hit the nail right in the head.

According to this article a poll showed the majority of those who answered what movie they want to see next from DC answered back "Justice League".

 

[Crook]

It might do better than TIH... but IM??? No chance... GL will already be overlooked by IM2. And it will probably be the sandwich film between IM2/Thor unless they do a winter release which they won't. It is another TIH in terms of box office at best. Maybe a little more... maybe a little less.

This is based off what? GL looks to be a game-changer because it's pulling out all the stops. It's a film that is epic in every imaginable way by being a space opera. If the effects hold up, I have no doubt this will be another big hit like IM. There is no way in hell this will do TIH numbers.

Can DC fans stop comparing IM and Hulk to characters like GL and FLash... seriously... if you want to argue that they are both B-listers for Marvel/DC respectively then fine... but if we are going head to head??? Just stop... please stop... . And that's before Marvel made a single film this century.

Why am I not to compare them? They are B-listers with great cinematic potential. Space and intergalactic narratives is a niche owned by SW and no one else. GL is fitting for this genre and to boot can provide something never seen before with flight and the ring's powers. Flash is a speed demon. Again, sfx and utilization of his powers is integral to his success and capturing the audience's imagination.

Yeah the genre is here to stay... but at what point will fans no longer see the difference... GL is a bit different... but I fail to see how characters like Flash and WW would distinguish themselves.

Flash is right along the lines of IM and Spidey in being a light-hearted adventure. He also has his powers on his side, which hasn't really been fully taken advantage of in the modern age. Do you see the possibilities in the glorious fights that can be choreographed using speed and time?

WW is too similar to Superman/Captain America... and she's a chick. It will turn a lot of people off.

It'll turn people off it reminds them of another film that tries to depict a strong female, when it's a little girl playing make-believe. It's a hard role to cast, but it's not impossible. They need to find a girl that can be seen as threatening, while still easy on the eyes.

And she's nothing like Superman/Captain America asides from her being a hero to the people and certain moral values. She is most definitely her own character.

As proven by SR... you are nuts... NUTS... if you think a reboot done this soon will relaunch a successful multi-picture solo franchise.

As proven by SR? I said a Superman film done right. Evidently it does not apply. Frankly, I think the bar has been set so low, that I think a film that blasts it's way into the game firing on all fronts can be a smash hit.

True... but to me it's going to end up being another Batman Forever if they recast... they will go back to a light tone and will gear it to kids and families. JLA would be a camp fest if Batman is not handled properly. Plus Bale is the most bankable star and has been a poster boy for WB over the last few years. The film might still make decent cash... but I think it could easily be a camp fest... especially if the other solo films are mediocre.

Bale is far from bankable. TDK's success rode highly on the Joker and interest in seeing Ledger's last role.

Camp-fest is not a possibility here either. Especially when the latest statement from WB indicates they're going dark to align itself better with Nolan's universe.

 

[FaT_tONle]

This is based off what? GL looks to be a game-changer because it's pulling out all the stops. It's a film that is epic in every imaginable way by being a space opera. If the effects hold up, I have no doubt this will be another big hit like IM. There is no way in hell this will do TIH numbers.

Yeah I just don't see it... yeah its space and fancy smancy... to me it is nothing more than what a Silver Surfer film could potentially do... GL will flat line at around 150 million. It is what it is. Unless they get some bankable stars for the role which they probably won't... I feel the same way about Thor as well. To say this will automatically be better than Hulk??? I just don't see how there will be such a huge improvement.

Why am I not to compare them? They are B-listers with great cinematic potential. Space and intergalactic narratives is a niche owned by SW and no one else. GL is fitting for this genre and to boot can provide something never seen before with flight and the ring's powers. Flash is a speed demon. Again, sfx and utilization of his powers is integral to his success and capturing the audience's imagination.

IM and Hulk don't sell JUST because of their powers... Stark has better more relatable characterization than Hal Jordan... Hulk is deeper than Flash. If you look at it objectively, Marvel's characters are more movie material than those respective DC characters. Not being Marvel bias in any way. And Hulk's powers are way more fascinating than either of those DC guys.

Flash is right along the lines of IM and Spidey in being a light-hearted adventure. He also has his powers on his side, which hasn't really been fully taken advantage of in the modern age. Do you see the possibilities in the glorious fights that can be choreographed using speed and time?

So Flash's powers will be the selling point of his film???

It'll turn people off it reminds them of another film that tries to depict a strong female, when it's a little girl playing make-believe. It's a hard role to cast, but it's not impossible. They need to find a girl that can be seen as threatening, while still easy on the eyes.

And she's nothing like Superman/Captain America asides from her being a hero to the people and certain moral values. She is most definitely her own character.

And yet development is nowhere on the horizon and WB is weary of female leads after Catwoman... WW will need a superstar to play her if she is to have her own movie... that's the only way it will sell. Wanted doesn't make half it's money without Jolie in there... take it seriously and cast an unknown and no one will pay attention to it IMO. Not being sexist here. That's just how I see it.

As proven by SR? I said a Superman film done right. Evidently it does not apply. Frankly, I think the bar has been set so low, that I think a film that blasts it's way into the game firing on all fronts can be a smash hit.

TIH had everything the fans wanted... yeah it could have been a little more fleshed out but still... what did it do for Marvel??? Nothing... absolutely NOTHING... a Supes reboot will barely pass SR numbers no matter how "right" it is... maybe more with inflation. It will have a lower budget so WB will still deem it a success if it comes to that... but the bar has flat lined... it's a 200 million dollar film.

Bale is far from bankable. TDK's success rode highly on the Joker and interest in seeing Ledger's last role.

Camp-fest is not a possibility here either. Especially when the latest statement from WB indicates they're going dark to align itself better with Nolan's universe.

Let them go dark with Superman... they'll get burned... let them go dark with WW... they'll get burned... you can't do dark dark dark... a recasted Batman will cater to the rest of the heroes... it will be a camp fest. Bale gives you credibility.

 

[I Am The Knight]

I require an emoticon where a character rubs his eyes in disbelief. You hit the nail right in the head.

According to this article a poll showed the majority of those who answered what movie they want to see next from DC answered back "Justice League".

Eh, look at the poll options. JL, GL, WW, Flash, TT, GA and...Captain Marvel??

It's well known that, after Batman & Superman, The Justice League is DC's most popular "franchise" I guess. And guess who's missing from that poll?

Plus, there was another poll last year, asking people wheter they wanted to see a Superman sequel or JL. Surprise, surprise, Superman won.

 

[jmc]

It would seem to be a copout, but the simple answer is "they just are". People know WW, Batman, Supes, Flash, and GL co-exist. Especially comic book fans who have been exposed to continuous cross-overs for the better part of the comic book reading life.

'They just are' is not good enough. That to me is the biggest issue, is that it's not going to feel genuine, especially since the Nolan series was trying to portray a realistic a possible interpretation, a series you now have to build other franchises around featuring super powered beings. Another problem I foresee is the devaluing character aspect, Batman is king **** in Nolan's world, yet what happens when he's got super powered beings around him? It seems like doing it that way is simply making JL for the sake of it.

As for tone; it can be generalized. I'll take your example of GL, since he would seem like a polar opposite of Batman. By tone, I meant the approach in how the character is to be adapted towards film. Obviously, certain elements are dictated by the mythos. GL is inherently gonna be more lighthearted in comparison to the dark world of Batman. That's fine to represent. It would not contradict anything simply because of the characters' nature.

But, if the material is presented in a very tightly written and epic scale in the same vein as TDK, then the two worlds are plausible enough to co-exist. Take a look at the first two Terminator films. Delved heavily into sci-fi, but the dark and gritty nature almost cancels out the fantastical elements that some would consider too silly.

I take your Terminator example, but I can't see a GL film being as possible to tone down to the same extent, there's at least some level of believability to the idea of artificial intelligence consuming us, in GL we're talking 'magic rings', more or less Hobbit territory.

If the film were to overtly display a style and tone greatly differing from the "norm" of the DC Universe, then yes I would agree it'd be hard to unite. Like say if a film used green-screen ala 300, while everyone else used real locations. Or if a film is ridiculously kid-friendly, with several winks and nods to the audience. When all the other films could be Oscar contenders.

I'm not quite sure what the 'norm' of the DC universe is because as far as I can see it doesn't exist on film, we have Nolan's universe, I don't see it as a DC universe. The thing is, a film like GL shouldn't have to restrict itself to having to go by what Nolan's universe/production has done (even loosely), it should be it's own film and options like green screen should be on the table.

You misinterpret what I mean. You're talking as if guidelines are immediately negative to the productions. Am I gonna say it's alright for execs to say "Flash cannot be a relatable guy, GL has to be brooding, Supes has to be dark like Batman, etc"? No, of course not.

But if the rules are:
The cities must all look like they were set on-location
the canvas for the film should strive for an epic masterpiece
avoid stories that come off as cookie-cutter
cast actors that bring gravitas to the film
never break the 4th-wall

I will absolutely advocate that. I will refer to the comics again. Each solo title or arcs that feature the characters have their own unique manner to separate themselves from the rest. Different. But at the end of the day a JL story still works to bring them together.

Those rules, whilst I agree with them, are still not enough to blend things together so smoothly, lets say you do all those basic rules with a WW movie, you add Amazons, Greek Gods and Greek mythological beasts and monsters, suddenly combining that character with a Batman film that uses the same basic rules, but in a completely different context, just doesn't add up to me. Honestly, I would loved to be proven wrong, but if things are to be tied together via the Nolan universe, I just don't think it's as easy as people think it is to have our cake and eat it too.

 

[Crook]

Yeah I just don't see it... yeah its space and fancy smancy... to me it is nothing more than what a Silver Surfer film could potentially do... GL will flat line at around 150 million. It is what it is. Unless they get some bankable stars for the role which they probably won't... I feel the same way about Thor as well. To say this will automatically be better than Hulk??? I just don't see how there will be such a huge improvement.

Because GL reaches a wider canvas for telling it's stories and setting it's battles. Hulk still has the unfortunate brick wall of having a cgi lead and technology that isn't quite there in photo-realism. There's a disconnection.

IM and Hulk don't sell JUST because of their powers... Stark has better more relatable characterization than Hal Jordan...

How is that? There aren't many billionaire playboys who f**k models every day and have no care in the world. Nor can they relate to having the power of controlling mass weaponry on a global scale and the moral implications that come with it. No, Stark is not relatable. His personality is just likable all thanks to Downey's charm and presence.

Hulk is deeper than Flash.

And? Hulk is deeper than the Spartans. Than Stark. Than Spidey. Obviously it's not that big of a factor.

If you look at it objectively.Marvel's characters are more movie material than those respective DC characters. Not being Marvel bias in any way.

I lol'd.

And Hulk's powers are way more fascinating than either of those DC guys.

Can't even disagree more. Hulk has super-strength and regenerative abilities. How in the world is that more fascinating than flight, speed of light, invisibility, transformation, and a ring that can summon anything? Of course this is all opinion, but I know there are several people that will disagree with your statement.

So Flash's powers will be the selling point of his film???

Absolutely. Just as bullet-time was for Matrix, and webslinging was for Spidey.

And yet development is nowhere on the horizon and WB is weary of female leads after Catwoman... WW will need a superstar to play her if she is to have her own movie... that's the only way it will sell. Wanted doesn't make half it's money without Jolie in there... take it seriously and cast an unknown and no one will pay attention to it IMO. Not being sexist here. That's just how I see it.

You get someone sexy in the role and some powerful money-shots in the trailer, you'll catch attention. It doesn't take much to gain an audience. People went to 300 because they wanted some adrenaline-filled action that involved blood and glory. People went to TF to see robots f'n smash each other to pieces. No stars necessary if you have something else to occupy their attention.

TIH had everything the fans wanted... yeah it could have been a little more fleshed out but still... what did it do for Marvel??? Nothing... absolutely NOTHING...

Because it did nothing for the mainstream. It wasn't anything special, even with the action being amped up. Hell, I saw the movie opening weekend, and I could tell this was gonna do significantly less than the first movie.

a Supes reboot will barely pass SR numbers no matter how "right" it is... maybe more with inflation. It will have a lower budget so WB will still deem it a success if it comes to that... but the bar has flat lined... it's a 200 million dollar film.

Whether it's the reboot, or it's sequel, I have no doubt it can easily pass the 200 million dollar mark if it's "right".

Let them go dark with Superman... they'll get burned... let them go dark with WW... they'll get burned... you can't do dark dark dark...

Dark to the character's extent, as WB pointed out. Serious in tone and approach to the source material is what that means.

a recasted Batman will cater to the rest of the heroes... it will be a camp fest. Bale gives you credibility.

You're pulling this camp nonsense out of nowhere. They just had their biggest studio film ever made, which was as dark as you can get. They're not going another direction for a long long time.

As for Bale, yes he gives credibility. But he is not the only actor to have that capability.

 

[dnno1]

With the shape the economy's in, I think there is little chance of WB making Justice League or Wonder Woman any time soon.

Batman 3? Definitely will be made. Green Lantern? We'll see. Green Lantern what he lacks in name recognition he makes up for in lack of baggage. A fresher comic property to turn into a movie. Iron Man shows how much that can work in someone's favor. People thought Iron Man wouldn't fare well against the big names since to the mainstream audience he's virtually unknown.

A Green Lantern movie wouldn't be cheap, but it would still cost less than a Justice League movie. Wonder Woman movie wouldn't be cheap either, but the problem is . . . it's Wonder Woman. And WB. And Jeff Robinov doesn't want big budget movies starring women.

Didn't you read? Hollywood was included in the bail out bill. $470 million over 10 years.

 

[Evil Twin]

You're pulling this camp nonsense out of nowhere. They just had their biggest studio film ever made, which was as dark as you can get. They're not going another direction for a long long time.

Yeah, that "they're going camp" is just made up out of nowhere. People act like WB isn't completely aware of what went wrong with Batman and Robin. Heck, The OMAC Project, which was the reported basis of the Miller JLA film ISN'T camp. Heck, the reports that the cast went through boot camp should indicate that Miller wasn't intending JLA to be camp.

I really wish people wouldn't just make up stuff.

And I really think people underestimate the public's ability to process that these are actors portraying fictional characters. Fictional characters that have had different interpretations over the years. People are so eager to label something as "definitive" that they sometimes forget that many of the most iconic performances have been followed up on.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Because GL reaches a wider canvas for telling it's stories and setting it's battles. Hulk still has the unfortunate brick wall of having a cgi lead and technology that isn't quite there in photo-realism. There's a disconnection.

True.

How is that? There aren't many billionaire playboys who f**k models every day and have no care in the world. Nor can they relate to having the power of controlling mass weaponry on a global scale and the moral implications that come with it. No, Stark is not relatable. His personality is just likable all thanks to Downey's charm and presence.

Well... Stark is more relatable than either of those DC figures. You can't really argue that... it's not that people can't relate to a multi-million dollar playboy... you said it yourself... the personality works. And the concept is a lot more serious and legitimate than the concepts of GL/Flash. Tony Stark is something people can buy... GL/Flash are characters that require a stretch of the imagination... and that's a turn off.

And? Hulk is deeper than the Spartans. Than Stark. Than Spidey. Obviously it's not that big of a factor.

Their is a pyschological aspect there that is missing from Flash and even GL to an extent. Hulk is deeper material... might not be a huge factor but it certainly helps.

I lol'd.

Well Marvel has a track record with successful SH movies... DC has Batman... until one of these other heroes stick (and Watchmen and 300 or V for V don't really fit the same bill) it is what it is.

Can't even disagree more. Hulk has super-strength and regenerative abilities. How in the world is that more fascinating than flight, speed of light, invisibility, transformation, and a ring that can summon anything? Of course this is all opinion, but I know there are several people that will disagree with your statement.

... we agree to disagree

Absolutely. Just as bullet-time was for Matrix, and webslinging was for Spidey.

Flash... as a fun, family, children oriented film with fancy/dazzling effects will work... anything more than that and the film will bomb. It's not exactly material you'd call "Dark Knightesque"... as a fun, special effects happy, low budget film you may have something.

You get someone sexy in the role and some powerful money-shots in the trailer, you'll catch attention. It doesn't take much to gain an audience. People went to 300 because they wanted some adrenaline-filled action that involved blood and glory. People went to TF to see robots f'n smash each other to pieces. No stars necessary if you have something else to occupy their attention.

People ain't seeing a freaking sprinter for two hours... I don't know if GL can pull off the intense action either... please don't compare the potential to Transformers... it has no chance of duplicating that in terms of action now c'mon... and 300 is a completely different animal that caught people's attention for completely different reasons.

Because it did nothing for the mainstream. It wasn't anything special, even with the action being amped up. Hell, I saw the movie opening weekend, and I could tell this was gonna do significantly less than the first movie.

Tell me how GL/Flash will be more mainstream? A more fleshed out script? You are just being overly optimistic...

Whether it's the reboot, or it's sequel, I have no doubt it can easily pass the 200 million dollar mark if it's "right".

With inflation... but the finals numbers will flat line around there IMO. And SR didn't even make up for itself world wide... not even Superman sells overseas. Why expect a reboot to completely surpass that?

Dark to the character's extent, as WB pointed out. Serious in tone and approach to the source material is what that means.

If they made up their mind that quickly that this will be the approach for the rest of their characters they are fooling both you and themselves... the minute one of these films bombs they'll go back to their old ways... MORE CAMP REQUIRED!!! That doesn't mean B & R per say... but it could certainly mean SM3, FF, etc. The cycle will never end.

You're pulling this camp nonsense out of nowhere. They just had their biggest studio film ever made, which was as dark as you can get. They're not going another direction for a long long time.

The cycle will never end...

As for Bale, yes he gives credibility. But he is not the only actor to have that capability.

Capability is irrelevant. People like continuity... it makes sense. JLA is supposed to fit into the existing continuity... otherwise it is a BIG turn off. People will seriously "wtf" when they see a new guy playing Batman in the JLA trailer.

And here's the deal with Batman... and I don't want ONE DC FAN or ANY fan for that matter to tell me otherwise. Over 50% of Batman fans... die hard and even general Batman fans... INCLUDING a significant portion of general audiences... have no interest in seeing Batman in a JLA movie... it's too out of their comfort zone IMO. You want to make a case for Batman/Superman and a World's Finest film I'll give you that... so maybe that gives WB more incentive to let Bale go? Possibly... but I still think it's a mistake because of continuity problems.

 

[Webhead2006]

Yea i agree with you guys for both marvel and Dc the solo films/teamup films have alot of issues/problems they need to solve and if they dont do things correctly they can all fall apart. But though for dc from the reports now it does look like they want to go the solo route now and if that true after getting gl,batman3,superman reboot, and atless a flash or ww solo out we wont be seeing jla to atless any time between 2014-2020 period which does suck dc has came out late to the game. Then the whole superman copyright in 2013 we dont know for sure what is going to happen there.

 

[Evil Twin]

And here's the deal with Batman... and I don't want ONE DC FAN or ANY fan for that matter to tell me otherwise. Over 50% of Batman fans... die hard and even general Batman fans... INCLUDING general audiences... have no interest in seeing Batman in a JLA movie... it's too out of their comfort zone IMO. You want to make a case for Batman/Superman and a World's Finest film I'll give you that... so maybe that gives WB more incentive to let Bale go? Possibly... but I still think it's a mistake because of continuity problems.

That's a made up statistic and you know it. You don't know if it's 90%, 50%, or 10%. You especially don't know if its true of general audiences. Yes, let's make up statistics out of thin air.

I'll bet WB has marketing studies that tell them exactly whether people are interested in Batman in JLA or not. And, if they make a JLA film with Batman, like they almost did, that will answer the question.

Continuity is much less important with the general public, the majority of which just want to see something entertaining on a Saturday night.

 

[FaT_tONle]

That's a made up statistic and you know it. You don't know if it's 90%, 50%, or 10%. You especially don't know if its true of general audiences. Yes, let's make up statistics out of thin air.

I'll bet WB has marketing studies that tell them exactly whether people are interested in Batman in JLA or not. And, if they make a JLA film with Batman, like they almost did, that will answer the question.

Continuity is much less important with the general public, the majority of which just want to see something entertaining on a Saturday night.

Go to the Batman boards right now... nobody gives a **** about the rest of these characters except maybe Superman... you don't need to be a genius to estimate a stat like that. They like what Nolan has done and they want Batman on an island by himself... hell people are against a live-action Batman/Superman film. Those are the facts. Not statistics pulled out of my A-hole...

 

[Evil Twin]

Go to the Batman boards right now... nobody gives a **** about the rest of these characters except maybe Superman... you don't need to be a genius to estimate a stat like that. They like what Nolan has done and they want Batman on an island by himself... hell people are against a live-action Batman/Superman film. Those are the facts. Not statistics pulled out of my A-hole...

The internet is NOT representative of all of fandom and, especially, the general public. And everyone should know this by now. A couple of hundred hardcore fans is probably unrepresentative of the people who watched JLU and The Batman over the years. Not to mention, fandom is fickle and changes its mind ALL THE TIME.

Heck, once fandom swore that they'd never go to an obviously camp Batman film starring Michael Keaton. How about the uproar over Daniel Craig as James Bond? You know when the general public judges that they're going to see a movie, when they see trailers and commercials.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

Go to the Batman boards right now... nobody gives a **** about the rest of these characters except maybe Superman... you don't need to be a genius to estimate a stat like that. They like what Nolan has done and they want Batman on an island by himself... hell people are against a live-action Batman/Superman film. Those are the facts.

Opinions of a limited number of fanboys are not facts.

 

[FaT_tONle]

You guys really think that the Dark Knight audience is representative of the audience of a JLA film? Because I think that is completely laughable... Batman fans and that built in fan base would probably watch JLA no matter what... but there is no denying that a significant portion of Batman fans will be turned off by his involvement in this film especially if Bale is not involved and they won't end up seeing this film.

 

[Crook]

'They just are' is not good enough. That to me is the biggest issue, is that it's not going to feel genuine, especially since the Nolan series was trying to portray a realistic a possible interpretation, a series you now have to build other franchises around featuring super powered beings.

How is this different from the comics? Are there not tons of stories out there with Batman dealing in small-time affairs? This same character is then saving the world in the next?

Another problem I foresee is the devaluing character aspect, Batman is king **** in Nolan's world, yet what happens when he's got super powered beings around him? It seems like doing it that way is simply making JL for the sake of it.

Bats is the brains of the league. Being the only non-powered superhero and making that work within a dream-team isn't a new problem. Writers have been struggling and working around that issue for decades. It's proven to work.

I take your Terminator example, but I can't see a GL film being as possible to tone down to the same extent, there's at least some level of believability to the idea of artificial intelligence consuming us, in GL we're talking 'magic rings', more or less Hobbit territory.

Dude. Android assassin, who is a shapeshifter. Made out of liquid metal. C'mon.

I'm not quite sure what the 'norm' of the DC universe is because as far as I can see it doesn't exist on film, we have Nolan's universe, I don't see it as a DC universe. The thing is, a film like GL shouldn't have to restrict itself to having to go by what Nolan's universe/production has done (even loosely), it should be it's own film and options like green screen should be on the table.

Maybe it'd be better if you point out what these restrictions would be, because I'm not seeing anything that would affect the potential for a GL movie.

Those rules, whilst I agree with them, are still not enough to blend things together so smoothly, lets say you do all those basic rules with a WW movie, you add Amazons, Greek Gods and Greek mythological beasts and monsters, suddenly combining that character with a Batman film that uses the same basic rules, but in a completely different context, just doesn't add up to me. Honestly, I would loved to be proven wrong, but if things are to be tied together via the Nolan universe, I just don't think it's as easy as people think it is to have our cake and eat it too.

Of course it's not easy. But I have heard so many people that would have you thinking it's impossible, and that's just as false. I won't lie to you, my concern is how WW will fit in with the rest. You're right, the Greek mythology is a whole 'nother league. At least with everyone else, it's with typical fantasy elements such as magic and aliens.

Well... Stark is more relatable than either of those DC figures. You can't really argue that...

There are plenty of people that will argue this. I don't know why you're so intent on stating it like a fact. You know damn well people react to these characters in different ways.

it's not that people can't relate to a multi-million dollar playboy... you said it yourself... the personality works. And the concept is a lot more serious and legitimate than the concepts of GL/Flash. Tony Stark is something people can buy... GL/Flash are characters that require a stretch of the imagination... and that's a turn off.

I'm speechless. Please tell me how stretching imagination is a turn-off. I could literally give you a list of 20 films right now that are beyond plausible, yet garnered a huge audience, and are one of the top-grossing films of all time.

If there is one thing that cannot be denied here, it is that fantasy is just as viable in a Hollywood market as any other genre.

Well Marvel has a track record with successful SH movies... DC has Batman... until one of these other heroes stick (and Watchmen and 300 or V for V don't really fit the same bill) it is what it is.

In terms of being financially and critically successful, the advantage isn't much. Marvel has put out a few good films, but they have put out just as many, if not more crap ones.

Flash... as a fun, family, children oriented film with fancy/dazzling effects will work... anything more than that and the film will bomb. It's not exactly material you'd call "Dark Knightesque"... as a fun, special effects happy, low budget film you may have something.

Never said it was Dark Knight-esque. I even mentioned a couple posts ago that it's along the same category of what Iron Man and Spider-Man are. Fun action flicks with some substance.

People ain't seeing a freaking sprinter for two hours...

I don't know how you expect me to discuss with you, when you're pulling statements like this out of your ass. I talk about a Flash movie, and the first thing you think of is watching a sprinter?? Please watch the JL series, or at least a few comics. Flash is right up there with the best of them in terms of visual dazzle.

I don't know if GL can pull off the intense action either...

Same as above.

please don't compare the potential to Transformers... it has no chance of duplicating that in terms of action now c'mon...

Flash doesn't in terms of scale. GL does considering he has a larger canvas (space) and his ring can do anything imaginable.

and 300 is a completely different animal that caught people's attention for completely different reasons.

Which is my point. There is no one singular factor that a movie must have to attract an audience.

Tell me how GL/Flash will be more mainstream? A more fleshed out script? You are just being overly optimistic...

One, none of the films have to worry about the backlash against a previously bashed story. Two, absolutely a fleshed out script is helpful. TIH was one of the most bland comic book movies I've seen in recent memory, and that is unfortunate. Audiences aren't stupid, if the movie doesn't stand out (especially during spring/summer season), they're not gonna turn out in droves.

With inflation... but the finals numbers will flat line around there IMO. And SR didn't even make up for itself world wide... not even Superman sells overseas. Why expect a reboot to completely surpass that?

Because SR was a terrible film to reintroduce the character, and had next to nothing that would truly excite audiences like a potential Superman film could. That's why.

If they made up their mind that quickly that this will be the approach for the rest of their characters they are fooling both you and themselves... the minute one of these films bombs they'll go back to their old ways... MORE CAMP REQUIRED!!! That doesn't mean B & R per say... but it could certainly mean SM3, FF, etc. The cycle will never end.

So say they manage to put out 5 or 6 films in a semi-dark tone. One underperforms, and that changes everything to camp? Sorry, not how it works. They'll make some changes to that one project, but they will continue as is with the ones that were successful in the first place.

Capability is irrelevant. People like continuity... it makes sense. JLA is supposed to fit into the existing continuity... otherwise it is a BIG turn off. People will seriously "wtf" when they see a new guy playing Batman in the JLA trailer.

As I said posts ago, depends when a recast is set. If it's after the trilogy, then it would be acceptable if Bale doesn't return. That way you won't have 2 Batman's running around at the same time. He has the Terminator franchise now, and if the replacement is good it won't be that big of a deal.

And here's the deal with Batman... and I don't want ONE DC FAN or ANY fan for that matter to tell me otherwise. Over 50% of Batman fans... die hard and even general Batman fans... INCLUDING a significant portion of general audiences... have no interest in seeing Batman in a JLA movie... it's too out of their comfort zone IMO. You want to make a case for Batman/Superman and a World's Finest film I'll give you that... so maybe that gives WB more incentive to let Bale go? Possibly... but I still think it's a mistake because of continuity problems.

That statistic is completely made up. I'm sure this is based off the fans in the TDK forum, but realize where you are. That is a board dedicated to the film and it's production crew. They are loyal to Nolan. To Bale. To "realism". It is a niche population.

You are the one fooling yourself if you don't think audiences want to see Batman interact with Superman, or any of the JL members. JL is the all-star team of superhero groups. Everyone knows about them, and with the spawn of the comic book film, people are just waiting for it to come on the big-screen. Even in my high school days, before TDK came around, people were still discussing about "who can beat up who?" within the DC universe. Superman, WW, GL, Flash, Bats, you name it. There is an underlying interest in the all-stars. Nolan fans, Bale fans, Batman fans, no matter how much they can say they have no interests in JL...are greatly outnumbered by those that do.

 

[The Guard]

I don't know whether Bale would sign onto JLA, and I don't really care, to be honest. He either will or he won't. The whole "But only Bale can play Batman!" argument simply isn't even worth having, it's just beyond absurd. Christian Bale may have leverage with WB, but he won't have enough to prevent a JLA film once the third Batman is completed. Once the third Batman film is in the books, WB will likely go all out, especially if GREEN LANTERN is a large success.

And I've seen no example of how Nolan's Batman could work with super powered beings given they spent the last two films trying to present a realistic as possible version of the character. So it's a stalemate.

Then, respectfully, you must be blind. Read a JLA comic. Read any Batman comic where he, a relatively realistic character, interacts with any metahuman or outlandish situation. The juxtaposition of the realistic Batman and more outlandish elements of the DCU is an approach that works, and has worked, for decades. Film need be no different, and could work much the same way. It's not rocket science. The whole point is that he's human, whereas the rest of the JLA and many of the elements of the DC Universe that he encounters are metahuman or alien. And then you build on that. It's not difficult.

The medium is the problem, it's about interpretation so environments do clash, say for instance someone wants to make a more family friendly action adventure Flash film, how do you then merge that with Nolan's Batman or an epic fantasy based Wonder Woman or a Sci-Fi based GL?

You're missing the point entirely. A JLA film shouldn't be about combining MOVIES, it should be about combining CHARACTERS. All DC heroes are based in some kind of mythology. The DC universe encompasses science fiction, mythology, and realistic elements to boot.

How do you merge them all? How have writers been doing so for decades? How does Batman ever interact with lighter-hearted or superpowered characters? He just does. It's not difficult to accomplish. Writers have been doing it for a long, long time.

It's not as easy as saying they're all in the same universe, what if each film style, tone and environment is vastly different from the others? How then do you merge 4-5 different characters from different universes together?

How do you merge 4-5 characters (from the same universe, not different ones) together? You just DO. The way writers have been putting the lighthearted Flash opposite the somber Batman for decades.

Some of you are making this whole DC films/JLA interplay seem much, much more difficult than it is, or than it needs to be. These heroes inhabit the same universe. That doesn't mean all their adventures have to have the same tone, or that a JLA adventure cannot have several tones to it, informed by the various characters who will take part in it. And it's not like Batman can't have his lighter moments, either.

'They just are' is not good enough.

That interesting. Because it's been good enough in the comics for what...over forty years now? I've said it before, I've said it again. The JLA heroes are not difficult to understand. They are not difficult to flesh out. There are ways to get to know characters without an entire origin film dedicated to each one.

Another problem I foresee is the devaluing character aspect, Batman is king **** in Nolan's world, yet what happens when he's got super powered beings around him? It seems like doing it that way is simply making JL for the sake of it.

Have you never read a JLA comic? Batman tends to be king **** there, too. Why would WB "make JLA for the sake of it"? Come on.

I disagree completely. A film only works if it's successful on its own terms, not because it piggybacked on half a dozen prior successful films. Christian Bale could sign up for JLA and it could still stink. A good approach can succeed without Christian Bale. Heck, sometimes showing the origin of everything is a less successful approach. I liked Star Wars better before we got Darth Vader's origin.

And really, I wish people would quit pretending that having the origin of everyone is necessary for a JLA film. You're not going to get a Martian Manhunter film before JLA. You're not likely to get Aquaman either. The Avengers is likely to come out before Ant Man. Watchmen isn't going to delve into the secret origin of The Comedian or Nite Owl. And there's no need to, as their origins aren't relevant to the story at hand. How is the origin of WW relevant to a JLA film? Or the Flash? Why should JLA have more storytelling restrictions placed on it than X-Men, Watchmen, or Avengers? Heck, they made Lord of the Rings before The Hobbit.

Powers are trivia. Character traits are what's important and that can be introduced with standard storytelling.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Evil Twin gets it.

Yeah, that "they're going camp" is just made up out of nowhere. People act like WB isn't completely aware of what went wrong with Batman and Robin. Heck, The OMAC Project, which was the reported basis of the Miller JLA film ISN'T camp. Heck, the reports that the cast went through boot camp should indicate that Miller wasn't intending JLA to be camp.

I really wish people wouldn't just make up stuff.

As do I. Some of the arguments against a JLA film working in context with other DC films are just...silly and clearly not very well reasoned.

 

[BATZARRO WWD]

Hulk is deeper than Flash

I thought people just wanted "Hulk Smash" out of the Hulk. Gotta wonder why that earlier Hulk film underperformed...

a recasted Batman will cater to the rest of the heroes... it will be a camp fest. Bale gives you credibility

YES! If it's not Bale, it will inmediately be camp. This is why George Clooney's carrer is in the toilet...

 

[jmc]

How is this different from the comics? Are there not tons of stories out there with Batman dealing in small-time affairs? This same character is then saving the world in the next?

Bats is the brains of the league. Being the only non-powered superhero and making that work within a dream-team isn't a new problem. Writers have been struggling and working around that issue for decades. It's proven to work.

You can get away with integrating him more easier in comics than in film. It's the nature of the beast, put 3 Dimensions around it and it's a completely different story, especially if we're talking Nolan's Batman.

Dude. Android assassin, who is a shapeshifter. Made out of liquid metal. C'mon.

You missed my point, even though T1 and T2 are fanciful, the basic idea of artificial intelligence consuming us is more believable than some guy that gets a ring that lets him do what ever he wants. Both series have a level of fantastic elements, T1 and T2, even though they're ridiculous, have a certain 'what if' mentality to it, I can't see GL being the same.

Maybe it'd be better if you point out what these restrictions would be, because I'm not seeing anything that would affect the potential for a GL movie.

The main potential restriction I foresee if you were to go TDK route with GL is you could potentially be denying a richer and more dynamic film. Although I want a more mature GL film, I don't really want it bogged down in trying to go the whole 'realism' road when it's not in the characters best interest to do so, there's only so much you can do to a sci-fi character in a 'real world' setting, the last thing I would want is watered down GL or WW or FL just to fit within a certain guideline, just let them be their own character.

Of course it's not easy. But I have heard so many people that would have you thinking it's impossible, and that's just as false. I won't lie to you, my concern is how WW will fit in with the rest. You're right, the Greek mythology is a whole 'nother league. At least with everyone else, it's with typical fantasy elements such as magic and aliens.

Neither you or I are correct in this situation, the truth is no ones knows how things would turn out for JL, some look at it and see it as simple A+B=C, I look at it and see a nightmare quadratic equation, my concern is seeing hollow and 'stock' solo films that don't do justice to the likes GL, FL and WW all for the sake of simply doing a JL film, hence why I'd prefer separate continuity. I'm not trying to be a pain in the arse here, I just want what's best for the characters, I guess we'll find out in a few years time how things pan out.