Justice League The Justice League General & Speculation Discussion Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 50

[2kt09]

All of the prestige that is associated with the character (i.e. being the leader and role model for the Justice League and other heroes) may be rewritten and retconned for future iterations so that they can be given to other and more popular heroes. Just look at how Cyclops lost his role as a leader in the original X-Men trilogy due to how popular Wolverine/Hugh Jackman was.

...the scriptwriter spelled it out:

How did you decide Wolverine would be the star of the piece [X-Men (2000)] even more so than Xavier or Magneto?
He is the fulcrum of X-Men. The earlier X-Men group was a brilliant creation of Stan Lee's, but when Len Wein created Wolverine and they brought him into the X-Men, it was the perfect fulcrum between Professor X's philosophy and Magneto's philosophy. The fact that the wasn't bound by either gave him such a wild, attractive freedom that it was obvious that was the character that the series needed to revolve around. It was originally supposed to be Mel Gibson. Back when I got hired all of our concept art was Mel Gibson.

The DCEU has had 4 movies now where Superman is seen as such a big deal.

 

[Vaibow]

Eh, I think the Death of Superman 2 movies in was just a bad idea plain and simple. Maybe a great film-maker could have pulled that off and make it work, but even then it seems like a poor choice for the second movie in your ongoing cinematic universe.

If the map was planned out and the story was coherent, if it was always the plan and a success, naturally it works, but, i think it didn't work was due to the fact the audience not really connecting to this superman enough to really care, it's all in the execution and i think it misstepped..

It could have worked if things went in a more positive direction. In a more traditional superhero structure, death is usually the end game and the pay-off for audiences. Instead, Zack used the DoS as a gateway and backdoor as an opportunity to not only build on Superman's arc, but to also bring in an evil; Injustice Superman that would have also connected to bringing in Apokolips and Darkseid. The death of Superman didn't work because BvS was basically dead on arrival. If the audience would have taken to all the build and set-up, especially the whole Knightmare sequence, it probably would have made more sense where the payoff would have happened later on. Instead, things fell incomplete, audiences were confused and the wheels came crashing off. It's unfortunate. The only thing we can hope at this point is if WB/DC use this as a learning tool.

It needed one more movie pre BvS perhaps a MOS2, or Batman with a superman cameo just to flesh it out. However, i still say if Superman was presumed dead at the end of BvS and the movie literally ended with lois cradling him, only for JL to pick up moments after that, as other heroes swarm in, wondering what happens next with Batman naturally rising as Clark lays in state, only for a boom tube to appear and then clarks body disappear to return a hero, it would flow better, as say a part 1 and 2.

The idea that a characters second film is inherently too early for them to die rings false to me.
Look outside of superheroes and you'll find plenty of great movies where the main character dies in their first and only appearance.
I've never heard anyone say "Gladiator was alright, but they should've waited until the third film before killing him".

It's not too early at all, but gladiator as an example was a one shot, complete story - neither of which BvS or MOS was, however, Maximus wasn't an expected franchise.

 

[herolee10]

The JL experience leaves a rotten egg after taste in my mouth and a knot in my stomach. I will gladly move on from all of this and only reminiscence with you guys since I spent so much emotion with you guys through the ups and downs. Overall and at this point, I give two ****s about JL. The sooner we move on, the better.

But what exactly are we to move onto? A DC Universe that doesn't have a Batman or Superman? Doesn't sound like much of a better option if you ask me.

Don't get me wrong folks, I like characters like Wonder Woman and Aquaman, but how many of you guys can honestly say that your excitement won't always be limited due to the fact that there is no Superman and Batman anymore, with the studio trying to have their roles passed onto lesser characters?

 

[Tra-El]

I refuse to have any good-will at this point to watch JL knowing what they did to Henry's/Superman's face. It's an utter embarrassment on so many levels not worth the time or effort trying to explain. I'm livid knowing Superman's current position BECAUSE of Justice League. But I also know that the health of other DC films from this point forward will strengthen the possibility of another Superman film down the road. I'm going to be annoyed but patient until that happens. Still, I will certainly allow myself to enjoy what's next in the pipeline. Aquaman looks amazing and I feel Shazam will surprise. That's a start to getting back to a healthy Superman and Batman.

 

[herolee10]

I refuse to have any good-will at this point to watch JL knowing what they did to Henry's/Superman's face. It's an utter embarrassment on so many levels not worth the time or effort trying to explain. I'm livid knowing Superman's current position BECAUSE of Justice League. But I also know that the health of other DC films from this point forward will strengthen the possibility of another Superman film down the road. I'm going to be annoyed but patient until that happens. Still, I will certainly allow myself to enjoy what's next in the pipeline. Aquaman looks amazing and I feel Shazam will surprise. That's a start to getting back to a healthy Superman and Batman.

Honestly, I'm of the mind where I feel like the rising success and popularity of the other heroes may end up serving as a double edged sword to Superman's current predicament.

If Warner Bros finds great success in Wonder Woman, Shazam, Birds of Prey/Harley Quinn, Aquaman, and even in Supergirl, then they may end up being less motivated to spend their time and resources in getting another Superman film off of the ground.

It's very telling right now on how Warner Bros aren't ACTIVELY doing anything to get superman's film off the ground. Hell, they aren't even trying to get a TV series in the works as well, despite the positive reception that Tyler's Superman has received in his few appearances on the CW Network.

Frankly, I think it's time that we have to look at the possibility that Warner Bros don't just care anymore about the character like they like once did. And I hate to say this, but I think a lot of this has to do with the terrible and mixed receptions that he got from his appearances in BvS and MOS respectively.

JL only cemented their negative views of him, which is ironic since they are the main culprits for that debacle as well.

I'm honestly ready at the very REAL possibility that we may have to wait a decade or even two before we ever see Superman again in his own film.

 

[Tra-El]

It's going to take time. I think WB wants some stench takin' away from what has been created. They have room with other JL'ers and DC characters to play with but right now, Superman isn't in all that great of shape, cinematically. We know WB wanted Henry to appear in cameo's and I think that entire situation has put a monkey wrench in things. The studio can't afford to misfire on Superman again or it very well could be another 26 years.

I say take your time, find your groove with DC films and insert Superman into a winning formula rather than the other way around. I'm pissed we're here, but still optimistic to see Superman get his when the time is right.

 

[flickchick85]

I'm honestly ready at the very REAL possibility that we may have to wait a decade or even two before we ever see Superman again in his own film.

Does the legal situation with the Siegel estate even allow for that?

 

[Tra-El]

My guess for another Supes film, if DC/WB hit their marks in the near future, will be 2023-2024.

 

[Micromind]

Does the legal situation with the Siegel estate even allow for that?

We can only guess, but I think they will have to pay some money if they don't make any Superman movie after every few years.

 

[flickchick85]

We can only guess, but I think they will have to pay some money if they don't make any Superman movie after every few years.

And see, I don't think they'd do that. Either way, they'd be spending money - surely they'd rather spend money on something that they can make a profit on instead of simply throwing money down the drain. Though I guess it depends on how much money they'd have to pay. But yeah, I'm with Tra-El - I think we'll have a new Supes by 2024.

 

[Vaibow]

Honestly, I'm of the mind where I feel like the rising success and popularity of the other heroes may end up serving as a double edged sword to Superman's current predicament.

If Warner Bros finds great success in Wonder Woman, Shazam, Birds of Prey/Harley Quinn, Aquaman, and even in Supergirl, then they may end up being less motivated to spend their time and resources in getting another Superman film off of the ground.

It's very telling right now on how Warner Bros aren't ACTIVELY doing anything to get superman's film off the ground. Hell, they aren't even trying to get a TV series in the works as well, despite the positive reception that Tyler's Superman has received in his few appearances on the CW Network.

Frankly, I think it's time that we have to look at the possibility that Warner Bros don't just care anymore about the character like they like once did. And I hate to say this, but I think a lot of this has to do with the terrible and mixed receptions that he got from his appearances in BvS and MOS respectively.

JL only cemented their negative views of him, which is ironic since they are the main culprits for that debacle as well.

I'm honestly ready at the very REAL possibility that we may have to wait a decade or even two before we ever see Superman again in his own film.

I hear ya, they have probably learnt a lesson or at least think they have - where now they focus on good story telling and they will also be thinking 'marvel used second fiddle characters and got success, so can we' and in all honesty, they can, with good production teams/directors make money with a lot of the DC universe and they probably won't need superman, but.... a big but, how can they not move forward without superman?

All i can think is that the DCEU will carry on, but with no justice league as we know it - the focus will be on WW, BoP, AM, Shazam and they can make trilogies of solo's etc - Batman/Superman can exist but not be featured - a name drop here or there, they could even mention knightfall and Batman being broken as an explanation to why there is a no show (which would be criminal), or stunt doubles could fill in for cameo's and we never see under the mask. Heck, they could even skip 5 years into the future and nightwing is on the scene. Superman, he'll just be written out and characters like Shazam will be used - it will seem odd to some of us, but the GA will just be engaged with what they see before them.

I truly believe they will give Superman the Matt Reeves treatment, in that his Batman will spawn a new universe where they tread lightly and not rush and superman will exist in that universe and have his own solo reboot.

 

[brandeezy89]

I don't think the Siegal estate owns a percentage of Superman anymore. They lost two ownership lawsuits against WB in 2013 before MOS released.

 

[Vaibow]

i heard that WB/DC have to make a film by a certain time or lose rights, like a rolling lease hold.

 

[brandeezy89]

i heard that WB/DC have to make a film by a certain time or lose rights, like a rolling lease hold.

Never heard about that. I do know that Superman & the characters/settings portrayed in Action Comics #1 becomes pubic domain in 2033.

 

[Micromind]

And see, I don't think they'd do that. Either way, they'd be spending money - surely they'd rather spend money on something that they can make a profit on instead of simply throwing money down the drain. Though I guess it depends on how much money they'd have to pay. But yeah, I'm with Tra-El - I think we'll have a new Supes by 2024.

Now WB are waiting for some director to come and make a good pitch for the solo movie, if things are favorable, they will make another Superman movie, even if that means recasting the Superman.

No need to rush just to catch up to Marvel, putting cart before the horse got them in trouble, first get a good story and production team and plan what they want to do with the character in future.

 

[Micromind]

i heard that WB/DC have to make a film by a certain time or lose rights, like a rolling lease hold.

They are not losing rights, just as per whatever agreement they had with the Siegel Estate, WB will have to pay them some amount if there's no Superman movie. (or Superman's appearance in some DC movie)

Edit: WB won the rights case and they have full rights to everything Superman except whatever was published in Action Comics #1, for which they have made the legal arrangement with the Siegel Estate. I think the heirs of Shuster have given WB their part of rights (of Action Comics #1) for some undisclosed amount.

 

[Micromind]

I don't think the Siegal estate owns a percentage of Superman anymore. They lost two ownership lawsuits against WB in 2013 before MOS released.

Exactly.

Never heard about that. I do know that Superman & the characters/settings portrayed in Action Comics #1 becomes pubic domain in 2033.

Agreed, in 2033, everything published in Action Comics #1 will be in public domain, which means any Studio can make a Superman movie if it strictly adheres to how Superman (and his supporting characters like Lois Lane) are shown in that Comic Book alone. Keep in mind, the logo and Superman's suit is a bit different in first Action Comics. Perry White is just called as "The Editor", Superman can only jump (not fly) and there's no Kryptonite, no Lex Luthor, no Perry White in that. It's a retro version of Superman.

 

[herolee10]

Exactly.

Agreed, in 2033, everything published in Action Comics #1 will be in public domain, which means any Studio can make a Superman movie if it strictly adheres to how Superman (and his supporting characters like Lois Lane) are shown in that Comic Book alone. Keep in mind, the logo and Superman's suit is a bit different in first Action Comics. Perry White is just called as "The Editor", Superman can only jump (not fly) and there's no Kryptonite, no Lex Luthor, no Perry White in that. It's a retro version of Superman.

So does that mean that Warner Bros is no longer forced to make a Superman film within a certain time-frame? If so, then double yikes for us all.

 

[Micromind]

So does that mean that Warner Bros is no longer forced to make a Superman film within a certain time-frame? If so, then double yikes for us all.

They have to make the movie or pay the Creators family a compensation amount.

And, that means after 2033, other Studios (Lionsgate/Sony/ Paramount/Universal/ Disney/WB) can make a Retro version of Superman movie. However, the rights to make a modern version of Superman movie will still be with WB.

 

[RomanticPenguin]

Action Comics #1 becomes pubic domain in 2033.

that's a hairy situation they got there

 

[RomanticPenguin]

they'll make another movie with superman in it if these next few movies do well and batman gets in production

 

[RomanticPenguin]

also just thinking james wan has a resume that's begging for a justice league movie or any team up comic book blockbuster (assuming aquaman goes well)

 

[Tra-El]

The way Aquaman looks, Wan can bring it and take it on no sweat. His scope and eye candy looks like an epic winner.

Nonetheless, I think WB knows how the fanbase feels and they should feel pressure of getting Superman right. That's been the cries for so long. The world was ready for a new Superman. You can't ignore that as a studio. The character doesn't come easy for them for whatever reason so at this point, they need a solid team, from top, middle and bottom, to take on Superman and do him justice. If things turn the corner in a positive light, I think we'll start inching closer to that. I don't think WB wants to personally neglect Superman. They just can't afford to fudge him up again. That's pressure and for good measure. Although, they should be up for every ounce of that challenge. The payoff would be absolutely enormous.

 

[Flint Marko]

The DCEU has had 4 movies now where Superman is seen as such a big deal.

Superman's been "such a big deal" in the way a plot device is a big deal, i.e. something everyone is apparently all worked up over but not much more. In that way he has more in common with the Motherbox and the Tesseract than Wolverine.

If the map was planned out and the story was coherent, if it was always the plan and a success, naturally it works, but, i think it didn't work was due to the fact the audience not really connecting to this superman enough to really care, it's all in the execution and i think it misstepped.

At the end of the day everyone can agree that the execution is what ultimately failed them, but I maintain that there are good ideas and there are bad ideas apart from execution and killing Superman in his second movie that was also intended to kick off a cinematic universe is just a bad idea plain and simple. I have yet to see a compelling reason they should have gone that route beyond the mere notion that it could have worked had it been handled better.

 

[2kt09]

Superman's been "such a big deal" in the same way Mother Boxes were a "big deal" in JL. A plot device everyone's apparently worked up over but not much more.

RIP Reign of Supermen (JL) Cut