WB & DC Meet For A Summit

Isn't it time for some "news" to come out that will lead to hours of speculation? Has anyone asked the Presidential nominees where they come down on sequel vs. reboot?
 
WB taps into ties at DC Comics

Co. has heroes like Wonder Woman, Flash

By MARC GRASER


When it comes to superhero properties, Warner Bros. couldn't be sitting on a more enviable source: DC Comics, home to Batman, Superman and other well-known caped crusaders.

But to make its heroes fly at the megaplex, the studio knows it needs to make the right movies. The financial payoff is too big to squander with a creative misfire like "Catwoman."
"They can really be an evergreen source of enjoyment and income," says studio topper Alan Horn, referring to the coin a hit pic can collect at the B.O. and from sources like TV, homevid, vidgames and merchandise. The studio earned $1 billion from DC fare alone in 2005, when "Batman Begins" was released. "If you do it wrong, you're dead, you're out of there."
Getting out there, however, has taken time.
Warners and DC (both Time Warner entities) have labored in vain over another Superman, and launches for Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Arrow and Green Lantern. It's maddening for fans as rival Marvel Comics has successfully begun financing its own slate of pics, first with "Iron Man," then a reboot of "The Incredible Hulk" this summer.
That could soon change, as Warners is readying to revamp how DC's properties are developed -- changes that could be announced within the next month.
DC doesn't have a separate film division the way rival Marvel does, which is moving forward with an "Iron Man" sequel and adaptations of Thor, Captain America and the superhero team-up "The Avengers" for 2010 and 2011.
That means Warners doesn't have a sole cheerleader for its comicbook projects, or someone to work closely with filmmakers to develop them.
Until now, those duties have been shared by production prexy Jeff Robinov and Gregory Noveck, senior VP of creative affairs for DC Comics, who has served as a liaison between the comicbook publisher and the studio.
Some say Robinov's attention may be pulled in too many directions, given his other responsibilities, which include the rest of the studio's slate and marketing. Noveck formerly was Joel Silver's TV topper.
"We're having a lot of internal discussions on it," Horn says. "We haven't committed to any change at DC at this point," adding that both Warners and DC are committed to turning "the properties into viable movie product in an intelligent way so that we introduce them like planes on a runway. They have to be set up the right way and lined up the right way and all take off one at a time and fly safe and fly straight."
One high-profile property is "Justice League," which Warner Bros. had hoped would start production before the writers strike.
But given that it unites Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, the Flash, Green Arrow, Aquaman and Martian Manhunter, the studio is trying to figure out how such the pic (cast with younger actors) would affect its existing Batman and Superman franchises -- and whether the script respects how the characters play off each other in the DC universe.
To put it simply: the studio doesn't want to piss off the Comic-Con contingent.
"We're not off the notion of a Justice League," Robinov says. "There's a massive interest and knowledge in the comicbook industry and it takes time to sort of catch up and understand the characters and the history, where they've intersected with each other and what their worlds are. That's part of the education that we're going through."
When it comes to Batman, the future of the franchise is in Christopher Nolan's hands. That's what a successful reboot with "Batman Begins" and breaking records with "The Dark Knight" will do.
There's a deal for the director to helm a third pic, but he has yet to decide on whether to tackle it yet.
"We have no idea where Chris is going with this," Horn says. "We haven't had any conversations with him about it."
Either way, there's no question Warner Bros. will produce more superhero pics. The question is when.
"These are big, iconic characters," Noveck says. "So when you make them into a movie, you'd better be shooting for a pretty high standard. You're not always going to reach it, but you have to be shooting for it. We're going to make a Justice League movie, whether it's now or 10 years from now. But we're not going to do it and Warners is not going to do it until we know it's right." Dave McNary and David S. Cohen contributed to this report.
 
Personally, I think "the studio is trying to figure out how such the pic (cast with younger actors) would affect its existing Batman and Superman franchises -- and whether the script respects how the characters play off each other in the DC universe" sounds good for a Superman sequel.
 
This sounds good for a Superman sequel. At least it seems that they want Routh and Bale in a future JLA movie.

IMO the most interesting part is

"That could soon change, as Warners is readying to revamp how DC's properties are developed -- changes that could be announced within the next month."


So there is a possibility of an announcement about the movies based on the DC Comics characters (Superman included) within the next month.
 
You don't suspect they will take the WHOLE month do you?
 
Next month is really code for months and months longer.:D
 
Personally, I think "the studio is trying to figure out how such the pic (cast with younger actors) would affect its existing Batman and Superman franchises -- and whether the script respects how the characters play off each other in the DC universe" sounds good for a Superman sequel.

Or Superman reboot...

Either way I'm happy to be honest. I just want another Superman film :(

The cool thing is whether it is a reboot or sequel it will be called MAN OF STEEL pretty much guaranteed :D
 
I can't really complain, though. I got what I asked for at 8:36.
 
I hope this meeting is fruitful and they place someone in charge of the properties that knows their @$$ from a hole in the ground when it comes to the books. I mean, as little four years ago they figured that Catwoman would be a bankable film to make. That says something as to what kind of pulse the higher ups of Warner have as to what kind of arrows they actually have in their quiver.

I've said it for the longest time (as many others have had): Warner is sitting on a gigantic goldmine that they can mine all by themselves. Marvel was smart and actually got themselves to be predominantly self-sufficient so they could oversee all the productions in-house to develop their stable and not have to deal with people at each studio except when it came to distribution. Warner has had this ability in their pocket since the 1970's and they were too stupid to see the potential.

Let's hope someone there finally woke up after counting the receipt for Batman's latest foray. Dare to dream, though, because if they're still talking about doing JLA any time except for AFTER they establish the solo pics...then they're not even asking the right questions and understand nothing.
 
It seems like they are still trying to get JLA off the ground.

Good news is, there will be news! In a month or so...(Maybe.)
 
Maybe. I'll believe it when I see it though.
 
It seems like they are still trying to get JLA off the ground.

Good news is, there will be news! In a month or so...(Maybe.)

Showtime has mentioned several times that the current Miller incarnation of JLA is dead. And if you read between the lines in these reports, with the way JLA is mentioned, that would appear to be the case. It would appear WB still has plans for an eventual JLA film but it won't be the one that almost came to fruition, thankfully.
 
Or Superman reboot...

Either way I'm happy to be honest. I just want another Superman film :(

The cool thing is whether it is a reboot or sequel it will be called MAN OF STEEL pretty much guaranteed :D

I'm thinking that Warner Bros. is leaning towards a Superman sequel.

From what is said, they've moved onto Justice League being a film similar to Marvel Studios' Avengers which is a crossover film instead of a film that creates multiple spin-offs.

Frankly the best way to do this and have Superman in it is with a sequel. Warner Bros already tried to reboot Superman with Superman Lives and Superman Flyby and failed miserably in trying to make a Superman movie and lost tens of millions of dollars in the process.

Trying to do another reboot will just slow Superman down because unlike Batman there is no definitive way to do him. Do you have to make another origin film? What direction do you want to take? What inspirations do you want to use? Who are you going to cast? Who's going to make it? Etc. With a sequel, you already have a cast, direction, inspirations, crew, and more. You can just simply go forward if you choose to.

Not only that, Superman fans aren't like Batman fans. Almost everyone is loving what Nolan has brought us. Almost everyone wanted a reboot. And almost everyone wanted the origin. With Superman you have the fanbase split into those who want a complete reboot with an established Superman, Smallville the Movie, a reboot via Superman Begins, or the Man of Steel. And no matter what route you take, you're going to piss off a lot of people.

People are going to be pissed if you make a sequel. People are going to be pissed if they don't see Bryan Singer finish with what he started. People are going to be pissed if Tom Welling isn't Superman despite the fact that he's a horrible actor whose film career only consists of three crappy movies Cheaper by the Dozen 1 and 2 and the Fog. Warner Bros. has probably realized that it is impossible to make everyone happy.

If you make a sequel that is good and addresses the problems of the first film, you can at least convert some people who hated Superman Returns. If you make it look like a totally awesome film (like they did with the Dark Knight) and give it a good release date (unlike Superman Returns), people will go out and see it. Even though the film underpeformed, Superman Returns was still a box office and critical success.

And on a plus side, since the film underperformed, Bryan Singer isn't going to be given free reign. He's going to have to do what Warner Bros wants to do and put on a leash if he wants to make this film. And judging by Warner Bros. more recent decisions with Batman Begins/the Dark Knight and from what is being said about Green Lantern, Warner Bros. taking more active control doesn't sound as bad as it used to.
 
I hope this meeting is fruitful and they place someone in charge of the properties that knows their @$$ from a hole in the ground when it comes to the books. I mean, as little four years ago they figured that Catwoman would be a bankable film to make. That says something as to what kind of pulse the higher ups of Warner have as to what kind of arrows they actually have in their quiver.
Actually it was more like they thought it was bankable after Batman Returns but delays caused the project to take such a radical shift in tone and style. They knew that the film they had was a piece of crap and was going to bomb.

I remember hearing a rumor that Warner Bros considered to demote it to direct-to-video because they knew they had such a stinker, but decided not to because they invested too much money into it.

This is a new era of Warner Bros. on how they treat their properties. Based on how they've treated the Batman films, the Green Lantern script and debateably Superman, they are treating their comic book properties with the respect they deserve.
 
I'm thinking that Warner Bros. is leaning towards a Superman sequel.

From what is said, they've moved onto Justice League being a film similar to Marvel Studios' Avengers which is a crossover film instead of a film that creates multiple spin-offs.

Frankly the best way to do this and have Superman in it is with a sequel. Warner Bros already tried to reboot Superman with Superman Lives and Superman Flyby and failed miserably in trying to make a Superman movie and lost tens of millions of dollars in the process.

Trying to do another reboot will just slow Superman down because unlike Batman there is no definitive way to do him. Do you have to make another origin film? What direction do you want to take? What inspirations do you want to use? Who are you going to cast? Who's going to make it? Etc. With a sequel, you already have a cast, direction, inspirations, crew, and more. You can just simply go forward if you choose to.

Not only that, Superman fans aren't like Batman fans. Almost everyone is loving what Nolan has brought us. Almost everyone wanted a reboot. And almost everyone wanted the origin. With Superman you have the fanbase split into those who want a complete reboot with an established Superman, Smallville the Movie, a reboot via Superman Begins, or the Man of Steel. And no matter what route you take, you're going to piss off a lot of people.

People are going to be pissed if you make a sequel. People are going to be pissed if they don't see Bryan Singer finish with what he started. People are going to be pissed if Tom Welling isn't Superman despite the fact that he's a horrible actor whose film career only consists of three crappy movies Cheaper by the Dozen 1 and 2 and the Fog. Warner Bros. has probably realized that it is impossible to make everyone happy.

If you make a sequel that is good and addresses the problems of the first film, you can at least convert some people who hated Superman Returns. If you make it look like a totally awesome film (like they did with the Dark Knight) and give it a good release date (unlike Superman Returns), people will go out and see it. Even though the film underpeformed, Superman Returns was still a box office and critical success.

And on a plus side, since the film underperformed, Bryan Singer isn't going to be given free reign. He's going to have to do what Warner Bros wants to do and put on a leash if he wants to make this film. And judging by Warner Bros. more recent decisions with Batman Begins/the Dark Knight and from what is being said about Green Lantern, Warner Bros. taking more active control doesn't sound as bad as it used to.

Well said, Hippie Hunter. (By the way, I almost shortened it and called you "Hippie," as I normally would. But I guess you wouldn't like that as you hunt hippies.)
 
I'm thinking that Warner Bros. is leaning towards a Superman sequel.

From what is said, they've moved onto Justice League being a film similar to Marvel Studios' Avengers which is a crossover film instead of a film that creates multiple spin-offs.

Frankly the best way to do this and have Superman in it is with a sequel. Warner Bros already tried to reboot Superman with Superman Lives and Superman Flyby and failed miserably in trying to make a Superman movie and lost tens of millions of dollars in the process.

Trying to do another reboot will just slow Superman down because unlike Batman there is no definitive way to do him. Do you have to make another origin film? What direction do you want to take? What inspirations do you want to use? Who are you going to cast? Who's going to make it? Etc. With a sequel, you already have a cast, direction, inspirations, crew, and more. You can just simply go forward if you choose to.

Not only that, Superman fans aren't like Batman fans. Almost everyone is loving what Nolan has brought us. Almost everyone wanted a reboot. And almost everyone wanted the origin. With Superman you have the fanbase split into those who want a complete reboot with an established Superman, Smallville the Movie, a reboot via Superman Begins, or the Man of Steel. And no matter what route you take, you're going to piss off a lot of people.

People are going to be pissed if you make a sequel. People are going to be pissed if they don't see Bryan Singer finish with what he started. People are going to be pissed if Tom Welling isn't Superman despite the fact that he's a horrible actor whose film career only consists of three crappy movies Cheaper by the Dozen 1 and 2 and the Fog. Warner Bros. has probably realized that it is impossible to make everyone happy.

If you make a sequel that is good and addresses the problems of the first film, you can at least convert some people who hated Superman Returns. If you make it look like a totally awesome film (like they did with the Dark Knight) and give it a good release date (unlike Superman Returns), people will go out and see it. Even though the film underpeformed, Superman Returns was still a box office and critical success.

And on a plus side, since the film underperformed, Bryan Singer isn't going to be given free reign. He's going to have to do what Warner Bros wants to do and put on a leash if he wants to make this film. And judging by Warner Bros. more recent decisions with Batman Begins/the Dark Knight and from what is being said about Green Lantern, Warner Bros. taking more active control doesn't sound as bad as it used to.

:up::up: You are so wise, Hippie.

They should just greenlit that sequel!
 
Bryan Singer isn't going to be given free reign. He's going to have to do what Warner Bros wants to do and put on a leash if he wants to make this film

As long as they keep Peters away from it otherwise the big bad guys will be Giant Spiders & Polar Bears
 
As long as they keep Peters away from it otherwise the big bad guys will be Giant Spiders & Polar Bears

Yep yep. Peters should quit working on films (he was involved with a huge dud in "Wild Wild West") & go back to cutting people hair. I mean, he was a barber or something like that, right? :hehe:
 
Yep yep. Peters should quit working on films (he was involved with a huge dud in "Wild Wild West") & go back to cutting people hair. I mean, he was a barber or something like that, right? :hehe:

How dare you question Jon Peters' credentials? He had to date Barbra Streisand to get where he is today. That's a tough gig.
 
I'm thinking that Warner Bros. is leaning towards a Superman sequel.

From what is said, they've moved onto Justice League being a film similar to Marvel Studios' Avengers which is a crossover film instead of a film that creates multiple spin-offs.

Frankly the best way to do this and have Superman in it is with a sequel. Warner Bros already tried to reboot Superman with Superman Lives and Superman Flyby and failed miserably in trying to make a Superman movie and lost tens of millions of dollars in the process.

Trying to do another reboot will just slow Superman down because unlike Batman there is no definitive way to do him. Do you have to make another origin film? What direction do you want to take? What inspirations do you want to use? Who are you going to cast? Who's going to make it? Etc. With a sequel, you already have a cast, direction, inspirations, crew, and more. You can just simply go forward if you choose to.

Not only that, Superman fans aren't like Batman fans. Almost everyone is loving what Nolan has brought us. Almost everyone wanted a reboot. And almost everyone wanted the origin. With Superman you have the fanbase split into those who want a complete reboot with an established Superman, Smallville the Movie, a reboot via Superman Begins, or the Man of Steel. And no matter what route you take, you're going to piss off a lot of people.

People are going to be pissed if you make a sequel. People are going to be pissed if they don't see Bryan Singer finish with what he started. People are going to be pissed if Tom Welling isn't Superman despite the fact that he's a horrible actor whose film career only consists of three crappy movies Cheaper by the Dozen 1 and 2 and the Fog. Warner Bros. has probably realized that it is impossible to make everyone happy.

If you make a sequel that is good and addresses the problems of the first film, you can at least convert some people who hated Superman Returns. If you make it look like a totally awesome film (like they did with the Dark Knight) and give it a good release date (unlike Superman Returns), people will go out and see it. Even though the film underpeformed, Superman Returns was still a box office and critical success.

And on a plus side, since the film underperformed, Bryan Singer isn't going to be given free reign. He's going to have to do what Warner Bros wants to do and put on a leash if he wants to make this film. And judging by Warner Bros. more recent decisions with Batman Begins/the Dark Knight and from what is being said about Green Lantern, Warner Bros. taking more active control doesn't sound as bad as it used to.


Another key for the SR sequel to be successful is making sure they maintain budget discipline. Keeping the budget no more than 160 million would be good. If the sequel is a tighter film (say 2 hour and 10 minutes) more fun, and has great action, flight and fight scenes and with the lower budget and a redesigned and better looking suit....half the battle is already done for it be financially profitable.
 
Showtime has mentioned several times that the current Miller incarnation of JLA is dead. And if you read between the lines in these reports, with the way JLA is mentioned, that would appear to be the case. It would appear WB still has plans for an eventual JLA film but it won't be the one that almost came to fruition, thankfully.

Good :up:

RickO'Connell said:
As long as they keep Peters away from it otherwise the big bad guys will be Giant Spiders & Polar Bears

Nightwing1977 said:
Yep yep. Peters should quit working on films (he was involved with a huge dud in "Wild Wild West") & go back to cutting people hair. I mean, he was a barber or something like that, right? :hehe:

Doubledown44 said:
How dare you question Jon Peters' credentials? He had to date Barbra Streisand to get where he is today. That's a tough gig.

I think he has changed his ways since SR, as seen in the DVD Special Features. Or maybe he was just smiling for the camera :hehe:
 
How dare you question Jon Peters' credentials? He had to date Barbra Streisand to get where he is today. That's a tough gig.

I don't think dating a lady with a nose I wouldn't touch is anything special. But yes, it is a tough gig. Especially with me never wanting to touch the nose, but somehow Peters did. His nose does kinda look like her though. :hehe:

jon-peters.jpg
 
As long as they keep Peters away from it otherwise the big bad guys will be Giant Spiders & Polar Bears
Considering the type of film Superman Returns was, it was pretty obvious that Peters was a producer in name only.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"