What DC should learn from Marvel

[jmc]

But from a business perspective, who really cares? They're making money and increasing their brand awareness. In fact, these movies basically saved Marvel from bankruptcy.

Business side, yes they are doing well from these film to date, but if they continue down the path of making mediocre movies eventually people will get sick of the crap they're producing and won't hand over their hard earns to sit through 2 hours of bad story, weak characters and over the top special effects. Marvel films are borderlining on becoming the modern version of B-movies, cheap flicks that you don't really care for. I'd hate to see DC go the same way, I'd rather wait 10 years to see a Wonder Woman or Green Lantern film with a good story than be presented with something that has been put on screen just for the sake of getting the character on the screen, coz it will suck.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I agree with that... seems like crap ass sequels or takes on lesser characters are just trying to max profits... Fox should never touch anything again b/c they embody that line of business. And Sony now needs to recover and start over after the mess that was SM3... no point in hurrying WW and GL now just to fit them in before a JLA... but that doesn't mean make a JLA so we can milk profits from future spinoffs, etc... I would much rather have them focus on two characters right now (if they have no confidence in the rest which they clearly don't) and then try doing WW and Lantern later on just so we get the best possible product when this is all finished up

 

[maxmccumber]

What's more embarrassing for DC, crappy movies or no movies?? I ask this because on the one hand, WB is responsible for two of the worst movies ever made, Batman and Robin and Catwoman. But its gotta be just as much of a disgrace for there never to be a WW, Flash, GL or even an Aquaman movie. Seriously, you don't have to be a comic book nerd to figure out how easily all of those characters can be adapted to the screen in this day and age. Yes, DC is handicapped in the movie business because no one else but WB can do anything with their properties. But the box-office success of Spider-Man 3 and FF: Silver Surfer has got to be a wake-up call to the folks at WB. A superhero movie can be a big blockbuster, and they have more iconic characters to do it with besides Superman and Batman. And audiences probably want something new....

 

[jmc]

What's more embarrassing for DC, crappy movies or no movies?? I ask this because on the one hand, WB is responsible for two of the worst movies ever made, Batman and Robin and Catwoman. But its gotta be just as much of a disgrace for there never to be a WW, Flash, GL or even an Aquaman movie. Seriously, you don't have to be a comic book nerd to figure out how easily all of those characters can be adapted to the screen in this day and age. Yes, DC is handicapped in the movie business because no one else but WB can do anything with their properties. But the box-office success of Spider-Man 3 and FF: Silver Surfer has got to be a wake-up call to the folks at WB. A superhero movie can be a big blockbuster, and they have more iconic characters to do it with besides Superman and Batman. And audiences probably want something new....

Embarrassing is Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Hulk, the list goes on. So you'd rather DC prostitute its characters just to make a quick buck? You'd rather DC and WB create crap films? They've learned from their past mistakes, that's why there's no rush to bring WW, GL, F etc to the screen. Audiences do want something new, but also something good, not the crap Marvel keeps dishing up.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Embarrassing is Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Hulk, the list goes on. So you'd rather DC prostitute its characters just to make a quick buck? You'd rather DC and WB create crap films? They've learned from their past mistakes, that's why there's no rush to bring WW, GL, F etc to the screen. Audiences do want something new, but also something good, not the crap Marvel keeps dishing up.

Wrong...

Hulk: Wrong Direction... Wrong vision
Dare Devil: Studio interference to make an extra buck
FF4: Too campy... too children oriented
Ghost Rider: Absolute nonsense... (yeah Sony ****ed this one out)

WW: With the right girl and director... it could be a super duo that propels the greater collection of DC films

Flash: A gritty, yet light tone... the perfect blend of humor, action and drama... the movie has all the makings of a classic... can be everything Dare Devil wasn't.

GL: A compelling story can make this one a dark horse summer blockbuster.

You give these films about 50-75 million to work with... and they can bring back 80-90 million no sweat... maybe even 200-250 million WW... a solid profit.

 

[Mr. Socko]

They should learn to not hire MSJ for a theatrical stinker then give him another chance only to make another dud.

 

[jmc]

Wrong...

Hulk: Wrong Direction... Wrong vision
Dare Devil: Studio interference to make an extra buck
FF4: Too campy... too children oriented
Ghost Rider: Absolute nonsense... (yeah Sony ****ed this one out)

WW: With the right girl and director... it could be a super duo that propels the greater collection of DC films

Flash: A gritty, yet light tone... the perfect blend of humor, action and drama... the movie has all the makings of a classic... can be everything Dare Devil wasn't.

GL: A compelling story can make this one a dark horse summer blockbuster.

You give these films about 50-75 million to work with... and they can bring back 80-90 million no sweat... maybe even 200-250 million WW... a solid profit.

You can give a film all the money in the world to make it but that doesn't mean it will succeed.

 

[GL's Light]

What Warners/New Line/DC can learn from Marvel's films, as well as from past DC films:

1. Hire great directors.

2. Make sure the great directors you've hired stay on the right track in terms of a cinematic vision that best serves the characters.

3. When you have a great director with the right vision, do everything possible to have him stick around and at least complete a trilogy in those cases where the character should be featured in a series. Which brings me to...

4. Not every character needs to be franchised. Sometimes it's preferable to just make one great standalone film and leave it at that.

5. Following on from the last point, rather than make lots of sequels, lay out a game plan whereby you make DC films that exist in the same universe and have repeat appearances by characters, yet stay fresh and different by putting characters onscreen in various combinations. For example you could make a Green Arrow film that features Black Canary as well as GA, then a Catwoman film, and then a Birds of Prey film introducing Huntress and featuring repeat appearances by Catwoman and Black Canary.

6. Don't settle into a rut whereby there's a standard superhero story template that is applied to almost every film. Mix it up with different styles of storytelling, essentially different genres. Make Catwoman as a sexy heist film, Plastic Man as a riotous comedy, Green Lantern as a science fiction epic, etc.

7. Spend your money wisely and pick the right release dates. Not every superhero film needs a massive budget. For those characters who don't have spectacular, budget-busting powers, make films with modest budgets and release them in the spring. When you spend a lot of money on those characters who lend themselves to summer or Christmas blockbusters, make sure you've got the right mix of elements, especially in terms of large-scale action set pieces, that will satisfy audiences and keep the box office registers ringing. Moreover, if you spend a truly huge amount of money, like $ 200 million, you have to make the film appealing to kids. An older demographic can't be relied on to buy enough tickets to justify a budget of that level.

 

[jmc]

What Warners/New Line/DC can learn from Marvel's films, as well as from past DC films:

1. Hire great directors.

2. Make sure the great directors you've hired stay on the right track in terms of a cinematic vision that best serves the characters.

3. When you have a great director with the right vision, do everything possible to have him stick around and at least complete a trilogy in those cases where the character should be featured in a series. Which brings me to...

4. Not every character needs to be franchised. Sometimes it's preferable to just make one great standalone film and leave it at that.

5. Following on from the last point, rather than make lots of sequels, lay out a game plan whereby you make DC films that exist in the same universe and have repeat appearances by characters, yet stay fresh and different by putting characters onscreen in various combinations. For example you could make a Green Arrow film that features Black Canary as well as GA, then a Catwoman film, and then a Birds of Prey film introducing Huntress and featuring repeat appearances by Catwoman and Black Canary.

6. Don't settle into a rut whereby there's a standard superhero story template that is applied to almost every film. Mix it up with different styles of storytelling, essentially different genres. Make Catwoman as a sexy heist film, Plastic Man as a riotous comedy, Green Lantern as a science fiction epic, etc.

7. Spend your money wisely and pick the right release dates. Not every superhero film needs a massive budget. For those characters who don't have spectacular, budget-busting powers, make films with modest budgets and release them in the spring. When you spend a lot of money on those characters who lend themselves to summer or Christmas blockbusters, make sure you've got the right mix of elements, especially in terms of large-scale action set pieces, that will satisfy audiences and keep the box office registers ringing. Moreover, if you spend a truly huge amount of money, like $ 200 million, you have to make the film appealing to kids. An older demographic can't be relied on to buy enough tickets to justify a budget of that level.

1. A great director doesn't guarantee a great film. Sometimes, an unknown director could do better.

2. If studios have to keep the director 'on track' then that director is going to walk away from the project due to artistic differences.

3. Trilogies are becoming clichéd.

4. Agreed

5. Will never happen, this is film, not comic books, entirely different medium.

6. Yes variation is needed, not every film needs to be totally serious and have 'super villains'.

7. Release dates mean squat, if the film is good, word of mouth will do more no matter how much hype is given to the film. A majority of cinema goers are between 18-40 so they can rely on that demographic for repeat business.

 

[Hush]

I think the Warner Bros is going to wait it out to see how TDK does before they give the green light to do more super hero movies. They want to see if a sequel can make them the doe they want, if it can then they will get the ball rollin. Just I mean if you think from a bussiness point of view they saw BB and were pysched then SR blew big time in the numbers dept., so they are being cautious which is very smart. Those guys are all suits up there and they want to stay in there suits so they just want to make sure the audience will still come in, which it will for TDK. So we will get our films its just a matter of time give it a year or 2 and you'll see it.

 

[GL's Light]

1. A great director doesn't guarantee a great film. Sometimes, an unknown director could do better.

It doesn't guarantee one, but it makes the odds of getting one much higher. And when I say a great director, I'm not just talking about long-established directors. Talented newcomers should be looked at for certain projects too.

2. If studios have to keep the director 'on track' then that director is going to walk away from the project due to artistic differences.

Film is a collaborative process. There's always back and forth between the director, the producers and the studio. Keeping a director from going off the rails, but still maintaining good relations so that he stays on the project and moves forward, is part of being a good producer and a good studio exec.

3. Trilogies are becoming clichéd.

They're overused. That's why I said that not all films should get sequels. But some characters lend themselves to sequels and should get them.

5. Will never happen, this is film, not comic books, entirely different medium.

Of course they're different media, but I still think it could work if done properly.

7. Release dates mean squat, if the film is good, word of mouth will do more no matter how much hype is given to the film. A majority of cinema goers are between 18-40 so they can rely on that demographic for repeat business.

I strongly disagree. Release dates are of key importance. A good film can die with the wrong release date and a bad one can rake it in with the right one. As for the demographics: the latest study by the MPAA showed that 36% of moviegoers are 12-24 and 29% are 25-39. The first demographic tends to be where you get most of your repeat business from. So if you're going to spend $ 200 million on a summer blockbuster you better make sure it has very wide appeal and that that key 12-24 demographic is going to turn out in large numbers.

 

[GL's Light]

I think the Warner Bros is going to wait it out to see how TDK does before they give the green light to do more super hero movies.

Every indication is that they've already given the greenlight to Watchmen and that it's moved into pre-production.

 

[Eros]

Embarrassing is Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Hulk, the list goes on. So you'd rather DC prostitute its characters just to make a quick buck? You'd rather DC and WB create crap films? They've learned from their past mistakes, that's why there's no rush to bring WW, GL, F etc to the screen. Audiences do want something new, but also something good, not the crap Marvel keeps dishing up.

I agree man, although Marvel upcoming Iron-man has one of the best casts in superhero movie, so if it is a good movie, and succeeds, we can start seeing less crap marvel movies.

 

[Hush]

Every indication is that they've already given the greenlight to Watchmen and that it's moved into pre-production.

Thats a good point but that is also a different type of comic book movie and can be marketed differently from Batman and Superman etc. plus Snyder does have the success of 300 behind him so that does give him some leway. As far as mainstream heroes im stickin with after TDK but thats just me.

 

[jmc]

Film is a collaborative process. There's always back and forth between the director, the producers and the studio. Keeping a director from going off the rails, but still maintaining good relations so that he stays on the project and moves forward, is part of being a good producer and a good studio exec.

Yes film is a collaboration. If there's a good balance, everything should work fine, not always the case though

They're overused. That's why I said that not all films should get sequels. But some characters lend themselves to sequels and should get them.

What I hate is the term 'franchise' and yes some characters are more suitable for sequels than others[/quote]

Of course they're different media, but I still think it could work if done properly.

These are films based on comic book characters who just happen to be published by the same company. Making sure every DC film from here on in is linked and in the same 'universe' is ridiculous. No-one outside of the die hard comic fans cares about matching up.

I strongly disagree. Release dates are of key importance. A good film can die with the wrong release date and a bad one can rake it in with the right one. As for the demographics: the latest study by the MPAA showed that 36% of moviegoers are 12-24 and 29% are 25-39. The first demographic tends to be where you get most of your repeat business from. So if you're going to spend $ 200 million on a summer blockbuster you better make sure it has very wide appeal and that that key 12-24 demographic is going to turn out in large numbers.

Those figures don't look right. If 36% are 12-24 and 29% are 25-39, that means the remaining 35% are 40 and over? I can't believe there are more 40 year olds watching films than 25 year olds. Also, I'd say a large majority of the 12-24 demographic would actually fall under the 18-24 banner.

 

[GL's Light]

Yes film is a collaboration. If there's a good balance, everything should work fine, not always the case though

No, it's not always the case. I'm just saying they should strive for it; make it a priority.

These are films based on comic book characters who just happen to be published by the same company. Making sure every DC film from here on in is linked and in the same 'universe' is ridiculous. No-one outside of the die hard comic fans cares about matching up.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough on this. I'm not saying every DC film needs to match up from here to eternity. What I mean is that for a given period, say a production cycle of four or five years, you could plan out some connection between a certain number of DC films as an alternative to doing sequels. Not all DC films would have to fall into this, and I'm not suggesting anything like some kind of wholesale attempt to take the DCU from the comics and directly transfer it to the screen. I'm talking about a relatively small number of films that would connect, with reappearances by certain characters. If it was done properly I think DC fans and the general public alike would enjoy it.

Those figures don't look right. If 36% are 12-24 and 29% are 25-39, that means the remaining 35% are 40 and over? I can't believe there are more 40 year olds watching films than 25 year olds. Also, I'd say a large majority of the 12-24 demographic would actually fall under the 18-24 banner.

They are correct. These are the figures for admissions. The number of tickets sold to the various age groups. The remaining 35% is for 40 and over. The other two age groups are 40-59, which accounted for 26%, and 60+, which accounted for 9%. This was from the MPAA's study of moviegoing in 2006. You can see it here here. And as for the breakdown of the 12-24 demographic, teenagers, including teens below 18, account for a big slice of habitual moviegoers and repeat ticket buyers.

 

[Norm3]

What Warners/New Line/DC can learn from Marvel's films, as well as from past DC films:

1. Hire great directors.

I wish Marvel would do that most of the time!

 

[Matt.S99]

1. hire good directors
2. dont make up too much BS that isnt true to the comics
3. star power will not necesserialy make the movie good(DD)
4.get good writers

 

[Norm3]

2. dont make up too much BS that isnt true to the comics

Thats a great point.

 

[Matt.S99]

thanks

 

[tomorrel]

take a page from Marvel... line your solos up... then do a cross over... not exactly rocket science

now HERE is somebody who is finally talkin some damn sense, lets get this dude over to WB stat!!!

but honestly how can you make a jla OR titans movie BEFORE any of the necassary charecters are introduced?!

 

[Nokio]

Don't let Tim Story direct any of your upcoming films.

There are some directors who should be named way before Tim Story and has done an awful job with out the problems Tim Story faced(FOX). I'm not going to rag on Story, cuase I know the destruction of some of marvel characters has been due to FOX. Lets not forget that all of the bad comic films has come out of that studio since the comic too film resurgence.

I'm not saying Story is a great talent but he was directing under FOX's orders, so until i can get a full bead on his talents for films of this genre then i'm not going to go after him. Story did great on Barber Shop. F4 was completly driven by Rothman and other execs. Story was just there to direct the film, he had little creative control. Remember it was said that he wanted Rachel McAdams for Sue, but FOX put Alba in the role. I've read that from different sources on the web and though nothing was ever official I believe it's a good chance it was true about Story wanting McAdams. I know that FOX wanting Alba was true. I remember a good source posted on here before Alba was even confirmed or even mentioned in the running for Sue that FOX had offered her the part and it was hers if she wanted it. People were furious and hoped it was a rumor and it panned out a 100 percent true.

F4 was an awful film, while FF2 was a good improvement over the 1st, and Story was given more control, but not enough for me to get a full bead on his talents. Again I'm not saying he's a steller director, infact don't think he is, but I think he's quite capable and he's a young guy, so he'll grow.

 

[JamesBond-007]

X-men- good supporting actors can give great substance to a film.

Well, at least they're getting that right, so far, with Batman, maybe.

Hulk-comic panels don't look good on screen.t:

Agreed, t: .

 

[Rorschach2012]

another thing dc shoulf learn from marvel is to remember quality over quantity

 

[Changeling]

Quality over Quantity is right