What is DC Entertainment doing? What is their plan?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's a difference between optimism and bring delusional
 
Cain said:
You ever notice that the DCU stories that have the most appeal to casual comic fans are the ones where the characters are able to stand alone on their own and be the best they can be within them? like Sinestro Corps War which is just based around the GL universe or All-Star Superman and The Long Halloween (not a fan of that tale personally but just an example).

That should be a hint on how to approach cinematic adaptations. This trying to copy Marvel desperateness is why DC movies are in such bad shape in the first place. These characters are larger than life.

There are so many mythological allegories to Superman, Flash, Batman etc. that it's a disservice to not exploit them to their best of their abilities in their own individual franchises. This is better than instead of limiting the scope of their vision cause they have to fit in with a singular universe.

I mean I enjoyed Thor but I felt it didn't live up to it's potential either cause it had to be organic with Iron Man's movie universe. This is why Nolan's Batman works. You know they can't run to Superman or GL or anyone so it adds tension and gives the pictures weight because our hero really has to step up to the plate on all levels. You get to see why Batman REALLY is the best that we humans are capable of with a vision like that. It robs it of gravitas if you add capes to the picture.

Conversely you can't have Superman being threatened by Brainiac or having Mongul and Warworld being a huge threat and challenge for Supes if you know it's possible for the GLC to have his back. Robs the Superman story of it's individual scope right there.

I think they should focus on matching the best and most passionate talent to each individual property. Helping those properties become the best that they can become by crafting great stories for these characters.

It leaves the freedom of having space to do what they feel must be done to present the characters to their greatest ability to the masses instead of being limited by a shared universe and a forced and unfocused greedy vision of trying to force a JL movie since they want their own Avengers.
Click to expand...
OMG, You make so many points in one single post.
I agree that DC character have a grander scale. In fact, that is something I have said for a long time. Each of them, may it be Green Lantern or Wonder Woman or other, have a rich story to be told, that doesn't have to rely on something else to work. Just look at Superman. Can you imagine someone else interferring?
Unless they set the whole movie up as a combination with another hero, it shouldn't be done. And even then it will be quite hard. The film should not have one visual style, but TWO. The characters crave for that.
I don't know if it's right to compare with religious stories. But what if Noah, Moses and Jesus met? It would pretty much change everything, and take away the essence of each story.
And as Cain says, each DC hero shall stand out as the best we have hin the world. It's important! I say that they should all take a role of a saviour because of they power level. A little bit of a messias figure. Not only Superman is such.
 
Cain said:
It's really ridiculous. I knew WB was clueless about what to do with their DC brand but damn this is just sad to see. They're looking everywhere for direction and they have the vision they should follow already under their noses. The way they're handling Batman and Superman (stand alone universes) is they way ALL DC properties should be handled.

Focus on making the best Aquaman, Wonder Woman and Flash movie you could make AT A TIME. These characters are too rich to not get the best possible adaptations they could get. Their all very diverse from each other but the one common denominator is that all have brilliant themes and fantastic concepts. It's all a matter of giving it to the people that could properly translate that into a great cinematic presentation for each individual character.

Put talent that cares to bring these properties to life to their greatest ability. The right talent that will make people outside the fan community understand WHY these characters are so brilliant and have sustained for over 60 years each.

Just look at Batman. You have people that didn't think it was ever possible to see a good Batman movie again or who wrote the character completely off altogether after B&R hotly anticipating the next Batman now. Why? they matched it with the proper talent; people who care enough to adapt it with grace. Not only that they didn't force them into a "shared universe" corner which allowed them to make the best Batman movie they could make at a time TWICE already cause of the freedom that space provides.

I don't know why they can't see that their characters being more mythological and epic in scope than the competition's are better off with a treatment that explains why each of these "Gods" of the comics universe is worth a damn in the first place within their own individual universes. Really showcasing their importance to their world and why Coast City or Central City or Gotham City would not be better off without them.
Click to expand...
I can't describe it any better that you. I will only write everything down again if I even try.
Using the word "god" is right for DC heroes. It's more or less what they are. Even non-powered guys like Batman and Green Arrow still stand out. They are above normal humans in fighting skills, and their use of gadgets is unique.
To make a move adaption really work, you need to find a guy like Peter Jackson. His love for LOTR and the way he pushed his own vision through, THAT'S how to do it.
 
Cain said:
I'm not totally against a JL pic EVENTUALLY. However I think before then you should just mine the hell out of each property to it's fullest potential first on it's own. Not make each movie with the mentality of "oh boy it's another JL teaser trailer so let's get it out the way" but appraoch each movie as "let's make this the greatest Captain Marvel (or other DC hero) movie that it could possibly be" instead. That's the approach that CREATES franchises. Working hard on making each individual film the best it could be instead of thinking "lets make this one just so-so and then we'll have a great payoff in a sequel" which is just a suicidal perspective as a "so-so" movie is not always guaranteed to catch on. Just look at the GL situation.

Within a potential GL, Flash and Wonder Woman set of film series' alone you have the ability to make movies with 4 different lead characters and a GL corps with one property, or a movie about all the speedsters on epic adventures across time and space in another or an adventure of the Amazon women across an epic fantasy landscape with gods and other mythological creatures. All after you're done with already having established the leads of those properties on their own. All bringing something different & fresh to the superhero movie landscape & making those brands even stronger and even more marketable and profitable in the long run. All this of course before a JL movie is even necessary.

Simply because there is so much rich potential in each individual property to sustain and reinvent themselves in different ways if pulled off properly in the long run on their own without having to piggy back off the back of the more popular heroes. Matter of fact THAT approach will make the little known characters into more popular heroes themselves.

You have to allow each property the space to actually breathe and become it's own entity. In order to give each property some real importance and stature which in the long run also adds a lot of gravity & weight to a JL flick. It makes people anticipate and actually care about one far much more if they get heavily invested in each character first. Instead of it just seeming like "Batman & Superman with their superfriends" like many people will see it if it's just forced.

In other words no more "Aquaman is the guy who talks to fish" or "Wonder Woman is that lame chick that hangs around Batman & Superman" broad ignorant statements from your average person. Because movies were made that did a great enough job to really sell the world on what makes the characters and THEIR worlds SO much more than common misconceptions by average people who never read a comic about any of the characters say.
Click to expand...
They should go make the films. And go to the limit with each hero regarding how to approach the character the story, the visual style, the design. Each of the films must beat us to the ground. We should just sit there for over 2 hours with open mouths and be totally amazed. That's one of the things Warner Bros have to think about when making, for example Hawkman.
And they also have to think about to let each hero be as far from the others as possible, just as you say Cain.
When Warner Bros do a adaption of, let's say Elongated Man (if they ever do), it should be so different from the rest that it takes the superhero genre to another level. And that should go for all of them.
No DC hero should be treated as lame. They should all be presented to us as a truly powerful force. And Aquaman IS the god of the sea
 
Kyle Rayner said:
Black Widow and Fury version are from the Ultimates, if so then they should've appear in Captain America and the Avengers not Iron Man. Widow and Fury have to do with espionage and military Cap and the Avengers are that precisely. Iron Man is all about technology and military. Some character should've just stayed in the background. I like Black Widow, I like to see women kick ass, but IM2 was an adverstising vehicle for the Avengers like it or not.
Click to expand...

Black Widow and Nick Fury in the movies are agents of SHIELD, an organization that was established in the first Iron Man movie as keeping tabs on Stark. In fact, given Stark's increased notoriety in the second film it was perfectly justified to have a high-ranking operative and the big boss himself reigning him in.
 
guys Rayner admitted he's trolling. Just dont respond to him
 
If Mission Imossivle 4 is as good as his animated films, DC needs to grab Brad bird. Of course they won't since everything is in limbo. For God's sakes, the dude who did Bronson and Drive openly wants to do Wonder Woman and I doubt WB will listen.
 
Octoberist said:
If Mission Imossivle 4 is as good as his animated films, DC needs to grab Brad bird. Of course they won't since everything is in limbo. For God's sakes, the dude who did Bronson and Drive openly wants to do Wonder Woman and I doubt WB will listen.
Click to expand...

Refn is a great director and it's great that he's interested to do a WW movie. Since Logan's Run will be released by WB if the movie does well, critically and financially, WB might consider him, but for me they should already consider him. Drive has been well-received at the Cannes and Los Angeles film festival and this will be the movie people will keep an eye on when it's closer to its release. I have a good feeling about it. Refn will be an outside the box choice like for an example Nolan for a Batman movie and what could have been, Aronofsky for a Wolverine movie.

Right now they could start with getting a new writer to write a new script for The Flash, I'd be surprised if they keep the one Berlanti wrote after GL.
 
Last edited:
I think WB thought they found their muse with Berlanti. They were wrong.
 
The GL sequel talks...at this point...are in hopes of getting more people to the theater to get in on the beginning. They had already started work on a sequel because they were sure the first one would be a blockbuster, and I'll bet, if anything, that work has slowed.
 
i think DC feels lucky to have Nolan on board and any plans for a JLA movie, following the MARVEL trend, is come second to whatever Nolan decides to do with Batman and Superman.
 
Sorry that Forbes article is ******** and reads like a lame cheerleading fan editorial piece.

Also I believe nothing the studios say until I see some actual results.

Let's do the math. Sequels don't cost less. They cost more. Is WB really going to invest even more money in a sequel for a movie that underperformed?

Think about this. Superman Returns still made $200 million in the US and almost $400 million worldwide. No sequel. Singer wanted to make one and was still enthusiastic about doing one at SDCC 2006. WB stalled and no sequel ever materialized.
 
I can't even see GL even making Superman Returns numbers worldwide.

With GL I don't look at it and see all of that budget up on the screen. If they do another one I'm not sure where they could even cut costs. Reynolds isn't going to take a pay cut and if they base it more in space its only goign to cost more.

I just REALLY have my doubts.

I hate reboots sometime but at this point I'd rather they reboot GL in a few years...even if its a soft one like Hulk where they don't bother redoing the origin. The Reynolds film was mediocre at best.
 
I highly doubt they'll reboot GL. My guess is, we either see a version of GL (Hal or John) in a Justice League movie or never again.
 
Metallo said:
I can't even see GL even making Superman Returns numbers worldwide.

With GL I don't look at it and see all of that budget up on the screen. If they do another one I'm not sure where they could even cut costs. Reynolds isn't going to take a pay cut and if they base it more in space its only goign to cost more.

I just REALLY have my doubts.

I hate reboots sometime but at this point I'd rather they reboot GL in a few years...even if its a soft one like Hulk where they don't bother redoing the origin. The Reynolds film was mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

GL won't come close to SR's WW numbers.

B O Guru has lowered it's projected domestic take for the film to 120 - 125 million. GL is doing just so so in foreign markets. Being generous I'd guess somewhere around 150 million overseas.

Total take will pobably be less tha 300 million WW. SR did 400 million WW.

My guess is JL moves front and center now at WB along with Batman. I expect Batman to be rebooted after Nolan leaves with the next film. WB has a one-off with MOS in 2012 but won't be able to make Superman films after 2012.

So it comes down to a JL film starring Batman and using that venue to introduce 2 or 3 other character who, if the film is a success, will presumably get solo films later on.
 
Last edited:
Transformers 3 is coming out this week. How does WB hope for GL to compete against that?
 
Red Mask said:
Transformers 3 is coming out this week. How does WB hope for GL to compete against that?
Click to expand...

Thats only going to hurt GL's chances to make money. When a lot of people have a choice of TF3 and GL its easy to figure out which one is going to get more people excited. Personally I think the TF films aren't very good but theres already a huge build in audience there who will be curious to see how the third film ends this chapter.

I look at Green Lantern and aside from the digital effects I see a film thats made in the style of comic book movies 15 years ago instead of today. Its like WB still has the same antiquated view of all its comic book characters on film aside from Batman and maybe Superman.


Rowsdower! said:
I highly doubt they'll reboot GL. My guess is, we either see a version of GL (Hal or John) in a Justice League movie or never again.
Click to expand...

Its entirely possible it'll get rebooted at some point. It may take ten years but WB probably still sees enough potential in the character to try. Other films have been in similar situations and thats happened and those had characters even less well known than Green Lantern.

Judge Dredd was a massive failure that didn't even make half its budget back at the box office...but here we are over 15 years later and someones giving it another try.

Like I said IF they reboot I wouldn't expect it soon but to say NEVER is a bit much.
 
Last edited:
I really hope that Green Lantern doesn't mean that any future films about lesser-known DC characters will be extremely formulaic and generic with little effort invested. Ideally, I believe each franchise should occupy different niches or subgenres and/or have different moods, tones, themes, et cetera.
 
Octoberist said:
There's a difference between optimism and bring delusional
Click to expand...

I think it should be mentioned that companies are using a method of creating a false number of supporters to make it seem like there is appeal for their work or causes. It's already being applied to the Net. They create a number of false online identities that will be used in polls and so forth.

I wouldn't be surprised if DCE and WB would try to use this method to bolster support for their movies.
 
Mark Miller

“…the non-Batman DC characters just don’t seem to work in modern cinema and TV. I’ve loved these characters as far back as I remember, but whether it’s Wonder Woman or Superman or the Aquaman pilot or Catwoman or Jonah Hex or Birds of Prey or whatever… they just don’t seem to catch on in the modern world. I think it’s hard to compete with the new characters (or even the more recent Marvel characters, created a full generation later). Batman works because he’s more human for the big screen and more empathetic, but I fear The Flash and others would just meet the same fate as Green Lantern. They’re just too outrageous to provide tension in a live action format and I’d love to see them done, Pixar style, as brilliant, theatrical animated movies. Aquaman talking underwater would have us wincing in live action. In a cartoon we wouldn’t even blink. Some stuff just doesn’t suit the format.”
Click to expand...
http://www.primaryignition.com/2011/06/28/mark-millar-comments-on-superhero-movies-dc-characters/

I don't agree that these characters can't work in live action. One or two misfires does not mean it's impossible. WB needs to have the right people behind the projects. People with a passion for the character. I'm not a big fan of Refn, but his passion for WW would probably make for a pretty good flick.
 
DC Entertainment has no plan. Well, okay, they do have a plan and that is to reboot everything (comics, films, TV shows, cartoons, etc.) as frequently as they can.
 
biolumen said:
Mark Miller


http://www.primaryignition.com/2011/06/28/mark-millar-comments-on-superhero-movies-dc-characters/

I don't agree that these characters can't work in live action. One or two misfires does not mean it's impossible. WB needs to have the right people behind the projects. People with a passion for the character. I'm not a big fan of Refn, but his passion for WW would probably make for a pretty good flick.
Click to expand...


I completely disagree with Mark Miller. It's not the content...it's the horrible directors that get picked for these films.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
What is wrong with WB?
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
6K
Steelsheen
Steelsheen
gugumugats
  • Poll Poll
What do you think will be the next DC/WB movie franchise?
8 9 10
Replies
227
Views
11K
The Strategos
The Strategos
Crazymaverick
Warner Bros looking at a Justice League movie?
4 5 6
Replies
148
Views
29K
Rockstar
Rockstar
Spider-Bat
Frustration with WB.
17 18 19
Replies
471
Views
28K
Webhead2006
Webhead2006
Binker
The general public's preferences
Replies
15
Views
1K
Forty-Two
F

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 2,104 (members: 16, guests: 2,088)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,289
Messages
22,080,731
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"