What is DC Entertainment doing? What is their plan?

[jmc]

2012 is the year where there's a risk of oversaturation as far as comic book films; I don't see it for 2013. However, Marvel Studios has their own problem as far as oversaturation of their own characters in a short amount of time. By 2013, Iron Man will have been featured as a main character in films four times in five years, and Thor three times in a little over two years.

That's quite insane if you think about it, IM will have appeared in more films in his first 5 years than James Bond did. I really don't get the 2013 release date for Thor, 3 times in 3 years? Overkill.

 

[TheVileOne]

Release dates always change. Thor's release date has already changed numerous times. It was originally supposed to come out in 2010.

 

[jmc]

Another question is how do the actors feel about it?

 

[Airwings]

jmc: No, Iron Man won't make more appearances than James Bond if he does the fourth film in a time period of five years.

Dr No - 1962
From Russia With Love - 1963
Goldfinger - 1964
Thunderball - 1965
You Only Live Twice - 1967

That makes five films in five years, not four films.

 

[jmc]

Regardless it's overkill.

 

[psylockolussus]

Release dates always change. Thor's release date has already changed numerous times. It was originally supposed to come out in 2010.

Yeah I'm pretty sure the release dates Thor 2 and Iron Man 2 are set in stone. t:

 

[merced]

To be fair, only two of those so far will be actual Marvel Studios films, which is fine since that is that studio's specialty. Fox may or may not have a Marvel-based movie out at that time, but based on Hugh Jackman's recent comments the Wolverine film is likely to be released in late 2012. I don't know what other Marvel-based movie you are referring to, but it has to be something from another studio that I'm not remembering at the moment. Deadpool maybe? I wouldn't count on that one yet.

Edit: I wouldn't count on a Fantastic Four or Daredevil reboot either being released at that time.

Yeah, they seem to really want Wolverine out in December 2012 feeling that's a better slot I guess than summer 2013. Whether they can make that date remains to be seen.

Frankly with the Hobbit coming out in December 2012 I think the Wolverine folks are wrong in pushing for a 12/12 release instead of 2013.

 

[Micromind]

WB can make a Justice League movie for a December 2013 release, It can have Batman, Superman, Green Lantern (Hal Jordan) and Wonder Woman and martian Manhunter.

No need for Flash and Aquaman, Hawkgirl in the first movie, they can be introduced later (Flash can even get his solo movie later.)

Batman's and Superman's Origins need not be explained as most people know about them already, GL (Hal Jordan) has already had his origin movie so he can be a part of the team they only need to explain about WW and MM and that can be done, IMO.

If they make a JLA movie WB will most likely cast someone different as Bats (JLA continuity will be separate from solo Batman movie continuity.)

In case of Superman they can get Henry Cavill as Superman in JLA, or get someone new to keep the Superman movie universe separate from the JLA movie verse (I would not mind if they cast Brandon Routh as JLA Superman.)

 

[merced]

WB can make a Justice League movie for a December 2013 release, It can have Batman, Superman, Green Lantern (Hal Jordan) and Wonder Woman and martian Manhunter.

No need for Flash and Aquaman, Hawkgirl in the first movie, they can be introduced later (Flash can even get his solo movie later.)

Batman's and Superman's Origins need not be explained as most people know about them already, GL (Hal Jordan) has already had his origin movie so he can be a part of the team they only need to explain about WW and MM and that can be done, IMO.

If they make a JLA movie WB will most likely cast someone different as Bats (JLA continuity will be separate from solo Batman movie continuity.)

In case of Superman they can get Henry Cavill as Superman in JLA, or get someone new to keep the Superman movie universe separate from the JLA movie verse (I would not mind if they cast Brandon Routh as JLA Superman.)

To make 12/13 WB would have to be filming this thing in 2012. There is no evidence that will happen.

Even if they were to film in 2012, they can't use Superman as they won't know in 2012 exactly what rights they own or not. They would not take the risk of making a movie in which they don't have all the copyrights either owned or licensed.

You really don't need Superman anyway. Batman is DC's flagship character. Also they'd want to showcase as much as possible the new characters in the film. Having both Batman and Superman would take away from their ability to maximize screen time for the new heroes.

In any case, after GL I think WB will rethink their whole game plan re: superhero movies. They don't need to rush somehing for 2013. That would be a mistake IMO.

Shoot for JL in 2014.

 

[Saulutations!]

DC should make Y: The Last Man their next franchise, that would be great.

 

[Airwings]

Bruce_begins: No Flash for Justice League? Tell me how you think there. I am kinda lost....

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

The whole point and appeal of the Justice League is that all the top hitter come together and try to stop the big threat that even Superman can't handle alone.q

 

[Micromind]

Bruce_begins: No Flash for Justice League? Tell me how you think there. I am kinda lost....

I think that Flash should first get a solo movie featuring his origins, WW can be introduced in a Justice League movie along with small flash back explaining her origins (as WB are not going to spend millions to make a solo WW movie anytime soon.) , same for Martian manhunter, he can be introduced in JL movie itself.

It would look absurd to feature Flash in a JLA without introducing him in his own movie first, surely he deserves better treatment than what will be given to MM and WW.

The possibility of JLA happening is there but I cannot see the Team without Key players that is Superman, Batman, WW and Green lantern., the rest can be added, but I think they will not make a team of more than 5 members. (IMO.)

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

JLA has to have 7 original members. It will have 7 members.

 

[Airwings]

Bruce_begins: But MAKE the solo films first then, all of them. That's what I have said all the time.
Actually, Warner should be forbidden by the government to release any live action Justice League before the solo films (except MM)

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I'll add my voice to "Flash has to be in a JLA movie".

 

[MadVillainy]

YEah I'll add my voice to that too.

Not having FLash is ludicrous

 

[Captain Marvel]

Yeah I'm pretty sure the release dates Thor 2 and Iron Man 2 are set in stone. t:

The release date for Iron Man 2 is certainly set in stone given that, you know, it already happened.

 

[merced]

The release date for Iron Man 2 is certainly set in stone given that, you know, it already happened.

Is the release for MOS set in stone?

If Marvel moves Wolverine 2 to December 2012 and coupled with Hobbit, MOS is liable to have a large chunk of it's audience lost to these other two films.

The Wolverine 2 folks don't seem to think it will be a problem going against MOS.

Given the disappointment of GL, I wonder if WB might push the release date up a month to November? Thye've got to be getting a little nervous is my guess.

 

[WildcatNC]

I think WB/DC is still fumbling a plan together to try and keep up with Marvel and not seem like they are losing the market.

Marvel has beat them to the team-up punch and now they can't just do it right after. It would seem like a copy to general audiences. DC has yet to show a proven money maker past Batman. I'm not even sure that Superman (iconic as he is) is a proven franchise. Its been 30 years since the Reeve films after all, and nothing successful since.

WB/DC has some great properties but they have bungled the transition to the screen so far and relied solely on Batman to carry them.

They got punched in the nose and are bumbling around playing catch up.

 

[Metallo]

I think WB/DC is still fumbling a plan together to try and keep up with Marvel and not seem like they are losing the market.

Marvel has beat them to the team-up punch and now they can't just do it right after. It would seem like a copy to general audiences. DC has yet to show a proven money maker past Batman. I'm not even sure that Superman (iconic as he is) is a proven franchise. Its been 30 years since the Reeve films after all, and nothing successful since.

WB/DC has some great properties but they have bungled the transition to the screen so far and relied solely on Batman to carry them.

They got punched in the nose and are bumbling around playing catch up.

You mean 30 years since the last great one

 

[Godzilla2014]

I think WB/DC is still fumbling a plan together to try and keep up with Marvel and not seem like they are losing the market.

Marvel has beat them to the team-up punch and now they can't just do it right after. It would seem like a copy to general audiences. DC has yet to show a proven money maker past Batman. I'm not even sure that Superman (iconic as he is) is a proven franchise. Its been 30 years since the Reeve films after all, and nothing successful since.

WB/DC has some great properties but they have bungled the transition to the screen so far and relied solely on Batman to carry them.

They got punched in the nose and are bumbling around playing catch up.

Exactly. They are coming in late to the game after both Batman & Superman were stuck in development hell for the first half of the 00s.

One thing that I think fans should accept is that if you expect there to be as great a multitude of DC character adaptations as there are of Marvel characters, that is not likely to happen. Most of these franchises require a lot of special effects, and a high budget, so it would be a massive burden on any studio to put out around 5 superhero films a year. Marvel only has gotten a multitude of them because some of their franchises are spread around. While there are a whole bunch of them in a single year, they are from different studios, of whom each may only be making one or two in that year.

DC, on the other hand, is completely owned by Warner Bros., so they don't option off the intellectual properties. This means that they would be bearing the production cost of each DC property. With a bunch of potential franchises like Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, and Flash in DC's library, each one of those aforementioned characters have great powers that would require very high special effects budgets to accomplish well. While there are franchises that don't entail a lot of special effects, like Batman or Green Arrow, with the exception of Batman, not a lot of people are clamoring for those characters to be adapted into feature films. And with the whole genre's future in question, it's easy to see why they have such trouble getting any non-Batman franchises off the ground, and especially things like a Justice League film.

 

[Metallo]

I agree. As far as Marvel studios goes they had much more to lose when Iron Man and TIH first went into production.

With WB its pretty obvious they can afford to be less concerned about the details and can be more concerned about making something for mass consumption. Nothing wrong with that but many of their comic book films seem more by the numbers.

Like Green Lantern.

It was like they were trying to check off a checklist of things the movie had to have so they could market and merchandise the hell out of it and if felt like they got the tone of the character wrong.

These movies are always going to be corporate but it would be nice if WB took them a little more seriously artistically speaking.

The only real exception so far is Batman.

The frustrating thing is that WB are in a position to bring us the best comic book films. They have tremendous resourses and a more direct line to the source material than many other sudios becaus they fall under the same parent company.

Sometimes is just hard to fathom why they can't get it right. Its like they just don't get it.

 

[merced]

I think WB/DC is still fumbling a plan together to try and keep up with Marvel and not seem like they are losing the market.

Marvel has beat them to the team-up punch and now they can't just do it right after. It would seem like a copy to general audiences. DC has yet to show a proven money maker past Batman. I'm not even sure that Superman (iconic as he is) is a proven franchise. Its been 30 years since the Reeve films after all, and nothing successful since.

WB/DC has some great properties but they have bungled the transition to the screen so far and relied solely on Batman to carry them.

They got punched in the nose and are bumbling around playing catch up.

Yet that is exactly what is happening. WB is losing market share to Marvel in the superhero film franchise business.

If you use 450 - 500 million as the cutoff for a top tier superhero franchise WB has only 1 - Batman in that league.

Marvel has 4 with Spidey and Ironman and Thor and X-Men.

Actually Thor and X-Men are knocking at the door - just shy of 450 million in WW box.

Watch Captain America. It's going to be bigger than Thor. It has a chance to reach 500 million WW and join the other 3 big boys of the comic book film world.

So of the top 6 or so franchises WB has one - and isn't set in the immediate future to add any of it's franchise characters to that class.

You are right IMO Superman is not a proven franchise. MOS is iffy despite the good cast. I get the feeling many in the industry are skeptical it will do well.

WB has farmed out it's stuff to other studios in the pat - Canon films had Superman for a while. I think they should farm out some of their lesser characters for a 10 year period and see what happens. They'll get a license fee and a small cut of any profits. More important if one of these films is a hit it will help lift the DC brand.

I don't see that the genre is in question as someone mentioned. It just keeps chugging along.

Box Officr Mojo had an article on 2012 superhero flicks and said with next year's Spiderman, Batman and Avengers it could be the biggest year yet for the genre.

 

[KangConquers]

I still say Superman can be huge. I frankly don't see the logic that Flash has a chance of being huge, but Superman can't.

Iron Man has proven to be a fluke. B-listers don't break 500 Million worldwide. Thor couldn't do it, and Green Lantern couldn't do it. Flash won't be able to do it.

Wonder Woman is like Captain America in that she's iconic, and A-list but has some baggage/ no one really knows much about her except her name and what she looks like. The brutal truth about Wonderwoman though is that action movies with a female protagonist don't make 500 Million dollars. Even though I'm a marvel fan, I think there's no way in hell Cap breaks 500 M either.

So either DC A) makes a Justice League Film B) makes lower budget movies for Flash, WW, Aquaman etc (125 Million budget max; preferably lower) C) they stick with Superman and Batman or D) All of the above.

The answer after a movie that bombed as hard as Green Lantern isn't to take another b-lister like Flash and stick him in a 200 Million dollar movie with a 100-150 million dollar advertising budget. The answer is to play it safe, at least for a few years.