What is DC Entertainment doing? What is their plan?

[psylockolussus]

You know what else probably ruined it? That they weren't planning on doing one.

Exactly

WB don't know to handle the other DC superheroes unless its Superman and Batman. And they give up too quickly.

 

[Karelia]

Well I guess their's still a slight possibility of a GL sequel of some sort.

 

[chiefchirpa]

I contend doing fresh with Flash or WW is better than jamming GL sequel reboot on to audiences mouth. The GL franchise is persona non grata this time and putting a film with the same amount of budget (or more likely higher because now they want real space opera) is suicide.

The Flash franchise has lower budget requirement and still retains its dignity. So does WW.

 

[Karelia]

Yeah, I'd like to see a Flash or Green Arrow movie next. Wonder Woman would be awesome too.

 

[The Morningstar]

What makes anyone think these top notch directors have any interest in any of these properties? I remember people used to say Spielberg should do the Captain America movie because of the somewhat similar Indiana Jones movies instead they ended up with Joe Johnston the 2nd rate Spielberg protege. Spielberg obviously had better things to do.

Because books like Sandman are considered some of the finest pieces of litature in modern times. Gaiman's Sandman isn't exactly obscure or only known by comic fans.

 

[The Morningstar]

Well I guess their's still a slight possibility of a GL sequel of some sort.

No there isn't. Unless it makes 200 million dollars somehow.

 

[REDophile]

Well now that MOS is set for 2013 we most likely won't see another non Supes/Bats DC hero on screen until 2014.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Sorry, but if they intend to not make any of the superheroes as live action, why keep holding on the rights? To prevent anyone from making the films, or what? So that we NEVER will see them on the big screen?
Warner Bros are not worthy of the rights, just as Thor was banned to earth and not longer worthy of Mjölnir. (I just had to make that superhero comparison)

We deserve to be treated better. And it's not just comic book fans that like sci fi, fantasy and adventure very much. Others do that too.
DC have heroes with different themes. It can be about space, mythology, ancient times, other dimensions etc. Everyone of them has a sense of wonder and escapism: Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Hawkman and so on.

Why should we be denied this?

Gotta agree. Why keep the rights if you don't plan on using them? Doesn't make any sense. If Warner isn't interested...fine...let someone else do it.

 

[KangConquers]

Sad thought: It's been nearly 30 years since WB has made a profitable movie for a non-Batman superhero film.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Sad thought: It's been nearly 30 years since WB has made a profitable movie for a non-Batman superhero film.

Superman Returns, Watchmen, and Constantine grossed more than their worldwide.

 

[psylockolussus]

Those movies kinda flopped in the US box-office.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Those movies kinda flopped in the US box-office.

OK. They still profited worldwide. So yeah... That thing I said.

 

[The Morningstar]

It's hard to judge WW profit though. You have to take into account distribution, percentages that the theaters keep etc.

 

[HighFivingMF]

It's hard to judge WW profit though. You have to take into account distribution, percentages that the theaters keep etc.

While that's true, I don't see why most people (not you) assume that means it didn't profit.

Constantine overall made 130 million dollars over it's budget. Superman Returns made 120 million dollars over it's budget. Watchmen made 55 million dollars over it's budget. All before home video. If they couldn't profit off of that much, would they even bother to release the movies overseas?

 

[DrCosmic]

^Because not releasing it overseas would be throwing away money. Unless you know who the distributor is, you can't gauge how much was made overseas. Even with what's domestic, they studio is only bringing home 60-70% of that. Theatres and such keep the rest.

I strongly believe that WB's current plan is to make Batman their new Harry Potter, and maybe keep Superman around if MOS does stellar.

 

[Donut]

^Because not releasing it overseas would be throwing away money. Unless you know who the distributor is, you can't gauge how much was made overseas. Even with what's domestic, they studio is only bringing home 60-70% of that. Theatres and such keep the rest.

I strongly believe that WB's current plan is to make Batman their new Harry Potter, and maybe keep Superman around if MOS does stellar.

If MOS does good & is well liked & if they win that rights case I guess eventually we will get a Batman vs Superman movie

 

[Lencho01]

Same old, same old...

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011...tern-2-will-be-edgier-flash-has-solid-script/

“We had a decent opening so we learned there is an audience,” said Warner Bros. film group President Jeff Robinov, pointing to the film’s box office debut of $53 million. “To go forward we need to make it a little edgier and darker with more emphasis on action…. And we have to find a way to balance the time the movie spends in space versus on Earth.”

Of course, the future of DC superhero movies is still somewhat up in the air. “The Dark Knight Rises,” the final chapter of director Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, comes out next summer, followed by Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot, “Man of Steel,” in June 2013. Later that year or in 2014, Warner could go ahead with a second Green Lantern or Flash movie. Robinov said the studio has “a solid script” for the Scarlet Speedster. The executive also remains interested in bringing DC heroes together for a “Justice League” movie.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/30/business/la-fi-0728-ct-super-heroes-20110730

"I don't believe there is superhero fatigue," said Jeff Robinov, film group president for Warner Bros., the studio behind "Green Lantern." "Every year there are half a dozen or more horror films and comedies. Superheroes have become a genre of their own and if you deliver, there's an audience."
Indeed, despite the weak box-office performance of "Lantern" in the U.S. and in a limited overseas launch, Warner Bros. has not scrapped the idea of a sequel. With an outline already in hand, studio executives are mulling over what changes would be needed to make a follow-up work. Robinov said he would like to see it be "a little darker and edgier with more emphasis on action."

Warner Bros. has been explicit about its plans to further develop characters from its DC Comics unit, including Green Lantern, Superman, Flash and Wonder Woman, in a similar manner. Its Superman reboot, "Man of Steel," is scheduled for June 2013.

But a miss can be a big one. If ticket sales for "Green Lantern" don't pick up as it expands in the foreign market, its loss could exceed $100 million, according to one person with knowledge of the studio's finances. Another person familiar with the matter said losses probably wouldn't be that high but would be substantial.

 

[cherokeesam]

Same old, same old...

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011...tern-2-will-be-edgier-flash-has-solid-script/





http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/30/business/la-fi-0728-ct-super-heroes-20110730

"Same old, same old" is exactly right.
*This* is where Warners fails: they believe there are only two approaches to superheroes --- campy or dark 'n' gritty. It never occurs to them that superheroes have different personalities, different themes, different genres.

They should have been shooting for a Star Wars vibe for GL. Epic adventure, fun without being campy, conveying a sense of awe and wonder at the magnitude of space and alien life instead of just breezing through it like "yeah, okay, whatever....next"

 

[Raiden]

GL is like Capt. America and Iron Man, in which you don't try to make it "darker and edgier" like Batman because it is not Batman, and whether it's Hal Jordan or John Stewart, they are not as dark and brooding as Bruce Wayne is. Seems to me that at the first sign of trouble, WB will revert to the Nolan-ism to try to fix the problem, and it looks like they are clueless on the reasons why movies like GL fail in the first place.

 

[biggles2000uk]

Lets make this clear.

WB do not "hold the rights" to DC characters like Sony holds the rights to Spiderman and Fox to X-Men.

WB own DC outright.

Marvel sold rights of characters to film companies to make money.

Whilst WB didn't buy the rights to DC characters from DC, the bought DC.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Saito is the head of WB.

"We need to buy Superman. Buy Batman."
"I bought the company."

 

[KangConquers]

Superman Returns, Watchmen, and Constantine grossed more than their worldwide.

Studios only get 55% of ticket sales.

Superman Returns total, counting marketing is documented as 260-something million dollars. The film needed to gross nearly 500 Million to get in the black, and it didn't even break 400.

Watchmen cost a little less, but still would've needed to break around 300 Million worldwide to see a profit. It didn't, and hell, I don't even know if it made a profit on home video.

I'm not familiar with Constantine's figures, but if they'd been as great as you say, I'm thinking there would've been a sequel by now.

 

[GhostPoet]

The future of big screen DC feature films is in CG animated films. Watching Megamind made me think "wow...I could totally see an amazing Batman or Green Lantern film with big budget animation!"

Heck...the trailers for Batman: Arkham City are more impressive than anything i've seen ont he big screen. Have THEM do a movie :P

 

[psylockolussus]

CG animated film for DC characters are like meh...

People prefer live-action movies for comic-book heroes.

 

[Red Mask]

Live action hasn't worked for Jonah Hex or Green Lantern. I had more fun watching Megamind and Kung Fu Panda. (Good times, that.)