What is wrong with WB?

[matrix_ghost]

Let s face it! WB did some stupid mistakes! Why constantine & cat woman and Vendetta before the Flash? or before green arrow? 2 super heroes that are well known. I understand that before spider rman red flashy costume was a no go, but with the succes of spider man the flash would have been a perfect fit!. Now we will probably wait until 2010 before we see a flash movie because WB is betting all he s money on batman and superman sequels.

C'mon man . You know that isn't the way it works.
Movie properties are constantly in the works and in some cases people will go public with the fact that they are working on a movie and sometimes not.
Not only that but for a studio it comes down to this :
Anything that is ready can be made into a movie .

There are three factors that can lead to a movie being fastracked
1 finished script
2 cast and/or director
3 Producer willing to cough up the $$$

Constantine was a movie long in the making. I think in the mid to late 90's , Nichaloas Cage was set to make a Constantine movie with Tarsem Singh ( director of the Cell). In the end it didn't work out but what i've read so far is that the script was constantly send to actors , producers and studios and each of them passed on it. Finally it landed on Keanu's lap just as he was finishing up with Matrix Revolutions. He asked Larry and Andy Wachowski about the comic character and they just said "go for it".
So that's why a movie like Constantine is made.
You have an working script , you have a director and you have a moviestar willing to play the role and you have a producer with the money.

And it is the same reason why a movie like V for Vendetta is made. Larry and Andy had written the script and they were willing to make the movie. Joel Silver provides the $$$.

Dunno what the deal was with Crapwoman but i guess that given the success of X-men & Charlie's Hookers , some exec. thought that Halle Berry acting all hot with a whip in a idiotic movie would somehow work.


The thing with WB is that they know , like any other studio, that you need to start with the big franchises first. Once you nail that then you can move onto the smaller comic book projects.
They would gladly make a Flash movie if they had a working script if someone else has already written a working script , a producer comes along to finance the movie and you have a cast.
They've got the Batman franchise working great ( critical praise , fanboy praise and commercial praise) , now they need to work on Superman.
If Supes can truly make the same amount of cash SPiderman can make then i could see WB actively working to make other comic-book properties into movies. Until then those properties could be make into movies if they got a working script , producer and cast/director

 

[Lestat74]

Superfriends is not on the same level as JLU, and that cartoon wasn't that big a hit. Why else are we getting Superman: Doomsday and Judas Contract straight to animated video?

Of course Superfriends wasn't on the same level ( quality wise ) as JLU, but it ran forever...It was a pop culture institution for most of the 70's and 80's. If pure nostalgia can make hit films out of Scooby Doo and the Flintstones ( believe me, I knew tons of smart adults who turned out for those flicks, despite knowing they were gonna be pure crap, simply because it pushed their nostalgia buttons ) and probably Transformers, the same logic would apply to a JLA movie. And while JLU was not as widely seen or as big a hit, most kids know what it is and would totally see a live action version of some sort. A Justice League movie would hit all the right demographics: The now adult kids of the 70's and 80's, and their kids who watched or at least familiar with the Cartoon Network show.

 

[Lestat74]

You say it s fear? But they pay big time for doing constantine. I mean if you r really afraid of not losing money well you better choose your movie wisely before Paying Mr Keanu Reeves . Don t get me wrong I liked constantine but it was not my first choice either.

But Constantine was almost certainly not perceived as a Super Hero movie by the public at large, the majority of whom had no idea it was based on a comic book. It was marketed as a Supernatural Thriller/Action Movie. V for Vendetta also was not really marketed as a "comic book" movie to the masses. But characters like Wonder Woman, Flash and Green Lantern? Very clearly super heroes in the same vein as Superman, Batman, Spidey and the X-Men to the general audience. These characters would be in family friendly summer fare, with Happy Meal tie-ins and t-shirts at Wal Mart. A lot more would ride on them than movies like Constantine and V for Vendetta and presumably Watchmen as well. They would also likely be far pricier than any of those movies. Not sure what Constantine's budget was, but I know V for Vendetta's was something like $55 million....no way Wonder Woman, Flash or GL are gonna come in for that cheap.

 

[matrix_ghost]

But Constantine was almost certainly not perceived as a Super Hero movie by the public at large, the majority of whom had no idea it was based on a comic book. It was marketed as a Supernatural Thriller/Action Movie. V for Vendetta also was not really marketed as a "comic book" movie to the masses. But characters like Wonder Woman, Flash and Green Lantern? Very clearly super heroes in the same vein as Superman, Batman, Spidey and the X-Men to the general audience. These characters would be in family friendly summer fare, with Happy Meal tie-ins and t-shirts at Wal Mart. A lot more would ride on them than movies like Constantine and V for Vendetta and presumably Watchmen as well. They would also likely be far pricier than any of those movies. Not sure what Constantine's budget was, but I know V for Vendetta's was something like $55 million....no way Wonder Woman, Flash or GL are gonna come in for that cheap.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/VFVND.php
VfV cost 50 mil.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2005/CNSTN.php
Constantine cost 75 million

 

[GL1]

You guys are missing the obvious.

1) WB doesn't CARE. There is no DC-fanboyism in the halls of WB's offices that makes them feel like they are in ANYWAY competing with Marvel. Their competitors are Fox, Sony, Paramount and Universal, regardless of whether the movies involved are origional, based on comic books or based on something else... it's irrelevant.

2) WB already has several tentpole franchises, I can't remember all of them, but a little something called Harry Potter runs the kids vote for them, among several others I'm sure you're familiar with? Why make a Wonder Woman or Green Lantern when you can make a Batman sequel that will do just as well? Especially if Baleman is proven AND has a following. What would you need both a GL and a Batman film for?

3) Lack of Faith in the comics.
A WB exec can pull DC comics sales, since they own DC. If sales on a property are sagging, or have ever sagged, they have to wonder: does this thing REALLY have a following? Can it really fill seats no matter what, or are even the FANS only going to go see it if it's of high quality? Will these hokey storylines and concepts translate to the big screen? They never have before, why should they now?

 

[Nokio]

Someone mentioned that DC heroes are too overpowered? Which ones? DC isn't that much different then marvel. some of marvel characters are too overpowered. Jean Grey/Phoenix, Franklin Richards, Sentry(although i haven't seen it). I could go on. Now cosmic beings like Galactus or The Celestials I understand, but not a human.

 

[Steelsheen]

Superfriends is not on the same level as JLU, and that cartoon wasn't that big a hit. Why else are we getting Superman: Doomsday and Judas Contract straight to animated video?

uh, dude are you too young to remember even watching Superfriends on TV? because believe you me, Superfriends was a big hit. every kid and their parents watched that at one point or another. hell thats the reason why we even have a JLU and Teen Titans and all the other animated series and movies today.

Someone mentioned that DC heroes are too overpowered? Which ones?

some Marvel fans and writers tend to whine about that. they just dont get DC superheroes.

 

[BROOD5050]

I agree the show was one of the longest running Saturday morning staple ever from 1973 to 1986. The show was a tremendous hit and it sparked my fascination with the modern American Comic book mythology. It also introduced me for the first time to my all time favorite super hero Green Lantern.

 

[Red Mask]

uh, dude are you too young to remember even watching Superfriends on TV? because believe you me, Superfriends was a big hit. every kid and their parents watched that at one point or another. hell thats the reason why we even have a JLU and Teen Titans and all the other animated series and movies today.

You're missing the point. The Superfriends cartoon was for all ages, but JLU was more mature, good for teenagers and young adults. It didn't attract as big an audience as Superfriends. Static Shock & Teen Titans attracted the younger crowd that JLU missed. Look at the success of Smallville. It's appealing to teens and above because Clark isn't wearing the costume yet. The show's creators knew that would make it work. It's a teen soap with super powers. But if you make a big budget, live-action film with people in tights, that's a gamble. There are conflicting views on how serious it should be and still be marketable.

That's why Superman/Doomsday and Judas Contract are gong straight to video. Those are for the more hardcore fans, not the general audience. This is why WB has produced Harry Potter to film. The success is a sure thing on the screen. Tentpole? More like a BIG TOP attraction! And WB knows this!

 

[ShadowBoxing]

3) Lack of Faith in the comics.
A WB exec can pull DC comics sales, since they own DC. If sales on a property are sagging, or have ever sagged, they have to wonder: does this thing REALLY have a following? Can it really fill seats no matter what, or are even the FANS only going to go see it if it's of high quality? Will these hokey storylines and concepts translate to the big screen? They never have before, why should they now?

While I already brought up the first two points, this is pretty much flat out wrong. DC's sales isn't exactly grand perhaps, but it ain't much worse than Marvel's comic sales figures. Yes comic sales have been sagging, especially compared to where they were. But part of the reason comic movies are doing so well at the moment, and part of the reasons other studios have invested so much in these "revised properties" like Spider-Man, Batman, Transformers, etc. is because the generation who made them popular is now of the summer blockbuster demographic crowd. That 18-24 year old sweet spot and also the adult crowd (24-48) are the ones who bought comics in droves.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Blade 1 and 2 were damn good films and it was a very smart thing for them to make them. Do you really consider Ghost Rider minor? Not in my book. That crap movie might have made him seen minor.

The difference is that DC is owned by Warner Bros and Marvel is it's own company. Warner Bros is one studio. Marvel can get Sony, Fox, Lions Gate, Universal, and themselves to make the movies. I'd like to see the big seven get films before lets say, the freaking Metal Men! And honestly it's rather annoying to see small-fry heroes get movies before Captain freaking America.

And yes Ghost Rider is minor. DC has Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash, and Aquaman. Most people know about them.

Marvel has Spider-Man, the X-Men, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Hulk, and Captain America.

 

[Lestat74]

The difference is that DC is owned by Warner Bros and Marvel is it's own company. Warner Bros is one studio. Marvel can get Sony, Fox, Lions Gate, Universal, and themselves to make the movies. I'd like to see the big seven get films before lets say, the freaking Metal Men! And honestly it's rather annoying to see small-fry heroes get movies before Captain freaking America.

And yes Ghost Rider is minor. DC has Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash, and Aquaman. Most people know about them.

Marvel has Spider-Man, the X-Men, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Hulk, and Captain America.

As far as Marvel goes, I would also add Thor to that list of Iconic properties. And then that's pretty much it...everything else is a spin-off property ( Wolverine, Magneto ) or C-List, like Luke Cage or Power Pack. Not to say a movie based on a C-lister can't make money ( look at Blade ) only that the expectations and ( therfeore the budget )will be lower. But those characters you mentiond are the only Marvel characters ( along with Daredevil and the previously mentioned Thor ) that have been continuously published for over 40 years. 45 in the cases of Spidey and the F.F.

And as long as there is a DC Comics, they will publish Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash and G.L. Those characters are DC Comics. Aquaman will always be around in some form, but he won't always have a book of his own since it's always a low, low seller. Like J'onn, I think he works best in JLA and less on his own. I think if and when they make a JLA movie, Aquaman may be the first to be written out or reduced to a cameo. Not because I don't like him, but because he become the hardest character to find something for him to do.

 

[Red Mask]

Hear the news? Speilberg and Peter Jackson teamed up to create a series of Tintin movies. Tintin! He's not a superhero but he's still one of the most recognizable comic book characters in history. I think he was in the top 5 a few years ago. What were these two men thinking? They who've done fantasy, horror, and sci-fi films. They must have been thinking really well.

 

[dnno1]

Let s face it! WB did some stupid mistakes! Why constantine & cat woman and Vendetta before the Flash? or before green arrow? 2 super heroes that are well known. I understand that before spider rman red flashy costume was a no go, but with the success of spider man the flash would have been a perfect fit!. Now we will probably wait until 2010 before we see a flash movie because WB is betting all his money on batman and superman sequels.

1. "Constantine" and "V for Vendetta" were acclaimed graphic novels by none other than Alan Moore. Many of his graphic novels have been adapted for film and have faired well at the BO ("From Hell", LXG, soon to be "Watchmen", et. al.). A conservative outfit like the WB probably thought they couldn't go wrong with these films if they stayed withing budget.

2. I think that they were testing the waters with Catwoman. My observation on the film was that they thought they could lick the curse that female super heroine films have had in the past by going with a bigger budget and a big name in Academy award winner Halle Berry. Unfortunately, mistakes were made and the film wasn't well received among a consensus of the movie going public. I am sure they did learn something from that that can be applied to future films and I think it would have been better to risk a failure on a minor character like Catwoman than a flagship character like Wonder Woman.

 

[maxmccumber]

1. "Constantine" and "V for Vendetta" were acclaimed graphic novels by none other than Alan Moore. Many of his graphic novels have been adapted for film and have faired well at the BO ("From Hell", LXG, soon to be "Watchmen", et. al.). A conservative outfit like the WB probably thought they couldn't go wrong with these films if they stayed withing budget.

This is true, from the WB's perspective, lesser known graphic novels are probably a lot cheaper to make than Wonder Woman or the Flash. Sure, WW has great potential as a movie, but for the studio's money Harry Potter is the sure-fire blockbuster so they have to go with that. And as other people have pointed out, DC has no other choice because they are under the umbrella of WB. But it still must be sad to see a dissapointing BO performance from Superman Returns while Spider-Man 3 is making an insane amount. Hopefully WB is taking that into consideration and will try and build on the superhero film genre once and for all.

 

[ANTOINE X]

C'mon man . You know that isn't the way it works.
Movie properties are constantly in the works and in some cases people will go public with the fact that they are working on a movie and sometimes not.
Not only that but for a studio it comes down to this :
Anything that is ready can be made into a movie .

There are three factors that can lead to a movie being fastracked
1 finished script
2 cast and/or director
3 Producer willing to cough up the $$$

Constantine was a movie long in the making. I think in the mid to late 90's , Nichaloas Cage was set to make a Constantine movie with Tarsem Singh ( director of the Cell). In the end it didn't work out but what i've read so far is that the script was constantly send to actors , producers and studios and each of them passed on it. Finally it landed on Keanu's lap just as he was finishing up with Matrix Revolutions. He asked Larry and Andy Wachowski about the comic character and they just said "go for it".
So that's why a movie like Constantine is made.
You have an working script , you have a director and you have a moviestar willing to play the role and you have a producer with the money.

And it is the same reason why a movie like V for Vendetta is made. Larry and Andy had written the script and they were willing to make the movie. Joel Silver provides the $$$.

Dunno what the deal was with Crapwoman but i guess that given the success of X-men & Charlie's Hookers , some exec. thought that Halle Berry acting all hot with a whip in a idiotic movie would somehow work.


The thing with WB is that they know , like any other studio, that you need to start with the big franchises first. Once you nail that then you can move onto the smaller comic book projects.
They would gladly make a Flash movie if they had a working script if someone else has already written a working script , a producer comes along to finance the movie and you have a cast.
They've got the Batman franchise working great ( critical praise , fanboy praise and commercial praise) , now they need to work on Superman.
If Supes can truly make the same amount of cash SPiderman can make then i could see WB actively working to make other comic-book properties into movies. Until then those properties could be make into movies if they got a working script , producer and cast/director

I think you for inform me about the movie business but again that confirm why WB is incompetent! Even if WB is huge some one as to tell those producer which come first!And not the other way around. The same way Avi arad is managing Marvel. Like a King! I Think there s a lack of leadership in WB, don t get me wrong I like superman and batman but for 2 decades thats all we have, Catwoman could have wait even if some one want the project. you have to put in mind Some business people dont give a rat about the comics they just want to see Miss Halle berry in a tithe suite what ever the the superhero what ever the story!

 

[ANTOINE X]

C'mon man . You know that isn't the way it works.
Movie properties are constantly in the works and in some cases people will go public with the fact that they are working on a movie and sometimes not.
Not only that but for a studio it comes down to this :
Anything that is ready can be made into a movie .

There are three factors that can lead to a movie being fastracked
1 finished script
2 cast and/or director
3 Producer willing to cough up the $$$

Constantine was a movie long in the making. I think in the mid to late 90's , Nichaloas Cage was set to make a Constantine movie with Tarsem Singh ( director of the Cell). In the end it didn't work out but what i've read so far is that the script was constantly send to actors , producers and studios and each of them passed on it. Finally it landed on Keanu's lap just as he was finishing up with Matrix Revolutions. He asked Larry and Andy Wachowski about the comic character and they just said "go for it".
So that's why a movie like Constantine is made.
You have an working script , you have a director and you have a moviestar willing to play the role and you have a producer with the money.

And it is the same reason why a movie like V for Vendetta is made. Larry and Andy had written the script and they were willing to make the movie. Joel Silver provides the $$$.

Dunno what the deal was with Crapwoman but i guess that given the success of X-men & Charlie's Hookers , some exec. thought that Halle Berry acting all hot with a whip in a idiotic movie would somehow work.


The thing with WB is that they know , like any other studio, that you need to start with the big franchises first. Once you nail that then you can move onto the smaller comic book projects.
They would gladly make a Flash movie if they had a working script if someone else has already written a working script , a producer comes along to finance the movie and you have a cast.
They've got the Batman franchise working great ( critical praise , fanboy praise and commercial praise) , now they need to work on Superman.
If Supes can truly make the same amount of cash SPiderman can make then i could see WB actively working to make other comic-book properties into movies. Until then those properties could be make into movies if they got a working script , producer and cast/director

I thank you for information me about the movie business but again that confirm why WB is incompetent! Even if WB is huge some one has to tell those producer which come first!And not the other way around. The same way Avi arad is managing Marvel. Like a King! I Think there s a lack of leadership in WB, don t get me wrong I like superman and batman but for 2 decades thats all we have, Catwoman could have wait even if some one wants the project. you have to put in mind Some business people dont give a rat about the comics they just want to see Miss Halle berry in a tithe suite what ever the the superhero what ever the story!

 

[ANTOINE X]

1. "Constantine" and "V for Vendetta" were acclaimed graphic novels by none other than Alan Moore. Many of his graphic novels have been adapted for film and have faired well at the BO ("From Hell", LXG, soon to be "Watchmen", et. al.). A conservative outfit like the WB probably thought they couldn't go wrong with these films if they stayed withing budget.

2. I think that they were testing the waters with Catwoman. My observation on the film was that they thought they could lick the curse that female super heroine films have had in the past by going with a bigger budget and a big name in Academy award winner Halle Berry. Unfortunately, mistakes were made and the film wasn't well received among a consensus of the movie going public. I am sure they did learn something from that that can be applied to future films and I think it would have been better to risk a failure on a minor character like Catwoman than a flagship character like Wonder Woman.

WB is working with a pyramid upside down. When you go see a basketball game you come for the stars not the regular players? Same thing with comics. I don t mind to see catwoman, vendetta(very good by the way) and constantine but not before the flash , green lantern , Capitan Marvel, wonderman and even aquaman. All I m saying is give what people want! Look on the Marvel side we were more than pleased with blade,x-men, spiderman, hulk(yes I liked angie lee movie), FF4 and Soon iron man and cap.

 

[ANTOINE X]

But Constantine was almost certainly not perceived as a Super Hero movie by the public at large, the majority of whom had no idea it was based on a comic book. It was marketed as a Supernatural Thriller/Action Movie. V for Vendetta also was not really marketed as a "comic book" movie to the masses. But characters like Wonder Woman, Flash and Green Lantern? Very clearly super heroes in the same vein as Superman, Batman, Spidey and the X-Men to the general audience. These characters would be in family friendly summer fare, with Happy Meal tie-ins and t-shirts at Wal Mart. A lot more would ride on them than movies like Constantine and V for Vendetta and presumably Watchmen as well. They would also likely be far pricier than any of those movies. Not sure what Constantine's budget was, but I know V for Vendetta's was something like $55 million....no way Wonder Woman, Flash or GL are gonna come in for that cheap.

I understand your point but 75 millions$ for something not well known and that you re not 100% sure about his success don t you think that s risky?

 

[Steelsheen]

You're missing the point. The Superfriends cartoon was for all ages, but JLU was more mature, good for teenagers and young adults. It didn't attract as big an audience as Superfriends. Static Shock & Teen Titans attracted the younger crowd that JLU missed. Look at the success of Smallville. It's appealing to teens and above because Clark isn't wearing the costume yet. The show's creators knew that would make it work. It's a teen soap with super powers. But if you make a big budget, live-action film with people in tights, that's a gamble. There are conflicting views on how serious it should be and still be marketable.

That's why Superman/Doomsday and Judas Contract are gong straight to video. Those are for the more hardcore fans, not the general audience. This is why WB has produced Harry Potter to film. The success is a sure thing on the screen. Tentpole? More like a BIG TOP attraction! And WB knows this!

so what are you saying? that they shouldnt do JLA at the risk of losing money? this is showbiz, that's always part of the risk. the trick is how to properly sell your product and have consumers (in this case movie goers) keep coming back for more. i myself have been wondering if they should've had Batman: Mask of the Phantasm go straight to video but back in the day WB had enough creative guts to release it in the theaters-- and it did better than expected. that i think is the first time the studios found concrete evidence that there is a market for more "grown up" oriented superhero movies. they just took the extra step and made them live action. that's how we get the current kind of superhero movies in the first place (X-Men, Spiderman, The Hulk, Batman Begins, Superman Returns).

btw the Superfriends was big because it was one of the few cartoons that parents and grandparents can relate to-- given that its about heroes from the comics they read in the past. with CBM coming out every year there is a saturation point with the audiences-- several franchises from both Marvel and DC have painfully proven that with their BO returns. hence going back to my point that there has to be something new to keep your product fresh so that people will keep buying it. a franchise concentrating on a solo superhero gets old hat, but how many superhero movies are made of several solo superheroes banding together? none so far (The X-Men dont count). now that is something new, something that hasnt been done before and something that the common moviegoer will be interested in seeing because it recaptures their imagination. Superman they know. Batman they know. Superman and Batman together? how the heck will that turn out? will they work well together or will they try to outdo each other to the point of direct conflict? curiosity, the box office's best friend

 

[Lestat74]

so what are you saying? that they shouldnt do JLA at the risk of losing money? this is showbiz, that's always part of the risk. the trick is how to properly sell your product and have consumers (in this case movie goers) keep coming back for more. i myself have been wondering if they should've had Batman: Mask of the Phantasm go straight to video but back in the day WB had enough creative guts to release it in the theaters-- and it did better than expected. that i think is the first time the studios found concrete evidence that there is a market for more "grown up" oriented superhero movies. they just took the extra step and made them live action. that's how we get the current kind of superhero movies in the first place (X-Men, Spiderman, The Hulk, Batman Begins, Superman Returns).

btw the Superfriends was big because it was one of the few cartoons that parents and grandparents can relate to-- given that its about heroes from the comics they read in the past. with CBM coming out every year there is a saturation point with the audiences-- several franchises from both Marvel and DC have painfully proven that with their BO returns. hence going back to my point that there has to be something new to keep your product fresh so that people will keep buying it. a franchise concentrating on a solo superhero gets old hat, but how many superhero movies are made of several solo superheroes banding together? none so far (The X-Men dont count). now that is something new, something that hasnt been done before and something that the common moviegoer will be interested in seeing because it recaptures their imagination. Superman they know. Batman they know. Superman and Batman together? how the heck will that turn out? will they work well together or will they try to outdo each other to the point of direct conflict? curiosity, the box office's best friend

Yeah, with all the Super Hero origin stories having come out in the last 7 years ( X-Men, Spider-Man, Daredevil, Hulk, Batman Begins, Fantastic Four, Ghost rider, Iron Man soon.... even Superman Returns is an origin in a way ) not to mention the sequels, By the time it comes to make another "must see" event, the JLA might be the way to go. Now, I personally think that there should be Origin films for Flash, Green Lantern and especially Wonder Woman first, but I understand how from a business point of view, Warners might want to skip that and jump right into JLA, where the returns are almost certain. Having all these well known Heroes in one movie will be an event at a time when Super Hero films will hardly be the events they once were. ( I imagine that a JLA movie won't come out till at least 2011 at the earliest, as by that time Chris Nolan's Batman Begins trilogy will likely be done and Singer's Superman Returns sequel will have also come out ) By this time, the modern Super Hero movie era ( which I think started with X-Men in 2000 ) will be over a decade old, and just another solo Super Hero movie might not be enough anymore.

 

[Red Mask]

so what are you saying? that they shouldnt do JLA at the risk of losing money?

That's WB's mentality. Not mine. They made the choice to bring Superman/Doomsday and Judas Contract into animation and straight to video.

that i think is the first time the studios found concrete evidence that there is a market for more "grown up" oriented superhero movies. they just took the extra step and made them live action. that's how we get the current kind of superhero movies in the first place (X-Men, Spiderman, The Hulk, Batman Begins, Superman Returns).

With the help of Blade it got started with X-Men and other Marvel characters.

btw the Superfriends was big because it was one of the few cartoons that parents and grandparents can relate to-- given that its about heroes from the comics they read in the past.

Precisely why JLU isn't as big as Superfriends. JLU isn't your pappy's Superfriends. Thus Static Shock and Teen Titans cover the remaining demographics.

(The X-Men dont count).

But it did feature multiple superheroes, characters for various age groups. Even has the most number of super women in a movie.

 

[Steelsheen]

That's WB's mentality. Not mine. They made the choice to bring Superman/Doomsday and Judas Contract into animation and straight to video.

dude they just hired writers to do the JLA movie, the Mr&Mrs Smith writers at that. if they didnt believe in the JLA they wouldnt have bothered with getting writers and probably just shelved it with the rest of the other superhero projects they were working on. why did they choose to go the straight-to-video route for Superman/Doomsday and Judas Contract? i dunno. why made them decide to go the theater route with Batman:Mask of the Phantasm? there must be someone who makes the decisions for all this, and given that there is big money involved, its not something to be taken lightly. they've surely done their research, see if there is enough demand for the product to justify the expense of releasing it theatrically versus the cost-savings and ROI of just going straight to video.

Precisely why JLU isn't as big as Superfriends. JLU isn't your pappy's Superfriends. Thus Static Shock and Teen Titans cover the remaining demographics.

dude look at it this way, if the JL didnt have as much an impact as what you're saying, the talk of a Justice League movie will never have surfaced, WB wouldnt bother with hiring writers for that and basically all we'll have is the DVDs for posterity. but that is clearly not the case. why did WB hire writers to pen a JL script and not a Titans script? because more people know about the Justice League than the Titans, its just a bigger market. if you worry about the demographics, dude every Titan fan knows who Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman is, but not all JL fans know who Cyborg is, or Starfire, heck the only familiar character there would be Robin (and he's usually associated with Batman).

But it did feature multiple superheroes, characters for various age groups. Even has the most number of super women in a movie.

but the X-Men story started out as a group already. Prof Xavier didnt have his own franchise before he formed the X-Men, neither did Wolverine or Jean Grey or anybody else there. so far there hasnt been any movie featuring superheroes from an already established franchise banding together. hence the buzz for DC's Justice Leagie and Marvel's The Avengers.

 

[Red Mask]

dude they just hired writers to do the JLA movie, the Mr&Mrs Smith writers at that. if they didnt believe in the JLA they wouldnt have bothered with getting writers and probably just shelved it with the rest of the other superhero projects they were working on.

They did the same thing with Joss Whedon. They had great expectations then too. Now the projects shelved for some odd reason. I wouldn't mind watching the WW2 version as long as they got the damn thing on the screen!

but the X-Men story started out as a group already. Prof Xavier didnt have his own franchise before he formed the X-Men, neither did Wolverine or Jean Grey or anybody else there. so far there hasnt been any movie featuring superheroes from an already established franchise banding together. hence the buzz for DC's Justice Leagie and Marvel's The Avengers.

Dude, you just answered the question to why there hasn't been a live-action JLA film yet. Capice?

 

[Steelsheen]

They did the same thing with Joss Whedon. They had great expectations then too. Now the projects shelved for some odd reason. I wouldn't mind watching the WW2 version as long as they got the damn thing on the screen!

because Whedon took too friggin long coming up with a draft that WB didnt like. dude couldnt admit that he is completely clueless about WW and the studio banked too much on his success on Buffy. besides he's a Marvel boy. the ironic thing about the whole project is that there are DC writers practically begging WB to let them write the screenplay but WB wouldnt give them a chance in hell.

Dude, you just answered the question to why there hasn't been a live-action JLA film yet. Capice?

i had a question? i was addressing your statement about why The X-Men dont count as a solo-superhero-banding-together franchise.