Where did DC/WB go wrong? - Part 1

[Daniel Thompson]

Now to me SUPERMAN LIVES was boss - I mean, the funeral scene? Now THAT would have built the universe. Problem is, and why I didn't focus on it, I'm unsure if budget-wise it could be done. I mean, the action was literally a comic. That's what I loved about it.

Puppets as the guardians? As said, just the whole thing irked me for some reason.

For fans? Maybe. General audience? No. They have no idea who Amanda Waller is in the least. They do know who Superman is though. Also it wasn't really Nick Fury in Iron Man that caused excitement it was these lines - "you are not alone" - signaling that other superheroes will come into play. Once again, at that point Nick Fury wasn't known to the GA. Just for an instant distance yourself as a comic book fan and just try to see what this all means for someone who's never picked up a comic book before. For example you said Amanda Waller worked greater, but GA know nothing about her.

I don't know exactly. I mean you say those things, but I kept on picturing it with a much broader color pallette. Maybe because the world was much more expansive and detailed than what wound up in the film. Maybe that the action was just more epic and seemed like panels in a comic book. Just the sheer differences between the two. The first draft seemed to go in the right direction, it got me as a non-fan to become a fan, but what came out? Still making heads and tails of it.

And there's really going to be nothing to be able to prove it. I can't post it. Share details about it or anything. Other than to say if you love what he did in the past and AVENGERS, you'd love this.

Superman Lives sounded terrible to me, as the other projects they had lined up in the 90s with Superman.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Superman Lives sounded terrible to me, as the other projects they had lined up in the 90s with Superman.

Did you read the script? If not, read the script. I know many relate it to Burton's take - but that's not this thing at all.

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/superman-lives-script.html

 

[Ultimatehero]

Is this Whedon's WW script? I thought he couldn't crack the character.

He did crack the character. All those rumors floating around and people who supposedly read it? Evidently and obviously didn't. Just from the rumors I've been hearing I'm the first to talk about the actual script.

As per studio - he went in the more fantastical route whereas DC wanted it darker, more grounded, and on a way way less budget.

If you meant Whedon thinking it needed more work. In an interview? Basically said the same thing about 'The Avengers' that's just a creative person's outlook.

I think Whedon is a big enough comic fan to adjust his style for Wonder Woman. He wouldn't have her busting out wise cracks that's for sure.

Diana didn't wise crack. Steve wise cracked, but there he reminded me more of Han Solo.

 

[Daniel Thompson]

Did you read the script? If not, read the script. I know many relate it to Burton's take - but that's not this thing at all.

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/superman-lives-script.html

Didn't Smith himself say he wrote a bad Superman script?

 

[The Guard]

Yes he did. The SUPERMAN LIVES script (Smith's) is okay. The action is huge compared to anything we'd seen up to that point. There's a decent amount of comic book influence, and some nice ideas in adapting the death storyline. But structurally, it's pretty standard action movie stuff.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Lobo has a director lined up now.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Didn't Smith himself say he wrote a bad Superman script?

He said he worked with what he had and hated the things that were forced upon him - a giant spider and fighting polar bears.

All I'll say is if we got that? We wouldn't be in reboot territory right now.

 

[jmc]

He did crack the character. All those rumors floating around and people who supposedly read it? Evidently and obviously didn't. Just from the rumors I've been hearing I'm the first to talk about the actual script.

As per studio - he went in the more fantastical route whereas DC wanted it darker, more grounded, and on a way way less budget.

If you meant Whedon thinking it needed more work. In an interview? Basically said the same thing about 'The Avengers' that's just a creative person's outlook.



Diana didn't wise crack. Steve wise cracked, but there he reminded me more of Han Solo.

By fantastical do you mean like Greek Mythology fantasy a la Clash of the Titans?

 

[Ultimatehero]

You're never going to get Clash of the Titans with Wonder Woman. It's set in modern day in a modern city. That said does it have gods and monsters? Oh yeah, for sure. Definitely.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

Did you read the script? If not, read the script. I know many relate it to Burton's take - but that's not this thing at all.

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/superman-lives-script.html

does anyone know who smith would have like as his supes? I'd like to know

 

[TheComicbookKid]

You're never going to get Clash of the Titans with Wonder Woman. It's set in modern day in a modern city. That said does it have gods and monsters? Oh yeah, for sure. Definitely.

More like the Sorcerer's Apprentice then?


I'm going to guess some variation on the Banner/Black Widow recruitment scene is from the WW script. I seem to remember the idea of Trevor being some kind of aid worker was in his script.

 

[jmc]

It'd be a great shame if WB's indecisiveness with that character prevented them from making a good movie. If Avengers is as good as it's being made out to be then someone at WB is going to be banging his or her head on the table for months for not letting Whedon do his thing. Oh well, potentially another missed opportunity by WB. *shrugs*

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Whateves. Singer proves that not every good comic director is good for every project.

Whedon's good on paper, but stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum or through a singular person. I'm sure the support he has from Feige and his Marvel team we don't see is just as important. Just like Nolan has his wife, brother, and Wally.

 

[jmc]

I know but at some point though they've gotta give someone a shot, it's not always going to end up with good results but you've gotta try. Just look at Nolan, they captured lightning in a bottle and look where they are now, they've got the biggest superhero on the planet because of him. That really should have been the incentive for WB to make GL, they shouldn't have needed IM to create a GL film.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I know but at some point though they've gotta give someone a shot, it's not always going to end up with good results but you've gotta try. Just look at Nolan, they captured lightning in a bottle and look where they are now, they've got the biggest superhero on the planet because of him. That really should have been the incentive for WB to make GL, they shouldn't have needed IM to create a GL film.

Marvel started scatter shot with multiple studios and now are under one umbrella .I admire their level of success though I think Avengers is their peak. Partly the spectacle and partly cause they have no diversity of product.

DC only have two more shots to start an obvious tentpole franchise clean before they'll all reboots. I'm sure it's a lot of pressure.

 

[mclay18]

Further breakdown, might help:

Batman is at Legacy.
Wonder Woman was at Silver.
Green Lantern is at De Line Pictures.
Unsure who has Flash.

That's not why WB isn't getting their act together -- they ultimately finance and have greenlighting authority over the DC titles. Just because one production team is working on a movie doesn't mean they have a say if a teamup movie or sequel will be produced outside of their jurisdiction.

Take the JL:M debacle. Had the WGA strike been resolved quickly and had there been a better cast involved -- we would've had that JL movie out around July 2009. When they tabled the JL project in early 2008 and after TDK hugely overperformed, they had to push back HP6 to July 2009 to guarantee a blockbuster tentpole during that period. Trust me, if WB was confident in JL:M they would've had that out despite Nolan's wishes, and HP6 would've likely stayed in the November 2008 date.

 

[Ultimatehero]

You missed the point ENTIRELY. I was saying why it would be difficult to have a building universe like Marvel did with easter eggs in franchise films due to studios not really keeping in contact with one another. Setting up a JL movie stand alone? Easy. Setting up a combined universe? Obviously a challenge due to breakdown. None of the companies have a clue what the other company is doing with their DC property, so any attempt to combine at this point would without a doubt be a challenge unless it's a pure stand alone.

 

[mclay18]

Setting up a JL movie stand alone? Easy. Setting up a combined universe? Obviously a challenge due to breakdown.

That's true. But if Joss Whedon and the reviews of The Avengers indicate, you don't necessarily need a combined universe to make a big, well-made superhero teamup film. It doesn't need to spelled out to the audience in each standalone film, nor do you have to see the films beforehand to get the full plot details.

Still, WB's made a lot of poor decisions when it comes to their DC stable. You'd figure they would be pursuing untried directors, see if they liked a certain DC character, and try to get the next Chris Nolan to revive GL or get WW up and running. Someone needs to slap sense into Robinov for not trying hard enough or looking out of the box... there's more than enough material in DC's vaults to sustain dozens of franchises and spin-offs.

 

[jmc]

Which is why I've been saying if you're going to do a JL then just do a JL film, don't worry about making sure things connect. It's sounds like from what I've read so far Avengers really is a stand alone film. If that's the case then WB don't need to suffocate each films potential like Marvel did in the name of continuity, just make the movies as best as you can and worry about a JL film when it comes up.

 

[Ultimatehero]

It could potentially work BUT keep in mind same universe even means same actors. Same actors means the films co-exist. Different actors in JLA means different seperate universe, that's possible. Everything else - numerous difficulties once they combine would be near impossible. That's most likely why WB went the different actors route, the other way means same universe which gets complicated due to numerous branches.

 

[mclay18]

Which is why I've been saying if you're going to do a JL then just do a JL film, don't worry about making sure things connect. It's sounds like from what I've read so far Avengers really is a stand alone film.

I don't think WB will get it until the movie comes out, makes a lot of money, and then the light bulb goes off in Robinov's head. A standalone JL film would be a helluva better plan than a Lobo movie for 2014.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Lobo has been in the works for a long time and I highly doubt it has any impact on JLA. And moving on it, this I know for sure, has nothing to do with Avengers. It's just, same as everything else, getting another script off the shelf and onto the screen for said company.

 

[jmc]

It could potentially work BUT keep in mind same universe even means same actors. Same actors means the films co-exist. Different actors in JLA means different seperate universe, that's possible. Everything else - numerous difficulties once they combine would be near impossible. That's most likely why WB went the different actors route, the other way means same universe which gets complicated due to numerous branches.

Who says it has to? Just do an elseworlds film with the same actors, just stylize it differently.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Just clarifying (it's late, probably spelled wrong) that even having the same actors without all the nods would make it a combined universe in audience heads. A pure solo JLA film, at this point, is all that can be done easily.

 

[jmc]

But do they really care? It seems the only ones who give a damn are fans about a combined universe.