Where did DC/WB go wrong? - Part 1

[Boy Scout]

Boy Scout, this may be hard for people not in the business - but typically there are a handful of films being made at the same time.

No, I understand that. And I've read your other posts.

Meaning Aquaman 2 may be being written at the same time that JLA is in production.

I realized that. I addressed that in my post.

It's not like you can just easily go back to the drawing board and in a matter of days change the character around - it takes time.

You misunderstand me. I didn't mean to imply it'd only take a few days to do all that. To use a math analogy: the solution to a problem could be two. But the amount you have to work in to get that answer might not be as simple as taking one away from three.

However, as suggested by Guard, if JLA really has no impact character-wise then yeah that would make things easy for those working on the solo films.

I would think a JLA film would focus more on how the characters act when they're together more so than when they're alone. But you never know.

You'd think so. Problem is it's hard to see that being the case after seeing how jumbled things can even become without a big undertaking as this would be.

Which would justify changing things up a bit, no? To make things easier on everyone?

Also I gave the easiest way - give those high ups working on it free access to everything regarding it (which is not currently happening); this would be the surest way to ensure everyone is on the same page.

They'd do what they have to do, I think. As someone who works closely with them, could you see that happening? As an outsider, I can.

Organizing meetings, know you didn't say it but others have, would be a logistical nightmare lol.

To be honest, that's what I was getting at. If it's necessary to do so, schedule some meetings. I don't doubt it would be a logistical nightmare, but if the goal is to make money - and lots of it - I'd think most everyone would be willing to take one for the team.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I typed a huge long response to this and then my internet died, great.

Bullet-points then:
> Iron Man 3 shooting soon, writer didn't have luxury of seeing Avengers.
> Thor 2, probably saw Avengers, but writer can't take months changing things to fit in line with it. He had to know prior to seeing Avengers. Unless he continues on the script during filming, happens but isn't the best scenario.
> A couple of days was only an exaggeration. Potentially changing a character's dynamic and arc would take a long time. It's also what usually drives part of the theme. Everything is very connected most of the time. That this could be a difficult change. It's manageable for sure, but chances are you'd be thrown into the category of writers still working on the script while on the set and as said - that's not really a great area to be in.

SCHEDULES...
> VP's schedule is beyond hectic, has so many tasks bringing all these VPs together would be a nightmare - just as bringing actors together. It's the reason we only really got one JLA episode on 'Smallville.' Same here. Also they take extended business trips overseas from time to time to oversee production.
> Making money is important. But DC isn't their only way to make money. They have a blockbuster each year to pay attention to and numerous other films as well. They can't slow things down for something that isn't connected to them at a given time, they have to keep focus on their yearly demands. All MARVEL has to worry about is MARVEL films. Not so with these production companies.
> DC properties/blockbusters are under the VP always.
> These companies are so hectic, there is little communication within a company itself. Sometimes trades (Variety, Hollywood Reporter) knows things about said company before the higher-ups within said company know themselves. Big example of how hectic it is. Trust me, they're not incompetent - it's just that busy that things like that do happen.
> Computers are already hardwired to connect everyone there. But this data isn't shared. Now, they can't share everything - they are competing after all. However, they can share DC property information. This contains A LOT of information beyond just the script that the VP can browse through and remain updated on at his leisure. This ensures continued company workings and keeping up to date. This is not currently happening. This is the system used for individual films within companies. It can easily be applied here without worrying about finding the times where all the VPs aren't busy (which would be rare getting them all in one room together).

Think that answers everything, there was more - a lot more details before - and here's hoping the net doesn't shut off again lol...

NOTE: Just remembered your question, the whole opening documents within companies? Yes, I do see this as possible since where shared universes are concerned this is the easiest way for the companies to work together and at a time that best suits them.

 

[Boy Scout]

I typed a huge long response to this and then my internet died, great.

If it makes you feel better, mine did too. So now I have to type this **** all over again.

So...

Iron Man 3 shooting soon, writer didn't have luxury of seeing Avengers.

Thor 2, probably saw Avengers, but writer can't take months changing things to fit in line with it. He had to know prior to seeing Avengers. Unless he continues on the script during filming, happens but isn't the best scenario.

What's your point? Everyone at Marvel Studios is on the same page. They communicate with each other and they know what's going to happen. Basically, what you're saying is for JLA to work, everyone is going to have to communicate, and that's what I've been stressing this whole time.

A couple of days was only an exaggeration.

I'm aware.

Potentially changing a character's dynamic and arc would take a long time. It's also what usually drives part of the theme. Everything is very connected most of the time. That this could be a difficult change. It's manageable for sure, but chances are you'd be thrown into the category of writers still working on the script while on the set and as said - that's not really a great area to be in.

All the more reason for everyone to (at least somewhat) be on the same page. As the writer for Aquaman 2, you wouldn't need to know anything about Justice League other than the bits that are relevant to that character and his world.

I don't see why WB wouldn't make an effort to communicate. Just because it's not usually done doesn't mean it won't be done if it has to.

VP's schedule is beyond hectic, has so many tasks bringing all these VPs together would be a nightmare - just as bringing actors together. It's the reason we only really got one JLA episode on 'Smallville.' Same here. Also they take extended business trips overseas from time to time to oversee production.

Making money is important. But DC isn't their only way to make money. They have a blockbuster each year to pay attention to and numerous other films as well. They can't slow things down for something that isn't connected to them at a given time, they have to keep focus on their yearly demands. All MARVEL has to worry about is MARVEL films. Not so with these production companies.

DC properties/blockbusters are under the VP always.

These companies are so hectic, there is little communication within a company itself. Sometimes trades (Variety, Hollywood Reporter) knows things about said company before the higher-ups within said company know themselves. Big example of how hectic it is. Trust me, they're not incompetent - it's just that busy that things like that do happen.

Computers are already hardwired to connect everyone there. But this data isn't shared. Now, they can't share everything - they are competing after all. However, they can share DC property information. This contains A LOT of information beyond just the script that the VP can browse through and remain updated on at his leisure. This ensures continued company workings and keeping up to date. This is not currently happening. This is the system used for individual films within companies. It can easily be applied here without worrying about finding the times where all the VPs aren't busy (which would be rare getting them all in one room together).

Think that answers everything, there was more - a lot more details before - and here's hoping the net doesn't shut off again lol...

No, I assure you, this abridged version works a lot better for me. t:

I'm not underestimating how hard it would be. But if it had to be done, it would be done, if in a way that is a little less personal. I don't doubt your knowledge of the business, so don't take any of this as a personal jab, but I find it hard to believe that any businessman wouldn't take at least some time to capitalize on an idea this big, especially in light of The Avengers.

 

[Ultimatehero]

No, what I'm saying is - might have misheard - the writer can't just watch Justice League and go "okay, that's what they did, back to the drawing board with limited time." The way these companies work it just can't work like that. It'd be disastrous unless there was truly a wide gap between the films. Otherwise looking at finishing the script during production. Need more to go off of then just seeing JLA after it's completed to have the time needed.

They would make an effort. And as I said since the beginning that effort would mean a change from the current status-quo. As things are currently - it can't work. Make a change within system - it can work.

Saying "they'd all be interested!" is looking at it more from a fan perspective. IF Iron Man and Thor do significantly better in their films after AVENGERS then you're looking at something. However what good would it do De Line if Legacy has JLA? Only Legacy would reap the reward. A contract could be written up designating that they all get equal earnings from the box office, but if one company is working on it more while the others take a back seat? They are likely to get angry that other companies are riding it's coat-tails. Warner Bros is a parent company. Their production companies are like rival siblings. If they don't do better than another company they risk being let go, so it's not how much money WB can earn - but how much they can earn to stay with WB. One company getting the primary finances from JLA, doesn't really benefit the others. And for the others if that's their only blockbuster that year? They'd literally fall apart financially due to it's division of finances. That's why they have a quote of the number of movies they need to make a year even if they think the scripts suck. Yes studios knowingly put out bad movies that they see earning money back.

It'd be the less personal way. It's the easiest and allows each company to work on their own blockbusters alongside it. Possibly the only company that would capitalize is the production company behind JLA unless a deal is drawn up that would make it a good deal for all involved. As said, the production companies are rivals to each other. Good for WB, good for at least one company, iffy for the rest. I should also note the divided pay would be LESS than what one of those companies gets for their yearly blockbuster unless that yearly blockbuster is a flop. So, from a fan stand-point: Yes. From a business one - not really, they wouldn't be earning that much if anything unless a contract is drawn up. That's the thing it's not one company, it's many and for it to be lucrative they all have to see the right amount of profit to put aside time specifically for it outside of browsing documents. Capitalizing would only happen for WB, not these production companies making the films.

Basically "it's capitalizing!" is good in theory, but it really wouldn't work out like that due to current division amongst branches. They'd be earning less than they usually do.

 

[Boy Scout]

No, what I'm saying is - might have misheard - the writer can't just watch Justice League and go "okay, that's what they did, back to the drawing board with limited time." The way these companies work it just can't work like that. It'd be disastrous unless there was truly a wide gap between the films. Otherwise looking at finishing the script during production. Need more to go off of then just seeing JLA after it's completed to have the time needed.

Nope. I understood you just fine.

They would make an effort. And as I said since the beginning that effort would mean a change from the current status-quo. As things are currently - it can't work. Make a change within system - it can work.

Well, yeah, that's what I've been saying, dude.

Saying "they'd all be interested!" is looking at it more from a fan perspective.

How so? They would be interested. Avengers is looking to make major money. These guys want to make a lot of money. I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who can relate to wanting to make money.

However what good would it do De Line if Legacy has JLA? Only Legacy would reap the reward. A contract could be written up designating that they all get equal earnings from the box office, but if one company is working on it more while the others take a back seat? They are likely to get angry that other companies are riding it's coat-tails. Warner Bros is a parent company. Their production companies are like rival siblings. If they don't do better than another company they risk being let go, so it's not how much money WB can earn - but how much they can earn to stay with WB. One company getting the primary finances from JLA, doesn't really benefit the others. And for the others if that's their only blockbuster that year? They'd literally fall apart financially due to it's division of finances. That's why they have a quote of the number of movies they need to make a year even if they think the scripts suck. Yes studios knowingly put out bad movies that they see earning money back.

It'd be the less personal way. It's the easiest and allows each company to work on their own blockbusters alongside it. Possibly the only company that would capitalize is the production company behind JLA unless a deal is drawn up that would make it a good deal for all involved. As said, the production companies are rivals to each other. Good for WB, good for at least one company, iffy for the rest. I should also note the divided pay would be LESS than what one of those companies gets for their yearly blockbuster unless that yearly blockbuster is a flop. So, from a fan stand-point: Yes. From a business one - not really, they wouldn't be earning that much if anything unless a contract is drawn up. That's the thing it's not one company, it's many and for it to be lucrative they all have to see the right amount of profit to put aside time specifically for it outside of browsing documents. Capitalizing would only happen for WB, not these production companies making the films.

Basically "it's capitalizing!" is good in theory, but it really wouldn't work out like that due to current division amongst branches. They'd be earning less than they usually do.

I see where you're getting at. And I concede that the only way I can respond to that is, "If they had to, they'd find a way to make it work." I'll leave the blow-by-blow to someone else who knows a little more about this stuff and the possible ramifications of making JLA than I do.

Good convo.

 

[Ultimatehero]

That it would make a lot of money for them. All that would benefit is WB and fans. As I think you may have understood from the final paragraphs. So in the end it would make them the same money, or I'd imagine from the way a good contract can be drawn up, the same amount of money as their usual films - just not their blockbuster films. They'd need to appropriate merchandising and DVD sales into the deal to make it lucrative or some may even lose money.

Breaking it down...

Say it makes 600 million worldwide. It's just a random number.

You have four companies with the rights.

600 million broken down equally means they'd each get only 150 million total earnings.

With three companies it's 200 million only each.

Or ONE BILLION (TDK)...

4 companies = 250,000 million
3 companies = 333,333 million

Which is still less than what their average blockbusters bring in. It could be more than one of their other films, but that's if it gets TDK level earnings (which I even think TDKR will get slightly lower than TDK).

Each company makes more than that in their yearly blockbusters. It could be less than some of their usual films too or more depending. But, it basically wouldn't be striking gold unless they hit that one billion worldwide.

 

[The Guard]

Dude, I don't quote. Let me put that again - just to get through to you - I don't quote. Not I don't know how to quote. Not I can't quote. I don't quote. Simple. Good. I have more important things to do with my life than break down every single thing I'm replying to. I have a life and a career that takes up most of my time.

You don't have a few seconds to quote, but you have time to repeat and repeat your points ad nauseum in large paragraphs?

Fair enough.

It seems like you're a smart guy. So you'd know I wasn't talking about just Flash. I know little about Flash. And as I already stated Flash was just a name to use. Nothing more. Nothing less. Good? Let's move on.

Being smart doesn't mean I assume things. I read in context. I didn't know that you weren't talking about Flash...because you were, in fact, talking about Flash for some time. And more to the point, regardless of the character, I have asked for examples of how a character would likely be developed in their solo film that would affect a Justice League film...so that I can better understand your argument, which you've yet to provide, for Flash, or Aquaman, who you state you understand better.

You don't always need to "write carefully." To make sure the characters and events come off as real, yes. But there is no real tight rope to walk. There is no possible impeding force. If you're writing 'INCEPTION' then yeah you need to be careful. Unless, everything just comes easy to me that I don't see red flags everywhere that I need to watch out for. The character is the character, it lives, breathes, and does what it does naturally - it doesn't have an evil twin or doppelganger to possibly shake things up.

Agree to disagree. I believe that while characters do tend to take on their own personalities, and can surprise you, you do need a bit careful during the writing process in order to get a quality project.

Now if JLA is careful in the way you propose, not mentioning any single thing and really not taking the character to any place arc-wise, then yes that would undoubtably make it easier. Solo films using JLA aspects to me is really far-fetched, also why I said events wouldn't matter - only character would, due to being from different cities whereas MARVEL is more tightly packed together.

I have not once proposed that JLA doesn't take the characters to any place arcwise. I have never said that JLA should have no impact characterwise. I have stated that the type of character development featured in JLA should be in the context of the JLA, not something that would affect individual solo films and the exploration of character or development in those.

And you kind of just proved my point. You said "Solo films using JLA aspects to me is really far fetched". That's my point. Since the types of development would likely be different between solo and JLA films, I really don't think they would cause many issues with each other.

And yes, IF shared universe was in the future you'd expect communication. There really isn't. So I'm not really worried, as an actual writer that could possibly get a hold of Aquaman. I don't see a shared universe happening any time soon. And if they do - yeah, IF they go your way of JLA not really shaping the characters to impact what comes before and after - that could work.

We know there isn't, or at least we can assume there hasn't been, great communication. All anyone has been saying is this:

It's clear Marvel has communicated about their films. If WB wants to do what Marvel is, there will have to be communication.

And again, it’s not neccessarily about having to watch a movie to see what was already done in order to avoid continuity issues. Its about NOT WRITING ANYTHING INTO YOUR SOLO MOVIE THAT WILL POTENTIALLY CONFLICT WITH A JUSTICE LEAGUE PROJECT. Not using elements best served in the capacity of a Justice League movie, for instance, an independent character learning to be more of a team player with the JLA, in a solo film.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Dude comically you don't notice that YOU are repeating as well.

Actually I did provide the example and say if JLA made him kingly already - that would seem out of place with where he is in the solo film. Pay better attention to what you read. What you showed, however, was there is a way around this by JLA not focusing at all on that, which is possible.

Do characters surprise you? Yes. I just don't find that difficult or confusing or anything of the like. In fact I like it and find it easier when characters surprise you because that means they are alive and well-written. Any time a character isn't living on it's own - that's a bad character, not fleshed out enough. Experienced writers, no offense, know that, and I can see how that could confuse beginning or novice writers. Character's living on their own confused me when I was first starting out, now it's easy. You get used to the spontaneity.

ADDING: I should note what makes this difficult, and why you really need to understand the characters to a point where them having wills of their own doesn't boggle you is because eventually you will have studios telling you they'd like to see certain changes brought to said character. You need to go back and make it seem natural. Basically adding another limb but needing the character to be the same as before despite it being a more technical rather than spontaneous change, it still needs to feel normal. It's easy if the character is already alive and well. And as a writer who has actually worked with legit top film studios, trust me when I say - this is something you will need to get used to in order to better make those adjustments. Writing is the easy part. The hard part is adhering to what a studio wants while still keeping it as you want and making it flow all the same.

I was over exaggerating slightly, by solo JLA arcs wouldn't cause a major impact or dent in the character to impede what comes after. It's just not huge overall changes like in a solo film.

You can assume that posters know, HOWEVER some are still confused, when I first entered members thought that since I had some knowledge on a DC property I'd naturally know about another DC property. To me, that speaks for itself. YOU just seem to know more than the rest. Also this confusion would easily, beyond easily lend to some thinking a JLA film would be seen as a film that would strike gold for everyone involved - when really broken down - it doesn't. This basically just shows some people still think of WB as one company rather than multiple. It would be gold for WB, but far from that for the rest.

And your last paragraph missed everything about what that 'watch movie' thing was back and forth. Someone else stated that and all I stated was why that wouldn't work. And if you can't understand the reasoning of why that wouldn't work - not enough time and working on it at the same time - maybe you don't know as much as I thought you did. It would inevitably lead to finishing the script if things did work like that during production, which happens sometimes but is far from the best scenario.

I mean seriously dude, do you just skim things or have poor reading comprehension? It's pretty obvious I didn't bring up the watch the movie thing. And I'm pretty sure a couple times I said "such as Flash" "just Flash, no particular reason, just a name" and it's like you skipped right over that - are you just skimming or is there something else causing this?

 

[ElMariachi]

But let's look at what he actually is, an whether we've seen this in film and TV recently.

-He is a good man/boyscout. That is not a new concept. Superman is the most shining example of this, but there have been other characters with these traits on film, TV, etc, for a long time.

You claim this but not have provided any examples. I already pointed out Superman. And it's not like Superman has really been that successful since his heyday in the late 70's/early 80's. The character has taken a backseat to more 'real world' characters like Batman, Spider-Man, the X-Men, and even Iron Man now.

What other t.v. or movie boyscouts can you think of? Tin Tin is the only other one I can think of. While it was successful worldwide, it really wasn't a huge hit in the U.S. for obvious reasons. Luke Skywalker is somewhat of a boyscout and we all know Star Wars was largely sold on Han Solo. There aren't any t.v. characters like this at all and haven't been for a long time.

-He is patriotic propaganda. That is not a new concept either, not is it a particularly difficult one to grasp, even overseas, where it may not be as appreciated, but can certainly be understood. Again, Superman could fall into this category, as could any number of solider, government and police characters seen on film and TV over the years.

What other characters are patriotic propaganda? All movies that feature soldiers and police officers portray them as real world characters with doubts, fears, and flaws. There aren't any war movies that feature characters like Captain America. As a matter of fact, the Captain America movie featured this difference after the 'rah rah' USO scene. Even the John Wayne-era war movies didn't go quite to that level.

Yes, Captain America is a unique superhero. But he's still a superhero, made up of identifiable concepts that people have been exposed to many times, and responded to favorably. Captain America didn't become wildly popular over the years because he wasn't relatable or easy to understand. He became popular because a lot of people like him because he is, and because he is interesting.

Captain America is a niche character to most people before the movie came out. There is a difference between recognizing a character and a character being popular. Batman is a popular character. Captain America was only an identifiable character. The same as Thor, Flash, and the rest of the B-list.

Ok...you just listed a variety of popular characters, some dark, some lighter. I have no idea what your point was in doing that. So...audiences expect a range of darker and lighter characters? Doesn't that bode well for Captain America in general, who ideally treads on both sides? What was your point in listing those names?

The point was that audiences identify with flawed characters. Characters with quirks, dark sides, and things of that nature. It has been that way since the 60's when everything started to change in this country. Characters like Superman and Captain America haven't adapted as well as other superheroes. Oh sure, they've tried to make them more relevant but younger audiences were always more drawn to Batman, Spider-Man, and X-Men. That's what children of the 80's and 90's grew up with. Superman in many ways is still our 'dad's superhero'. Hulk could probally be added to this as well.

Your argument seems to be that WWII is a risky subject...when it's a Captain America Summer tentpole movie. I'm honestly not sure what you're basing that on. Obviously it's not that touchy a subject, because it made a ton of money, being just that.

It's a superhero movie that takes place during WWII. That is a very risky subject for a summer tentpole that requires bringing in hundreds of millions of dollars. Inglorious Bastards wasn't such a risk because it's Tarantino and it's an R-rated movie not aimed at children.

WWII is a very touchy subject around the world. The wounds of that war aren't still fully healed in many countries. Even in nations like the U.K. and U.S., there is a respect factor that goes with WWII. People in many countries (esp. UK and Russia) feel that Americans take all the credit for winning the war and this movie would just be a $150 million boast. They had to make this movie fun for people in all countries and not coming away feeling that it was overly biased.

But the Indiana Jones movies featured Nazis, HELLBOY featured Nazis...

SCHINDLER'S LIST made $321 million worldwide on a $22 million budget

SAVING PRIVATE RYAN made $481 million on a budget of $70 million.

INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS made $321 million on a budget of $70 million.

And in some ways, its even more a testament to the idea that people respond to well made/fun WWII films because some of these WERE "R" rated films, which tend to make less money.

THE ROCKETEER made some money even though it wasn't terribly well made.

Indiana Jones and Rocketeer were the templates for Captain America. That's why they hired Joe Johnston. The rest of those movies are R rated dramas. Schindlers List is a Holocaust drama, not a war movie. Like Saving Private Ryan, these movies were huge projects and two of the most iconic movies of the 90's. These three movies were directed by Speilberg & Tarantino. That alone gave them alot of buzz. Outside these movies, most recent WWII movies are bombs or critical failures.

In your opinion he's the most difficult superhero to pull off. In mine, an American propaganda character that is such a boyscout that he has fewer moral gray areas in many versions is infinitely easier to pull off than say, The Punisher, or the X-Men, or Thor or Iron Man or The Hulk. I'm aware of the requirements in adapting Captain America, but they don't make adapting him any more impossible or difficult than adapting any other character.

It would be easier to pull off if this was the 1950's. People today aren't drawn to characters like Captain America. The box office is all the evidence I need. I just don't think you are judging current trends accurately.

You don't think DAREDEVIL was a risk? THE PUNISHER? GHOST RIDER? HELLBOY, BLADE and SPAWN Apparently "much risk" means they didn't put up as much money. It's not quite that simple conceptually, though.

No, I don't think they were that big of risks compared to Captain America. These were all movies released during a better economy and during the superhero boom by large studios. Marvel could not stomach a bomb in the same way as a Fox or WB could. Avengers was completely tied to these two franchises. Captain America and Thor were far bigger swings than any of those movies you listed.

Yes, its unique in that Norse Mythology is not Green Mythology, and that Norse Mythology is less exposed, sure. I'm really not going to get into this nonsensical "That's not the same!" thing you're doing. Mythology is ultimately mythology. There have been adaptions of both. Norse mythology has been onscreen before. The 13th Warrior was pretty good. There have been more than a few movies about vikings, warriors, several Beowulf/Grendel adaptions, and I think that How To Train Your Dragon was Norse-inspired.

Norse mythology has not been onscreen often. What movies have you seen with Thor, Loki, or Odin? Compare this to the Greek gods that are in various movies, t.v. shows, video games, books, etc.

13th Warrior wasn't that bad in my opinion but it was a massive bomb. HTTYD is a kids movie. Beowulf was a great movie but it really didn't do exceptional at the box office given it's huge, Thor-sized budget.

Yes, it is a bizarre concept. But audiences tend to LIKE a lot of the bizarre concepts. They respond to them. People don't go to blockbuster movies to see everyday life. They go to see bizarre or interesting concepts.

That's not really all that true. All 'bizarre concepts' tend to be from already popular books or franchises. It's one thing to introduce it in a smaller movie. Another for a tentpole movie like Thor with so much riding on it's success. If it was this easy, WB would have put out alot more than Batman/Superman/Alan Moore movies.

I don't think it is ridiculous. There's a clear difference in the creative approach taken with certain films. It's kind of been you that's splitting hairs. Trying to boil down everything I say into "but that's different".

There's a very clear creative approach in The DARK KNIGHT that isn't as safe and generic as other films. That's just not arguable. Ditto SUPERMAN RETURNS, X-MEN, and several other recent superhero films.

CAPTAIN AMERICA cannot boast this. It presents fairly obvious morality, little villain depth, little exploration of its core concepts, and is mostly focused on
story and action after the initial third of the film.

There wasn't much depth in any of those movies you listed. The Joker had zero depth. He was a psychopath the entire film without any development. Two Face's arc was too quick and Batman not given as much as as in BB. This was all ignored because the movie was so well written, directed, scored, and acted. Same can be said about X-Men. There wasn't much depth to the characters in any of the X-Men movies with the expection of Magneto and Xavier. Not sure why you bring up Superman Returns. They tried to make that movie more serious and it ended up being the most boring superhero movie probally ever made.


I would respond to the rest of your response but I don't feel like writing anymore. Responding to your posts is like writing an essay.

 

[The Guard]

Dude comically you don't notice that YOU are repeating as well

Of course I realize that I’m repeating myself. But I’m not the one talking about how I don’t have time to “quote” people.

Nor do I randomly repeat what I know about being in the businesss and how complex and troublesome making a JLA film VS solo films is when someone’s post doesn’t even call for it. When I've already said it over, and over, and over, and am not responding to a direct statement that calls for that to be my response.

Actually I did provide the example and say if JLA made him kingly already - that would seem out of place with where he is in the solo film. Pay better attention to what you read. What you showed, however, was there is a way around this by JLA not focusing at all on that, which is possible.

You wrote in your example that he would have become a king in the solo film, in title, but didn’t feel like a king, only in title.

So the JLA concept I mentioned had him dealing with his concerns about being king in a broader sense, as a way to build rapport with his teammates, and open up to them a bit. It allows for the same concerns to be explored, without directly exploring his personal life, but rather in the context of the JLA.

Do characters surprise you? Yes. I just don't find that difficult or confusing or anything of the like. In fact I like it and find it easier when characters surprise you because that means they are alive and well-written. Any time a character isn't living on it's own - that's a bad character, not fleshed out enough. Experienced writers, no offense, know that, and I can see how that could confuse beginning or novice writers. Character's living on their own confused me when I was first starting out, now it's easy. You get used to the spontaneity.

You don’t find it difficult or confusing…except, apparently, when you have to not ruin a JLA franchise with a solo film.

ADDING: I should note what makes this difficult, and why you really need to understand the characters to a point where them having wills of their own doesn't boggle you is because eventually you will have studios telling you they'd like to see certain changes brought to said character. You need to go back and make it seem natural.

Yes, you would need to go back and change it to make it seem natural. Via writing that involves some care. Because writing without using some care tends to, by definition, be sloppy or lazy writing.

I was over exaggerating slightly, by solo JLA arcs wouldn't cause a major impact or dent in the character to impede what comes after. It's just not huge overall changes like in a solo film

So you do, or don’t, think its likely that having characters arcs in a JLA film would affect their development in solo films?

You can assume that posters know, HOWEVER some are still confused, when I first entered members thought that since I had some knowledge on a DC property I'd naturally know about another DC property. To me, that speaks for itself. YOU just seem to know more than the rest.

I just seem to know more than the rest about what?

Also this confusion would easily, beyond easily lend to some thinking a JLA film would be seen as a film that would strike gold for everyone involved - when really broken down - it doesn't. This basically just shows some people still think of WB as one company rather than multiple. It would be gold for WB, but far from that for the rest.

But…it would still potentially be gold for WB. And a good gague as to whether the individual companies you speak of could make solo films, if the characters were popular in a JLA film.

And your last paragraph missed everything about what that 'watch movie' thing was back and forth. Someone else stated that and all I stated was why that wouldn't work. And if you can't understand the reasoning of why that wouldn't work - not enough time and working on it at the same time - maybe you don't know as much as I thought you did. It would inevitably lead to finishing the script if things did work like that during production, which happens sometimes but is far from the best scenario.

I wasn’t making any definitive statements…not sure what you think my position on that was.

I mean seriously dude, do you just skim things or have poor reading comprehension?

There’s no need to be rude. I think I’ve made it pretty clear, via quoting and responding in full, that neither of those is the case.

It's pretty obvious I didn't bring up the watch the movie thing. And I'm pretty sure a couple times I said "such as Flash" "just Flash, no particular reason, just a name" and it's like you skipped right over that - are you just skimming or is there something else causing this?

I never said you brought it up...I was just addressing the statement someone made. And I’m aware that "Flash" was just an example. I have clearly been asking you for examples about the concept of character development between solo and JLA films causing issues, period, and trying to get you to explain your character arc concerns in more depth, with additional examples. The character we used as an example didn’t matter, the concept did. Which I understood. You said Flash. I’m not accusing you of anything except that you said “Flash” as an example. I don’t really care at this point. I was using Flash as a comparison, because you did. You’ll notice that when you decided to use Aquaman, so did I.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Yes, that's right, you have nothing to randomly repeat in the course of your posts about being in the business, because you aren't in the business. Sorry, just felt like that deserved a 'Tony Stark' type egotistical answer.

And as I've said that would work. By arc I mean something that really progresses the character. You'd be progressing an element of the character, sure. But nothing that would make a dent. Which, dude, if you read carefully is why I liked your JLA idea because it wouldn't mess things up. It'd be an arc, but not a very substantial one that'd impact what came before and after in the solo films.

Exactly a stand-alone franchise is always easier than being careful about people not stepping on each other's toes. Everyone involved with the MARVEL films have stated so as well. That it's overall a different kind of experience than what they are used to. Writing either a stand-alone script or a franchised blockbuster (I've done both with studio interest) is not at all the same as writing something that is part of a much larger world (which I've also done, outside of studio walls) and you'd be a fool to not acknowledge that you need to leave some room. Everyone involved with such a project has stated as much, so it's not just me. Not having information would without a doubt make it a lot harder though.

Going back to add things in, remove things, etc. does take care. The actual writing process itself to any talented writer should and does come as a second nature thing. Knowing your world takes time, sure. But, once you know your world and set pen to paper - it should come just as easily as breathing. If you're struggling through, that's usually not a good sign. You were, forgive me if I'm wrong, saying the actual writing process is difficult - not the draft process which does require attention.

If the arcs are as you proposed, then it wouldn't be a struggle. It would be somewhat difficult and restraining for those on JLA to not really make any massive changes. But, it is feasible as I have stated before and I'm saying again now. My mind was so wrapped in AQUAMAN and other gigs as to not see how it could work. But, from an outside perspective - you've nailed it. And I could work easily within those parameters.

You know more about the inner-workings than some of these other posters. For example, after hearing I have knowledge regarding 'Wonder Woman' I highly doubt you'd automatically expect me to naturally have the same knowledge on other DC properties. You know more than some other people do. What may be stating the obvious to you is not so, from experience on here, to others.

If you start off with JLA, yes. It would be. If you lead into it - no it wouldn't be. Also, as said, the true measure of the judge for WB and these companies will be how IRON MAN 3 and THOR 2 perform at box office and I am really interested in seeing if AVENGERS elevates those films potential box office receipts. But a JLA film by itself would definitely NOT be seen as gold by all. Just to WB and DC - unless, as said - a combined film makes a significant difference on the earnings for the rest otherwise it would be the same as without it and these smaller companies wouldn't make that much off of it (JLA).

So I got lost in noting who it was regarding? Alright. Need to clarify, which if you even see my earlier post on here - I notate if it's two separate people/posters as to not lead others to that mistake.

I can't and won't bring in any further details on AQUAMAN lol. I just can't let myself do that due to where I am. But, as said, from an outside perspective - you alleviated my fears and are right on how JLA could possibly not have a big impact on the solo film world.

 

[Tobias]

There wasn't much depth in any of those movies you listed. The Joker had zero depth. He was a psychopath the entire film without any development. Two Face's arc was too quick and Batman not given as much as as in BB. This was all ignored because the movie was so well written, directed, scored, and acted. Same can be said about X-Men. There wasn't much depth to the characters in any of the X-Men movies with the expection of Magneto and Xavier. Not sure why you bring up Superman Returns. They tried to make that movie more serious and it ended up being the most boring superhero movie probally ever made.

I pretty much agree. SR may not be the single most boring superhero film ever but it's among the 2 or 3 such films.

I watched it again last summer after Thor and Cap and in comparion it is a poorly done film. Odd when Richard White was the heroic and sympathetic character in SR and not Superman.

GL had it's problems too.

Comparing WB lack of success in doing superhero films, besides batman, and given that TA is turning into maybe the best-ever superhero film made I think WB needs to focus on producing a decent solo film before they tackle JL. IMO a WB JL is not near ready for primetime yet.

 

[Breogan]

Looks like WB, Geoff Johns and DC have finally got their act together, and committed to putting together a Justice League project worthy of the name, and to stand against the Avengers media explosion.
They should be proud! -http://www.superherohype.com/news/a...nnounced-for-robot-chickens-dc-comics-special

Dude! You punk'd or rick rolled us!

he punk roll'd us.

....And finally what you've all been waiting for DC and it's Chief "Creative" Officer
Geoff Johns brings you the JL - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AOI79rLovI&feature=youtu.be

Who was that humping the Bat Signal?

Silly Marvel has got nothing on the genius that is DC/WB, who needs over $600,000,000 Boxo, when you can have Joker pee and Two Face not wiping.

 

[Monstrosity]

It really shouldn't be this hard. Just make a good Superman movie, then Batman, have a crossover and then expand on that.

Problem is they are screwing all the tradition of Superman with this reboot. There is a thousand stories they could tell but no they have to take away the red underwear and give us a Superman who doesn't want to be Superman. I refuse to watch it.

 

[The Guard]

What's this about Superman not wanting to be Superman?

 

[HighFivingMF]

....And finally what you've all been waiting for DC and it's Chief "Creative" Officer
Geoff Johns brings you the JL - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AOI79rLovI&feature=youtu.be

Who was that humping the Bat Signal?

Silly Marvel has got nothing on the genius that is DC/WB, who needs over $600,000,000 Boxo, when you can have Joker pee and Two Face not wiping.

Yeah. They shouldn't make anything but a Justice League movie! They should stop printing the comics too because the comics aren't a Justice League movie!

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Who was that humping the Bat Signal?

The Humping Robot. Pretty notorious on Robot Chicken.

[YT]csqrZ0ZfBvY[/YT]
[YT]Mm_j78WEn-U[/YT]
[YT]KSI7Rh_j_18[/YT]

 

[UltraHypnotic]

I'm not a frequent commenter, so maybe this has been said before. But the problem I see with DC/WB is that, other than Batman and Superman, no one cares about the rest of their characters. From the late 1930's until now, how many television shows, cartoons, movie serials and movies have Batman and Superman had? In that same amount of time, how many have all the rest had? Look at their direct to dvd animated movies. The most of them have been Batman and Superman. The only time we've seen all of their characters work have been in Super Friends, Super Powers, Justice League, Teen Titans and now Young Justice. All team shows.

Looking at all of the Marvel movies, there is no reason why the WB shouldn't have been able to put together at least a Flash movie by now. His, getting struck by lighting and doused with chemicals origin story, is just a crazy as Peter Parker being bitten by a spider. And character wise, if you can make Steve Rogers work on film, you sure as hell can make Barry Allen work on film. But can you really take seriously Captain Cold, Mirror Master, Heat Wave, Weather Wizard, the Trickster, Pied Piper, the Top, and Captain Boomerang? I don't think the question should be where did DC/WB go wrong? It should be, how can they do it right. And I don't think they even know how to answer that question.

That's why coming out with a Justice League movie is their best bet. Other than their big two, the rest of their characters are stronger together than they are apart. If they can make a kick ass JL movie, then they might be able to spin off of solo movie of one of the characters.

Another thing I think they need to do, and this can be confusing as hell if handled wrong and misused like it was back in the day, is take advantage of the Elseworlds/Multiverse angle. That can be an easy way for them to explain why the Christopher Nolan version of Batman that everyone now knows, isn't involved with the JL. Or even Zack Snyder's Superman if Henry Cavil isn't in it either. If done right, they can build up to an epic Crisis on Infinite Earths movie or movies.

 

[metaphysician]

The thing is, no one cared about Marvel's characters, either. This didn't stop them from making various hits, including one mega smash. People not knowing your characters is an obstacle, but hardly an insurmountable one, if you know what you are doing.

 

[Octoberist]

Problem is they are screwing all the tradition of Superman with this reboot. There is a thousand stories they could tell but no they have to take away the red underwear and give us a Superman who doesn't want to be Superman. I refuse to watch it.

Regarding point number two: You mean Superman 2?

 

[Breogan]

But the problem I see with DC/WB is that, other than Batman and Superman, no one cares about the rest of their characters.

The thing is, no one cared about Marvel's characters, either. This didn't stop them from making various hits, including one mega smash. People not knowing your characters is an obstacle, but hardly an insurmountable one, if you know what you are doing.

Yeah I think the barrier might be more that no one with power at WB movies cares or recognizes anything worth pursuing other than Batman Superman.
And why would they, it's where they see the $$$.
They fast forwarded crap like Catwoman & the Green Lantern script, but on the marquee value of the Actors names they were able to attach, they saw those as vehicle for their actors.
Didn't give a *** if the script was that good or connecting to the actual material, then they just attach a formula director to it, who had no passion or investment in the character either.

It's like they do it backwards, but no surprise it's a corporation.

This is all managed from above, just coldly moving pieces already under WB management.
Built from the top down. WB has a whole world besides comics to invest in. Comics to them is little beyond Batman Superman.

While Marvel who is just comics, does the opposite and seems to have built from the bottom up. Where they are fans of the material first, who gave a crap about Iron-Man? They did, they see it as all having potential, and then build up from there.
That's how they pulled it off, building several franchise up to Avengers success, before WB could even blink or realize how to get to a Justice League.

That any potential JL momentum has just shifted again to Batman Superman specific , just bears this out.

WB just got huge accolades with the success of Argo and Afleck, and now they've moved (that piece)him into their big franchise Batman/Superman, just shows how they manage it like very expensive pieces from the top down.
This isn't any passion towards a Justice League, these are managers coldly putting pieces together.

Batman Superman may pay off for WB again.
Meanwhile Marvel forges ahead passionately (some good some bad) but with their whole universe opened up to them and on the screen.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

What's this about Superman not wanting to be Superman?

Yeah, I didn't get that point of his either, and the Red underwear thing is not important at all.

 

[storyteller]

When it comes to do it's simple. Marvel only needed to worry about marvel. DC does not have it's own studio. It is depended on the WB.

Marvel
Iron Man - great success that forces the to reevaluate TIH
The Incredible Hulk - Lukeworm I guess. Not exactly a rush to get TIH 2 out before Avengers or after.
Iron man 2 - success and Marvel knows it's shooting for Avengers.

Thor and Captain America - well first off I would like to know what kinda boost they got from 3D ticket sales. But Marvel was pushing the Avengers was going to happen

Avengers- Raging success and now DC needs to compete with that standard and Marvel has been running away with it since.

But when it comes to Marvel, they aren't always nice to work with. You got cast and director turnover which may or may not be a good/bad thing.


DC

Batman has been successful more or less but their game plan as never moved beyond making more Batman films. I think Nolan staying on for all the films was a wise move. The series needed to develop and that's hard to do when you you jumping through a whole new cast or crew.

Superman Returns is I think sums up part of the WB/DC relationship. The WB likes to put Superman in development hell. The movie made a lot of money. But that budget was huge. Clearly lower the damn budget and of course have Singer make his film better. They further away we got the more the squandered momentum until they just decided to reboot. Superman needs to be handled with care but damn they handle him like he's radioactive. But of course soon enough Iron man and Hulk come around and show that Marvel means business.

Now the WB decides to start two productions over the next fear years. Justice League? Why would they go into this with something so shallow. A movie like this shouldn't fall apart after some costume tests. The WB lacks conviction.

Green Lantern the second problem. They green light movies with huge budgets and this is a budget that needs the film to have insane success at the box office. Marvel goes for lower budgets with lesser expectations and get's a reward. Had Captain America and Thor been handled by the WB, they would have seen the box office and concluded these films to be failures. Their expectations are too damn high. The other problem is they have high expectations but offer no support.

Seriously did anyone read the script? Did any competent producer go. "you know what this is pretty mediocre, this is not a film that would launch a DC cinematic universe but would be an okay intro for Green Lantern. If we went forward I would suggest a 120 to 150 million budget with a moderately invested director who has navigated the sci fi genre". Instead they threw money at it, hoping that would make it good and they got burned by it. They should have known the movie wasn't going well when people praised the OA footage. You know the part of the film that really does nothing for the rest.

Batman was fine. i don't DC needs to make Justice League as much as Marvel needed to make the Avengers. Marvel is geared toward that team dynamic in general. DC though is geared toward the solo experience. I mean wonder woman, Flash, Superman, Batman, Green lantern, and others save the world themselves. So it's a big deal when they need to come together. Marvel heroes team up every weekend to grow grocery shopping.

But no WB was stuck on making a Superman movie. Whats worse is they green lit movies fewer were invested in. Jonah Hex? Catwoman?


But here's the thing, DC has been lukewarm in the movies but on TV they own it. The Flash will have made his third live action appearance when he shows up on arrow. Since the CR movies, Superman has had 3 live action television series. Batman sorta had one with Birds of Prey. Green Arrow and Black Canary have two live action appearances. The list goes on thanks to Smallville and Arrow. Then when it comes to animation, Marvel can't touch em. Sure Marvel has ramped it up but DC I feel has just had better written shows that do not just cater to the children. You can watch the DCAU at any age without feeling your too old for it.

Which brings us back to the WB's problem. Your keys to the DCU kingdom is right there. These people know these characters. They have adapted them multiple times. Why the hell are you making Justice League war in animated form. Get these guys on live action. Don't get Geoff Jones to look at some productions. He doesn't have the experience. Bruce Timm should be Director of the DC cinematic universe and have Mark Hamill come in every week to deliver a prep talk in the Joker voice.


DC/WB has potential and they waste it.

 

[Breogan]

Bruce Timm should be Director of the DC cinematic universe ....
DC/WB has potential and they waste it.

I'd be curious to see Bruce Timm's take directing a live action movie, has he ever expressed any interest in live action directing? Seems like a very different world.
Maybe Batman Beyond heavy on CG animation, but I don't know that he should automatically be Director of the entire DC cinematic universe.

 

[Xak-Ell]

its the years of only focusing on batman and superman. if they payed attention to all their characters, then they could have done a JL movie in the 90's or early 2000's