Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Eh, still not interested in D.C. They honestly need to stop production and go back to square one like Sony after ASM2.
And the big advantage that Sony has is that they can piggyback onto Marvel since they have Marvel characters. The Marvel brand is at an all-time high worldwide, where even non-comic/superhero fans love everything Marvel. The fact that Sony gets to use the Marvel label and pair with them makes it much easier to get back into the game.
DC on the other hand, doesn't have that advantage. In fact, many casual fans will not even be interested in seeing a superhero film that isn't Marvel. The true comic book/superhero fans will, but the causal fans that Marvel has captured (worldwide, from every demographic group) will not even pay attention to a superhero movie that isn't affiliated with "Marvel."
DC needs to wait until this era of superhero films is over, and strategize how to improve their brand. They don't have a worldwide brand like Marvel does. So even if they create the most amazing films ever, they won't do well because the casual fans just aren't interested (no matter how good a movie it is) if it isn't Marvel. So total sales aren't going to be good.
What is "Square One"? Batman? The Batman will film next year..
Wonder Woman 2 first scene: Diana opens a portal to Earth Two and meets the real Superman and Batman, says, "You wouldn't believe the idiots I've been working with."
The portal closes behind her.
Start over. But keep Gal Gadot. She is the only thing DC has done right onscreen since the Nolans left.
^^^Lol, that would work. There's a Black version of Wonder Woman or something like that....would DC be able to ride the Black Panther wave and introduce her or would it look to much like copying ideas from Marvel?
Is there a DC equivalent of Marvel Studios or is DC's involvement limited to selling the rights to movie makers?
Warner Bros. is DC.
Marvel Studios exists because a number of IPs (X-Men and all the mutants, Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, Blade, Daredevil, Ghost Rider and their collective nemeses) had been sold to Sony and Fox in the 1990s when Marvel Productions was going through a bankruptcy.
Since that's never happened to DC, all of the characters are under one house and there is no "DC Studios." DC doesn't "sell the rights to movie makers."
^^^Lol, that would work. There's a Black version of Wonder Woman or something like that....would DC be able to ride the Black Panther wave and introduce her or would it look to much like copying ideas from Marvel?
There's no need to do that, and Marvel has copied DC for decades. That's why they've tried creating their own Batman multiple times (with the best version being Moon Knight).
And the big advantage that Sony has is that they can piggyback onto Marvel since they have Marvel characters. The Marvel brand is at an all-time high worldwide, where even non-comic/superhero fans love everything Marvel. The fact that Sony gets to use the Marvel label and pair with them makes it much easier to get back into the game.
DC on the other hand, doesn't have that advantage. In fact, many casual fans will not even be interested in seeing a superhero film that isn't Marvel. The true comic book/superhero fans will, but the causal fans that Marvel has captured (worldwide, from every demographic group) will not even pay attention to a superhero movie that isn't affiliated with "Marvel."
DC needs to wait until this era of superhero films is over, and strategize how to improve their brand. They don't have a worldwide brand like Marvel does. So even if they create the most amazing films ever, they won't do well because the casual fans just aren't interested (no matter how good a movie it is) if it isn't Marvel. So total sales aren't going to be good.
Nonsense. That's like saying no science fiction films should be made while Star Wars is out there (and there's more of that now than ever before).
"Casual fans" are actually, casually, interested in anything. The Marvel-DC rivalry is generated by geekdom.
DC's "worldwide" brand is DC, but people continue to delude themselves thinking the Marvel formula is The Only Way.
That's why you have epic storylines like Ragnarok being turned into punchlines, Ego the Living Planet going around in human form — singing refrains from '70s pop tunes and relieving himself by a tree — "Do you have a penis?" — and Stark showing up anywhere they can afford to cut Downey another check. They even wedged a number of concepts, plus Hulk, into a Thor movie because they're not fully committed to portraying a Norse saga on its own. A Thor trilogy should have been the CBM equivalent of Lord of the Rings.
I don't need DC to be "as big as" Marvel, anyway. Marvel has been the better-selling publisher since the early '70s. That doesn't mean they always have the best titles. In the '80s, DC soundly whupped Marvel's rear by publishing years of superior content. In fact, you may not know this, the '80s were so good to DC that that's where we've seen a number of comics reboots sourced for the screen: Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One (a lot of that in Nolan's trilogy); John Byrne's Man Of Steel; and George Pérez's reimagining of Wonder Woman, which started over with #1 in 1986. Watchmen? Yep, another '80s comic. I'm waiting for them to adapt Alan Moore's take on Swamp Thing — it must happen.
Warner Bros. should have had a pair and doubled down and committed to their darker-toned cinematic universe as initially planned. Bringing in "a Marvel guy" to restructure Justice League was a colossal error. The result is a tonally inconsistent film with unfinished CGI and noticeable errors that has a few standout moments.
Here is what I think D.C. to start fresh.
First, D.C. should stop producing films. Freeze everything for a year or two that isn't already shooting. I honestly don't even know why Shazam is going as scheduled after the Justice League failure. I will let Aquaman slide since it wrapped up by the release.
Second, get a Kevin Feige style guy in charge. WB has to let free-kick to this Feige like head of the D.C. movies. Maybe it is Geoff John's but they can't keep letting Suighara interfering with the movies. Dont get me wrong, Feige did this especially with Age of Ultron and a little bit with Dark World (leading to Patty Jenkins leaving) but nothing to the levels of say Suicide Squad or Justice League (though I can't say if those films would have been better with the director's vision before studio interference came into play.)
Third, this head should not to another origin for the Trinity. We saw a Wonder Woman origin, it isn't going to change much. In film, we saw Batman's parents die what 5 times (half are flashbacks in sequels) and Superman is a frickin' alien. We don't need to see those again for another 20/25 years. Even Green Lantern don't need one, just have Hal Jordan have the ring and explain the backstory. Flash maybe can do it Spiderman 2 style since it is known Barry is known Barry reads comics. Any other hero could be fair game origin wise.
Fourth, recast. Ezra Miller great actor and could be a very good Wally West, but he isn't Barry Allen, sorry. Ben Affleck was great in Batman V. Superman but was just getting paid in Justice League. Gal and Amy were good, but keeping them will just confuse the audience. Aquaman can be done by someone who can act. Superman has to be someone who is hard to cast but I know Henry Caville isn't him, even though we didn't stench of Clark Kent with him, I don't see that two sides of coin that is needed for him.
Fifth, don't make the movies dark just to be different. The Flash isn't a really dark comic like say the Gotham City based books are. Justice League followed the Batman V Superman look which was dark to the point of parody. We don't need all of that. If the tone of the character and the story calls for it to be dark, do it. Don't just do it to do it. And while we are at it, don't do a Thor Ragnarok and make a serious movie into a comedy.
You're just saying you want a reboot. Since you don't even want Gal around, that's what you're saying.
Kevin Tsujihara is no longer overseeing anything DC film-related, as far as I know. His replacement is Walter Hamada.
A complete reboot with new actors, no holdovers, isn't progress. Making more movies is progress. Commitment is progress. So WB isn't roping in the critics like Marvel is. So what? They tried to appease the critics and the result was Justice League. Do you want more of that?
You say keeping certain actors around will confuse the audience, but replacing everybody will confuse the audience even more, especially with everyone invested in Gal and Henry. Those two will be harder to replace than you realize.
Steppenwolf sucked because he was redone and rewritten. Portions of Justice League that didn't have to be rewritten and reshot were. Why did Joss do that? Who the hell knows. But he added some truly cringe-worthy materials.
No reboot. Because, really, I don't want to see another Superman or Batman origin (we don't yet know what exactly Matt Reeves is doing), and Wonder Woman's origin is fine. Let's move forward.
A complete reboot with new actors, no holdovers, isn't progress. Making more movies is progress. Commitment is progress.
If you're heading toward the cliff, keeping on keeping on isn't progress either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
So WB isn't roping in the critics like Marvel is. So what? They tried to appease the critics and the result was Justice League. Do you want more of that?
It isn't that WB tried to please the critics. It isn't that WB tried to please fans. It is that WB doesn't seem to have a direction or overall plan, other than large special effects budgets. And with very few exceptions, they keep producing screenplays that seemingly have no clue on how to build character and build up a plot. To be fair, they aren't alone in this. The current train wreck of the STAR TREK movies is doing the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Steppenwolf sucked because he was redone and rewritten.
And because he has a silly name. What? The Penny Plunderer and the Condiment King were holding out for too much money? Oo! O how about Egghead? True, it would be hard to fill Vincent Price's skullcap, but with WB's budget, I'm sure they could find someone. Benedict Cumberbatch maybe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Portions of Justice League that didn't have to be rewritten and reshot were. Why did Joss do that? Who the hell knows.
Seemingly no one at WB. Their movie-making plan is largely something like this:
Nonsense. That's like saying no science fiction films should be made while Star Wars is out there (and there's more of that now than ever before).
"Casual fans" are actually, casually, interested in anything. The Marvel-DC rivalry is generated by geekdom.
DC's "worldwide" brand is DC, but people continue to delude themselves thinking the Marvel formula is The Only Way.
That's why you have epic storylines like Ragnarok being turned into punchlines, Ego the Living Planet going around in human form — singing refrains from '70s pop tunes and relieving himself by a tree — "Do you have a penis?" — and Stark showing up anywhere they can afford to cut Downey another check. They even wedged a number of concepts, plus Hulk, into a Thor movie because they're not fully committed to portraying a Norse saga on its own. A Thor trilogy should have been the CBM equivalent of Lord of the Rings.
I don't need DC to be "as big as" Marvel, anyway. Marvel has been the better-selling publisher since the early '70s. That doesn't mean they always have the best titles. In the '80s, DC soundly whupped Marvel's rear by publishing years of superior content. In fact, you may not know this, the '80s were so good to DC that that's where we've seen a number of comics reboots sourced for the screen: Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One (a lot of that in Nolan's trilogy); John Byrne's Man Of Steel; and George Pérez's reimagining of Wonder Woman, which started over with #1 in 1986. Watchmen? Yep, another '80s comic. I'm waiting for them to adapt Alan Moore's take on Swamp Thing — it must happen.
Warner Bros. should have had a pair and doubled down and committed to their darker-toned cinematic universe as initially planned. Bringing in "a Marvel guy" to restructure Justice League was a colossal error. The result is a tonally inconsistent film with unfinished CGI and noticeable errors that has a few standout moments.
I disagree with you, and think your plan in nonsense. DC needs a fresh start.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
— and Stark showing up anywhere they can afford to cut Downey another check. They even wedged a number of concepts, plus Hulk, into a Thor movie because they're not fully committed to portraying a Norse saga on its own. A Thor trilogy should have been the CBM equivalent of Lord of the Rings.
