I actually think the idea of moving from Man of Steel to Batman v Superman was an inspired one on paper; it's a chance to address the character flaws people raised with Man of Steel, it encourages people who were put off by Man of Steel to come and see Batman (or if they redeem Superman), it puts two of your biggest heroes on screen so you can get the setup for Justice League and ride that expanded universe hype through the next two films, which are the riskier propositions. It's actually a really good idea, in theory.
THR: Warner Bros. Mulls Releasing Fewer Films as 'Batman v. Superman' Stalls
- Thread starter Frosty Droid
- Start date
- Status
I really do hope Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman will be good, both critically and commercially. It will send a strong undeniable message that the audience IS there for something else than Marvel films, just not Snyder's brand of not-Marvel-films.
This is the right answer here
There is a Wonder Woman movie coming. It's being worked on now and is currently set for release in June 2017 (so will see release before the Justice League film)
You say no one cares about Aquaman? Could say hardly anyone cares about most of the characters that Marvel has. Outside of Hulk, Spiderman and X-Men I didn't know any of them until they had films made. Thor I only knew of as the traditional Norse god. Ant Man? Guardians? Iron-Man? Many didn't know of Iron Man. I think I and many others only went to see it as it looked interesting. Robert Downey Jnr stuck in the desert trying to create some sort of robot suit. As for Guardians, didn't know of them prior to the film but now Rocket and Groot are some of my fave ever characters.
The little bit I have seen of Jason Momoa for Aquaman looks interesting to me. so I want to see what is done here. I know next to nothing of the traditional character (apart from he does stuff with water and aquatic creatures) and was saddened when I looked at him and he doesn't have the long hair and facial hair as Jason does for the role. So just because a character isn't widely known beforehand doesn't mean they can't make a good movie with them. In some ways it perhaps actually works better as they don't have to try and live up to previous times they were on screen.
time to hunt down Nolan and chain him to a director's chair. Then go after his brother and lock him into the dungeon with a typewriter. Then get someone to edit out all the cheesy camp from the scripts that finds it's way into every Nolan movie somehow
boom, DC cinematic universe is saved
boom, DC cinematic universe is saved
Right, because we can't have original whacky off the charts space operas anymore. We can't have any bit of risk taking...
because that's what that movie was. It's not a bad film at all. It's incredibly campy and enjoyable. So many references to past films in there to that people missed.
I like originality, even if filled with homages, if something can be completely different than what is out there (like these by the numbers marvel films) i'm on board.
I love WB because they still take risks. I'm very fearful what may happen in the next 5 years.
It's going to be nothing but really safe summer blockbusters year round.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
They should be mulling over finding new jobs.
MrRudiMentary
Member
Just wait until Aquaman ends up being their largest superhero because they have him to James Wan.
I think Nolan would do a great job directing a new Batman trilogy with Affleck.
Batman is already established. Joker and Harley are going to be established soon. They already have commissioner Gordon. Cast someone like McConaughey as the Riddler and you have yourself plenty of characters Nolan can work with to make several coherent films.
And they would have terrible action scenes. You win some, you lose some.
thehypocrite
Member
He doesn't want to do it. This is obvious, Nolan gets to do whatever he wants, the money trucks are there for him and he gets offered all promising scripts and projects by WB. He isn't interested so there's no point entertaining that fantasy.
Sumio Mondo
Member
Time for the solo Batman film. Get somebody other than Snyder to do it, preferably just Affleck himself to do it and we're set. Or Bruce Timm.
Nailed it, just fire Snyder and make an actually good movie instead.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
I understand where all the criticism came from, but I kinda dug the film. Lots of room for improvement but overall, still not as bad as some critics say.
Also, I think the main issue here is no one reining in Snyder and -- this is a big one -- Dave Goyer writing it. Has Goyer written any movie that was good (solo or collaborated?).
Don't forget, Goyer directed this turd:
You left off the best film:
Dash_Riprock
Member
There was nothing "original" about Jupiter Ascending. It hit every Sci-Fi cliche in the fucking book.
And just because a studio takes a risk doesn't mean they should be rewarded for doing so. That's the entire point of calling it a risk: it can do well or it can bomb spectacularly.
Thus far all of WB's risk films have bombed, except now they don't have HP and the TDK trilogy to fall back on anymore.
Because origins aren't needed. Did GOTG have a origin story? No.
Right. He's not going back to Batman. No freaking way.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Do we even need a DC Comics Universe? I think that the interconnecting of IPs is just going to ultimately not do well for Marvel or DC.
Technically it did, but it lasted for six seconds :v
As for this though, I don't think it should have been an origin story, but I think a solo Batman flick starring Affleck would have been nice to have before BvS.
Technically it did, but it lasted for six seconds :v
As for this though, I don't think it should have been an origin story, but I think a solo Batman flick starring Affleck would have been nice to have before BvS.
Agreed.
And other films showed team-ups of new characters as well. X-men and Guardians of the Galaxy are centered around them, with all characters unknown initially to the masses. Though most of those films do tend to have a focus on a single character (Wolverine in most of the main X films, Professor X in the prequels, Starlord).
Still don't know how they're going to do Aquaman from technical point of view. Having the character obviously holding his breath underwater just looks as goofy as fuck
I appreciate it more when a studio knows the essence behind the success of their ip's and makes sure to use that for future releases. Risks are not worthy of praise if they are just throwing shit at a wall to see what sticks, which is what WB is doing.
I do appreciate the creative freedom directors seem to have, but it really would help to have better planning and quality control in the early stages, I think. If an original and risky vision has potential and is well thought out, go for it. Because that might be the next big thing. But the risk of a film should be the concept of the film itself, not it being a complete mess in what it is set to do, of which the latter is the case for BvS.
(I haven't seen Jupited Ascending, so can't comment on that one).
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
That wasn't one of the issues for BvS for me
Problem is that a film of Batman becoming cruel enough to court Superman won't baller it box office wise.
Finaika
Member
He's depressed.
Isn't Universal scheduled to film a live-action The Little Mermaid movie? Disney probably has one planned along the way. Might as well get used to it!
They're going to have to do underwater talking, and underwater combat, all while fighting the stigma of Aquaman being a goof character.
Should make it easier for him to get into character then.
Spring-Loaded
Member
It hasn't been announced yet? I've seen that idea tossed about as if it was actually slated.
GabeTheGrouch76
Member
Except Miller has just recently proved that he's still a great director with Mad Max: Fury Road? Justice League: Mortal was going to start filming after the release of the first Happy Feet (also by Miller), so even then making this assumption doesn't make any sense.
It's also worth pointing out in regards to Campbell that a. his previous film before Green Lantern was his Edge of Darkness adaptation, which wasn't critically well-received and underperformed--a stark contrast to Miller's JL preceding Happy Feet, so comparing the two is kinda disingenuous; and b. Green Lantern's problems were related more towards the script; which had the potential to make for a good movie but got hackneyed into a mess by too many creative and executive cooks.
This is a really poor argument all around.
You left off the best film:
Worth pointing out though that he co-wrote the script alongside Christopher Nolan for The Dark Knight trilogy, and Dark City had two other writers with him (Alex Proyas and Lem Dobbs). Blade I and II were indeed solo efforts though.
Excluding those films, Goyer's had far more misses than hits when writing films by himself (Blade: Trinity, The Unborn, The Crow: City of Angels) and in collaboration with other writers (Jumper, Ghost Rider 2, MoS, and now BvS).
JimiNutz
Banned
I don't think so, think it's just as assumption. Maybe they will wait until after Suicide Squad to see how the Joker is received first?
Reizo Ryuu
Member
I don't think the box office is as "disastrous" as people say. It's at pretty much the same point as IM3 atm, which went on to make 1.2b, excluding home video.
Dash_Riprock
Member
Its less than IM3 at the same point in time and goes lower with each passing day.
At this point its an ASM2 level of failure where it made its budget back but its nowhere near successful enough to justify building an entire franchise around it.
And home video sales have been crap for a long time now since the rise of Netflix and Amazon prime. They'll help, but not as much as they used to.
Reizo Ryuu
Member
It's in its second week and doing better than both MoS and ASM2, I don't see the doom and gloom warranting calling this a "disaster"
KonradLaw
Member
Will he sing "Darkness! No Fresh Tomatoes!?"
Finaika
Member
That's really scary.
KonradLaw
Member
Maybe. But their saving grace is that they do not need to built that franchise solely on BvS. ASM2 was different, since they had to really grasp for ridiculous straws to justify making spin-offs.
Because he's finishing up Live By Night and jumping into Justice League right now.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Its the first time that the DC trinity appear on the big screen after decades. It should be performing much better than simply just better over 2 shitty movies.
And neither of those movies needed to make $900 million or so to turn a profit. This film is definitely more costly than Man of Steel was, though I hear Amazing Spider-man 2 cost a lot as well and still underperformed at over $700 million.
For being the first film ever to have Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman, you bet financial expectations were higher.
Furthermore, I think the name of both Batman and Superman is actually stronger than Justice League. It is well known, but Superman and Batman are two of the most iconic names in the whole spectrum of comic book characters. Even my mother could describe them out of her head. Hell, my grandmother could.
More_Badass
Member
Why was In The Heart of The Sea an obvious failure before release? Historical survival action/drama? That isn't exactly a run-of-the-mill genre flick like superhero or sci-fi or reboot
Its actually not. Whether it would have been a great movie is only an assumption. You only have a script which would have likely been changed throughout the production of said film. It could have failed just as the next. I'm just pointing out the possibility that it could have been shit.
And Green Lantern's failure were way more than the script. It was just a shitty movie all around with pretty CGI.
Yeah I remember folks being pretty excited about it. Especially because Ron Howard and Hemsworth were coming hot off of Rush.
GabeTheGrouch76
Member
And I'm pointing out that given the information we do know about the project --namely the people involved and their past credentials-- the possibility of it not turning out to be shit was a more likely chance than it turning out to be shit. A project never getting off the ground doesn't suddenly make it exist in a vacuum. Would it be unfair to assume JL: Mortal would had likely turned out to be mediocre if, say, Michael Bay was attached to direct instead?
You can still be original while paying homage. Tarantino did it his whole career. What does that say about the state of the film industry when the only thing that is a sure fire money maker is a brand?
The movie business is sinking, fast.
- Status