DC Comics and the film industry

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

i was thinking marvel is cranking out 2 or 3 films a year, while DC/WB seems only able to get Batman off the ground. the only real way to fix this is to give DC their own studio and let it run independent of WB. yeah this will likely never happen but i think its the only way DC can get their characters on the big screen.

[The Xenos]

I think I said this same thing in another thread. Actually, I'm sure I've said it numerous times over and over again. DC is AOL Time Waner's bitch. The studio politics and total lack of knowledge of the characters Warners owns is killing any chances of a good DC franchise.

[Rahul]

You know, once I thought DC had a greater chance of releasing movies on not so well known characters(well, compared to Bats and Supes) like Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow etc because of the financial backing Time Warner provided. And Marvel would the one to rely on big guns Spidey, Hulk, X-Men...

I was wrong!

[blackdragon6]

You know, once I thought DC had a greater chance of releasing movies on not so well known characters(well, compared to Bats and Supes) like Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow etc because of the financial backing Time Warner provided. And Marvel would the one to rely on big guns Spidey, Hulk, X-Men...

I was wrong!the cruel irony lmao...

[GRANT!]

You know, once I thought DC had a greater chance of releasing movies on not so well known characters(well, compared to Bats and Supes) like Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow etc because of the financial backing Time Warner provided. And Marvel would the one to rely on big guns Spidey, Hulk, X-Men...

I was wrong!

You were. Time Warner can only finance so many movies. And not everyone wants to see movies about dudes in tights. Marvel can just focus on superhero movies. They don't need to make romantic comedies or whatever. Even before Marvel became a studio they could sell off properties to rival studios interested in making their own superhero movies.

[Jmacq1]

You were. Time Warner can only finance so many movies. And not everyone wants to see movies about dudes in tights. Marvel can just focus on superhero movies. They don't need to make romantic comedies or whatever. Even before Marvel became a studio they could sell off properties to rival studios interested in making their own superhero movies.

That's all true. However you'd think that Time-Warner would look at the huge amounts of box-office scratch those Marvel Superhero movies are raking in and push their own superhero properties a little higher on the docket to try and compete.

[JDogindy]

I fail to understand why DC keeps failing in most mediums outside of comics. When it comes to their movies, they wind up dealing with groups that don't even want to make a movie befitting Superman.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

The thing is that the X-Men and Fantastic Four are teams that worked as a unit; the JLA is made up of heroes who had their own titles, like Supes, Batman, Green Lantern, and so on. So the Marvel teams could have a story that could be told easily, but the JLA is not so easy to tell, because they're more like get-togethers.

That said, I think Green Lantern would be a good movie, but I've never seen one made yet. But it's early in the morning, and I can't think of any other DC character outside of Batman and Superman who could be good candidates.

[Jmacq1]

That said, I think Green Lantern would be a good movie, but I've never seen one made yet. But it's early in the morning, and I can't think of any other DC character outside of Batman and Superman who could be good candidates.

Flash? Personally I think the Flash is the best candidate for a solo movie outside of Batman and Superman (yes, even before Wonder Woman), primarily because the Flash's "secret identity" tends to be a lot more "everyman" than a billionaire Bruce Wayne, fearless ace test pilot Hal Jordan, or even a Pulitzer Prize-winner Clark Kent.

In that sense, Flash comes across as one of the most "Marvel-like" of the DC stable.

Though the challenge for Flash is bringing his villains to the screen without them looking exceedingly silly......

[JDogindy]

Flash? Personally I think the Flash is the best candidate for a solo movie outside of Batman and Superman (yes, even before Wonder Woman), primarily because the Flash's "secret identity" tends to be a lot more "everyman" than a billionaire Bruce Wayne, fearless ace test pilot Hal Jordan, or even a Pulitzer Prize-winner Clark Kent.

In that sense, Flash comes across as one of the most "Marvel-like" of the DC stable.

Though the challenge for Flash is bringing his villains to the screen without them looking exceedingly silly......

Yeah, Flash's main pro is that he's more of a common folk, compared to other DC characters. The problem is that a good part of the moviegoing public probably hasn't read a comic book, and Flash's villains usually rank in the second tier of DC's rogues gallery, like Gorilla Grodd and the Reverse Flash. How they can be implimented without screwing up is a big mystery.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

Wonder Woman would be a good candidate, for obvious reasons, but, since she's from an Amazon Island, this could turn out to be Hercules goes to New York (or whatever that Arnold Schwarzennegger movie's name was).

Flash is also a good candidate. How about the Atom? A nuclear physicist gets into nanotechnology and ... you know.

I think Shazam would also be good - many people would identify with crippled Billy Batson, and the series from the 1970's was apparently a success. This brings back memories. :)

[JDogindy]

Wonder Woman would be a good candidate, for obvious reasons, but, since she's from an Amazon Island, this could turn out to be Hercules goes to New York (or whatever that Arnold Schwarzennegger movie's name was).

Flash is also a good candidate. How about the Atom? A nuclear physicist gets into nanotechnology and ... you know.

I think Shazam would also be good - many people would identify with crippled Billy Batson, and the series from the 1970's was apparently a success. This brings back memories. :)

You got the title right. I'd like to see Shazam, as well.

[Jmacq1]

Atom wouldn't be bad. Green Arrow could probably work.

Reverse-Flash might be the best bet for a Flash villain in a movie, honestly. At least then you don't have to explain how ordinary humans are posing any challenge for a guy that moves at lightspeed.

Grodd could actually be pretty terrifying as a movie villain, but you'd have to play it just right, and it'd be really easy to end up seeming silly rather than scary. Plus well...explaining where he comes from? Uh...yeah, could be a problem if you want to be comic-accurate at all.

It's funny how DC's pedigree gets in the way of its' success at times. All that Silver-Agey silliness that's so entrenched can really kark up trying to make them into movies that general audiences won't find unintentionally hilarious.

[Agent Helix]

The biggest hurdle with DC characters is that unlike Marvel, few of them have a real definitive version. Which Flash do you adapt? Which Green Lantern? Which VERSION of Superman or Batman? You don't have those problems with Spider-Man or Iron Man, because those characters haven't gone through so many drastic upheavals in terms of actual characterization and tone.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

I can't see Green Arrow working - I mean, in an age of automatic weapons, his bow and arrow just wouldn't cut it.

Reverse Flash would be a good villian in a Flash movie, but you'd have to explain where he came from. I think Captain Cold would also be a good candidate, but the best would be Rose and Thorn - both love interest and female opponent, the classic Batman/Catwoman dichotomy. Her dual personality could also be used to make the movie interesting.

[Jmacq1]

The biggest hurdle with DC characters is that unlike Marvel, few of them have a real definitive version. Which Flash do you adapt? Which Green Lantern? Which VERSION of Superman or Batman? You don't have those problems with Spider-Man or Iron Man, because those characters haven't gone through so many drastic upheavals in terms of actual characterization and tone.

Yeah, that too. Though I think most people default to "modern" version or "most famous version" in most cases. The average moviegoer isn't likely to be familiar with "Earth-1, Earth-2" business or "Crisis" or whatnot, and in all truth, at least with the "big 3" there are a lot of aspects of the characters that are pretty timeless and carry over between (nearly) all incarnations.

Yeah, it's a little harder for the second-tier characters, though.

[Jmacq1]

I can't see Green Arrow working - I mean, in an age of automatic weapons, his bow and arrow just wouldn't cut it.

That's where suspension of disbelief comes in, coupled with playing the character "smart." A stealthy fellow who softens up a gang of gun-wielding thugs with say, a flash-bang arrow or tear-gas arrow, and keeps himself mobile could probably do quite a bit of damage without getting pinned down.

With of course a strong helping of nigh-supernatural archery skills, of course.

But yeah, having him running around in broad daylight, in costume, and facing down hordes of gun-wielding thugs with just a bow and arrows would be a harder sell.

[Jmacq1]

I can't see Green Arrow working - I mean, in an age of automatic weapons, his bow and arrow just wouldn't cut it.

That's where suspension of disbelief comes in, coupled with playing the character "smart." A stealthy fellow who softens up a gang of gun-wielding thugs with say, a flash-bang arrow or tear-gas arrow, and keeps himself mobile could probably do quite a bit of damage without getting pinned down.

With of course a strong helping of nigh-supernatural archery skills, of course. Besides, if we can believe that a typical "martial arts master" in an action film can deal with gun-wielding thugs, why not a superhero with a bow? Heck, Batman doesn't even use weapons longer than throwing range against gun-wielding thugs, but people still accept his movies.

But yeah, having him running around in broad daylight, in costume, and facing down hordes of gun-wielding thugs with just a bow and arrows would be a harder sell.

[Magneto_X]

Grodd could actually be pretty terrifying as a movie villain, but you'd have to play it just right, and it'd be really easy to end up seeming silly rather than scary. Plus well...explaining where he comes from? Uh...yeah, could be a problem if you want to be comic-accurate at all.


It'd be better to just give him a new origin.

Just make Grodd an ordinary gorilla experimented on by scientists who gave him telepathy and an augmented body.

It would even give him a motive for hating humans, too.

[Naetnalta]

The biggest hurdle with DC characters is that unlike Marvel, few of them have a real definitive version. Which Flash do you adapt?

Barry Allen.
Which Green Lantern?
Hal Jordan.
Which VERSION of Superman
Richard Donner and Christopher Reeve's is pretty well accepted.
or Batman?
Batman: The Animated Series.
You don't have those problems with Spider-Man or Iron Man, because those characters haven't gone through so many drastic upheavals in terms of actual characterization and tone.
For Flash and Green Lantern, Super Friends has the definitive versions simplified into marketable images. Just use the the characterization they developed during the Silver Age and Bronze Age to fill them out.

I don't see them changing Superman any time soon. Giving him a kid out of wedlock was pretty messed up but as long as you keep away from the Superdick characterization, you're alright.

As for Batman, the Bruce Timm and Paul Dini animated series nailed him for me. He wasn't a humorless psycho. I think Christian Bale's Batman got some of that humanity across.

[Naetnalta]

I can't see Green Arrow working - I mean, in an age of automatic weapons, his bow and arrow just wouldn't cut it.

Yeah, but law enforcement today is also trying to use a lot of non-lethal weapons like foam and tasers. Ollie was sticking all that stuff on the tips of his arrows decades ago.

Did you forget that Batman only uses batarangs, a grappling gun, and a utility belt? Green Arrow has pretty much the same stuff but in his quiver.

[Naetnalta]

It'd be better to just give him a new origin.

Just make Grodd an ordinary gorilla experimented on by scientists who gave him telepathy and an augmented body.

It would even give him a motive for hating humans, too.
Making him a lab experiment gone wrong would just turn him into another sci-fi cliche. People already accept giant gorillas living on an island with dinosaurs behind a wall built by primitive savages.

[4thHorseman]

I think several movies could work. Definately Green Lantern, Flash, Wonder Woman, and Green Arrow I think could make good big screen characters.

I also think some lower tier characters could work. Seeing The Question done in maybe a Sin City or The Crow-esque type of film would be pretty good imo.

[Superbeast]

Marvel have came a long way in 10 years, from Chapter 1 to multimillion dollar movies, but they were smart in many ways. They put their big name franchises out there, in terms of X-Men, Fantastic 4 and Spider-Man as well as smaller names like Blade and Daredevil. However the entire time they were reaping profits to invest in the future of their franchises to make the successful stories of comics past modern movies. They never let the Avengers ace slip from them after reacquiring several franchises and I reckon we'll the see the Invaders in Cap's movie that will be released before the Avengers movie. They've played their strongest hand but with their own creative control with Paramount seemingly only as a distributor. So they make money from their big names commercially to funnel into their tighter universe they produce on their own. It's a very smart hustle.

[The Xenos]

I still say DC's biggest problem is they are stuck at the whims of Warners. That's AOL Time Warner, one of the six media conglomerates that control everything you see in the American media. Instead of having anyone who knows the character or even any of the editors work on the films, they have random Hollywood people do it.

We lucked out with Goyer and maybe some others having input for Batman Begins. Superman Returns on the other hand was a remake sequel thing of the 70s film with some stuff they pulled out of their ass tossed in. Then again, with asshat Jon Peters producing still, it could have been much worse somehow.

I think several movies could work. Definately Green Lantern, Flash, Wonder Woman, and Green Arrow I think could make good big screen characters.

I also think some lower tier characters could work. Seeing The Question done in maybe a Sin City or The Crow-esque type of film would be pretty good imo.

Naw. For Question, I wouldn't go anywhere near as stylized as Sin City or even The Crow. Do more of a street level crime drama. A Charles Bronson movie that's stumbling to figure out how to be zen. It's bad enough we got one blue collared superhero (The Spirit) going all Sin City. I'm a bit of a Guestion fan. I only pained my whole room a familiar shade of blue.

[Black Atom]

Barry Allen.

Hal Jordan.

Richard Donner and Christopher Reeve's is pretty well accepted.

Batman: The Animated Series.

For Flash and Green Lantern, Super Friends has the definitive versions simplified into marketable images. Just use the the characterization they developed during the Silver Age and Bronze Age to fill them out.

I don't see them changing Superman any time soon. Giving him a kid out of wedlock was pretty messed up but as long as you keep away from the Superdick characterization, you're alright.

As for Batman, the Bruce Timm and Paul Dini animated series nailed him for me. He wasn't a humorless psycho. I think Christian Bale's Batman got some of that humanity across.

I think Helix's point stands. When the '89 Batman came out, some people complained about how dark it was because the most widely known Batman at the time was the Adam West one. And the Nolan Batman movies have an even more realistic tone than the Burton films (Nolan himself has already said that there will be no Robin in his movies). For an even better example, check out the numerous debates on how to adapt Wonder Woman right. She has a different personality in every medium she appears in, not to mention pre and post-Crisis. You'd be hard pressed to find two fans who agree unilaterally on whether she should fly, have an invisible plane, or have star-spangled panties.

[Captain Smith]

It's easy - Stupid scripts that wander way off continuity so the director can add HIS special interpretation.

SR - piece of trash as it was to be a LOVE story. The last of the old Bats movies - nipples and Ah-nuld - bah.

Iron Man - good movie, good script, close to the story.

[G. Wayne]

Shazam is in the works, in theory anyway. and Watchmen is in production. WB seems to be a quicker to adapt the non-superhero comics than the capes and tights crowd. Quality aside, Constantine, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and V for Vendetta all managed to break past whatever it is that's keeping every DC character that isn't Superman or Batman from getting movies.

[Naetnalta]

For an even better example, check out the numerous debates on how to adapt Wonder Woman right. She has a different personality in every medium she appears in, not to mention pre and post-Crisis. You'd be hard pressed to find two fans who agree unilaterally on whether she should fly, have an invisible plane, or have star-spangled panties.
For a good example of a fictional female hero with the physicality and confidence of Wonder Woman, there's Xena, who looks eerily very much like Wonder Woman, wears a similarly designed costume, and also acts against an ancient Greek-inspired setting.

Wonder Woman also wore a skirt, way back in the Golden Age, and it's not very drastic a change to go all the way and use Xena's leather skirt. While stars were used in medieval heraldry, pentagrams were common in ancient Greece and associated with Venus, one of the gods who gifted Wonder Woman. Probably just better to stick with stars, though.

The ability to fly is an ability that has been associated with the stereotypical superhero since nearly the beginning of the genre, and Wonder Woman, the most famous female superhero of all, finally got the ability after Crisis. Let her keep it. Hermes gifted her with his speed, and since he is the only fictional character I can think of who could fly without wings before superheroes were invented, it seems kind of appropriate for Wonder Woman to have the ability.

While it may seem like the ability to fly makes the invisible jet pointless, don't forget that the invisible jet preceded the invention of stealth jets. It was undetectable to radar before we had the technology in the real world, and it's also undetectable by any other means of detection as well, including the human eye. Pretty handy when you think of how the military was tracking Iron Man in the "Iron Man" movie.

As for her personality, compromise the extremes. Don't make her too girly like when she was the Justice League's secretary. Don't make her too belligerent like she is in Kingdom Come.

[Peter Griffin]

I just hope when they eventually do make a green lantern movie they don't screw it up. they better not damn it!

[Comic_Mobsta]

Naw. For Question, I wouldn't go anywhere near as stylized as Sin City or even The Crow. Do more of a street level crime drama. A Charles Bronson movie that's stumbling to figure out how to be zen. It's bad enough we got one blue collared superhero (The Spirit) going all Sin City. I'm a bit of a Guestion fan. I only pained my whole room a familiar shade of blue.only if its based off the JLU version

[shades of eternity]

if dc needs a base line to develop their universe, they already have one: their animated universe.

batman animated, superman animated, justice league and jlu give it the strongest defintion of characters that would be comparatively easy to convert to the big screen.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

Marvel has it, and it's making tons of money - should DC have its own? I understand, though, that Warner Bros owns DC, so it already has its own studion, doesn't it?

[GRANT!]

Marvel has it, and it's making tons of money - should DC have its own? I understand, though, that Warner Bros owns DC, so it already has its own studion, doesn't it?

It's more like Time Warner has it's own comic book company. Warner Bros has to make more then just superhero movies to survive.

[IamtheRock3]

wait WB owns the whole of DC?

thought it was just the movie deals and Tv they owned

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

DUDE!!!

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=221885

[Green Lantern wannabe]

I would prefer a business model that's more tightly integrated, like Marvel owning the comics and movie studios, or Lucasfilm owning and making money from the entire Star Wars franchise.

[Expletive Deleted]

wait WB owns the whole of DC?Yep. DC Comics is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Warner Brothers Entertainment, part of Time Warner.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

That answers my question, then.

[GRANT!]

I would prefer a business model that's more tightly integrated, like Marvel owning the comics and movie studios, or Lucasfilm owning and making money from the entire Star Wars franchise.

That's a pretty high risk model. Lucasfilm wouldn't survive if Lucas didn't own Star Wars. Marvel had to mortgage their entire library of characters and Trademarks to finance Iron Man and the Hulk. If Iron Man tanked Marvel studios would probably have been done for.

[david r]

It makes no sense why DC/TimeWarner aren't capitalizing on the huge library of properties DC Comics possesses. Look at the success of Iron Man, Batman Begins, Hellboy, Blade etc. All comic properties that have been extremely lucrative for their corporate bosses.

TimeWarner is just leaving money on the table.

[The Xenos]

only if its based off the JLU version
I like the JLU version, but I like the O'Neil and Cowan version even better. JLU Question worked because of the rest of the JLU. He was a mix of Ditko's, O'Neil's, and a helping of generic conspiracy nut. I really enjoyd it. Yet as a stand alone, I don't know how he would hold up. Check out the mid 80s Question series. It's amazing. Then again, it's different from the original Charlton version as JLU is different from it. Plus that 80s Question was brought back by Rucka and used alongside Huntress in Huntress Cry for Blood. Unfortunately, the powers that be at DC decided to off him.
TimeWarner is just leaving money on the table.

Not to mention flushing it down the toilet. Superman Returns anyone? Not just the movie itself, but previous ones like the Burton attempt that cost millions of dollars and never got made.

[metalhead_dave743]

Then again, with asshat Jon Peters producing still, it could have been much worse somehow.



Two Words... Giant Spider

Or Thanagarian Snare Beast, whatever you prefer.

[IamtheRock3]

so dont expect a big rush for DC movies any time soon I guess.

[shades of eternity]

use the animated universe as a baseline and centralize the dc characters in a specific studio and maybe we can get some descent stories.

hell, I'd love to see a secret six, or lobo movie, but without proper support, not going to happen.

and if it does ...see the superman V script.:eek:

[Green Lantern wannabe]

I don't know about Superman V. I really like Christopher Reeve I and II, but not the rest, and I've been wondering if we should let it rest for a generation or so, and then start again.

They did that with Batman.

[The Xenos]

Clearly they should have done that with Superman Returns. He shouldn't have been returing. They didn't need an origin story, but to make it a sequel by way of a rehash of the Donner films was moronic. If I wanted to see Donner's Superman, I'd go see that one. Give me something new. Wait, they did. They gave us Super Bastard Boy. Where did they pull that crap from. Compare that to Batman Begins where it was based on actual stories and characters from the book. A bit smooshed together, but they were there.

[shades of eternity]

oddly enough when I say superman V, I'm not refering to superman returns.

singer took the best of a bad situation.

as for the story, well see for yourself (http://dementeddragon.proboards100.com/index.cgi?board=tvmovie&action=display&thread=801), but it's not for the faint of heart.

[LtMarvel]

It makes no sense why DC/TimeWarner aren't capitalizing on the huge library of properties DC Comics possesses. Look at the success of Iron Man, Batman Begins, Hellboy, Blade etc. All comic properties that have been extremely lucrative for their corporate bosses.

TimeWarner is just leaving money on the table.
Hulk, Daredevil, Elektra, Catwoman.

And there have been others...

And now there is ownership issues on Superman, which is certain to make the numbers people balk at any movie featuring the Man of Steel.

DC has published a lot of other books that were made into terrific films: A History of Violence, Road to Peridition, and so forth.

[Dr. Banner]

It makes no sense why DC/TimeWarner aren't capitalizing on the huge library of properties DC Comics possesses. Look at the success of Iron Man, Batman Begins, Hellboy, Blade etc. All comic properties that have been extremely lucrative for their corporate bosses.

TimeWarner is just leaving money on the table.


For DC to emulate Marvel's success they need to do more than simply release movies. They've got to find a way to make their stable of characters as interesting to the public as Marvel's are. I mean, Iron Man's got a cool suit of armour, he's a billionaire playboy who flies around with strippers and saki bombs on his own private jet. The X-Men have that whole badass outsider vibe going for them. Spidey is just flashy everyman fun.

The closest thing DC's got is Batman and that's why he's their biggest success. Otherwise it's a boring indestructable god who spends his off hours pretending to be a loser (and no amount of robot punching is going to fix that), a boring guy that runs really fast, or someone who wears boring magic jewelry.

[The Batman]

Clearly they should have done that with Superman Returns. He shouldn't have been returing. They didn't need an origin story, but to make it a sequel by way of a rehash of the Donner films was moronic. If I wanted to see Donner's Superman, I'd go see that one. Give me something new. Wait, they did. They gave us Super Bastard Boy. Where did they pull that crap from. Compare that to Batman Begins where it was based on actual stories and characters from the book. A bit smooshed together, but they were there.

Wow really?!?

I guess I just missed all those Batman comics where he needed to be hand held through each point of his journey to being Batman. You know, the ones where Rachel Dawes had to slap into him that killing was wrong and then sent him to Carmine Falcone to be told he needed to get out and explore the world? The ones where Ras al Ghul taught him pretty much everything he needed to know, including the benefits of wearing a costume to scare people, and then has Q - err I mean Lucius Fox - build it all? Yeah, I haven't seen any of those.

The recent Batman and Superman movies are about neck and neck in this,Batman Begins departed about as much from the source material as Superman Returns did.

[Jmacq1]

Yeah, and let's not forget that Batman's currently the one that (maybe) has a bastard son in the comics.

[Naetnalta]

if dc needs a base line to develop their universe, they already have one: their animated universe.

batman animated, superman animated, justice league and jlu give it the strongest defintion of characters that would be comparatively easy to convert to the big screen.

As long as they leave out Hawkman's cuckolding.

[David Walton]

I can't see Green Arrow working - I mean, in an age of automatic weapons, his bow and arrow just wouldn't cut it.

Nah, the contrast would make it work. Remember that the most recent Die Hard movie was sold as "an analog hero in a digital world" and it sold brilliantly.

They could take inspiration from the Grell run.

[David Walton]

Wow really?!?

I guess I just missed all those Batman comics where he needed to be hand held through each point of his journey to being Batman. You know, the ones where Rachel Dawes had to slap into him that killing was wrong and then sent him to Carmine Falcone to be told he needed to get out and explore the world? The ones where Ras al Ghul taught him pretty much everything he needed to know, including the benefits of wearing a costume to scare people, and then has Q - err I mean Lucius Fox - build it all? Yeah, I haven't seen any of those.

The recent Batman and Superman movies are about neck and neck in this,Batman Begins departed about as much from the source material as Superman Returns did.

Most of the examples you mention from BB can be traced to source material, it's really just about compression. The Rachel Dawes angle is adapted from "Batman: Year Two," it's just a much less messy take on why a bitter Bruce Wayne won't use a gun. Ra's al Ghul has always had a mentor/protegee relationship with Batman so the writers compressed Bruce's various mentors over the years into Ra's to make it work in a single movie.

I can't think of much in SR that was inspired by the comic. Certainly not the deadbeat dad angle.

[kalorama]

Ra's al Ghul has always had a mentor/protegee relationship with Batman so the writers compressed Bruce's various mentors over the years into Ra's to make it work in a single movie.

Batman and Ra's have never had a mentor/protege relationship. Batman has always viewed Ra's as a megalomaniacal psycho. Ra's tried to get BM to join his "cause" early on but Bruce threw it back in his face. They've been bitter enemies ever since. The only point of convergence they've ever had has been their mutual love for Talia.

[The Xenos]

Wow really?!?

I guess I just missed all those Batman comics where he needed to be hand held through each point of his journey to being Batman. You know, the ones where Rachel Dawes had to slap into him that killing was wrong and then sent him to Carmine Falcone to be told he needed to get out and explore the world? The ones where Ras al Ghul taught him pretty much everything he needed to know, including the benefits of wearing a costume to scare people, and then has Q - err I mean Lucius Fox - build it all? Yeah, I haven't seen any of those.

The recent Batman and Superman movies are about neck and neck in this,Batman Begins departed about as much from the source material as Superman Returns did.
I did say they were a bit smooshed together.

Making Lucius part of R&D and putting him into Year One was a shortcut for time. It has been shown that Wayne stole tech from his company for Batman. Plus I was really glad to see Lucius in a film. Plus Morgan Freeman. Wow.

Same with Ra's training Bruce so much. I agree I wanted to see Bruce opening those years over seas and all the places he went. Maybe he did that before we meet him coming home from Princeton. I do wish we saw more of that.

Well, you got me on Rachel. She was a studio mandate and the worst part of the movie. Even with a better actress that I really like I'm not looking forward to her too much in this film. Though she does seem to help introduce Harvey, who was originally planned to be in the first one, but the studio demanded a love interest.

Another nitpick I had was Gordon being there when Bruce's parents died, but I guess that was a time cutting shortcut too. You are taking decades of comics and cutting it down to two hours. Yet at least they took things from the books.

Compare that to Superman Returns. I couldn't tell if it was a sequel or a remake of the old ones. You have a son that Superman abandons. Lois is seeing someone new. Lex is the villain again and even has the goofy female sidekick. Superman rising on the third day after martyring himself against a giant chunk of rock. How can you not see how much worse that was than Batman begins?

Batman and Ra's have never had a mentor/protege relationship. Batman has always viewed Ra's as a megalomaniacal psycho. Ra's tried to get BM to join his "cause" early on but Bruce threw it back in his face. They've been bitter enemies ever since. The only point of convergence they've ever had has been their mutual love for Talia.

Gee. Isn't that what happened... in the movie. Again, you're taking years of comics and compressing it into two hours. Plus they mixed Ra's into Bruce's pre-Batman training. I have to admit, I really liked that change for time.

I remember I did some fanart of what could have been if they did a Batman show instead of Smallville. You'd have young Bruce world hopping and training for his war on crime. I thought it would be amazing is he met Ra's while he was doing this. Lo and behold, they had this in the eventual film. Sadly, no Talia. Still, it was pretty good.

Plus look at the cast. Liam Neesan as Ra's! Didn't anyone else love that? And Ken Watanabe as Ubu. Not to mention Tom Wilkinson as Falcone. I didn't think that one would work until I saw it and then I was impressed. Cillian Murphy as Crane. Gary Oldman as Gordon. Wow. They even got Michael Cane as Alfred. Certainly not a throwaway role this time! And.. okay.. blah for Katie Holmes as generic childhood love interest #347.

[kalorama]

Gee. Isn't that what happened... in the movie.

Not quite. As noted, in the movie they started out as friends. They never had any such relationship in the comics. In the books they've always been arch-enemies with no warm feelings between them, thus disputing the idea that they've "always had a mentor/protege relationship". It wasn't "compression" of any kind (and further disputing the idea that batman Begins didn't deviate from the books or create stuff from scratch). That part was a pure manufacture of the film that had no basis in the comic (not that there's anything wrong with that).

[StoneGold]

Not quite. As noted, in the movie they started out as friends. They never had any such relationship in the comics. In the books they've always been arch-enemies with no warm feelings between them, thus disputing the idea that they've "always had a mentor/protege relationship". It wasn't "compression" of any kind (and further disputing the idea that batman Begins didn't deviate from the books or create stuff from scratch). That part was a pure manufacture of the film that had no basis in the comic (not that there's anything wrong with that).

No, it's the idea that you have to tie that first villain into the origin somehow. So Doom was on the spacecraft with the FF, Kingpin killed Daredevil's father, Magneto built Cerebro, Stane was Tony's mentor and manipulated the attack that forced him to become Iron Man... am I missing anything? The only first villain who hasn't been shoved into the origin somehow that I can think of is Green Goblin, who had nothing to do with Pete becoming Spider-Man. Even though they could have easily made the science lab with the spiders an Oscorp facility.

[Grazzt]

No, it's the idea that you have to tie that first villain into the origin somehow. So Doom was on the spacecraft with the FF, Kingpin killed Daredevil's father, Magneto built Cerebro, Stane was Tony's mentor and manipulated the attack that forced him to become Iron Man... am I missing anything? The only first villain who hasn't been shoved into the origin somehow that I can think of is Green Goblin, who had nothing to do with Pete becoming Spider-Man. Even though they could have easily made the science lab with the spiders an Oscorp facility.

Even Animated DC fell into that trap: they decided to make Brainiac responsible for the demise of the Kryptonian population.

[StoneGold]

Even Animated DC fell into that trap: they decided to make Brainiac responsible for the demise of the Kryptonian population.

It's not necessarily a trap. I can understand the logic behind it. They're trying to compress decades of continuity into a compressed amount of time, so sometimes it is a lot easier to make the main villain involved with the origin, even if they never had anything to do with it originally. Hence, you have the Joker killing Thomas and Martha back in '89, which is the first time I can really think of them having done it (unless you want to count the Scarab getting involved in Billy Batson getting trapped in Shazam's cave in the serial). When it is done well, you compress time and raise the importance of the villain, as in Iron Man. When it is done poorly, you lengthen the amount of time and make everything a clusterfrig, like in Hulk.

[Magneto_X]

For DC to emulate Marvel's success they need to do more than simply release movies. They've got to find a way to make their stable of characters as interesting to the public as Marvel's are.

This makes sense.


I mean, Iron Man's got a cool suit of armour, he's a billionaire playboy who flies around with strippers and saki bombs on his own private jet.

Hal Jordan/Green Lantern. A daredevil fighter pilot, ladies man and interstellar police officer with the greatest weapon on the universe that allows him to create anything he desires on his finger.

There are plenty of other characters just as interesting.


The X-Men have that whole badass outsider vibe going for them.

Doom Patrol.


Spidey is just flashy everyman fun.

Jame Reyes/ Blue Beetle III, Ted Kord /Blue Beetle II, Wally West/ The Flash.


The closest thing DC's got is Batman and that's why he's their biggest success.

They only have Batman since they're only making good films about Batman.They need to give other characters the same treatment otherwise they will never succeed.


Otherwise it's a boring indestructable god who spends his off hours pretending to be a loser (and no amount of robot punching is going to fix that), a boring guy that runs really fast, or someone who wears boring magic jewelry.

DC has hundreds of characters just as interesting or moreso then Batman is but Warner Brothers needs to give them the best adaptions possible for them to work.

[StoneGold]

Doom Patrol.
Except they're the Doom Patrol, and their "differentness" was always kind of BS. Oh no, I can grow tall, I'm a freak! At least with the X-Men, there was the crap about genetics, which never made much sense, but moreso than DP.

That, and you'd have to rename the entire team. Ain't no one taking Elasti-Girl and Robot Man seriously.


Jame Reyes/ Blue Beetle III, Ted Kord /Blue Beetle II, Wally West/ The Flash.

You mean DC attempt at doing Spider-Man for the 40th time, a character that's only ever worked in a team setting, and a character that is in no sense an everyman? (Sorry, kid sidekick to superhero kind of negates the everyman appeal)


They only have Batman since they're only making good films about Batman.They need to give other characters the same treatment otherwise they will never succeed.



DC has hundreds of characters just as interesting or moreso then Batman is but Warner Brothers either doesn't know they exist, doesn't care, doesn't see the potential any average comic reader/creator does in the character or more often then not when they do adaptions give them awful films or tv shows. It's no wonder they don't do well under those conditions.

I dunno, Batman is pretty interesting...


But seriously, the problem is they have to take characters that Marvel hasn't already mined theatrically the best parts of. There is a good Green Lantern movie to be made, but making it a color-challenged version of Iron Man is not the way to do it. Flash... I'm not so sure of. Flash's core concept has always been a little weak. Maybe it's because his origin is a little weaker than most. It's hard to tie "I got hit by lightning, now I can run fast" into anything larger. They tried on the TV show, and it's arguable as to how well it worked. Frankly, Aquaman ends up being more compelling, at least as far as a solo first film goes.

[Grazzt]

Except they're the Doom Patrol, and their "differentness" was always kind of BS. Oh no, I can grow tall, I'm a freak! At least with the X-Men, there was the crap about genetics, which never made much sense, but moreso than DP.

That, and you'd have to rename the entire team. Ain't no one taking Elasti-Girl and Robot Man seriously.

Just don't refer to them by codename. Cliff, Rita, Jane, Rebis, and Danny would make an interesting team. Or play up the absurdist bits and put 'em up against the Brotherhood of Dada.

There is a good Green Lantern movie to be made, but making it a color-challenged version of Iron Man is not the way to do it.

I agree. I mean, if anything they should make it more like Men in Black, what with all the alien weirdness that Green Lanterns deal with.

[StoneGold]

Just don't refer to them by codename. Cliff, Rita, Jane, Rebis, and Danny would make an interesting team. Or play up the absurdist bits and put 'em up against the Brotherhood of Dada.
Given that they can't put together a decent Doom Patrol comic, I'd say stay away from a movie. OK, that would have been a bad idea in the case of Blade, but seriously, a movie is never going to do the absurdist bits well, and the rest ends up coming off like a weaksauce ripoff of the X-Men (I don't care what ripped off what originally, I'm only talking about what it's going to look like to the Norms).


I agree. I mean, if anything they should make it more like Men in Black, what with all the alien weirdness that Green Lanterns deal with.

I'm not sure if that's the best idea either, but mostly because the comedy and mentor/mentee relationship of MiB wouldn't work here. You want to know how to do a good GL movie? Read Emerald Dawn. Maybe Emerald Dawn II as well. Smooshing them together might be the best, since that gives you Sinestro as a villain.



On the other hand, then you have Sinestro as a villain. I know, he's the big GL villain, but he's a red-faced Snidely Whiplash, and his name is Sinestro.

[Black Atom]

Not quite. As noted, in the movie they started out as friends. They never had any such relationship in the comics. In the books they've always been arch-enemies with no warm feelings between them, thus disputing the idea that they've "always had a mentor/protege relationship". It wasn't "compression" of any kind (and further disputing the idea that batman Begins didn't deviate from the books or create stuff from scratch). That part was a pure manufacture of the film that had no basis in the comic (not that there's anything wrong with that).

Actually, making Ra's Bruce's mentor was one editorial change I had an issue with. Partially because he has 18 mentors in the first movie, which really chipped away at the trait of self-determination that's always been (in my opinion) one of the core traits of the character. Bruce gets the idea to go across the tracks from Rachel, the idea to become a criminal from Falcone, the idea to become a vigilante from Ra's and all of his gadgets from Lucuis.

[kalorama]

Actually, making Ra's Bruce's mentor was one editorial change I had an issue with. Partially because he has 18 mentors in the first movie, which really chipped away at the trait of self-determination that's always been (in my opinion) one of the core traits of the character. Bruce gets the idea to go across the tracks from Rachel, the idea to become a criminal from Falcone, the idea to become a vigilante from Ra's and all of his gadgets from Lucuis.

Strictly speaking, none of those others were really mentors. They planted seeds, but Bruce took the initiative to develop them. Ra's was the only one who really trained him over a period of time. Besides, in the comics he's been shown through the years to have had a number of different mentors/trainers/etc. who taught him various skills.

[Grazzt]

Given that they can't put together a decent Doom Patrol comic, I'd say stay away from a movie. OK, that would have been a bad idea in the case of Blade, but seriously, a movie is never going to do the absurdist bits well, and the rest ends up coming off like a weaksauce ripoff of the X-Men (I don't care what ripped off what originally, I'm only talking about what it's going to look like to the Norms).

I don't know why that is, though. Not the rip off part, but the "can't do absurdist bits well" part. Surely that's simply a matter of finding the right screenwriter.

I'm not sure if that's the best idea either, but mostly because the comedy and mentor/mentee relationship of MiB wouldn't work here. You want to know how to do a good GL movie? Read Emerald Dawn. Maybe Emerald Dawn II as well. Smooshing them together might be the best, since that gives you Sinestro as a villain.

For the mentor/mentee relationship, there are plenty of senior Lanterns to train Earth's new one. You could do, say Sinestro and Hal. Or Katma Tui and John Stewart. Or Kilowog and Kyle.

As for the comedy, there's enough absurd aliens out there to play for laughs. Even without needing to invent them, Mogo, Ch'p, and Leezle Pon are good almost on their own, and Kilowog can be mined for humour as well (remember on Justice League when Kilowog was in John Stewart's apartment?) The ring itself can be a source of humour (Kyle crushing a guy under a giant teddy bear is an example from the comics), and Guy Gardner can be a source of jerkass humour if you choose him to be one of the characters.

On the other hand, then you have Sinestro as a villain. I know, he's the big GL villain, but he's a red-faced Snidely Whiplash, and his name is Sinestro.

Well, there's two solutions to that. The first is to make him out to be obviously the villain...and then do a complete 180 and reveal somebody else is using Sinestro as a patsy and he's really a good guy despite his name and Snidely Whiplash appearance. And that can take up the movie's Aesop quota, freeing us for more really cool ring constructs and demented looking aliens.

The second is you can just revamp him: I sometimes imagine a Green Lantern movie where it's Kyle as the protagonist, with Sinestro and the Qwardians as antagonists, but the big reveal would be that Sinestro is really Hal Jordan, kidnapped by the Qwardians in the 70's and brainwashed into being a weapon against the Corps.

[metalhead_dave743]

Wow really?!?

I guess I just missed all those Batman comics where he needed to be hand held through each point of his journey to being Batman. You know, the ones where Rachel Dawes had to slap into him that killing was wrong and then sent him to Carmine Falcone to be told he needed to get out and explore the world? The ones where Ras al Ghul taught him pretty much everything he needed to know, including the benefits of wearing a costume to scare people, and then has Q - err I mean Lucius Fox - build it all? Yeah, I haven't seen any of those.

The recent Batman and Superman movies are about neck and neck in this,Batman Begins departed about as much from the source material as Superman Returns did.

I'm so sick of this "hand holding" bullshit that I hear about Begins. No offense TB.:wink:

But if he was really just being strung along and hand held on his journey to become Batman, he would have joined up with Ras's league of shadows and killed that guy.

He may have been influenced by other people, but it was still his desisicion to do what he did to become Batman.

[StoneGold]

As to the GL thing (the quotes within quotes was getting irritating)...


Thing is, I don't think there should really be a mentor/mentee relationship in the film. That's not the core of GL. In fact, I'd much rather have Sinestro as the evil teacher, just because it allows Hal to have that philosophical split where he becomes his own man more readily.

And the problem with Sinestro isn't his motivations or anything, it's the fact that he physically looks like a red-faced Snidely Whiplash, and his name is basically Sinister. I realize he's an alien, but the only things worse would be if he had a big top hat, and his name were "Evilguyo."

[kalorama]

"Of course he's guilty.His name is Destroyo, not Have-a-nice-dayo."

[StoneGold]

"Of course he's guilty.His name is Destroyo, not Have-a-nice-dayo."

That's what I'm saying. You can't have Sinestro go evil till the third act, but his name his Sinestro, and he is literally mustache-twirling evil. I guess you could say the same about Obadiah Stane, but they were smart about that, casting him as The Dude, having him buy Tony pizza, etc. But that's hard to do with the imperious alien.

[Grazzt]

Thing is, I don't think there should really be a mentor/mentee relationship in the film. That's not the core of GL. In fact, I'd much rather have Sinestro as the evil teacher, just because it allows Hal to have that philosophical split where he becomes his own man more readily.

And the problem with Sinestro isn't his motivations or anything, it's the fact that he physically looks like a red-faced Snidely Whiplash, and his name is basically Sinister. I realize he's an alien, but the only things worse would be if he had a big top hat, and his name were "Evilguyo."

That's what I'm saying. You can't have Sinestro go evil till the third act, but his name his Sinestro, and he is literally mustache-twirling evil. I guess you could say the same about Obadiah Stane, but they were smart about that, casting him as The Dude, having him buy Tony pizza, etc. But that's hard to do with the imperious alien.

And that's why I placed it in my list of possible "mentor/mentee" combinations. And I'd disagree about it not being the core of GL. Well, okay, it's not the core, but it's an important part. They're a Corps. Having mentors helps show the bonds between members, and can be a useful expository device for at least the first movie. Maybe it wouldn't work as well for Hal, but I'd be partial to doing Kyle anyway and I think him and John or Kilowog would make an interesting combo.

As for Sinestro, you can easily change his appearance to something less Snidely Whiplash and more alien. And you can come up with a better reason for his name: maybe it was a nickname he got after his fall from grace. Or maybe that's what the people of his sector have been calling him in secret, since he started spreading fear to preserve order. Alternatively, graft his persona onto Star Sapphire, make her the anti-Lantern.

I also disagree that you can't have Sinestro go evil until the third act. He might start out as a cautionary tale that the protagonist Lantern has to confront later on. Or Sinestro might try to kill Hal before he even realizes his new powers and has to be saved by a more experienced Lantern.

[Black Atom]

Strictly speaking, none of those others were really mentors. They planted seeds, but Bruce took the initiative to develop them. Ra's was the only one who really trained him over a period of time. Besides, in the comics he's been shown through the years to have had a number of different mentors/trainers/etc. who taught him various skills.

They did more than plant seeds--they completely gave him direction. He took their advice and bumbled forward like a lemming until the next person steered him in another direction. That seems pretty different from seeking out specific people to train under and learn individual desired skills from.

[Black Atom]

That's what I'm saying. You can't have Sinestro go evil till the third act, but his name his Sinestro, and he is literally mustache-twirling evil. I guess you could say the same about Obadiah Stane, but they were smart about that, casting him as The Dude, having him buy Tony pizza, etc. But that's hard to do with the imperious alien.

I'd have him be evil from the beginning as you said. He could be the Denzel character from Training Day.

[StoneGold]

And that's why I placed it in my list of possible "mentor/mentee" combinations. And I'd disagree about it not being the core of GL. Well, okay, it's not the core, but it's an important part. They're a Corps. Having mentors helps show the bonds between members, and can be a useful expository device for at least the first movie. Maybe it wouldn't work as well for Hal, but I'd be partial to doing Kyle anyway and I think him and John or Kilowog would make an interesting combo.

As for Sinestro, you can easily change his appearance to something less Snidely Whiplash and more alien. And you can come up with a better reason for his name: maybe it was a nickname he got after his fall from grace. Or maybe that's what the people of his sector have been calling him in secret, since he started spreading fear to preserve order. Alternatively, graft his persona onto Star Sapphire, make her the anti-Lantern.

I also disagree that you can't have Sinestro go evil until the third act. He might start out as a cautionary tale that the protagonist Lantern has to confront later on. Or Sinestro might try to kill Hal before he even realizes his new powers and has to be saved by a more experienced Lantern.
Except the only time Hal has had a mentor has been in flashback. Hal has bosses. The core essence of GL has always been Hal with/vs. the Guardians. Which is why Sinestro is a good foil, because he highlights the weakness of the Guardians, while at the same time being evil in his own right. But again, the problem with Sinestro is you'd have to totally change him up to even come close to taking him seriously.

Even most of the mentor stories have ended up mostly being about the inadequacies of the Guardians. Emerald Dawn, which I think was the first place to actually show Hal getting full-on trained, was more about the Guardian's mistake with Legion.

If you focus this too much on being the superhero version of Men in Black or Training Day, you lose focus on the best of GL. You start to fall into Hulk traps. Banner has father issues, but they really aren't the core aspect of the character. They got stuck in much later. Much like learning to become a GL isn't really what makes a great GL story. It's questioning authority.

(OK, so that didn't really come about until Denny O'Niel, but it's been the focus of damn near every GL story since.)

[Grazzt]

You're also assuming that it has to be Hal. Personally, I think Hal isn't a very interesting character and doing the movie around one of the others would be far better.

And I don't think that having a mentor/rookie relationship means cutting out a "questioning authority" theme. It just makes it so that he trusts someone who's more experienced (like, say, Kilowog), while at the same time questioning the people at the very top (the Guardians). Say the Guardians have betrayed the Lanterns for some reason and felt they couldn't tell the Corps, for "the greater good". Then mentor/rookie have to team up to expose the truth or deal with some sort of awful consequence.

[StoneGold]

You're also assuming that it has to be Hal. Personally, I think Hal isn't a very interesting character and doing the movie around one of the others would be far better.


Given that Hal is currently the Green Lantern, it seems unlikely they'd use anyone else. Especially as John has no real personality as a solo character. And even within the cartoon, his big solo arc was rebelling against the Guardians.


And besides that, the whole thing originally spun out of a Hal as GL comment. And really, it's either him or John. It's not going to be Guy, and with Hal back, Kyle is basically a footnote. So either the main dude or the black guy.

[kalorama]

They did more than plant seeds--they completely gave him direction. He took their advice and bumbled forward like a lemming until the next person steered him in another direction.

If they'd given him actual direction, then he wouldn't have had to bumble forward, would he? Direction implies purpose and destination. They didn't supply that. He figured that out for himself. All they gave him were ideas (and even that was unintentional). It takes more than that to qualify for mentorship.

That seems pretty different from seeking out specific people to train under and learn individual desired skills from.

That was my point. Mentors are people that someone goes to to get specific direction from them. Bruce didn't go to Rachel or Falcone seeking direction. They weren't his mentors. The only person he sought out, specifically, to help him learn the skills he needed was Ra's.

[The Batman]

I did say they were a bit smooshed together.

Making Lucius part of R&D and putting him into Year One was a shortcut for time. It has been shown that Wayne stole tech from his company for Batman. Plus I was really glad to see Lucius in a film. Plus Morgan Freeman. Wow.

Same with Ra's training Bruce so much. I agree I wanted to see Bruce opening those years over seas and all the places he went. Maybe he did that before we meet him coming home from Princeton. I do wish we saw more of that.

Well, you got me on Rachel. She was a studio mandate and the worst part of the movie. Even with a better actress that I really like I'm not looking forward to her too much in this film. Though she does seem to help introduce Harvey, who was originally planned to be in the first one, but the studio demanded a love interest.

Another nitpick I had was Gordon being there when Bruce's parents died, but I guess that was a time cutting shortcut too. You are taking decades of comics and cutting it down to two hours. Yet at least they took things from the books.


I know that they altered stuff for the sake of fitting it into a two hour movie. My point was that they altered a lot of stuff for Batman Begins, and some pretty important stuff at that.

Aside from Jason and Richard, which I'd say is about even for a Rachel Dawes, what exactly did Superman Returns alter about Superman? Most everything there you could find at one point or another in the books from the space plane rescue (Man of Steel) to the alienation and wanting more than anything to belong ("For the Man Who Has Everything . . .") to the desire to visit Krypton (countless stories really) to Luthor using Kryptonian technology (Birthright).


Compare that to Superman Returns. I couldn't tell if it was a sequel or a remake of the old ones. You have a son that Superman abandons. Lois is seeing someone new. Lex is the villain again and even has the goofy female sidekick. Superman rising on the third day after martyring himself against a giant chunk of rock. How can you not see how much worse that was than Batman begins?

Yeah, I'm not talking about better or worse just close to the comics. I really don't feel like having another "Superman Returns doesn't suck" or a "Batman Begins wasn't the Second Coming" argument.

[The Batman]

Actually, making Ra's Bruce's mentor was one editorial change I had an issue with. Partially because he has 18 mentors in the first movie, which really chipped away at the trait of self-determination that's always been (in my opinion) one of the core traits of the character. Bruce gets the idea to go across the tracks from Rachel, the idea to become a criminal from Falcone, the idea to become a vigilante from Ra's and all of his gadgets from Lucuis.

Bingo! This is what felt off to me too. I don't care if they want to change Lucius Fox or add on a Rachel Dawes, it was that after the death of his parents and before everybody gets their hands on him the only thing Bruce does is mope and decide to blast Joe Chill in revenge.

Maybe it's hokey now and nobody told me but I've always thought that vow on the graves of his parents to and the single minded determination to follow through with it was powerful stuff. It was what made Batman Batman. Without it, the character just doesn't feel the same.

I mean, sure she didn't have a bat-suit or ninja skills, but Rachel Dawes still managed to become a crusading assistant DA working against corruption in Gotham while Bruce was still thinking he'd like to kill Joe Chill.

[The Batman]

I'm so sick of this "hand holding" bullshit that I hear about Begins. No offense TB.:wink:

It's alright. Along the same lines, don't be offended if I don't stop saying what's on my mind just because you might be sick of hearing it.

But if he was really just being strung along and hand held on his journey to become Batman, he would have joined up with Ras's league of shadows and killed that guy.

Nah, because that conflicted with the lesson Rachel had already slapped into him that killing was wrong. Still. had Ras not come to find him he'd have probably sat in that jail, all directionless anger, beating people up until somebody got smart enough or lucky enough to put a shiv between his ribs or a bullet in his head.

He may have been influenced by other people, but it was still his desisicion to do what he did to become Batman.

It was his decision to walk through that door, sure. He just needed these people to take him by the hand and show him where the door was again and again.

[Black Atom]

If they'd given him actual direction, then he wouldn't have had to bumble forward, would he? Direction implies purpose and destination. They didn't supply that. He figured that out for himself. All they gave him were ideas (and even that was unintentional). It takes more than that to qualify for mentorship.

But he did bumble forward. He was basically directionless, willing to kill his parent's murderer before Rachel, literally, slapped some since into him, TOOK him to crime alley and set him on a different path. He didn't seek her advice, consider it carefully, then make a calculated decision. He meandered along the path she set him on until he bumps into Falconi. Bruce's journey toward becoming Batman is essentially several different people blindfolding him, spinning him three times, then sending him off in another direction holding his donkey tail pin.

That was my point. Mentors are people that someone goes to to get specific direction from them. Bruce didn't go to Rachel or Falcone seeking direction. They weren't his mentors. The only person he sought out, specifically, to help him learn the skills he needed was Ra's.

They may not have been mentors in the classic sense, but they were various people that held his hand along the way which seems, conspicuously, un-Batman.

[Black Atom]

Bingo! This is what felt off to me too. I don't care if they want to change Lucius Fox or add on a Rachel Dawes, it was that after the death of his parents and before everybody gets their hands on him the only thing Bruce does is mope and decide to blast Joe Chill in revenge.

Maybe it's hokey now and nobody told me but I've always thought that vow on the graves of his parents to and the single minded determination to follow through with it was powerful stuff. It was what made Batman Batman. Without it, the character just doesn't feel the same.

I mean, sure she didn't have a bat-suit or ninja skills, but Rachel Dawes still managed to become a crusading assistant DA working against corruption in Gotham while Bruce was still thinking he'd like to kill Joe Chill.

Excellent points. Summed up my thoughts exactly.

[Magneto_X]

Except they're the Doom Patrol, and their "differentness" was always kind of BS. Oh no, I can grow tall, I'm a freak! At least with the X-Men, there was the crap about genetics, which never made much sense, but moreso than DP.

I'd say DP makes much more sense then X-men. They're mutilated humans who see lives got saved with experimental surgeries that turned them into freaks who can never live in public due to their deformities, most mutants can do this they just need to hide their mutant status from the public. The only mutants in the DP's situation would be the Morlocks.


That, and you'd have to rename the entire team. Ain't no one taking Elasti-Girl and Robot Man seriously.

Just have them use their real names, as the previous poster said.

They will be taken seriously if they are presented as seriously dangerous, screwed up characters.

Elasti-Gal could be unable to control her size growing who causes incredible property damage when she is in giant form. Her personality is a full of potential to mine. She's a successful actress turned freak. It writes itself.

Robot Man would be simple to adapt. Just make him more machine then man, have him a very angry guy that hates his situation who can destroy objects or people brutally and update his physical form into something truly frightening.

They could blend all the seriousness with a warped film which shows how screwed up their situation is.


You mean DC attempt at doing Spider-Man for the 40th time,

Most characters start off as rip-offs as others but they can still be unique.

Jamie's concept has even been proven to work in cartoon form watch Ben 10.

Reyes has many differences from Spiderman. His family and friends know he's a super-hero, he's been physically bonded with a sentient weapon which is powerful enough to give veteran Green Lanterns fights when he doesn't have any idea how to control it properly, his whole community is latino which gives him a very unique take on life since he's a minority not a white guy, he's being mentored by The Peacemaker etc.

That could fill a trilogy incredibly well with that information.


a character that's only ever worked in a team setting,

All the need to do is hire a good script writer with a good take on the character, get a good actor and a great director to translate it to the screen.

Ted did have a solo series which went over 20 issues IIRC so its not like he can't work alone. It would be child's play for any talented individuals to do Ted well on the big screen.


and a character that is in no sense an everyman? (Sorry, kid sidekick to superhero kind of negates the everyman appeal)

Okay, but Wally is still a great character which people can get into. The public loved him n Justice League Unlimited while he's been a virtual non-stop Flash since Barry died during Infinite Crisis in the comics.


I dunno, Batman is pretty interesting...

He's not the only character DC has which can do that.


But seriously, the problem is they have to take characters that Marvel hasn't already mined theatrically the best parts of. There is a good Green Lantern movie to be made, but making it a color-challenged version of Iron Man is not the way to do it.

I was just giving you an example. They can do many things with Hal or any other heroes. It just needs to be done well.


Flash... I'm not so sure of. Flash's core concept has always been a little weak.
Maybe it's because his origin is a little weaker than most.


They could update it. It's what they do in film adaptions.



It's hard to tie "I got hit by lightning, now I can run fast" into anything larger.

Speed Force.


They tried on the TV show, and it's arguable as to how well it worked.

Time's change. We have the technology now all they need is the proper creative staff to adapt it to live action.

They just need to put it in the hands of people who know how to update it well and who know the comics.


Frankly, Aquaman ends up being more compelling, at least as far as a solo first film goes.

I'd like to see a good Aquaman film I just think Flash or GL could do just as well.

[StoneGold]

I'm mostly going to go on the Flash one, because the rest of the stuff is going to devolve down to "Yes they can!" "No they can't!" arguments.

The problem with the Flash's origin is that it is purely plot-based. There's nothing character-based around it. It has nothing to do with lightning vs. speed force.

Superman's origin has character elements. His parents' dying action is to save his life, his being raised by a good Midwestern family. Same with Batman - his parents dying, his world travels. Spider-Man's origin isn't just getting bit by a spider, but his learning responsibility from his uncle's death. Flash gets hit by lightning, then saves his girlfriend from a guy who just so happens to move really slow. There's no character element to it whatsoever. Which isn't to say one can't be invented, but some 50 years later, no one has.


The reason why Flash is popular in a team setting is that he's the wiseguy. The goofball. But notice that the cartoon never really delved into his origins. Because the whole thing gets convoluted. We knew as much about Booster Gold as we did about Flash.

Now, there could be an interesting story maybe about what does a kid sidekick do when his mentor is killed. But I don't know if the movies have the balls to kill off a hero in the first act and not bring him back by the third.

[Magneto_X]

Given that they can't put together a decent Doom Patrol comic, I'd say stay away from a movie.

Grant Morrison's run on DP is legendary.

Mark Waid did a great job with them in Brave & The Bold and JLA: Year One.

Johns did a semi-decent take in Teen Titans.

IMO they haven't done well the last few years in their series since DC doesn't really make them that crazy anymore. In every appearance I mentioned above they were sideshow freaks.

The comics and film should do that. It should be a very surreal absurd crazy movie. It would require a great script, a huge budget and a director with the vision to make it work. They should get the guy who directed Night Watch, del Toro or Luc Besson to do it.



OK, that would have been a bad idea in the case of Blade, but seriously,

Blade's success is the perfect reason why DP or any other low level DC comic could work on film. It shows a comic book doesn't need to be A-list to do well it just needs to a good film for the public to latch on to.


a movie is never going to do the absurdist bits well,

Doctor Who does wierd shit like that all the time no reason DP can't.

They just need to hire the proper people who know how to translate it correctly.


and the rest ends up coming off like a weaksauce ripoff of the X-Men (I don't care what ripped off what originally, I'm only talking about what it's going to look like to the Norms).


It would only be a "weak rip-off" if Warner Brothers didn't adapt it well. DP has similarities to X-men they just aren't limited by it. DP could certainly go into the devastating effects it's like to be crippled or loathed by society on appearance perhaps even more then X-men did with its characters.

Stonegold:

Originally in the script for Justice League: Mortal was Barry dying so Wally could inherit the mantle.

[BYC]

Aquaman.

James Cameron.

140 mil!

[StoneGold]

Grant Morrison's run on DP is legendary.
Legendary is hyperbole. That said, it's a second team with a narrative structure that wouldn't work as a commercial movie.


Mark Waid did a great job with them in Brave & The Bold and JLA: Year One.
Sure, as guest stars.
Johns did a semi-decent take in Teen Titans.

So semi-decent is our sign of quality now?

Doctor Who does wierd shit like that all the time no reason DP can't.
Which is why Doctor Who is a perrenial mainstream hit in America, and is never, ever canceled in the UK.
Stonegold:

Originally in the script for Justice League: Mortal was Barry dying so Wally could inherit the mantle.

Notice however it wasn't used?

[The Batman]

I think that you could find a movie in the Doom Patrol if you work it long enough.

Problem is that you might have to futz around with the thing to the point that the people who read Morrisson's "legendary" run will be calling the movie a DPINO or worry about the people who didn't read the books, when Caulder and his team of freaks enter scene, wondering when Marvel's going to sue for ripping off the X-Men.

[kalorama]

But he did bumble forward. He was basically directionless, willing to kill his parent's murderer before Rachel, literally, slapped some since into him, TOOK him to crime alley and set him on a different path. He didn't seek her advice, consider it carefully, then make a calculated decision. He meandered along the path she set him on until he bumps into Falconi. Bruce's journey toward becoming Batman is essentially several different people blindfolding him, spinning him three times, then sending him off in another direction holding his donkey tail pin.

They may not have been mentors in the classic sense, but they were various people that held his hand along the way which seems, conspicuously, un-Batman.

How was Falcone "holding his hand"? He threatened to kill Bruce then had his hoods kick Bruce's ass and toss him into the street. Rachel slapped him and berated him and kicked him out of her car. That's some harsh hand holding. They didn't give him any direction or set him onto a path. He simply took what they said to him (most of of which wasn't actually intended as real advice) and used it to find a path for himself.

[The Batman]

Maybe "hand holding" isn't the best term, but certainly Bruce was, beyond his plan for a revenge kill, pretty rudderless until each of these characters got their hands on him. I mean, without Ras al Ghul, it seems that the thought of a war on crime, which in most versions it's that hokey notion that motivates Bruce to travel and learn, never really even occurred to Bruce.

And that's fine. It's different, but fine. Movie Batman is just that, movie Batman and the creators should have room to interpret. Like I said before, however cool and important I might think it is, maybe the idea of young Bruce making a vow on his parents' grave is hokey now and these changes were necessary to make movie Batman a more relatable and human character.

[Black Atom]

How was Falcone "holding his hand"? He threatened to kill Bruce then had his hoods kick Bruce's ass and toss him into the street. Rachel slapped him and berated him and kicked him out of her car. That's some harsh hand holding. They didn't give him any direction or set him onto a path. He simply took what they said to him (most of of which wasn't actually intended as real advice) and used it to find a path for himself.

Rachel takes Bruce directly to Falcone's doostep and basically says "If you want to fix the system, start here". Without any real consideration,He goes in, expecting to accomplish God-knows-what, and gets throttled and tossed out on his ass by Falcone's goons. Now, I guess we can give Bruce moderate credit for inferring from his conversation with Falcone that he needed to learn more about the underworld before he'd be able to fight it properly, but once he commits to being a criminal, he does so self-destructively without any long-term goal until Ra's discovers him.

You can probably make a case as to how these changes affect the story for better or worse, but I think you have to acknowledge that there IS a definite change.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

This is just a thought, but Firestorm would be a great young adult movie/tv series - it could be the young kid growing up, with the other half, a professor, as a mentor guiding him through life.

[The Xenos]

Yes! I was never into Firestorm too much, but that does sound like a very good idea.

Right now I heard news of a serious Green Lantern with Hal in consideration. Yay. Plus the dumb title Supermax is just going to be Green Arrow and it might get fast tracked. Shazam is in the works but not for next year.
http://www.comics2film.com/index.php?a=story&b=33607
http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5002&Itemid=99

Rachel takes Bruce directly to Falcone's doostep and basically says "If you want to fix the system, start here". Without any real consideration,He goes in, expecting to accomplish God-knows-what, and gets throttled and tossed out on his ass by Falcone's goons. Now, I guess we can give Bruce moderate credit for inferring from his conversation with Falcone that he needed to learn more about the underworld before he'd be able to fight it properly, but once he commits to being a criminal, he does so self-destructively without any long-term goal until Ra's discovers him.

Well the level or losing himself in the side of the criminal is debatable. It was mostly shown in a montage.

As for the bar scene, again, this is Year One Batman. In the book he goes down to the red light district and gets the crap kicked out of him by a pimp and his hookers, as well as a young Catwoman. Would that have been better? Actually, I do miss having Catwoman, but Warners screwed up that character too much to use her so soon. Plus the scene where Batman introduces himself to Falcone was nice in the book, but leaving Falcone on the light for the cops served a number of purposes for this movie's story.

[hugh45]

I think someone mention it here,that DC makes better movies from their non-main titles. I think they should stick w/that formula.

[carabas]

Which is why Doctor Who is a perrenial mainstream hit in America, and is never, ever canceled in the UK.Star Trek ran for three years. Who ran for 26 years, not countng the current series. It was only canceled because the then controller of BBC 1 outright detested the programme.

I hear the new series does all right overseas on Sci-Fi Channel.