Is DC even going to try to compete with Marvel on the big screen?

[Fate's Faith]

EDIT: Oh, and I have to agree with SpideyCzar. Don't be afraid to try up-and-comers who may have more vision to write and direct. Don't worry too much about the big name stars because the film isn't about the star. They're not selling this actor or actress. They're selling the characters.

I think that's a key point. And its due to Warners more than anything because they are selling the films based on the actors and not the character. We can go back to Superman The Movie in which there was a real desire to have big names in order to sell the film because they weren't selling the character. Someone had the genius to hold them to the thought that Superman can't be a named star in order to work. And I think Green Lantern shows the same thought process. They need a named actor to make it work. Yet almost all Marvel films go with relatively unknowns. Downey was the most famous I can recall. If DC had more say, we'd see a focus on characters I would bet but with Warners, they probably don't even refer to them by the character names and instead call them the Ryan Reynolds project.

[SpideyCzar]

It's a known fact that GL was a disaster, it made 220 million on a 200 million budget. Sales for action figures didn't help they were mostly left on the stand from what I heard. GL opened okay in Blu-Ray DVD/Sales (it sold less copies than Horrible Bosses), but saw a huge drop in it's second weekend, and quickly left the top ten.

In the long run - GL was far from being profitable.

Again as I stated in my original post, not saying that licenses and other revenue streams were great for Green Lantern as a GL fan I felt horribly let down by the movie and it's quality. Just pointing out that the notion of double the budget equals a profitbale movie as you stated is not always true for a lot of movies. especially movies with a lot of licenses agreements, not saying this for GL, saying in general. So beware before you use the double the budget formula to determine if a film is a success or not.

[Mat001]

I think that's a key point. And its due to Warners more than anything because they are selling the films based on the actors and not the character. We can go back to Superman The Movie in which there was a real desire to have big names in order to sell the film because they weren't selling the character. Someone had the genius to hold them to the thought that Superman can't be a named star in order to work. And I think Green Lantern shows the same thought process. They need a named actor to make it work. Yet almost all Marvel films go with relatively unknowns. Downey was the most famous I can recall. If DC had more say, we'd see a focus on characters I would bet but with Warners, they probably don't even refer to them by the character names and instead call them the Ryan Reynolds project.

The Salkinds were the ones who wanted famous actors in the role of Superman and it was Donner who said that people will see the actor in a costume and not the character itself. Hence he pushed to cast an unknown and after looking at three hundred people, he finally found Reeve, a virtual unknown. Having a known actor doesn't hurt as the Batman films can attest. It just really depends more on the story and characters than just the status of the leading character.

[Flashpoint]

Once again, Disney's ongoing unprecedented success with Marvel movies continues to reverberate throughout Hollywood.

Now there is serious talk that Marvel's Kevin Feige could take over the entire studio:

No sooner had Rich Ross announced his resignation Friday as chairman of Walt Disney Studios than talk turned to Kevin Feige, Marvel Studios' baseball cap-wearing president of production, as his potential successor.

At 39, Feige is the driving force behind what's become known as the Marvel Cinematic Universe, an ambitious slate of interconnected films that's grossed more than $5 billion since the 2008 release of "Iron Man." Four years and five movies later, all eyes are on "The Avengers," the $220 million crown jewel of Marvel Studios whose May 4 opening is made that much more important to parent company Disney by the disastrous performance of "John Carter." But with the abrupt departure of Ross, who was blamed for the poor marketing of the sci-fi flop, the spotlight also turns on Feige, a producer who, by all accounts, is more comfortable in a rumpled sweatshirt on a film set than in a jacket and tie at a board meeting.

The prevailing belief, according to Variety, is that Feige is the top choice of Walt Disney Co. CEO Bob Iger to replace Ross, and the job is his if he wants it.

The more comic book properties that Marvel is able to turn into blockbuster movie franchises, the greater the pressure it puts on Warner Brothers to meet the challenge and try to overturn the loss of shelf space on movie screens, TV screens, tablets, cellphones and stores of all kinds. If a comic book movie executive can be considered the #1 choice to head Disney to greater heights of success, then the writing is on the wall.

The clock is ticking on Robinov's stewardship of DC properties as Disney continues to widen its market share with Marvel product.

[Vibranium]

I don't see Feige taking that job....he seems to be happy with running the mint known as Marvel Studios

[Flashpoint]

I don't see Feige taking that job....he seems to be happy with running the mint known as Marvel Studios

Whether Feige does accept a promotion to head of Disney or not, I think it speaks volumes of how hugely successful comic book movies are for all the studios, as well as how pivotal comic book movies are to the studios' annual profit margins and revenue streams.

Comic book fans have been screeching for years now that the comic book movie "fad" is about to end(!!!) and the sky is falling. Starting with Marvel breaking their movie curse with Blade's #1 success at box offices in 1998, we're approaching the 15 year mark on this so-called "fad."

Comic book movies are bigger than ever and show no signs of going away. Meanwhile, as Marvel's films continue to dominate the marketplace and screens big & small, WB's share pales in comparison--and continues to do so under Robinov's tenure.

As I said before, Feige's brightening career prospects and rapidly growing success cast a long shadow over what Robinov has so far failed to do with DC Entertainment.

[nosocialize100]

With word of a Lobo movie…probably. It's going to take years though. Especially when stuff like Green Lantern fails.

[Judge-Dredd]

Do WB have any plan?
I thought I heard rumours of them making a serious announcement this year, so far all we've got is Lobo. I highly doubt that will be made, and frankly I won't mind.

[Mat001]

If there's a plan, it'll be announced by July.

The Hollywood Reporter has early box office returns on "The Avengers". It has made $17.1 million in only ten markets, since it's early international release.

[marvelprince]

Do WB have any plan?
I thought I heard rumours of them making a serious announcement this year, so far all we've got is Lobo. I highly doubt that will be made, and frankly I won't mind.

Yeah, I thought it was kinda strange that with as much on DC for their comicbook movie plans Lobo is what is announced. I mean really, of all the characers. Not to say the movie can't be good, I just highly doubt this is project will end up getting greenlit.

[Judge-Dredd]

If there's a plan, it'll be announced by July.

The Hollywood Reporter has early box office returns on "The Avengers". It has made $17.1 million in only ten markets, since it's early international release.

While I'm completely a DC fan, I admit the Avengers is gonna be huge. I'm gonna see it this Saturday, and I know a lot of non-comic reading people who are psyched for it. Still don't think they should have bothered calling it 'Avengers Assemble' here in Ireland and in the UK. Most people don't even remember the old TV series, and those that do remember obviously don't think its in any way related. Most people seem perplexed at its current title here, I've had to explain to so many people its named after their battle-cry, funnily enough a lot thought it was Will Ferrell who came up with that cry in Anchorman, you know "News-team Assemble!".

So yeah back to my original point, it'll be big, don't think I need to say that here. I just wonder whether it will motivate WB enough to seriously consider doing a singular cinematic universe, either beginning with or culminating in, a Justice League movie.

[Flashpoint]

If there's a plan, it'll be announced by July.

The Hollywood Reporter has early box office returns on "The Avengers". It has made $17.1 million in only ten markets, since it's early international release.

That's what I'm hearing from friends in the business, too. The latest rumor is that Man Of Steel will have some sort of comment or nod to the Justice League from Superman during the movie. If that's in the movie itself or just an end credits scene, I have no idea. But that's the latest gossip running around town.

God, how I hope to Heaven that it turns out to be true!

[ChrisLyne]

Going to see Avengers tonight (really hate it being called Avengers Assemble, if they absolutely had to rename it why not use The Avengers Initiative? At least that's actually been used in the films!). Really can't wait, not been this hyped for a comic movie since TDK. Well, actually I'm more hyped about TDKR but that's still too far away and Avengers is here now!

Just sucks I'll have to go again next week to get TDKR trailer, what a shame

That's what I'm hearing from friends in the business, too. The latest rumor is that Man Of Steel will have some sort of comment or nod to the Justice League from Superman during the movie. If that's in the movie itself or just an end credits scene, I have no idea. But that's the latest gossip running around town.

God, how I hope to Heaven that it turns out to be true!

I hope that's true. I don't want anything too heavy handed as I really like the idea of Superman being the first, but something in the epilogue or (more likely) after the credits would be nice.

Since most people are counting Darkseid, or any type of alien invasion, out after Avengers spoilers, who do you all think should be the villain(s) in the first JL movie? I've recently been thinking the Crime Syndicate, I'm not convinced they're good "first movie" villains but it's very different to anything Marvel will be doing in the foreseeable future.

[Robotman4]

i wonder how many billions of dollars Marvel/Disney needs to make before DC/WB get their sh!t together?!?

i would be excited about a possible Lobo movie, but getting the guy behind "Journey 2: The Mysterious Island" to write and direct a movie about an ultra violent bounty hunter doesnt thrill me. sounds like yet another throw away DC movie. add it to the Catwoman, Jonah Hex, Steel, Constantine pile.

[Flashpoint]

\
I hope that's true. I don't want anything too heavy handed as I really like the idea of Superman being the first, but something in the epilogue or (more likely) after the credits would be nice.

Since most people are counting Darkseid, or any type of alien invasion, out after Avengers spoilers, who do you all think should be the villain(s) in the first JL movie? I've recently been thinking the Crime Syndicate, I'm not convinced they're good "first movie" villains but it's very different to anything Marvel will be doing in the foreseeable future.

RE: the BIG Avengers SPOILER

Having finally seen the SPOILER in question...yeah, I think WB and DCE will have almost zero chance of doing Darkseid in the first Justice League movie. There's no way they could do it without it looking like they were desperately trying to copy or ripoff Marvel.

Huge kudos to Marvel. Honestly, spoilers:

Thanos

end of spoilers looks like he literally walked off of the comic book pages and came to life.

This has now become my favorite scene from any superhero movie ever. No lie. I got chills.