Is Warner Bros. Embarrassed by Superhero Tropes?

[Den]

I thought this was an excellent article. Then again, I've often wondered the same myself so maybe totally biased. Yes, costumes are harder to do on live action TV and make them work. But it has been done. The Flash TV series comes to mind (Complete with a reason for the suit) though even they seemed to balk at costumed superVILLAINS. It wasn't the costume that killed that show, it was the cost of the FX budget. Now that we can do more and do it cheaper, that excuse should be fading. Lois and Clark had a pretty successful run, even if it focused more on the romance than the super powers.

I think , considering the sheer number of people who have seen animated superhero material, superheroes on the big screen, and so on, the public is more willing to suspend disbelief and give costumes a chance than WB execs realize.

There just needs to be a good story with good acting involved.

[gbshabo]

We already Know Arrow is utilizing DeathStroke, Deadshot, Dinah, and a host of characters from the comics. Other then the name and a costume change, it looks like it has a lot of elements that are essential to Green Arrow. Everything is sounding really good so far, and I'm actually more excited for the premier than I thought I would be. I think changes can be made that don't disrespect the character but rather make it more suited for the silver screen and the general public viewer needed to keep the series alive.

[stewart48]

Captain America would have never happened if he was a DC character. DC is concerned about every detail they think oils hurt global sales. Marvel isn't by any means a patriotic company they care about the dollar just like DC and Warner Brothers but I don't think marvel is as up tight about superheroes and their ideals, symbolism, and costume; they'll draw the line and adapt something's but aren't as anal. Heck the publishing side of DC seems anal enough.

Superman Returns got a lot of heat at the time for trying to reduce the perceived ideals of superman, truth justice the American way and not knocking up Lois lane and being a deadbeat dad

[Jimmy Bond]

I think the article is wrong headed in a few ways. First of all, TV shows have very low budgets compared to Marvel's films. They can't really pull off the spandex costumes in all its colorful glory in that compelling of a way, and they can't do big, CGI-induced action sequences. So it makes sense to tone some of that down so it doesn't look like a cosplaying fan film. In the case of Arro specifically, it'as based on Mike Grell's Longbow Hunters.

Comics and superheroes are so tied together, because the colorful, bombastic nature of superheroes works best that way. It only seems logical to me to want to tone that stuff down when you're doing live action.

[TheDarkNut]

I don't see how they're ashamed. They just always add a twist with their mythologies.

[carabas]

I don't see the problem. It looks like a pretty comics-accurate Green Arrow costume to me, especially for a tv budget. It's a lot more comicbooky than Hawkeye's movie costume for instance, if we really do have to compare everything to the Avengers movie from now on.

Also, nine or ten seasons of Smallville. One failed pilot for Wonder Woman. It seems hard to argue with success.

[josh straightedge]

It's not just in TV. I wish DC/Warner Bros. would just embrace what their characters are in the movie world too. They could do a JL movie and have the budget. Marvel Studios has proven time and time again with their movies that by taking a lot from the comics and adding in a fun, action element, that their movies are exciting and successful. Good acting, good directing and having some Marvel staff on as consulting. You can't deny what those movies have accomplished. And then DC gives us Green Lantern, which was such a colossal waste of time. I worry about what Man Of Steel will be like, not because of Zack Snyder, but by what Warner Bros. is going to make him change to stray from the comic likeness.

[Free-Man]

Most of the Marvel superheroes made alterations and compromises to an extent anyway, so I don't think it's accurate to frame it as "Marvel loves their properties and embraces their silliness but DC is cynical and bitter." Remember, Joe Johnston said he deliberately had the "iconic" Captain America suit reduced to jokey USO scenes because he thought it looked incredibly stupid. And the pages upon pages of debates here from people whining about Hawkeye not wearing purple tights with big buccaneer boots.

I think Marvel's genius is they found a good balance of what does and doesn't work in a live action setting, and aren't afraid to change things.

[Bricolo]

Great article, you hit the point precisely and I don't say that often here. Warner is ashamed and we need more bright and colorful things these days. I am so tired of dark and muddy. The attitude of the people behind Arrow in interviews is completely turning me off of even trying to give the program a chance. The JSA was the highlight of Smallville to me though I kind of enjoyed a lot of the series still. I dread this Amazon. The costume was wrong in the Wonder Woman film because of the design, the cut of the corset, the materials used, the pants. The 70s Wonder Woman costume was better, I can see and visualize a better way of updating it, many cosplayers have done remarkable jobs. It feels like Warner is ashamed. For that matter it seems like DC is sometimes too.

[Namtab]

I think part of the problem is their (half)desire to bring properties to the small screen, that probably shouldn't be there.

There are plenty of DC properties, that are already sans-tights/capes, could better work on the small screen, instead of trying to bring one of their higher caliber characters to TV, only to remove/alter the costume and change the name.

For example, with Vampires being as popular as they (still) are, WB/DC could either adapt "I, Vampire" or "Looker" for the small screen. Being relatively unknown, they'd have the same benefit Blade had during his first movie -- a vampire character that most people had no idea was a Marvel character, and therefore, wasn't really expected to be "super-hero-y."

[jade_nova]

Honestly since, I dunno, maybe The Dark Knight I've had this feeling like Warner Brothers is ashamed to admit that the source material for some of these things comes from comic books. Maybe it's because Green Lantern flopped, maybe it's because they don't want to be seen as copying Marvel (if they rush out a Justice League movie that will happen anyway), maybe they're just too caught up in wanting to be 'dark' or 'grounded' or 'real'.

How can stories about people with powers and abilities that don't exist in reality be 'real'?

[aNamored]

Everyone has made some great points here, I agree with so many. That really was a wonderful and spot on article. It is too bad we can't see the more colorful, strange and wacky side of DC's comics characters. Probably why I love that Lobo fan film as much as I do: they completely nailed the character and the o.t.t. humor.

[Legato]

I think with WB it's that the last time they took a chance with camp it tanked. Batman & Robin was a critical and finiancial failure and it took a few decades for them to repair the damage the Batman Film Franchise recieved from that. Superman Retuns was camp, in some ways, and it wasn't well recieved either. Green Lantern was a box office disappointment. So WB has to go with what worked for them and it's painting the DC heroes in a more modern light like the Nolanverse Batman films, which made money, and Man of Steel seems to be taking an inspiration from the Nolan Batman films.

[Legato]

How can stories about people with powers and abilities that don't exist in reality be 'real'?

I've asked myself that same question. The minute powers are thrown into the equation thats when realism should be thrown out the window no matter what anyone says

[Mat001]

Yeah, this.

Look at how crappy those JSA costumes were on Smallville, and that Wonder Woman costume looked incredibly cheap too (both the promo shot and the one they wound up filming).

I don't see Nolan's Batman suit or even the Man of Steel suit as deviating all that far from the source material -- certainly no more than the Marvel costumes. So, I'm not seeing the movie comparisons, but the TV versions, yeah, there seems to be some shame (or something else) there.

A show about Kal-El/Clark Kent had to be named "Smallville," Green Arrow has to be "Arrow," and the new Wonder Woman show might be named "Amazon," -- it's like they want to use the characters, but not really.

"Smallville" was a different situation. First off, when the show debuted in 2001, it had been eight years since "Superboy"/"The Adventures Of Superboy" went off the air. The showrunners were aware of that and didn't want to do another Superboy series. Likewise, it had only been four years since "Lois & Clark" went off the air. Hence they wanted something that stood out. Second, Superman's origin in 2001 had him not being Superboy in his youth. Much less Superman. For the first eighteen years, all Clark did was live life normally. Then he spent seven years using his powers to help others before going public as Superman. The show followed the guidelines set forth in "Man Of Steel" and "For All Seasons", the latter of which served as a basis for the show. And finally, the show was reworked from being about Batman, which would have followed the same principle of no costume and encountering his rogues early on. That was only nixed because "Batman: Year One" was in development. So they went to Superman which was easier to pull off. But in both stories, it was about the journey towards becoming the legend and not what was done once in costume. The type of story "Smallville" was, was something that had not been done in live action media. All previous Superman ventures showed only the basics and then jumped right into his wearing the costume, when it came to the origin.

"Amazon" and "Arrow" are both trying to copy "Smallville" and the Nolan Batman films. But more so with the latter, since the leads were wearing costumes. Likewise, "Birds Of Prey" came out and had the characters in costume and referring to each other by their code names. "Mercy Reef" was trying to imitate "Smallville" as well.

Most of the Marvel superheroes made alterations and compromises to an extent anyway, so I don't think it's accurate to frame it as "Marvel loves their properties and embraces their silliness but DC is cynical and bitter." Remember, Joe Johnston said he deliberately had the "iconic" Captain America suit reduced to jokey USO scenes because he thought it looked incredibly stupid. And the pages upon pages of debates here from people whining about Hawkeye not wearing purple tights with big buccaneer boots.

The Green Goblin, The New Goblin, Venom, Doc Ock, Typhoid Mary, Bullseye, Galactus, Whiplash, Crimson Dynamo and all the Mutant characters in the X-Men universe support that as well. And that's just Marvel.