Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 267
  1. #151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SephirothDZX View Post
    They need to sit down, look at Man of Steel, see if it has any legs to it and then ask Bruce Timm to build a DC universe with it.

    If they rush out a JLA movie for 2015 it's just going to look like they're ripping off Avengers, especially if there's no build up to it.

    Bruce Tim would be a great choice. He obviously have much love for the characters and can translate them from comics to a larger audience.

    MoS is definitely the canary in the coalmine. IMO, it doesn't look like much the build a "universe" on, but if it's a hit, there will be a sequel, and it would be foolish if the focus of that sequel was "more Superman" rather than building a cinematic DCU.

    That said, I don't think WB's goal should be building towards a JLA movie per se. WB should view its DC properties as almost the opposite of the Marvel approach. Instead of launching a bunch of solo movies to build to a big team-up, WB should roll-out with team-up movies that can spawn solo movies. Reboot a Batman series through a "World's Finest" sequel to MoS, and just keep adding heroes to the main vain of DCU movies and spin-off from there.
    "Don't Reboot The Bat!" Keep Going!
    MoS is a PoS.
    Twitter
    The Facebook

  2. #152
    Elder Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    16,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Clark View Post
    It has long been my theory and opinion that you cannot design a film to appeal to what you think people want.
    And at no point did I suggest or even imply that's what WB should be doing, so I'm at a loss as to why you quoted my post as a lead in for that observation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Clark View Post
    It is EXACTLY the same thing with making movies.
    I've never seen (and never will see) Face Off, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that very little about winning a basic cable "reality" TV show is EXACTLY like making a $200 million dollar feature film.

  3. #153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Clark View Post
    Except that Marvel would love to have those licensed properties back under their direct control. Those characters being at Sony and Fox are severely limiting what Marvel could achieve if they had full access to all their characters. That is the one small glitch in the way Marvel is doing things right now. And that glitch was the impetus for Marvels creating their own studio, to better control their characters fates in the Movies. And it has worked pretty well. And as time goes by they are just likely going to get more characters back, leading to better and more exciting movies.

    Yeah, but Marvel sold off its biggest characters, forcing their hand into developing their second-tier properties and putting them at the forefront. Marvel had to sell Spider-Man and Wolverine to make enough money to make Iron Man. WB has a slew of DC properties that have no connection to the JLA and that they will never ever make into movies. They don't have to sell Superman or Batman, but they have plenty of sub-universe DC properties they could sell to studios who don't have access to bigger name superhero properties in order to offset the production costs of WB's Super/Bat/JLA movies.
    "Don't Reboot The Bat!" Keep Going!
    MoS is a PoS.
    Twitter
    The Facebook

  4. #154
    Observer Vibranium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    19,266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauly T View Post
    Yeah, but Marvel sold off its biggest characters, forcing their hand into developing their second-tier properties and putting them at the forefront. Marvel had to sell Spider-Man and Wolverine to make enough money to make Iron Man. WB has a slew of DC properties that have no connection to the JLA and that they will never ever make into movies. They don't have to sell Superman or Batman, but they have plenty of sub-universe DC properties they could sell to studios who don't have access to bigger name superhero properties in order to offset the production costs of WB's Super/Bat/JLA movies.
    what part of "they can not do that" do you not get?

    there is ZERO option to do that because Time Warner owns everything
    Support your local roller derby league

  5. #155
    Senior Member Vidocq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vibranium View Post
    what part of "they can not do that" do you not get?

    there is ZERO option to do that because Time Warner owns everything
    And Marvel did that because they were dirt poor for a movie studio, WB doesn't have the same the issue. Not to mention that that caused a horrible cluster fcuk once they were bought by Disney
    ...And does Mr. Goddanm Batman says so much as ''Thanks''? OF COURSE not. That'd hardly be GRIM AND GRITTY, would it?

    The jerk...

    -DKU's Jim Gordon.

  6. #156
    Observer Vibranium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    19,266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vidocq View Post
    And Marvel did that because they were dirt poor for a movie studio, WB doesn't have the same the issue. Not to mention that that caused a horrible cluster fcuk once they were bought by Disney
    Marvel was its own entity when they started licensing things out, so they were able to look around and gauge interest...Blade was done by New Line, X-men by Fox, Spider-Man by Sony...so on and so forth
    Support your local roller derby league

  7. #157
    Senior Member Vidocq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kalorama View Post
    Which is exactly why I would expect them to avoid the same mistakes they made with Green Lantern.
    Yeah, hopefully. Though like I said, the people working on it must give at least a little bit of a shit. Even if it's run of the mill Take pride on their work.

    And FWIW every big budget summer blockbuster is designed to make money.
    I meant that are only designed to make money. The people working on Green Lantern clearly only cared to make the profit back and didn't cared about the quality of the story at all. Sure, your main interest is to make a profit but at least take some pride on your work.

    They had cool effects, a name actor, tie in after tie in to market the crap out of it... they had so much into the money coming and going into the movie... that the only thing they forgot was getting a decent screenplay and a director (I guess it had one? ... I mean they had to, right?)
    ...And does Mr. Goddanm Batman says so much as ''Thanks''? OF COURSE not. That'd hardly be GRIM AND GRITTY, would it?

    The jerk...

    -DKU's Jim Gordon.

  8. #158
    Senior Member SephirothDZX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauly T View Post
    Bruce Tim would be a great choice. He obviously have much love for the characters and can translate them from comics to a larger audience.

    MoS is definitely the canary in the coalmine. IMO, it doesn't look like much the build a "universe" on, but if it's a hit, there will be a sequel, and it would be foolish if the focus of that sequel was "more Superman" rather than building a cinematic DCU.

    That said, I don't think WB's goal should be building towards a JLA movie per se. WB should view its DC properties as almost the opposite of the Marvel approach. Instead of launching a bunch of solo movies to build to a big team-up, WB should roll-out with team-up movies that can spawn solo movies. Reboot a Batman series through a "World's Finest" sequel to MoS, and just keep adding heroes to the main vain of DCU movies and spin-off from there.
    They could do what Marvel did with Iron Man 1. If I remember right, Iron Man 1 was built as a standalone movie and the SHIELD/Nick Fury stuff was added in. Don't see why Man of Steel couldn't do the same.

    Plus, logically, I think a DC movie universe should start with Superman.
    Eh, Comics is a pretty cool guy...

  9. #159
    Observer Vibranium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    19,266

    Default

    and on Green Lantern

    Martin Campbell is a good director, I just think GL was a tad out of his wheel house
    Support your local roller derby league

  10. #160
    BANNED Phil Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Charles, Mo
    Posts
    5,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kalorama View Post
    And at no point did I suggest or even imply that's what WB should be doing, so I'm at a loss as to why you quoted my post as a lead in for that observation.
    You said...

    Quote Originally Posted by kalorama View Post
    ...every big budget summer blockbuster is designed to make money.
    and that spurred my general comment on the concept of "designing" films to be Blockbusters.


    Quote Originally Posted by kalorama View Post
    I've never seen (and never will see) Face Off, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that very little about winning a basic cable "reality" TV show is EXACTLY like making a $200 million dollar feature film.
    You really have no idea what an analogy is, do you? I was illustrating a comparison on the effect of creative intent (pleasing others versus following your heart/instincts) and its effect on quality of work and viewer/fan reception of the work.

  11. #161
    BANNED Phil Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Charles, Mo
    Posts
    5,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauly T View Post
    Yeah, but Marvel sold off its biggest characters, forcing their hand into developing their second-tier properties and putting them at the forefront.
    It just occurred to me reading this that Marvel is achieving something with it's "second tier" characters that DC cannot do with it's "First Tier" characters. That makes their attempts to launch a JLA film even more sad.

  12. #162
    Observer Vibranium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    19,266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Clark View Post
    It just occurred to me reading this that Marvel is achieving something with it's "second tier" characters that DC cannot do with it's "First Tier" characters. That makes their attempts to launch a JLA film even more sad.
    it does, in a way
    Support your local roller derby league

  13. #163
    BANNED Phil Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Charles, Mo
    Posts
    5,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauly T View Post
    Bruce Tim would be a great choice. He obviously have much love for the characters and can translate them from comics to a larger audience.
    Well... yes and no. Timm is indeed great at creating animated projects that faithfully adapt the comics characters into animated series and features. But that skill does not necessarily mean that he could do the same translating the same properties, much less other characters in DCs stable of characters, into successful live action film properties.

    Should he be given a chance, sure. Is he the 100% obvious choice for the task. I don't know. Who would have thought Fiege would have been the guy for Marvel? But Timm might (major emphasis on the "Might") be the best option DC/Warners has.

  14. #164
    Observer Vibranium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    19,266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Clark View Post
    Well... yes and no. Timm is indeed great at creating animated projects that faithfully adapt the comics characters into animated series and features. But that skill does not necessarily mean that he could do the same translating the same properties, much less other characters in DCs stable of characters, into successful live action film properties. Should he be given a chance, sure. Is he the 100% obvious choice for the task. I don't know. Who would have thought Fiege would have been the guy for Marvel? But Timm might (major emphasis on the "Might") be the best option DC/Warners has.
    true...for the most part, WB stays out of the animated productions

    quite the opposite for big budget films...getting notes from upstairs every day
    Support your local roller derby league

  15. #165
    BANNED Phil Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Charles, Mo
    Posts
    5,114

    Default

    That, and the fact that the process for Animation versus live action is different. And you cannot be as faithful to the look and to the story in Live Action as you can in Animation. You have to strike a balance between being faithful and producing something that looks good and not silly in live action.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •