How Come People Have Little Faith in The WB's Ability to Put Together a Good Cinematic Universe?
Options
Maximus Rex
Members Posts: 6,354 ✭✭✭✭✭
cho
If twenty years ago, the fate of the world was incumbent upon the ability of Hollywood to make a decent based upon Marvel characters, we'd all be ? dead. For some reason or another (unless the character was Superman or Batman,) Hollywood didn't take movies based upon comic book characters very seriously and end result was the first set of movies based on Marvel characters.
The Punisher starring Drago. The muthafucka didn't even wear the suit and inside of Microchip providing logistical support, some random ? ? was in the movie.
The Fantastic Four when The Thing and Dr. Doom looked cheap and wack ? and the Human Torch didn't flame on until the end of the movie.
and of course Captain America which was bad in every conceivable way known to man. it was until "Blade, come out, and the subsequent "X-Men," movie that proved the viability of comic book characters as money makers at the box office.
Now as DC and Warner Bros. are in the same position that Marvel was in two decades ago, fanboys have little or no faith in the WB's ability to make believable, coherent, and cohesive cinematic universe. Unlike Marvel (which hard a much harder task,) in building it's cinematic universe using (arguably it's second and third tier characters,) It would seem that Warner Bros. effects would be easier because the DCU contains three of the most well known and iconic characters not only in comic book fandom, but in popular culture in Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. My question is, why do people think Warner Bros. will either come up short or just straight up brick when the studio attempts to build it's cinematic universe, starting with MoS?
Comments
-
they have no clear game plan, they're playing catch up to marvel and they have no one overseeing the grand design of the universe like marvel does with kevin feige
-
Like the post said before, they dont have a gameplan. everything they are doing is reactive. Instead of trying to what marvel does, build your universe your way, but they aren't. They too distracted by the dollar signs. At least sony is trying to do something different with spiderman.
Putting too many eggs in the Supers/Batman basket when they could of launched stand alone movies of other properties and maybe connected it down the line, let the other properties stand on their own feet not attached to Superman/Batman like sidekick movies -
they have no clear vision and its not their top priority
-
I think because Green Latern flopped, they are shook to try and promote other properties without attaching them to Supes/batman now.
-
Not that I don't agree completely with what everyone is saying, but what Marvel is doing isn't easy. Kevin Fiege didn't just strut in and start making demands. He's a young guy, still in his 30's , who took what little he had and made an empire when he could have easily fumbled with The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man and no one would have been surprised.
WB is the company to blame. Take a look at the amazing work DC has done in animation: Batman TAS, Superman TAS, Static Shock, Batman Beyond, Justice League, JLU, Young Justice, all of those great movies. Take the same focus, dedication, and attention to source material to live action shows and movies and you get the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.
Marvel and Disney took a gamble with Kevin Fiege and it paid off big time. DC does have anyone in a position like that, that's trusted enough to handle these iconic characters. That lack of faith in their own franchise is why they fail to make the right moves. They see too big of a potential loss and in turn, don't take the financial risks of opening a budget.
That Green Lantern movie doesn't count either because they were trying to emulate RDJ and Iron Man but the script and directors ? up big time. Unfortunately for them, Christopher Nolan doesn't want to be Joss Weadon so they are going to have a harder time putting out consistent hits like they did with TDK and MOS.
Bottom line, the fact that they haven't done what Marvel has done, with way less, is cause enough for doubt. -
where is Broddie?
-
soul rattler wrote: »Not that I don't agree completely with what everyone is saying, but what Marvel is doing isn't easy. Kevin Fiege didn't just strut in and start making demands. He's a young guy, still in his 30's , who took what little he had and made an empire when he could have easily fumbled with The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man and no one would have been surprised.
WB is the company to blame. Take a look at the amazing work DC has done in animation: Batman TAS, Superman TAS, Static Shock, Batman Beyond, Justice League, JLU, Young Justice, all of those great movies. Take the same focus, dedication, and attention to source material to live action shows and movies and you get the Dark Knight Trilogy and Man of Steel.
Marvel and Disney took a gamble with Kevin Fiege and it paid off big time. DC does have anyone in a position like that, that's trusted enough to handle these iconic characters. That lack of faith in their own franchise is why they fail to make the right moves. They see too big of a potential loss and in turn, don't take the financial risks of opening a budget.
That Green Lantern movie doesn't count either because they were trying to emulate RDJ and Iron Man but the script and directors ? up big time. Unfortunately for them, Christopher Nolan doesn't want to be Joss Weadon so they are going to have a harder time putting out consistent hits like they did with TDK and MOS.
Bottom line, the fact that they haven't done what Marvel has done, with way less, is cause enough for doubt.
Couldn't have said it any better. Marvel has a vision, took a chance then just went with it. I also think the timing of these movies played a part into it too. Look when the Incredible Hulk, Iron Man, and The Dark Knight came out. All in 2008. Marvel was just starting and WB was in their second movie with Batman. Once Nolan came out and said his trilogy is a stand alone that wrapped it right there.
Another thing is that Christian Bale's Batman is still so fresh on people's minds. So if the world was connected to Man of Steel then that could have been the building blocks for it.
I kinda disagree with the Green Lantern part of what you said. Because if Green Lantern was a big hit then it wouldn't have been as forgotten as it is now and that would have been the building block for their shared universe.
That's why I give Marvel credit because the first Thor and Captain America weren't these big box office hits. It was all shared and built upon. In turn with building that and the Avengers, their sequels did much better.
I'm like the next person rooting for WB to do well because you have these characters who are iconic and you're just moving too fast instead of moving at a steady pace. -
Sometimes it's also about striking first. Any development of a shared universe for DC is going to look like a copy job to a lot of people at this point. And please don't let them bring Darkseid into it because then DC will really look like a biter.
-
Outside of the Spider-Man and X-Men marvel historically wasn’t as popular as DC. Therefore there was more demand for DC properties and those rights were liscenced to different studios. Marvel did the same but the only franchises that stuck were X-Men & Spider-Man. So when Marvel wanted to get into the movie business they had ownership of more comic properties and were able to build a united universe (outside of X-Men/Spider-Man & minor characters like Punisher/Daredevil/Ghost Rider which failed as franchise starters). DC on the other hand had properties at numerous studies and didn’t have the film rights.
DC is behind on the movie franchise world but they run laps around Marvel in the animation and tv department.
As a life-long comic fan I cant complain about seeing the Avengers Unite or Batman meeting Superman or Wolverine in Japan or Spidey slinging on the big screen.
-
gdatruth2.0 wrote: »Outside of the Spider-Man and X-Men marvel historically wasn’t as popular as DC. Therefore there was more demand for DC properties and those rights were liscenced to different studios. Marvel did the same but the only franchises that stuck were X-Men & Spider-Man. So when Marvel wanted to get into the movie business they had ownership of more comic properties and were able to build a united universe (outside of X-Men/Spider-Man & minor characters like Punisher/Daredevil/Ghost Rider which failed as franchise starters). DC on the other hand had properties at numerous studies and didn’t have the film rights.
Pretty much. WB wasn't able to put all their DC eggs in one basket until Man of Steel because the DC IP movie rights were all over the place instead of under one production studio for decades.
-
Does DC have all their characters rights now? or still a bunch of characters signed elsewhere?
I know they got a lot planned with Del Toro's "Dark Universe" that is supposed to have Swampthing, Deadman, Constantine. Pretty much a justice league dark movie.
Now they got Sandman coming out and a few Vertigo stories like Scalped and Preacher. Almost all of the TV shows are on different networks. -
Lou Cypher wrote: »Does DC have all their characters rights now? or still a bunch of characters signed elsewhere?
Yes WB has the movie rights to all their DC IP's under the DC Entertainment production banner now. WB is still fully in control though. They're moving DC from NY to Cali in the summer to make the communication between WB and DC a lot more fluid and organic but they still have to yield to WB's wishes. This isn't the Marvel Studios thing where an independent production studio makes all the creative calls and Disney just does the distribution. So no matter how much people ignorant of the politics of the movie business want to say it is it's still not the same type of situation even though there will now be a DC movie universe because it's finally possible. -
The answer is simple......................MARVEL >>>>>>>>> D.C!
That is all -
Umm the properties being spread didn't stop marvel, ironman 1 & 2 weren't under marvel studio, only iron man 3
-
CottonCitySlim wrote: »Umm the properties being spread didn't stop marvel, ironman 1 & 2 weren't under marvel studio, only iron man 3
not sure of the specifics but i think everything starting with Iron Man was done under the Marvel studios umbrella but distribution was outsourced until Disney bought them
-
CottonCitySlim wrote: »Umm the properties being spread didn't stop marvel, ironman 1 & 2 weren't under marvel studio, only iron man 3
Yes they were.gdatruth2.0 wrote: »CottonCitySlim wrote: »Umm the properties being spread didn't stop marvel, ironman 1 & 2 weren't under marvel studio, only iron man 3
not sure of the specifics but i think everything starting with Iron Man was done under the Marvel studios umbrella but distribution was outsourced until Disney bought them
Marvel Studios had a distribution deal with Paramount before Disney bought Marvel Comics.
-
gdatruth2.0 wrote: »Outside of the Spider-Man and X-Men marvel historically wasn’t as popular as DC. Therefore there was more demand for DC properties and those rights were liscenced to different studios. Marvel did the same but the only franchises that stuck were X-Men & Spider-Man. So when Marvel wanted to get into the movie business they had ownership of more comic properties and were able to build a united universe (outside of X-Men/Spider-Man & minor characters like Punisher/Daredevil/Ghost Rider which failed as franchise starters). DC on the other hand had properties at numerous studies and didn’t have the film rights.
DC is behind on the movie franchise world but they run laps around Marvel in the animation and tv department.
As a life-long comic fan I cant complain about seeing the Avengers Unite or Batman meeting Superman or Wolverine in Japan or Spidey slinging on the big screen.
Dont Marvel own the rights to use all their characters in animated movies?
-
they own everything except the movie rights as far as I know.gdatruth2.0 wrote: »Outside of the Spider-Man and X-Men marvel historically wasn’t as popular as DC. Therefore there was more demand for DC properties and those rights were liscenced to different studios. Marvel did the same but the only franchises that stuck were X-Men & Spider-Man. So when Marvel wanted to get into the movie business they had ownership of more comic properties and were able to build a united universe (outside of X-Men/Spider-Man & minor characters like Punisher/Daredevil/Ghost Rider which failed as franchise starters). DC on the other hand had properties at numerous studies and didn’t have the film rights.
DC is behind on the movie franchise world but they run laps around Marvel in the animation and tv department.
As a life-long comic fan I cant complain about seeing the Avengers Unite or Batman meeting Superman or Wolverine in Japan or Spidey slinging on the big screen.
Dont Marvel own the rights to use all their characters in animated movies?
-
DC and Disney's Marvel are on their A game. I still think MOS was the best superman movie ever and I'm hyped for 2 to come out. Kevin Smith is like Kevin Feige, he knows his ? .
-
Sour-Cream wrote: »DC and Disney's Marvel are on their A game. I still think MOS was the best superman movie ever and I'm hyped for 2 to come out. Kevin Smith is like Kevin Feige, he knows his ? .
I'm pretty sure Kevin Smith has no part of DC. He's said before he doesn't feel comfortable with these big budget superhero films so he'll never direct one. and I don't think they've brought him on as a producer or consultant, etc. -
ROZAYTABERNACLE wrote: »Sour-Cream wrote: »DC and Disney's Marvel are on their A game. I still think MOS was the best superman movie ever and I'm hyped for 2 to come out. Kevin Smith is like Kevin Feige, he knows his ? .
I'm pretty sure Kevin Smith has no part of DC. He's said before he doesn't feel comfortable with these big budget superhero films so he'll never direct one. and I don't think they've brought him on as a producer or consultant, etc.
I know, I'm just saying that Snyder has a team of people in his circle that is dedicated to ensuring that the movies correlate to the comic book fans. From previous works such as Watchmen and 300, he hasn't disappointed readers. I thought the only thing that was ? up in MOS was the dialogue but that was David S. Goyer's fault which is why they replaced him with Chris Terrio (Argo). The story was on point but Kal-El and Zod was speaking some cheesy ? . If what Broddie is saying is true that WB is connected to DC then I can't see this failing. Come to think about it, Disney and WB been feuding for some time since Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny. -
There was also Sucker Punch from Goyer and WB.
-
Sucker Punch should never be spoken of again. Wack azzz, misleading azzz movie.
-
It wasn't all that, but it was a step in the right direction for WB in terms of CGI, fight scenes, scenery, and heroines.
The chicks in Sucker Punch might be a precursor to what we see of Wonder Woman. -
Lol that Reed Richards from the Roger Corman movie looks like a raging alcoholic
