They are going ahead with a Justice League movie

[JD]

I don't see where any of the DC characters abilities are really that much worse than the Marvel characters. Hell, one of the next movies has a talking raccoon and a sentient tree among it's cast members.

Those aren't abilities.

I know that. In quotes Millar seemed to be talking about the DC characters not translating well to live action because of things like the GL powers, and the wings on The Flashs' mask, and so I was just pointing out that Marvel has found a way to translate things just as crazy (Rocket and Groot).

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

^^
Yes. Marvel found the way.
Who here has as much faith in WB doing the same? They don't know what to do with anything unless there's a Bat or an S on the heroes chest.

 

[JD]

If they go the same kind of quality of writers and directors as Marvel sure, and let them do their thing sure. But at this point if they keep screwing around then they're going to scare off all the decent creators.

 

[theenglish]

I'd rather they scrap a bad script and delay a few months to get a new one than to have a crappy movie made from said script.

I don't know--I would rather DC characters just have good movies first. The writing for GL was Captain America television pilot bad. DC has great characters and properties--they need to invest in quality film makers and actors. I have heard people comment about the commercialism of the Marvel franchise, but the people who make the films do care about them and it shows.

 

[Gaith]

I know that. In quotes Millar seemed to be talking about the DC characters not translating well to live action because of things like the GL powers, and the wings on The Flashs' mask, and so I was just pointing out that Marvel has found a way to translate things just as crazy (Rocket and Groot).

Ah, but remember the shooting gallery scene from Men in Black. A talking raccoon shooting a laser gun? He's just an alien gunslinger doing his job; nothing unusual there. But a human using a magic ring to conjure up green force-field weapons here on Earth, and wearing a mask that in no way obscures his face? Or an Amazonian warrior from an Ancient Greece-era culture wearing another nation's flag symbols because a pilot from there visited her accidentally? Now there's deviance for ya. Yep, you read that right: I'm calling the Justice League weirder than the Guardians of the Galaxy.

 

[theenglish]

I know that. In quotes Millar seemed to be talking about the DC characters not translating well to live action because of things like the GL powers, and the wings on The Flashs' mask, and so I was just pointing out that Marvel has found a way to translate things just as crazy (Rocket and Groot).

Ah, but remember the shooting gallery scene from Men in Black. A talking raccoon shooting a laser gun? He's just an alien gunslinger doing his job; nothing unusual there. But a human using a magic ring to conjure up green force-field weapons here on Earth, and wearing a mask that in no way obscures his face? Or an Amazonian warrior from an Ancient Greece-era culture wearing another nation's flag symbols because a pilot from there visited her accidentally? Now there's deviance for ya. Yep, you read that right: I'm calling the Justice League weirder than the Guardians of the Galaxy.

I disagree. Marvel live action characters deviate from the comic book counterparts just enough to make them seem believable in the real world. Mainly, they are just de-powered, but the actors play them as real people. Similar to...Nolan's Batman. Other DC movies fall into the vein of Daredevil--camp--and not good camp. Play Wonder Woman like Hugh Jackman plays Wolverine, or Green Lantern the way that Downey plays Iron Man and it will work.

 

[sojourner]

Daredevil was not camp. 60's Batman tv show was camp. You might want to check the definition on that.

I'd rather they scrap a bad script and delay a few months to get a new one than to have a crappy movie made from said script.

I don't know--I would rather DC characters just have good movies first. The writing for GL was Captain America television pilot bad. DC has great characters and properties--they need to invest in quality film makers and actors. I have heard people comment about the commercialism of the Marvel franchise, but the people who make the films do care about them and it shows.

I think you're agreeing with me.

 

[Admiral_Young]

"Daredevil" had it's issues but it certainly wasn't camp. That'd be the word I'd least use to describe the film

 

[CorporalCaptain]

No, Daredevil was not camp. The closest thing was the playground scene, but no.

 

[theenglish]

Daredevil was not camp. 60's Batman tv show was camp. You might want to check the definition on that.

I'd rather they scrap a bad script and delay a few months to get a new one than to have a crappy movie made from said script.

I don't know--I would rather DC characters just have good movies first. The writing for GL was Captain America television pilot bad. DC has great characters and properties--they need to invest in quality film makers and actors. I have heard people comment about the commercialism of the Marvel franchise, but the people who make the films do care about them and it shows.

I think you're agreeing with me.

Point taken--although remove that sentence and I stand by the rest of my post.

 

[Captain Craig]

Just for emphasis, agreed with the others Daredevil is not a camp film.

The closest Marvel film the past decade that could approach being called camp is Fantastic Four and that's not camp but it has campy moments more than any other Marvel movie. In fairness, the characters have been portrayed that way in the comics so it was true to the source.

 

[sojourner]

Spoiler for the end of DKR -

"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb!"

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Spoiler for the end of DKR -

"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb!"

 

[Trekker4747]

^I didn't realize he tried to write a Superman movie. Make me wonder if this isn't just frustration speaking.
As for what he actually says, I have to disagree. I don't see where any of the DC characters abilities are really that much worse than the Marvel characters. Hell, one of the next movies has a talking raccoon and a sentient tree among it's cast members. We've gotten plenty of adaptations over the last few years that have shown that the characters still work fine today. I know they've been mostly animated, but I think the things he says were true, then no versions of the characters would be popular today.

The difficulty in writing DC characters is not that they're too goofy, but that they're too strong.

Superman's power is to do anything that the plot requires, essentially. Writer are fond of pulling new powers out of their assess. But even if you limit him to the basics of flight super-speed, super-strength, and invulnerability, you can't challenge him. Even the Richerd Donnor movies required that he be a dumbass in order to provide a suitable challenge.

Green Lantern can literally do anything, limited only by his willpower and imagination. Creating a villain to fight that is not easy, as we saw.

The Flash's abilities actually make him more powerful than Superman. While he lacks flight, he's capable of running at lightspeed, producing infinite energy. Punching someone at full speed would release enough energy to destroy the earth several times over. With the exception of the several evil Flashes, there's nothing that can stand against him even before you get his weird speed-manipulating powers into it.

Wonder Woman is generally depicted as Superman with boobs these days and faces the same problems.

And the Martian Manhunter is Superman with shapeshifting and telepathy, which makes him even worse.

Yep, and Marvel has been so utterly perfect when it comes to depicting their characters as having limits.

It's not like one of their characters, with his own movie franchise now, is literally a god or one of their characters has a healing ability once depicted in the books as having him recovering literally from only a few surviving cells.



Please, both Marvel and DC have their "problems" when it comes to their comic book characters being "too strong" or having too great a range of powers. Doesn't mean that they can't translate into a movie franchise that "depowers" them to a more reasonable level. Comic book Superman once was able to "blow out" a star like you and I blow out a candle. But I doubt we'll ever see him doing that in any incarnation of the movies. And, hell, there's a LOT that can be said about what Thor and The Hulk have gotten away with in their comics as being a god and an indestructible ball of rage but both work fine as movie characters.

 

[theenglish]

^^^^
Exactly, just define how the characters limits function within the context of the story during the first chapter of the movie and you're fine.

 

[Dream]

And, hell, there's a LOT that can be said about what Thor and The Hulk have gotten away with in their comics as being a god and an indestructible ball of rage but both work fine as movie characters.

They worked because both characters were weaken for the movies. Thor was struggling after getting stabbed and Hulk was being overwhelmed during the New York battle in Avengers.

I'm really curious at how Superman's power levels with be depicted in Man of Steel.

 

[Captain Craig]

Rumor mill update #142

So 2015 is off the table. Pushed back to 2016...right?
This "report" is now saying not till after 2017, not in 2017 but sometime after. They speculate as late as 2021.

It looks like the JUSTICE LEAGUE movie was more wishful thinking than anything. As more and more negative press leaks about the project, Warner Bros. and DC seem to be becoming nervous about the project. First it was a bad script, then Mark Millar's negative comments, and now a rumor that the movie may not see the light of day until after 2017 at the earliest.

A quote from Batman On Film from the JoBlo article:

“If Superman is huge, then they’ve bought themselves some time and will have a franchise to hang their hat on for seven, eight years. The need for Batman won’t be as great, and [the reboot] of that franchise can wait until the Superman trilogy is done.”

That seems to be how JoBlo is arriving at 2021 in their article title.


I don't tend to agree. If MOS does spawn a trilogy I don't see any reason they can't start on JLA as it's own thing just as having had an Avengers film isn't stopping an IM3 etc.
I know the structure was set up that way intentionally at Marvel.
MOS could be ground floor though of a new DCU-CU though which GL failed to be. Instead of after 2017, how about by 2017? Film MOS2 then jump over to film JLA. MOS2 for 2015 and JLA by no later than 2017.

 

[Trekker4747]

If they're going to do this right -the way Marvel did it- then this sounds GOOD. They need to give all the character they want in the Justice League movie their own "origin movie" and have it build up to the JL movie. So Superman's movie needs to do good, we potentially need a Batman "reboot" (soft reboot, probably), and possibly even a Wonder Woman, Aquaman or other JL member movies.

 

[Gaith]

This "report" is now saying not till after 2017, not in 2017 but sometime after. They speculate as late as 2021.

​

"In the year... twenty-twenty-one... If people still think superhero flicks are fun..."
​

... But what about the Hawkman movie?!

 

[JD]

If they're going to do this right -the way Marvel did it- then this sounds GOOD. They need to give all the character they want in the Justice League movie their own "origin movie" and have it build up to the JL movie. So Superman's movie needs to do good, we potentially need a Batman "reboot" (soft reboot, probably), and possibly even a Wonder Woman, Aquaman or other JL member movies.

While I do think the way Marvel did things is the best way to go about these kinds of superhero team movies, I do have to wonder if DC will purposefully go a different route just to avoid being compared to them.