I think just jumping into a Justice League movie is a huge mistake. Everyone knows Batman and Superman, but the others are all basically unknown.
I don't understand the assumption that lack of prior knowledge of the characters is a dealbreaker. Nobody knew who Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia were when Star Wars came out in 1977. Nobody knew who Marty McFly and Doc Brown were when Back to the Future came out. Thousands of movies over the decades have been built around characters the audience had never previously heard of, because they never existed before their movies came out. So where in the world does this bizarre notion come from that unfamiliar characters can't work in a movie?
Besides, look at the MCU, all of the characters got "origin movies" before the team movie to establish them. Rush right into a JL movie and people might be afraid that it'll connect too much to Batman movies they've probably not seen, that the characters without movies aren't familiar enough to connect to them (this is a problem I think Hawkeye suffers from in the Avengers. He isn't established.)
Besides, whether or not you "need" origin movies for these characters or not is beside the point. Aquaman and Wonder Woman are strong characters who DESERVE their own movie.
Christopher said:I mean, when Smallville was on the air, there were a lot of viewers who had no idea that it had anything to do with Superman.
If anything Aquaman would need the "hardest" movie to overcome the damage Super Friends did to him.
Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, etc. are NOT new characters in the same regards as other movie characters because these characters are decades old and general audiences are going to be scared by that. Thinking they'll have too much weight on them from the past that'll leave them lost and confused.
Yea, pretty much, if the general audience has a passing familiarity or none whatsoever, they don't care abut all the different versions of the character from the past, they care about this specific version in this specific movie they are watchingIf anything Aquaman would need the "hardest" movie to overcome the damage Super Friends did to him.
Who the hell remembers the Super Friends? That was 30 years ago. In the meantime, the Justice League cartoon has come out, Justice League Unlimited, Batman: Brave and the Bold, Young Justice, Smallville.
Why does the Super Friends matter, except to a bunch of aging people? Who aren't the target audience?
Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, etc. are NOT new characters in the same regards as other movie characters because these characters are decades old and general audiences are going to be scared by that. Thinking they'll have too much weight on them from the past that'll leave them lost and confused.
And speaking as a DC fan for decades, this is ridiculous. Most audiences won't give a rat's ass about the comic history, they didn't for Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Batman, or Spiderman. In fact, because Wonder Woman has been in the public consciousness for so long, it should be EASIER to introduce her... unlike, say, Green Lantern.
Audiences aren't concerned with what happened in issue 55 of Aquaman, they want to know what he can do, AND, more importantly, what is character like... is he funny, is he angry, what does he want... Period. This "weight of past" is genre fans thinking way to hard and not realizing, most of that "weight" is just stuff that isn't really important.
Christopher said:I mean, when Smallville was on the air, there were a lot of viewers who had no idea that it had anything to do with Superman.
If cluelessness were an Olympic sport, this country could be great again!
Yea, pretty much, if the general audience has a passing familiarity or none whatsoever, they don't care abut all the different versions of the character from the past, they care about this specific version in this specific movie they are watching
Yea, pretty much, if the general audience has a passing familiarity or none whatsoever, they don't care abut all the different versions of the character from the past, they care about this specific version in this specific movie they are watching
Very well said.
That's all true but water is still his gimmick, if you don't use it and turn him into another Superman/Wonder Woman type, why use Aquaman at all?I don't agree that it's hard to make Aquaman useful on land. Surviving in the ocean depths with their crushing pressure, freezing cold, perpetual darkness, and abundant predatory animals would require truly superhuman strength, endurance, and senses. Far from just "guy who talks to fish," Aquaman would have to be one of the most physically powerful and indestructible members of the League, close to Wonder Woman's or Superman's power levels.
That's an idea I like, it gives him distinctive waterbased abilities. You convinced me, he just became the sixth member of Takeru's Justice League. But that's it, no one else is allowed to join, too many characters fighting for screentime is not good, six heroes is already pushing it.... gave him Mera's ability to form weapons out of water. Maybe a movie Aquaman could have the same sort of thing that Young Justice's Aqualad had in season 1, reservoirs of water on his costume that he could form hydrokinetically into blades, a shield, etc. (Much like waterbenders in the Avatar animated universe often carry waterskins on their belts so they always have water on hand to manipulate.)
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.
Thor has the power of a god. The Hulk has no upper limit on his physical strength.
Much the same is true of Dr. Strange.Green Lantern can literally do anything, limited only by his willpower and imagination.
When it comes to superpowers and basic character types, DC and Marvel have been drawing from pretty much the same well for decades. There's not that great a distinction in that respect. The key difference is in the personalities. Marvel characters -- at least in the Stan Lee era -- tend to have more human fallibility, more personal hangups, more vulnerabilities built into their natures. Captain America is the ultimate clean-cut hero, but he's a man out of time struggling to adjust. The Hulk has unlimited power but no control, making him potentially as much villain as hero. Iron Man has unlimited technology, but would die without it. The X-Men can save the world, but that world finds their very existence threatening or intolerable. And so on. What makes Marvel's characters distinct from DC's is that their Achilles heels aren't a radioactive rock or a particular color of the spectrum, but are either personal hangups or intrinsic downsides of the very things that make them heroes.
So it's not about how strong the characters are or what their powers are like. It's about how they're portrayed as people, how fallible and relatable they are. No matter how much power they have, the key is to find a way to challenge them on a personal level, an emotional level.
Perhaps a mod should rename this here thread They are not going ahead with a Justice League movie, amirite?!![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.