DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
The Daily Express is a notoriously unreliable British tabloid but they seem to have used as their source the same Variety story that I linked to.
No big loss IMO - hell even the cast didn't care for a lot of Jared Leto's antics on set. I didn't think he was that great a version of the Joker, so rebooting that aspect is no big deal.
"Disney doesn't seem to think that a movie can work unless Iron Man has SOME connection to it."
Do go on about how it's totally different for Marvel...
How was Iron Man connected to the Thor movies, or Guardians of the Galaxy? And at least they have the excuse of this being their first big cinematic experiment as opposed to how WB could've made non-Superman and Batman movies decades ago but chose to do nothing.
Agent Coulson was introduced in Iron Man before playing a bigger role in Thor. Thor 2 and 3 only happened after Thor had co-starred alongside Iron Man in The Avengers.
You mean the film that gave a better view of that big guy at the very end of The Avengers, starring Iron Man?
Yeah, while WB fucked up for decades making Superman and Batman movies, Marvel was smart enough to sell the rights to their major characters to other studios to take their time and maybe eventually make some of them into movies.
So the same kind of connection that Batman had to WW, which was a beloved film?
Yes.
They started making those movies soon after the rights were sold, as opposed to WB who had the rights to ALL of DC's characters as far back as the 1970s and did jack s*** with them until the 2000s.
How much does Disney pay you to write this drivel? Is it worth your dignity?
2021 at the earliest.
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/flash-standalone-movie-release-date-1202980356/
I'm looking forward to seeing what James Gunn does with Suicide Squad. I've loved everything he's done since writing Tromeo and Juliet.
First off, all of Batman that appeared in WW was a brief letter. Second, you're the one arguing that the Aquaman movie is a Batman spin-off.
Btw, even if we're using your logic, how is Shazam! a Batman- or Superman-related movie?
... alright, then.
Do you remember seeing that Cannon-made Spider-Man movie from the 80s? Or the James Cameron one? How about Chris Columbus' Sub-Mariner flick for Universal? The Brigitte Nielsen She-Hulk movie? Orion Pictures' X-Men? Universal was sitting in the rights for Hulk for over a decade before the Ang Lee film came out. And Wikipedia lists Universal, 20th Century Fox and New Line as studios working on Iron Man between 1990 and 2006. Do I need to go on?
So, you're complaining that one studio only made two DC characters into big movie franchises before the turn of the century? How many Marvel characters from any studio made it to the big screen before then?
Last edited:
You've made this factually incorrect statement before, and last time I pointed out that DC made two Swamp Thing movies, Supergirl, Steel, Catwoman, Constantine, Jonah Hex, Watchmen, V for Vendetta and Green Lantern movies you shut up,
Let's see if you've spent the last few months coming up with some convoluted explanation why those movies don't count...
Marvel didn't have a movie studio under its own control until 2008, as opposed to how WB controlled all of DC since the 1970s.
You've made this factually incorrect statement before, and last time I pointed out that DC made two Swamp Thing movies, Supergirl, Steel, Catwoman, Constantine, Jonah Hex, Watchmen, V for Vendetta and Green Lantern movies you shut up,
Let's see if you've spent the last few months coming up with some convoluted explanation why those movies don't count...
Supergirl was a Superman spin-off, Catwoman too for Batman (in name). Steel was a Superman character in the comics, The Swamp Thing movies I'll admit, Jonah Hex/Green Lantern/Watchmen came out after Iron Man meaning they were when WB finally started honestly trying to compete with the MCU (and failed abysmally). The only ones on there that really count for this argument are Constantine and V for Vendetta. And V for Vendetta was a non-canon miniseries that had nothing to do with the rest of DC.
For what it's worth, the trailers show that Billy and Freddy are Superman/Batman/JL fans, so presumably Superman is a role model for Billy, which could explain why his superhero form is so similar. So there is a connection, though of course that's just part of the tissue of a shared universe.
The whole purpose for the existence of Marvel Studios is to make movies based on Marvel properties. The purpose of WB is to make movies. DC is just part of that.
Again, how many Marvel properties made it to the big screen between 1970 and 2000? And as a follow-up, how many of those were big blockblusters like Superman and Batman?
And yet it never occurred to them for years that they could make tons of cash with the other DC characters aside from just Superman and Batman. Anytime they tried with others they half-assed it until the MCU started up and WB finally started pulling its head out of its ass.
They didn't have a big studio like WB backing them.
The popular Incredible Hulk tv show was produced by Universal and distributed by CBS first, then NBC. Where were all the other popular marvel tv shows?
Your obsession with Marvel vs DC is ridiculous. WB executives failed to take other superheroes seriously for the exact same reason that EVERY studio failed to take Marvel heroes seriously. Because EVERYONE in Hollywood failed to take superheroes seriously back then. They were all considered kiddie fair, and way too expensive and hard to make kiddie fair at that - even Batman and Superman, though the two of them were so popular that they were considered worth the money even as kiddie fair. That only changed when FX got good enough to be believable on a reasonable budget and when the geekier generations started changing the stigma that society still had about comics/sci-fi/fantasy/video games (iow, around 2000).
Yeah. But others had the rights. So, why didn’t they make anything?
The only studio doing anything with any comic book properties was.... wait, it’s on the tip of my tongue... Warners.
They rightly so went with the properties they thought would be easiest to sell. And for awhile they did great. The first few Superman movies are iconic. The first two Batman movies as well. Hell, Batman Forved did really well.
Did the bubble burst? Sure. They all do.
Meanwhile, in the 80s and 90s all Marvel properties could do were terrible made for TV movies.