Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Flying Spaghetti Monster, Jun 6, 2012.
No offense to Bale but I never need to see him as the Bat again. His character as established in the films would really not work in a JL movie. For those even thinking about not having Bruce under the mask you are all really dreaming. Far to much money invested in the character from a marketing perspective.
No, because I was only talking about movies. Had I included TV series, I would've mentioned the '88 Superboy, and of course Bewitched.
And yet he was just a giant void in Iron Man 2. No wit, verve, charisma...nothing. As good an actor as he is, I'm not yet convinced he was the right choice for Rhodey. Fingers crossed that IM3 gives him something meaty to do.
I'm not convinced either Cheadle or Howard fit the role of Rhodey.
They got damn lucky with RDJ as Stark, it's forgivable if who they picked for Rhodey isn't quite as perfect.
As long as they dont mess up the casting of Snapper Carr I will be happy.
Personally speaking the Justice League never worked for me. It always felt like they tried desperately to mush very different universes into one.
I always thought Howard would make a good Tony Stark actually, from how I thought about Stark from the comics.
A giant void bereft of wit, verve and charisma describes ALL of Iron Man 2 to me. It was a bad follow up. Cheadle is supremely talented and can only do so much with a shitty script.
Because the reverse might work just as well?
Hollywood's standard operating procedure for generations has been to copy what succeeded before and hope it would be equally successful. Most of the time, it fails. Because it wasn't the formula or the premise that made the initial work successful, but the imagination and skill that went into it. Imitation is a shortcut, copying the results of other people's imagination and skill rather than applying your own. So it rarely works.
Warner Bros. should neither imitate Marvel's formula or consciously try to counter it. They should ignore it completely and focus only on developing their own films with as much creativity as they can. The problem is that the studio doesn't seem to have the right mindset to allow that. At this point their preferred solution to everything seems to be "throw Christopher Nolan at it." Which is still copying a former success -- it's just their own success instead of someone else's.
Have they ever considered or asked Bruce Timm to get involved with live action DC movies?
Well—again, assuming the Nolan connection is an actual story and not just an unfounded rumor—at least building on your own success sounds more promising than ignoring your own success and trying to copy someone else's.
If Man of Steel really takes off (ha ha), then maybe Nolan really is the right man to produce JL.
If MoS is any good, maybe they should try doing a Superman-Batman movie first.
It might be better introducing a new Batman actor through that than a crowded JL. They could even have Wonder Woman or Supergirl appear in it and help them launch their own movies before ultimately doing JL.
A Superman/Batman movie would work for me to introduce a new Bat to the movie universe but I doubt that will occur. Theres just to much pressure to do the JL movie to counter the Avengers.
Maybe the WB should realise that the JL won't work because the DC universe outside of Batman translates poorly compared to Marvel on the big screen IMO...Before you say Superman, (1 is 50% good and 50% bad, 2 is good though the Donner cut is Great and 3/4 are downright awful with an ok-ish SR).
Marvel characters just seem to fit better together in a universe.
^I just don't buy that it's the characters. Go back 20 or so years and it was the DC-based films that were the box-office successes while the attempts at Marvel movies were generally bombs, like the Cannon Films Captain America, or never got past development, like the James Cameron Spider-Man. Marvel characters on film didn't start to work until X-Men came out, and even after that there were plenty of failures.
Not to mention that DC's characters work just fine in a shared universe in TV animation and have done so for nearly two decades. So there's no reason they couldn't do so in film as well.
It isn't the characters that make the difference, it's just that Marvel Studios currently has a better, more focused strategy for bringing those characters to the screen. But the way things are in recent times is not the only way they can ever be. Sooner or later, WB will get its act together, and sooner or later, Marvel will lose its way. And 10 or 15 years from now, there will be people who forget their history and make sage declarations about how only DC characters are well-suited to movies and Marvel characters aren't.
Two words: Justin Bieber.
How is that any different from the Avengers? Bunch of "science" based heroes and one from mythology.
^Right. Iron Man is techno-thriller, Thor is epic fantasy, Captain America is a war movie, Hulk is a Jekyll-and-Hyde monster story, and Fury, Black Widow, and Hawkeye are spy characters. Heck, Whedon himself has said on the record that the whole reason The Avengers appealed to him as a project was because these characters just didn't naturally fit together on a team, or even in the same universe.
OMG, I can't believe I never realised it before, Bond is a Time Lord!
Does Timm do live action? If so I would love to see this.
Not as far as I know.
But DC seems to have great difficulty with its live action heroes, so turning to him could have crossed their mind at some point.
Separate names with a comma.