Warner Bros. Puts DC's Live-Action Movies on Hold, Won't Do Any Good
Posted at 11:22 AM Jan 08, 2009
Both the Iron Man and The Dark Knight movies made a shit-ton of money in 2008. What was the difference between them? Marvel had a plan, and Warner Bros./DC didn't. While Marvel's assembling an Avengers onslaught of films that will likely have them rolling in money through 2015, DC has nothing but vague ideas and heads up asses. So perhaps it's a good thing that Warner has put all live-action DC films on hold until they figure out what the hell they're doing, according to director/screenwriter David S. Goyer via IESB.This means the long-rumored Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Supermax, the next Superman flick and whatever other big ones they once said they had coming down the pike, but assumably not Jonah Hex, who is likely to niche to count in the eyes of Warner and not Batman 3, which is still too ethereal at this point to exist and unlikely to be fucked with my anyone, having recently made a billion jillion dollars.
Whether Warner's pause is a good thing or a bad thing depends on whether you think they have the ability to make a plan at all. Frankly, I have grave doubts as to their ability to do what Marvel's done. Mostly because they've not done it yet (they've had all of 2008 to get their shit together, and have refused) and because DC is subordinate to Warner. See, Marvel set up its own studio, owns the characters and can call the shot, thus adding Robert Downey Jr. to the Hulk movie. DC has nothing, and has to do what a bunch of idiot executives who know nothing about the characters, the property, the fans or the culture say, which is how you end up with Superman, Super-Deadbeat Dad. I'm not optimistic.
In news that might produce an actual product, Robot 6 (home of the swell ex- Blog@ Newsarama guys) noticed that on the animated Wonder Woman DVD packaging, it's says there'll be a first look at the Green Lantern animated DVD movie. Which means the next animated DVD movie will be Green Lantern. I hope to god it's Kyle Rayner or at least some of the Geoff Johns stuff, because I already suffered through Hal Jordan's boring-ass origin in The New Frontier. I have no desire to watch that again.
Comments
I would rather wach years worth of Hal Jordan then put up with 15 seconds of Kyle.
Look a down on his luck comic book artist, lets have him be the last of the Green Lanterns, and then he douche bags arounds.
So many better people to give the ring to like people with a history with it. I am not a fan of John Stewert but I would have gone with him or Guy rather then the Fan Service that was kyle.
pffft kyle I would rather the movie have c'hip and the gay snake green lantern as a team up buddy movie then a Kyle flick.
Oh and I would also rather be locked in a room with a badger high on PCP and viagra then have another Superman Dead Beat Dad movie made.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 08:40:19 AMwould anyone really care about a Green Lantern movie? What about a Fables movie? That would be awesome.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 09:24:50 AMAs mentioned in the article,the absolute worst thing for DC Movies is the fact that DC is owned by Warner Bros...which means the WB is always going to be calling the shots. The WB obviously does not understand ANYTHING about comics or why comics are popular...all they know is Dark Knight made a shitload of cash so now every movie must look exactly like Dark Knight(which would suck). The WB needs someone like Avi Arad who at least understands both the world of comics and the world of filmmaking. There has to be SOMEONE who works for Warner Bros who could serve them in this capacity...hell,if nothing else,they should hire Richard Donnor or Geoff Johns as permanent creative consultants.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 09:43:41 AMThe Green Lantern movie might just be that rumored adaptation of the Sinestro Corps War.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 09:48:50 AMThey're making a Fables TV series, apparently:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3idc160e735d514c2d71f3aa5fdb3823c2
Posted 01/08/2009 at 10:37:23 AMI still don't understand thais. WB has had exclusive control over DC properties for decades. So why haven't they been making DC comics movies besides Superman and Batman? They didn't have to hustle around and buy DC licenses piecemeal like the different studios did for Marvel before it made its own studio. They didn't need to buy back the character rights for JLA like Marvel did for Avengers. WB's animation department understands that people love to see all sorts of superheroes, so why hasn't this info reached the live action department?
Posted 01/08/2009 at 12:53:27 PMIf they really want to crank out good movies that do the DC universe some justice, then need to filter "blockbuster live-action" kind of money toward Dini & Timm for animated feature films... And they need to let them operate as they wish, without restricting them to a specific rating because it's animated.
Come on... We all know Dini & Timm were the only guys who ever put out decent DC stories in this realm. Every other DC movie has been a pale shadow of what Dini (and Timm) did with the same characters. "Dark Knight" was good, but "Mask of the Phantasm" was better, and truer to the character (also, Kevin Conroy is the best Batman, and Mark Hamill is the best Joker).
Justice League Unlimited was a fine example of what happens when you put the DC characters into the hands of writers, producers, and directors who care about the comics. It stands head & shoulders above anything else out there regarding the DC universe.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 01:09:02 PMZeroCorpse-right on! ANd sahme on me for not thinking of the Timm and Dini team when I was talking about creative consultants. The thing about Warner Bros is,the studio has NEVER made a good superhero movie. Superman 1 and 2? That was all Ruchard Donner and the Salykinds. The first Batman and the current Batman movies? Tim Burton and Chris Nolan. And the animated stuff made by Timm and Dini is better than all of it. WB Properties works when a director/creator who loves and understands the material gets there hands on it and the studio stays out of the way. The problem now is that the WB KNOWS comics=$ and they dont want to be beat at their own game by the Matvel Studios. Instead of trying to micro-manage each and every detail(you know...kind of like the SHAZAM movie they just smothered to death),the WB needs to find screenwriters and directors who know and understand their characters and then just stay the hell out of their way.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 01:48:50 PMI honestly thought that's what they hired Singer for, and look what happened. His misdirected love of the characters led to badness, and I have to imagine WB gave him the free reign to make Superman a babydaddy. They're probably scared to do that again, so they're clenching up like a big pair of buttcheeks.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 03:43:35 PM20th Century Fox execs are sooo happy right now.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 06:38:37 PMI'm concerned about these properties being shelved to the point of no return if worst comes to worst. However, that being said...
While Marvel's assembling an Avengers onslaught of films that will likely have them rolling in money through 2015
To be fair in all this, there is a difference between making a bunch of quality films and just cranking them out lukewarm for cash. Something that unfortunately the comic book movie genre is more accustomed too. I'd rather have the projects put on hold until enough time can be devoted to them and see two or three quality films by 2015 rather than eighteen thrown together ones put out to fill gaps in a schedule.
Posted 01/08/2009 at 09:11:26 PMActually Zach_Oat, that's what they THOUGHT they hired Singer for. They actually hired a man who loved the "Superman: The Movie", not the character himself. Well, the first 2 movies.
Maybe next rtime they should hire someone whose knowledge of the character stretches into more than just one incarnation.
Posted 01/09/2009 at 07:10:13 AMActually Zach_Oat, the WB execs just THOUGHT they were hiring somebody who loved the character. But Singer's only experience with Superman was from watching the first 2 movies. As far as he cared, that's all he needed to know. So he based his interpretation solely on that to the point of simply copying parts.
Posted 01/09/2009 at 07:22:14 AMMaybe next time they should get someone who is actually aware of the many incarnations of Superman.
Actually Zach_Oat, the WB execs just THOUGHT they were hiring somebody who loved the character. But Singer's only experience with Superman was from watching the first 2 movies. As far as he cared, that's all he needed to know. So he based his interpretation solely on that to the point of simply copying parts.
Posted 01/09/2009 at 07:25:05 AMMaybe next time they should get someone who is actually aware of the many incarnations of Superman.
There IS somebody who is aware of Superman and has translated him to the screen successfully: Dini & Timm.
Unfortunately, WB still has this idea that animation is "for kids" and so they screw their animation departments. Even worse, like every other major studio, they don't think a non-CG animated movie can make it in the theater anymore. Ink & Paint and 2D animation are officially shunned by major filmmakers. It's a shame. Unless you're The Simpsons, South Park, or Family Guy, you don't get a 2D animated feature (and even then, they insert 3D CG parts!)
Imagine what Dini & Timm could do with the budget and marketing they gave to "Superman Returns".
Posted 01/09/2009 at 12:17:29 PMDC better get their shit together. I think they're relying on Watchmen blowing everything out of the water if it gets released with no issues. Still they'll have to owe probably half of their profits to Fox. DC should do a birds of prey animated...based off the comic book not the TV series. Keep the animated films coming at a regular pace.
Posted 01/14/2009 at 05:21:30 AMDC better get their shit together. I think they're relying on Watchmen blowing everything out of the water if it gets released with no issues. Still they'll have to owe probably half of their profits to Fox. DC should do a birds of prey animated...based off the comic book not the TV series. Keep the animated films coming at a regular pace.
Posted 01/14/2009 at 05:21:58 AMDC better get their shit together. I think they're relying on Watchmen blowing everything out of the water if it gets released with no issues. Still they'll have to owe probably half of their profits to Fox. DC should do a birds of prey animated...based off the comic book not the TV series. Keep the animated films coming at a regular pace.
Posted 01/14/2009 at 05:23:49 AM