ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Feb 25, 2009 12:10:06 GMT -5
Joss Whedon Explains Why DC Comics Movies Don't Work----- A fascinating bit of commentary from "Buffy", "Angel" and "Firefly" mastermind Joss Whedon has hit the web today courtesy of The Geek Files (via SlashFilm). In it, Joss explains why he thinks DC Comics movies don't work so well. And I've got to say, his reasons are just a bit brilliant, like all things Joss Whedon. In essence, he says that DC Comics' characters are "too mythological and god-like to connect to audiences." If you're a DC fan and that gets you riled up, then I encourage you to read onwards, because he explains this issue in a lot more detail and it actually does make a lot of sense, in theory. Joss begins by saying: "With that one big exception (Batman), DC's heroes are from a different era. They're from the era when they were creating gods." For a bit of background and perspective before we continue, DC Comics was founded in 1934 (originally as National Allied Publications), while Marvel Comics was founded in 1939 (as Timely Publications). Batman was created in 1939, Superman was created in 1932. On the Marvel side of things, Spider-Man was created in 1962, and Captain America was created in 1941. "The thing that made [rival publisher] Marvel Comics extraordinary was that they created people. Their characters didn't live in mythical cities, they lived in New York. They absolutely were a part of the world. Peter Parker's character (Spider-Man) was a tortured adolescent." "DC's characters, like Wonder Woman and Superman and Green Lantern, were all very much removed from humanity. Batman was the only character they had who was so rooted in pain, that had that same gift that the Marvel characters had, which was that gift of humanity that we can relate to." While this seems like a basic idea at the forefront, I think Joss has touched upon a much deeper discussion surrounding pop culture and our society on a whole. Because this covers not only the idea of comic books and the characters within them, but the idea of movies, and why they turn out good in the end and why audiences attach to particular stories. I haven't personally been reading comics long enough to get a real sense of the character differences between Marvel and DC, but I've found that I personally like reading Marvel's stories more. However, that's not to say that I don't also enjoy reading Batman and Superman. Taking a quick look at various comic book movies, on the DC side of things, we've got: Superman, Batman, and Catwoman, as well as Constantine, V for Vendetta, and The Spirit, but not much else. As for Marvel, we've got: The Punisher, Blade, X-Men, Spider-Man, Daredevil, Hulk, Elektra, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, and Iron Man. Obviously Marvel has adapted a lot more of their characters, although it could be argued that a lot more of their movies are failures, whereas most of DC's movies haven't been that bad. I've also got to mention Watchmen, because this whole idea (about "creating gods") is partially why that story is so brilliant (and why I loved the movie). Alan Moore took the concept of what it would be like to have an actual god-like superhero living in our world, as well as regular costumed heroes, and combined that with the idea of humanity and the struggles that these heroes must go through. If that doesn't get you excited for Watchmen, then I don't know what else will, but keeping on topic with Whedon's statements, I think he may be on to something. Maybe this is why more DC movies haven't made it to the big screen? Don't forget, Joss isn't trying to say that Marvel is better than DC overall, because they each have their own set of characters that are brilliant printed on paper and in the comic book medium, but as for adapting them to the big screen, that's a whole other story that can definitely be discussed.
|
|
|
|
Post by belloq on Feb 25, 2009 12:23:11 GMT -5
I'd have to pretty much agree with this. DC movies seem much more challenging. Superman and Batman have seemed to work, but it is hard for me to imagine how a Wonder Woman movie would work, or a Captain Marvel movie. Green Lantern may have hope, but its going to be hard to pull off.
I think all of this is the same concept of my view on Marvel movies as well. Everything they've done, I've never really had any questions about. There hasn't been a project announced where I was thinking, "They're never going to pull this off."
That is until I heard they were making a Thor movie. Which is the closest thing in the Marvel library to a DC character. Interesting point by Whedon.
|
|
|
|
Post by fggafagas on Feb 25, 2009 12:43:13 GMT -5
How can he say they don't work? Only two franchises have gotten any real attention, and one currently has one of the highest grossing movies of all time. The other pretty much started the comic movie genre, and has only had one real shot at modern cinema in Superman Returns, who's criticisms came more from people not liking the movie itself, not Superman the character. Nevermind that the character has had two successful shows in the past two decades, quality or not, they're generally popular shows.
It's all bs. People actually do like characters like Superman, the ones who bash him know jack about him. They act like he's still juggling planets or something, and that image is the problem. It's been years since he's been depicted as that overpowered,decades. It needs to be made clear that things have changed.
If Hollywood has any problem adapting DC characters it's because they aren't putting good enough writers and directors on the job. Just look at the moronic ideas WB tosses around regularly. If they had a little competence it wouldn't look like such an impossible feat.
|
|
matt
New Member
Posts: 2,537
|
Post by matt on Feb 25, 2009 12:53:51 GMT -5
The movies work, it's the people in charge that have no clue what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by fggafagas on Feb 25, 2009 13:03:41 GMT -5
Wasn't there a rumor at one point that Jack Black was gonna play Green Lantern?
|
|
|
|
Post by belloq on Feb 25, 2009 13:22:24 GMT -5
I think they could work, I just think that the characters are much more of a challenge to humanize sans Batman. Marvel movies are easier to do, so they don't require a Chris Nolan to do them right.
Would you feel comfortable with Superman under the control of Sam Raimi? Even with Superman Returns, it seemed Singer had to go an extra mile to make Superman relatable by giving him a kid. I think that the last two Batman films and SR are head and shoulders above anything that Marvel has ever done, it just seems to me that they need a lot more care to get right. Spiderman deals with teenagers and Superman deals with Jesus.
DC characters are obviously heavier, thus being more difficult to relay to the masses.
|
|
|
|
Post by MAVERICK on Feb 25, 2009 14:06:11 GMT -5
Everything Belloq just said.
Dead on.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Feb 25, 2009 14:22:04 GMT -5
Belloq speaks for me as well.
And I'll add that the fact that DC characters are more mythological, epic and god-like, is one of the reasons I prefer them to the Marvel ones.
DC is about Gods and Mosters. Marvel is about freaks and experiments gone wrong.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Feb 25, 2009 14:43:39 GMT -5
DC movies don't work cause there have barely been any movies outside of Superman and batman..and the first Superman worked pretty well.
Swamp Thing wasn't a perfect godlike being.
Joss worked on DC and marvel movies and neither one went anywhere for him. They didn't use all his ideas for X-men.
DC movies don't work because they've been owned by one of the biggest media empires in the world for almost 40 years and they micromanage the heck out of the properties. They don't understand what makes DC tick at all. I guarantee if DC could shop their characters around the way Marvel did we'd see a lot better results.
Maybe Joss should take his time to explain why most of his tv shows don't work.
|
|
ShogunLogan
New Member
If you shoot me, you're liable to lose a lot of those humanitarian awards.
Posts: 10,095
|
Post by ShogunLogan on Feb 25, 2009 16:58:41 GMT -5
Everything Whedon said is also why Marvel Comics outsell DC Comics...Marvel being more 'real' and DC being more Godlike. I don't think anything Whedon said was any real news or groundbreaking...I've heard it all before.
DC just needs to take chances with their other characters. The Flash is a prime example. I think he would be super cool on screen and he has a litany of colorful villians.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Feb 25, 2009 17:13:10 GMT -5
I think they could work, I just think that the characters are much more of a challenge to humanize sans Batman. Marvel movies are easier to do, so they don't require a Chris Nolan to do them right. Would you feel comfortable with Superman under the control of Sam Raimi? Even with Superman Returns, it seemed Singer had to go an extra mile to make Superman relatable by giving him a kid. I think that the last two Batman films and SR are head and shoulders above anything that Marvel has ever done, it just seems to me that they need a lot more care to get right. Spiderman deals with teenagers and Superman deals with Jesus. DC characters are obviously heavier, thus being more difficult to relay to the masses. ;D ooooooohhhh the make-mine-marvel types are gonna be piiiiiiiiisssssssseeddd ! i think you are very much correct. with the exception of IRON MAN the last 10 years of marvel movies have been mixed. some fun , some awful. iron man is the best of the lot. but making superman work is by nature virtually impossible. i love marvel , but i've always been a DC guy. |
|
Kirok
New Member
"You have failed this city!"
Posts: 3,179
|
Post by Kirok on Feb 25, 2009 17:36:27 GMT -5
Maybe Joss should take his time to explain why most of his tv shows don't work. ZING! Well, "Firefly" was great. Other than that...meh. Who knows if it would have held up though. I had a conversation with a friend about this the other day and I my point was you could take the first 13 episodes of "Star Trek: Voyager" and if there was nothing else think that it had the makings of a great show that got cut short. And you would be wrong. Whedon's argument has some validity, but as has already been pointed out DC hasn't been given a fair shot due to the ineptitude of WB. Yes there are characters like Wonder Woman and Aquaman who are more mythology than anything else, but characters like The Flash are easy to translate to live action (as the TV series proved). He's a very human character and also a very fun character who enjoys his powers and isn't dark, disturbed, or otherwise depressed about being a hero. |
|
Keith
New Member
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by Keith on Feb 25, 2009 19:13:38 GMT -5
I would love to see a Flash movie. I can see a Flash movie being a little like The Mask with Jim Carrey. A fun, silly kinda movie with some good action and a good story. Flash would almost be like the Disney movie of DC.. as long as it was Barry Allen.
Thats how I could see the Flash working, being serious without being too serious if that makes any sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Feb 25, 2009 19:47:05 GMT -5
i dont mind joss , he got screwed with " serenity " and managed to get an excellent " firefly " flick that was a great end-cap ( or was it the other way around? mmm ) anyhoo- he's ok. but i agree with a lot of the above :
- marvel wanted to go gritty and flawed, DC wanted to be heady and mythological
- FLASH would be excellent on film - IF executed properly.
- WB does NOT know thier collective asses from the grand canyon- but dont invest too much confidence on DC farming out- the approved muhammed ali for superman in 76!!
- star trek voyager....took quite a while to find its way.. which is silly since it was the THIRD version of ST:TNG
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Feb 25, 2009 22:50:18 GMT -5
You know, to be honest, I really liked Iron Man. Really fun flick, but I think X2 is superior. IM is cool and all, but the story is too simplistic, and it isn't epic at all. X2 is epic and deeper, IMO. Singer is the man.
|
|
|
|
Post by Avilos on Feb 26, 2009 1:17:19 GMT -5
Agreed Stargazer. The people who hated Superman Returns feel its fans are somehow reluctantly supporting it. Not that we genuinely like it. Which is the truth. Most of Marvel's movie have been average at best. Singer's X-men movies and Iron Man movies are certainly above average. But most of their other movies have huge problems. I may be in the minority but its my take. Marvel cranks out their films, regardless of the studio, like sausage. That is something to compliment?  BS! Look at all the money crunching problems Faveru has faced with Iron Man 2. Here is a guy who had a surprise success with a second tier character, going beyond all expectations - YET Marvel still wants to rush the sequel and do it on the cheap! |
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Feb 26, 2009 1:33:39 GMT -5
Agreed Stargazer. The people who hated Superman Returns feel its fans are somehow reluctantly supporting it. Not that we genuinely like it. Which is the truth. Most of Marvel's movie have been average at best. Singer's X-men movies and Iron Man movies are certainly above average. But most of their other movies have huge problems. I may be in the minority but its my take. Marvel cranks out their films, regardless of the studio, like sausage. That is something to compliment? BS! Look at all the money crunching problems Faveru has faced with Iron Man 2. Here is a guy who had a surprise success with a second tier character, going beyond all expectations - YET Marvel still wants to rush the sequel and do it on the cheap! ...sigh.... it should be harder to be " in charge " of a major studio. i swear these nimrods are impossible. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2009 3:27:31 GMT -5
Whedon has a good point, but that doesn't mean DC characters can't be adapted to the big screen as successfully as Marvel characters. It's just takes a little more creativity.
heck, practically every Marvel movie (sans X-Men) has been following a set blueprint- a grounded human character has problems, he gains superpowers that solve those problems, but those superpowers almost cause more trouble than they're worth. Spiderman gave Peter Parker an escape from his geeky insecurity, Iron Man gave Tony Stark a sense of purpose and a way to atone for his previous actions, Daredevil gave Matt Murdock an outlet to deal with the emotions stemming from his father's murder, etc. Each character is different, but they all have vaguely similar character arcs. Batman sort of fits into the same category; Batman gives Bruce Wayne a way to deal with his parents' murder, but it also creates a whole new set of evils that wouldn't have existed otherwise. It's relatively easy to write that kind of story when it's already been done several times in the last decade.
Most of the other DC characters are different. They're god figures, not human beings. You can still make great movies featuring them, but it requires a different approach. They have to be played broader, they have to be symbolic. They have to tie into our shared mythology in meaningful ways. Look at Star Wars; Darth Vader is nothing more than a redeemed sinner and betrayer, all things considered, but the character resonated- despite having no real concrete backstory in the original trilogy, beyond vague references to his past. Practically every character in the original trilogy exists as some kind of very basic stereotype. Han Solo is the pivotal warrior with his own agenda (Achilles), Chewbacca is the stereotypical loyal 2nd with no ambition or thought of his own, the Emperor is the remorseless and totally evil manipulator of a world that's essentially good, etc. I'm not saying you have to copy the original Star Wars trilogy to make a good DC film, but it definitely requires a similar tone.
Anyhoo. I don't think it's any harder to make a Superman or Wonder Woman film than it is to make an Iron Man or a Spider-Man one. It's just that there are a lot of recent influences to draw upon when it comes to typical Marvel characters, unlike the DC ones.
|
|
Shane
New Member
Posts: 2,031
|
Post by Shane on Feb 26, 2009 3:57:43 GMT -5
what a knob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2009 4:45:14 GMT -5
DC properties suffer from Warner Bros.' mismanagement. Period.
|
|
ShogunLogan
New Member
If you shoot me, you're liable to lose a lot of those humanitarian awards.
Posts: 10,095
|
Post by ShogunLogan on Feb 26, 2009 8:55:11 GMT -5
I think any claims that Marvel's characters are "more relatable" are instantly destroyed by "One More Day," You can't possibly be taking the entire mythos of what made Marvel great in the 1st place and and completely disregard it based on one storyline of one character that occurred last year, can you? |
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Feb 26, 2009 11:07:52 GMT -5
What Whedon is saying is such a cop-out, and completely off the mark. Thematically, Superman and Spiderman are pretty identical. They've both undergone the same steps of the hero's journey--and isn't that what it really boils down to? I mean, the fact that one's an alien and the other a human--isn't that just a superficiality when they're both red-blue blurs that are more powerful than locomotives, and both can leap tall buildings in single bounds? Come on, Joss. Do you have to whine about EVERYTHING?
Brad really hit the nail on the head. DC's characters are just fine--WB just doesn't know how to handle them.
|
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Feb 26, 2009 11:10:11 GMT -5
What Whedon is saying is such a cop-out, and completely off the mark. Thematically, Superman and Spiderman are pretty identical. They've both undergone the same steps of the hero's journey--and isn't that what it really boils down to? I mean, the fact that one's an alien and the other a human--isn't that just a superficiality when they're both red-blue blurs that are more powerful than locomotives, and both can leap tall buildings in single bounds? Come on, Joss. Do you have to whine about EVERYTHING? Brad really hit the nail on the head. DC's characters are just fine--WB just doesn't know how to handle them. EXAAAAAAACTLY! |
|
|
|
Post by belloq on Feb 26, 2009 12:18:58 GMT -5
There are similarities between Superman and Spiderman, but Spiderman is Superman Light. Spiderman lost his uncle, Superman lost his race. Superman could use his power to conquer the world. That's a little more responsibility than Peter Parker has ever dealt with. Superman's girl is a writer, Spiderman's is a model. Everything about Superman has more substance. That's why its harder to do. There's no room for emo dance numbers in Superman. If you don't take it seriously, you get Smallville.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Feb 26, 2009 12:36:31 GMT -5
What Whedon is saying WAS true...40 years ago. Not now. Titans was right behind X-men back in the 80s when it came to complex characters.
And there are plenty off exceptions to the rule. Capt America is pretty bland compared to Spider-man and definitely was when he was created in 1941. I find Superman more relatable than Thor. I still like Thor though.
Both companies have relatable aspects and unrelatable ones now. if Joss bothered to read a comic book in the last 20 years he'd know that. His narrow mindedness is the reason he's never been able to get a comic adaptation off the ground that he worked on.
|
|
