|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 19, 2011 13:48:58 GMT -5
Geoff Johns was pretty enthusiastic (but restrained) when talking about MANY plans for the DC characters...(he would have questions about this or that DC character being turned into a movie--- and he would answer, "Keep watching", "You're going to like what's in store", or...."I can't talk about that."--- He seemed like a pretty straight shooter, why wouldn't he be? He's a genuine comics fan turned pro, so... while I'm reading into the tone of how he answered these questions at the convention, (and the audience's responses to them), it sounded like a lot was being planned at the time--- BUT, this is BEFORE the major GL bomb. Would love to be in on the meeting on project fallouts that may have happened after that 'tentpole' movie crashed and burned. If WB was shaky and nervous about comic movies BEFORE GL.... how must they feel NOW? And.... I agree with what Metallo has been saying: Making DC character movies don't seem to be a top priority outside of Nolan's Batman. If a cheaply-made horror movie or comedy makes almost as much as an expensive superhero film- then, who's to say that they don't want to focus on those as a higher priority? At the same time--- WB owns these characters & properties--- but... Studios seem to have a long history of sitting on properties they even own- out of fear someone else might know how to do it 'right', and that they could do it 'wrong'. (Universal sat on "Battlestar Galactica" for years, with Richard Hatch not even being able to get a meeting to get a price tag on the rights to make a series/movies) I have this nasty hunch that Marvel is the main impetus for any DC properties to get moving at all- (as slow as they are). The stockholders HAVE to be wondering, 'we own the rights to all these characters, but no blockbusters- what the hey?'..... but then again, with a flop like GL--- maybe they're backing off that. Would be sad if superhero films (and the big budgets needed for them) dwindle- or become too risky a property to gamble on down the line. Disney COULD destroy their own Marvel movies (unintentionally), and WB seems to not know how to really nurture and grow a stable of their own characters properly. Having Nolan onboard as a consultant possibly helps- I say 'possibly' because Nolan isn't really a comic book nut and while Geoff Johns is a giant comic geek, his 'consulting' presence wasn't enough to guarantee quality control on the GL movie....  Who knows? |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 19, 2011 13:54:51 GMT -5
Batman is in the hospital, and Lois tells him that Jason is his son. Then he stops by Lois's house & tells him he'll always be 'around'. Then he flies towards the camera and smiles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 19, 2011 13:57:33 GMT -5
Geoff Johns, as much as I enjoy his work and respect him for being a good dude, has become a bit too much of a "company man". He's the face of the franchise, as it were, and he's a little too close to the material to shoot straight these days. The guy is, more or less, the architect of the current DC Universe. And while his love and devotion to all of this stuff is legit, he can't really be trusted to tell us the truth anymore.
Can't say I blame him. He's one of the very few comic creators making a serious living these days. The industry only has a dozen or so bonafide superstars these days, and he's at the top of the heap.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2011 13:58:09 GMT -5
Comic book movies are like Westerns and historical epics at this point. It's a well-established genre that will fade away and reappear over time, based on how the last couple of films fared both creatively and financially.
For Superman, I could be down with an open and close trilogy- if done right. The character is mythic in nature, he doesn't age or die quite like the rest of us, but All Star Superman is a great example of how to deal with the possibility of Superman either dying or changing form as a way of ending his story. It can be done, with the right approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 19, 2011 14:02:52 GMT -5
Batman is in the hospital, and Lois tells him that Jason is his son. Then he stops by Lois's house & tells him he'll always be 'around'. Then he flies towards the camera and smiles. Cam, I could have sworn this was an ATP post... |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 19, 2011 14:16:56 GMT -5
Good points, Val.
Well, a good warning sign was at the convention about 'creative control' and he said his position wasn't about control as it was about collaboration---- at the same time, if I was offered a day job to just offer my opinion about how a comic book movie was going, I'd be hard pressed to say that I'd be the first one to tell them that the casting sucked, the script sucked, and that need a better director.
Kevin Feige at Marvel seems to be a semi-hardliner (from the bits and pieces I've read) of the direction that the Marvel comics' movies need to take, for good and bad. ((*bad, according to the actor who played the villain of Iron Man 2, but that's another story))
I have a hunch that either Johns wasn't given the same authority in his position as a Feige- or- is too overloaded with comics' writing to be a hardliner- or- (as you suggested) mayve is too nice a guy and too chummy with the folks making the film(s) to be able to tell them bad news about a production.
Ironically, the two actors from GL were at Wondercon with Reynolds and expressed strong confidence that Johns was their 'go-to' guy on the set to make sure the movie and the characters didn't stray from what comic fans wanted.
Whatever the case is/was--- I don't know if Diane Nelson is the 'Kevin Feige' equivalent at Marvel......(if so, she didn't do her job quite right then based on how GL turned out)- but maybe DC needs a Kevin Feige position there calling the shots if they don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 19, 2011 14:27:05 GMT -5
Make no mistake, if I was getting paid a hefty salary to "collaborate" on translating comics properties to film, I would defend the company with my dying breath and sell every last one of you guys down the river, and cash my checks without batting an eye.
I can't hold too much against Johns, especially since I think all of the great comics he's produced far outweigh one crappy movie.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 19, 2011 14:37:34 GMT -5
Superman was ending after III anyway, dooftard. Reeve was ready to move on and thats why the Salkinds did SUPERGIRL. Try again.  OK, how about TPM, AoTC and ROTS. That is why you stop after three. Lucas could have made more and sadly they could have made a ton of money. Quality is another matter. Geoff Johns was pretty enthusiastic (but restrained) when talking about MANY plans for the DC characters...(he would have questions about this or that DC character being turned into a movie--- and he would answer, "Keep watching", "You're going to like what's in store", or...."I can't talk about that."--- He seemed like a pretty straight shooter, why wouldn't he be? He's a genuine comics fan turned pro, so... while I'm reading into the tone of how he answered these questions at the convention, (and the audience's responses to them), it sounded like a lot was being planned at the time--- BUT, this is BEFORE the major GL bomb. Would love to be in on the meeting on project fallouts that may have happened after that 'tentpole' movie crashed and burned. If WB was shaky and nervous about comic movies BEFORE GL.... how must they feel NOW? And.... I agree with what Metallo has been saying: Making DC character movies don't seem to be a top priority outside of Nolan's Batman. If a cheaply-made horror movie or comedy makes almost as much as an expensive superhero film- then, who's to say that they don't want to focus on those as a higher priority? At the same time--- WB owns these characters & properties--- but... Studios seem to have a long history of sitting on properties they even own- out of fear someone else might know how to do it 'right', and that they could do it 'wrong'. (Universal sat on "Battlestar Galactica" for years, with Richard Hatch not even being able to get a meeting to get a price tag on the rights to make a series/movies) I have this nasty hunch that Marvel is the main impetus for any DC properties to get moving at all- (as slow as they are). The stockholders HAVE to be wondering, 'we own the rights to all these characters, but no blockbusters- what the hey?'..... but then again, with a flop like GL--- maybe they're backing off that. Would be sad if superhero films (and the big budgets needed for them) dwindle- or become too risky a property to gamble on down the line. Disney COULD destroy their own Marvel movies (unintentionally), and WB seems to not know how to really nurture and grow a stable of their own characters properly. Having Nolan onboard as a consultant possibly helps- I say 'possibly' because Nolan isn't really a comic book nut and while Geoff Johns is a giant comic geek, his 'consulting' presence wasn't enough to guarantee quality control on the GL movie.... Who knows? Somebody like Johns is only going to have so much stroke. After a while I saw him as the guy the hired to sooth the fans fears not so much as a guy they would actually listen to. Sort of like when Larry Hama was hired as a consultant on the GI Joe movie. he could offer up suggestions but there was zero guarantee that the suits would implement them. I don't want to say figurehead but it seems like its not far from the truth. There have been so many instances where people said they weren't going to let the fans down or they were doing as much practical effects work as possible and it all turned out to be bunk. Look at Reds. Eventually WB sold off the rights to another studio when they couldn't figure out if it would be profitable. The movie made money and now WB will NEVER let another studio develop a DC comics film. Nobody else is going to make money off their characters if they can't...even if films never get made. Geoff Johns, as much as I enjoy his work and respect him for being a good dude, has become a bit too much of a "company man". He's the face of the franchise, as it were, and he's a little too close to the material to shoot straight these days. The guy is, more or less, the architect of the current DC Universe. And while his love and devotion to all of this stuff is legit, he can't really be trusted to tell us the truth anymore. Can't say I blame him. He's one of the very few comic creators making a serious living these days. The industry only has a dozen or so bonafide superstars these days, and he's at the top of the heap. I see what your saying and agree. A lot of those DC creators and executives are simply never going to be able to give a straight answer. Even if its crap they'll never admit it. Its usually years after the fact that you hear the whole truth. Avi Arad was the same way. He knew about the problems with films like Elektra and Man Thing but he spun the typical corporate snowjob. then talked about all the problems AFTER they came out. Not that I can really blame him since its his job to make these movies hits but I just don't always take execs at face value when they talk about these things. At best you'll hear the stock answer. One of the few exceptions is Bruce Timm. Before JL started he flat out said it wouldn't be easy or they were having problems with certain things. Comic book movies are like Westerns and historical epics at this point. It's a well-established genre that will fade away and reappear over time, based on how the last couple of films fared both creatively and financially. For Superman, I could be down with an open and close trilogy- if done right. The character is mythic in nature, he doesn't age or die quite like the rest of us, but All Star Superman is a great example of how to deal with the possibility of Superman either dying or changing form as a way of ending his story. It can be done, with the right approach. Yeah I think they are here to stay. comic book films are taken much more seriously as legit moneymakers and creative endeavors than they were 20 or even 15 years ago. back then MOST comic book movies were pretty tongue in cheek. You never saw an X-men or Dark Knight...films striving for legitimate drama. |
|
|
|
Post by eccentricbeing on Dec 19, 2011 15:03:44 GMT -5
Having a story arc that ends definitively is the way to go. This is how you get attached to characters and actually feel something when a good plot twist unravels. What made Harry Potter work for 8 movies is that there was a long story arc. It wasn't like they were pulling stories out of their asses to keep the character relevant (which how I felt Bond was going before the reboot).
Have a story arc, have an ending....if they kill off Superman, make it so that I'll be crying my eyes out because it was the noble and bittersweet thing to do. Having the series go 6 movies with this in mind is a bit of a stretch, which is why movies go to trilogies; it reflects the 3-act structure of storytelling.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 19, 2011 15:09:34 GMT -5
Good point. Having an ending certainly makes me feel like I can invest more in the journey because I know at some point there will be some finality just like in life. Things end.
Loved that about Rocky Balboa. You had a feeling it was the last story and Rocky felt like a real character after following him for 30 years.
|Thats why I've never understood how people can get into soap operas. Theres never an end in sight. Theres never a final pay off. My aunts love em though.
|
|
Keith
New Member
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by Keith on Dec 19, 2011 16:15:39 GMT -5
Bruce Timm, needs to be put in charge of ALL live DC Superhero franchises. Superman, Batman, WW, GL, Flash, Justice League.
If he can put together some bad ass Animated flicks, imagine what him and his team could put together for a live action movie. Do what Marvel is doing, establish the characters in their own movies, and then do a JL movie.
Bruce Timm I think could really do justice to all the characters.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 19, 2011 18:51:47 GMT -5
I think it's amazing (and sad) that in a recent interview with Bruce Timm about the idea of being part of the live action DC supehero films, Bruce Timm answered, "Dude, I'm not even on their radar."
Strange, eh? You'd think with all the internet acclaim and good sales on the dvds, that he'd have SOME clout. *sigh*
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 19, 2011 18:59:09 GMT -5
That's probably my problem with a lot of the Superman stories (and most of the more popular DC characters) in the last decade or so--- there's no significant change or growth to the stories.... often, (as you've stated), there's some stories that you can do, but in the long run- where is the payoff?
That's one thing that the movies might be able to offer, that the comic books can/won't do--- a series of films with the same cast - by necessity- HAS to wrap up its best stories within a certain time frame, if only due to nature aging the cast.
With the Reeve films, it might have been nice to have had a number of great Superman films, but personally I think they were sunk as soon as Lester ruined SII and turned it into comedic farce.
Even with Reeve re-dedicating himself to the character (though primarily it seemed to be an attempt at a career comeback) with SIV, If SIV had the budget and were better, I think there still would have been difficulties continuing with many more films, with Reeve's age at that point.
So..... here's hoping MOS is good, and if so, that they really use the rare opportunity to tell a series of great Superman stories onscreen that can only be done with today's tech and with a studio's big budget.
And if they decide to age him as time goes & include that as part of the story- why not? Could be cool, like how they did Kirk in Trek VI....
|
|
Keith
New Member
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by Keith on Dec 19, 2011 19:18:18 GMT -5
I think it's amazing (and sad) that in a recent interview with Bruce Timm about the idea of being part of the live action DC supehero films, Bruce Timm answered, "Dude, I'm not even on their radar." Strange, eh? You'd think with all the internet acclaim and good sales on the dvds, that he'd have SOME clout. *sigh* That's insane. I can't imagine him not being on the radar, he's been doing good stories, for Superman, Batman and everyone else in the DCU for how long now? Since 92, 93? He's been doing it for 20 years and a lot of people love it. WB are a bunch of monkeys... god I wish I had money and could take over the WB/DC franchise. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 19, 2011 20:29:17 GMT -5
WB just don't get it. That Batman TAS crew turned out arguably the best take on the DC Universe EVER. Maybe even better than the actual comic books. The TAS Mr Freeze and Brainiac were actually improvements. If anybody would know how to make it happen its them. Not saying Timm should direct but as a producer or writer or even as the guy storyboarding the damn movies the chances are high that he could knock it out of the park.
They probably don't take him seriously because he's a "cartoon guy" even though its been his cartoons that have been the few things that keep WB/DC's comic book adaptations from not look like a laughing stock.
The DC animated films kick the ever lovin sh** out of The Marvel/Lionsgate direct to dvd efforts. Can't say that about their live action counterparts.
Batman: Subzero was 100 times better than Batman & Robin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Dec 20, 2011 13:27:18 GMT -5
keep it going like james bond or (for a time) star trek.
MOS - zod and faora, seed brainiac/ metallo.
MOS-II - luthor builds metallo, end with brainiac looming.
or brainiac as principle villain.
MOS- III - brainiac seed mongul or new gods.
combine "exile" and " for the man who has everything" seed eradicator
MOS IV - superman vs new gods
MOS- V - superman and the LEGION
MOS VI- kingdom come/ gog vs old superman(future) and present day superman. old superman dies to save younger self.
MOS VII- soft reboot, young clark from mos 5 (the legion ep) cast as superman vs brainiac 13 or darksied (who'd still be around)
MOS VIII- bizarro (not a super-retard, but a menacing Frankenstein monster) luthor ( or darkseid) creates superman clones for his own super-army but they get away from him and terrorise the world and superman has to grapple with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 22, 2011 1:24:11 GMT -5
Interesting choices.
My own wish list (at this point since SR is history & MOS is on the way):
MOS - zod and faora, seed brainiac/ Lois & Supes stuff
(metallo I never thought was a strong enough villain, unless they can spin him in another way or use him in conjunction with another villain)
MOS #2 - Brainiac and lotsa bigass robots / Intro other daily planet supporting characters
(Given the mega boxoffice of Transformers, it's REALLY odd that neither big robots have appeared for a Superman movie nor Sentinels for any X-men films.....truly suprising)
MOS #3 - Luthor reinvented as a pg-13 version of Hannibal Lecter/Spock/ Lana Lang/ seed Supergirl's story?
MOS #4 - Supergirl/ Kandor - seed Doomsday?
MOS #5 - Luthor returns with an aspect of Brainiac/ Creates Doomsday/ Kills off Supergirl & Supes in a final battle- but not before saving the day/ epilogue
*Would love to see the Legion, but I can't picture any filmmaker outside of Lucas, Cameron, or Jackson knowing how to manage the fx and scale needed for the right budget. (If $150 could be blown on GL with very little OA (or anything else) how can WB manage to show a proper 30th century and Legion on-screen for anything less than $300-$400 million plus?)
Anyhow, just a wish list....
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Dec 22, 2011 12:55:55 GMT -5
I always thought it would be cool if in a sequel Lexcorp covertly recovered remnants of of the android Brainiac, reverse engineer it, and used it as the groundwork to build John Corbens Metallo body. The project could be headed by Professor Vale as part of Lexcorps advanced medical prosthetic division or contracted military R&D.
Do it sort of like a dark Alex Murphy or Cain in Robocop II or Marcus in Terminator Salvation. Instead of a cop they wait for a criminal to "volunteer."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2011 13:27:54 GMT -5
Yeah, I'd love to see Metallo in a possible sequel. He's just straight-up nasty, no affiliation or philosophy, and you could do just about anything with him action and visuals-wise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Dec 22, 2011 16:45:22 GMT -5
I always thought it would be cool if in a sequel Lexcorp covertly recovered remnants of of the android Brainiac, reverse engineer it, and used it as the groundwork to build John Corbens Metallo body. The project could be headed by Professor Vale as part of Lexcorps advanced medical prosthetic division or contracted military R&D. Do it sort of like a dark Alex Murphy or Cain in Robocop II or Marcus in Terminator Salvation. Instead of a cop they wait for a criminal to "volunteer." that's actually quite good. also, regarding the villain metallo, i really loved what S:TAS did, byt making corben a more layered character than the dullard in the comics. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 23, 2011 3:39:15 GMT -5
I thought Metallo made a great visual image for Byrne's Superman #1, but other than that.... I guess I always had a problem with Metallo as a villain, because it just seemed to me, that once Supes knew what Metallo was, all he had to do would be to fly a great distance, then drop a 1,000 ton weight on his head and flatten him..... or use his heat vision to melt the android into a molten soup from a distance. Maybe I haven't read enough of the right stories where he's put to good use, but from what I've read, he just seems like a pretty lightweight villain that should be able to be defeated fairly easily by Supes, once he knew what he's up against. |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 23, 2011 10:21:13 GMT -5
Metallo's a secondary villain. He's muscle. I think he'd be a fine way to introduce Kryptonite into the franchise, where Supes can't figure out WHY this guy is kicking his ass.
Actually, maybe with Zod and co in the new flick, we'll be spared a Kryptonite Plot Device in MoS!
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 24, 2011 19:43:50 GMT -5
Or anything to do with Real Estate. Please.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2011 13:14:52 GMT -5
I say no. I want all three movies, if there are three, to work on their own. To not need anything else but itself to work.
Does EVERYTHING have to be a trilogy nowadays? Everything has to be connected? Bah!
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Dec 26, 2011 4:23:36 GMT -5
That's fair. I just like the idea of having the same cast/creative team over a number of consecutive films so that it can go further and expand upon a universe and character it's created the first time around. (Sort of why I'm not thrilled about most of the DC animated films intentionally NOT being connected to one another).
|
|
