How to use this Page

Re: Spidey Preview

At 2:45, doesn’t it kinda look like there are some Doc Ock’esqu arms hitting the floor around whatever feet stomp down there?

The Avengers grew from the success of the Iron Man franchise. Everything else was satellite. For DC to do a JL film they’d need a successful franchise to build from. Superman continuously updating won’t be it. And with Dark Knight being not the third installment that was promised, it won’t be the Batman movies either.
Nolan and Bale had both said many times that this movie wouldn’t include villains that had previously appeared in live action, which now has been completely reneged. And of course Joseph Gordon-Levitt will be Robin- they’re calling it something else now for some surprise value. I think this entire direction is too “poppy” and will not serve to advance anything new, not really.

Thematically, if a Justice League film had been possible, they should’ve used the third film to spotlight the more lesser known and inhuman of Batman’s rogues gallery- like Clayface, KGBeast, Manbat, etc. Upping the ante. Tie the plot into underground genetic researching being funded by Lex Luthor perhaps. Then launch full on with Superman and Wonder Woman movies ala Thor and Captain America, and onto JLA. But Warners just missed the boat, by pushing Dark Knight to be a rehash of things seen before for the easier buck.

Of course, I’m likely completely wrong, but it makes sense to me.

@Richard Caldwell That breakdown seems viable to me! I think WB just didn’t grok, and therefore didn’t commit, to making a JLA franchise in the same way that Marvel has with The Avengers (although I’m sure they’re thinking about it now!). They’ve been struggling too hard to replicate Marvel’s successful movie formula in their approach to the individual pieces of it.

That’s been a great thing in the case of The Dark Knight movies, which are distinctly DC but also have that anti-hero vibe that modern audiences respond to so well in Marvel movies. But that approach has obviously not worked so well when they’re straight up trying to imitate Marvel’s approach by putting DC’s version of a grittier sassier superheroes like Green Lantern before more recognizable properties such as Wonder Woman, which resulted in an ill fated project with no clear voice.

And, you’re absolutely right, by continuing to re-boot Superman they’re just confusing things and making forgettable films. While in the meantime, EVERYONE is wondering,”where my Wonder Woman at?” – like it’s that complicated to make an action movie about a smart, modern amazon woman with an invisible plane and an unacknowledged but compulsive bondage fetish who fights evil in her underwear.

They’re just far too confused in terms of overall vision as to what to do with their individual IP’s while Marvel has been pretty clear and steady in intent and execution all along. It’s going to be interesting to see what DCE does next in terms of big movies after Man of Steel and Dark Knight Returns for sheezy. But with the current vision at the top, I’m not all that sold that what they choose is going to be any good. But I hope they surprise me. I do like surprises.

@ Richard Caldwell PS: I love your Lex Luthor underground genetic research plot tie in idea.

@Shannon OLeary
I would love to see a Wonder Woman film, and soon. The animated flick was fun, but I was worried by both the Whedon movie and the David Kelley TV series, as while I like each of their respective works I just don’t think either “got” the character. But she is a third of DC’s holy trinity and needs major representation. And Marvel has yet to do a solo female feature film so Warners could beat them to the punch there.
And since he’s grown too big for his britches regarding comic work, I would kill to see Neil Gaiman write a WW film. He can certainly handle strong and compelling women, and he understands the mythology.

See, I knew it. Congratulations, @Richard Caldwell! You have officially out-answered the Answer Bitch.

HA!

One of the bigger problems with doing Wonder Woman in a movie might be that people approach the project assuming that there will be sequels, a la comics or a TV series, and end up writing lousy scripts. A writer can’t just assume the existence of sequels to fill in gaps, unless he plans the storyline that way. The easiest route to take in writing a standalone Wonder Woman storyline would be to make the villain a sexist pig who wants to make her his possession. She defeats him, decides that Man’s world is filled with pigs, goes back home, and stays there. That approach wouldn’t satisfy her fans, but writing her as a generic superheroine wouldn’t satisfy her fans or the general public either. Azzarello’s doing a terrific job with Wonder Woman in her series, but he’s writing her as a player in an Olympian power struggle, not as a superheroine.

Another problem with writing one-shot treatments of superheroes would be thinking that each encounter with a villain is significant, as in a comics series. In comics, battles don’t happen in the background and aren’t mentioned only in passing—Reed Richards recalling his most memorable encounter with Dr. Doom, for instance. A prose writer who wanted to do one story about a hero would find it easy to say that he’s had 40 battles over the last 20 years, but the one he has now is his most significant, and have the battle change his life, or end it. That approach, though, requires both having the hero age and ending his story.

SRS

I agree. And something else filmmakers really, really need to drop are the origin stories. Characters from the Avengers or from a prospective Justice League film have generally been around for what, 40, 50 60+ years? Why not just save more of the movie for the actual adventurizing?