David Goyer Says Warner Bros Has No Plans For Cohesive DC Universe
- Thread starter IanDavis
- Start date
How about feminist and Lesbians? (or are they the same thing now?)...Vault101 said:
Anyway
Why not? They made a franchise of Milla Jovovich killing Zombie's, The Hunger games has a Female as the main protagonist and her solo animated movie is tops. She's the most recognizable comic book superheroine in the world, if WB can't make her movie good they'll still make money regardless.
You'd get "brand loyalty" if you handled the brand with a firmer wrist and a willingness to have fun. Remember fun Goyer? That thing you had when you were a kid and gave a shit about things?
Or coarse! A women believing she doesn't want to be defined by her relationship to a man must be a lesbian...it doesn't make sense otherwiseV4Viewtiful said:
also the only people to watch a movie with a female protagonist are women, and women only like rom comd and romance abd really there's only 3.5 billion of them in the world...where's the profit in that?
Ok before I confuse anyone yes I'm being sarcastic, and just as possed over the blatant lack of winded woman in an era when comic book movies are huge AND we've had several block busters featuring women...what more could they want?
Not surprised they would say this. WB/DC had to be confused as hell after Man of Steel. "Ok, we just made a TON of money, but this isn't our Avengers...what now?"
Of course though there are people at WB/DC trying to establish the connected universe, since Marvel has shown that if done right it's a license to print money. It's just kind of ridiculous how bad they are it all.
Of course though there are people at WB/DC trying to establish the connected universe, since Marvel has shown that if done right it's a license to print money. It's just kind of ridiculous how bad they are it all.
Actually most sources say David Goyer was pretty high up there in terms of actual creative control on Man of Steel. Even still, that would give no excuse for some of the massive problems in characterization and over complicated plot devices.BigTuk said:
Well, that's pretty obvious by this point. But what do they call a franchise with Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, plus a Gotham City TV show off to the side, if not a universe? Have Gotham and Metropolis conglomerated into a single mega-city? This series of terrible business decisions keeps getting more comical by the day.
Good post, only issue is that until Iron Man all the Marvel Movies were not truly under Marvels purview, your example of Fantastic 4 was in-fact a 20th Century Fox Production rather than a Marvel Studios offering.Hairless Mammoth said:
Let's face it, the Marvel Universe is much richer than DC Universe, and Stan Lee is a superhero Shakespeare. The two shouldn't really compare because they jut bring a lot of different things to the table. I was actually a big fan of more DC comics than Marvel until I was a teen, Batman and of course Superman being my favorites along with Spidey until I really got into Iron Man right around the time he was paralyzed.
My point really is that marvel has achieved it's status that is largely insurmountable and cannot really be competed with, but rather than competing I see Batman, Superman, and what could have been with other DC greats like Green Lantern, I see them as offering something great and unique in their own right.
"because there's not a lot of brand loyalty anymore"
Mr. Goyer, please allow me to introduce you to what we of the internet call, the common fanboy.
My point really is that marvel has achieved it's status that is largely insurmountable and cannot really be competed with, but rather than competing I see Batman, Superman, and what could have been with other DC greats like Green Lantern, I see them as offering something great and unique in their own right.
"because there's not a lot of brand loyalty anymore"
Mr. Goyer, please allow me to introduce you to what we of the internet call, the common fanboy.
Awe. I liked the second Blade movie. The fights were better than in the first installment, and the camp was turned up a bit. It wasn't perfect, by any stretch; but it was fun and entertaining with a nice consistent aesthetic and tone (except when they basically break the fouth wall to do the big feeding reveal). Individual scenes in it are memorable, and the creature designs still creep me the hell out. Now, Blade III where there is a slap stick bit, a horrible massacre, and they also fight a dime-store romance novel cover-model who is supposed to Dracula, Lord of Evil - THAT movie was a mess.Covarr said:
To the article: Of course one-shot super hero movies could still work. Just need a competent crew and a studio willing to take a risk. Dare Devil would be awesome as a stand alone story. Set it in the the late 70's in Hell's Kitchen and let Ridley Scott direct it. Dredd is comic adaptation and it was fantastic as a stand alone production. There is such a massive pool of source material from which to choose, the possibilities seem endless. Could you imagine if Edgar Wright and company, who did the Scott Pilgrim film adaptation tried their hand King City? Lawdy.
Can't really understand Warner Brother's thinking here.. they have first rights to all movies based on DC Comics characters,they own several movie companies that can make their superhero movies for them with no fights over rights (like with fox owning the x-men movie rights for example), better characters, better writers, better ideas.. all things considering... Warner Brothers should be in the place where Marvel is now. so why their not, and don't want to be makes no sense.
The safety of you... an indestructible being with limitless powers, capable of destroying the entire world or subjugating it at your whim... should hide... should not risk your live... should cower in fear of discovery... whilst others die, whilst they are trampled beneath the heel of those more powerful than they.J Tyran said:
That is what Superman is about. There is a reason why he saves no one. There is a reason why his father tells him to let a kid die, all under the guise of having no answer... no I don't buy that. The same people that raised the Ultimate Boyscout, or at least he was for the past 84 years would not say they don't have an answer.
They would tell him that sometimes things need to be sacrificed to help those need it. Even Batman saves more people on a regular basis, whilst chased by the police, than Superman... there is a problem when the grim dark Mitt Romney is saving more people than the symbol of justice, truth and the american way...
This movie failed. This movie was an abomination, it wasted every chance it had to throw in actual dilemma's and in fact shows how the Superman raised by these Kent's would not be the Superman that he should be, he'd be the Superman that weighs his options, that weighs life against convenience, that would let his own (surrogate) father get swiped away rather than improvising a plan. This Superman fails on all levels because he is not the example we should follow, he's just a super powered human.
He can fool people with glasses... I don't think he'd have a hard time hiding. He could have stomped the ground and create a dust cloud, fuck he could have sneezed and created a thick mist... but no... he just LET THEM DIE!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Swvf3w6hcY4
WB/DC needs to learn how to make a comic book hero movie again. They had success with basically the one character you can get away with making a gritty, realistic type of movie with and now they think they can shoehorn their other characters into that mindset. Which is completely wrong. Marvel understands this. They know that each character has his/her own tone and for each it is written that way. But one thing that Marvel's movies understand is that they are super hero/comic book movies and they are supposed to be fun, whether you personally find them fun is up to you, but they try to make them fun.
The main thing that WB/DC needs to do is get producers/writers who actually understand the characters, because it seems perfectly clear that the people who are driving the movie situation have no clue.
The main thing that WB/DC needs to do is get producers/writers who actually understand the characters, because it seems perfectly clear that the people who are driving the movie situation have no clue.
At best it seems like they're trying to shoe horn some other heroes into a stand alone movie to test the waters. Which isn't a great way to start off with a cohesive universe if you ask me. Sure, Marvel took things slow and used Iron Man to gauge interest, but they still had a plan for how to move forward if it was a hit. DC seems more like they're just getting ready to throw shit at the wall and see what works.Johnny Novgorod said:
I'm actually just glad to hear this. After I saw the mess that was Man of Steel, I (someone who really wants to see a successful movie/tv DCU) could only think that DC/WB needs to back off. Take some time. Let Marvel do it's thing and maybe overexpose its product (like the game publishers that feel they HAVE to have a yearly release for a franchise.) And then just test the waters with a lesser character movie. And if it goes well, THEN try to go to your Superman OR Batman big before launching the big JL movie. ANYTHING they do right now is second fiddle.
Totally fine with that. I'll be super glad for not all DC movies haven't to be in broody'n'gritty town. I also would not be looking forward to the "fugitive elite government soldier" background that Wonder Woman would likely be saddled with if she were supposed to be in the same universe as the Nolan Batman movies.