Rumor: Warner Bros. Imposes "No Jokes" Rule On DC Comics Movies
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Because that one big success of yours that you guys (and the rest of the industry) have been trying and failing to replicate for the past six years never employed any hilarious moments to offset the rest of the movie's darkness, right? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvKZq705t1Q]
It's too bad that Wonder Woman's very first official movie (besides the Lego Movie) is not even her movie. :/
Not that I really give a crap about her, it just seems a little weird is all.
Anyway yeah, I can't see this working out. As others have said, it's not a bad thing to have a bit of levity and humor in a serious story. In my opinion, it makes the characters more human and more relatable. It doesn't have to be Guardians of the Galaxy level of goofiness just something to break the tension every now and again.
Not that I really give a crap about her, it just seems a little weird is all.
Anyway yeah, I can't see this working out. As others have said, it's not a bad thing to have a bit of levity and humor in a serious story. In my opinion, it makes the characters more human and more relatable. It doesn't have to be Guardians of the Galaxy level of goofiness just something to break the tension every now and again.
Thing is, even the Nolan Batman movies had jokes, so yeah. But more to the point, I would think that the better way to distinguish themselves was with solid writing in a different writing style, rather than handicapping the already limited talent pool of David Goyer.Nowhere Man said:
Even Man of Steel had jokes. Remember that comical scene where Superman snaps Zods neck, screams about it, and then almost immediately forgets it? Good God, I nearly died laughing.
Isn't it funny how ashamed of the source material most comic book movies are? I can't wait for a reboot where Bruce Wayne develops an array of military hardware called Battle Armour for Total Military Assistance via Nanomachines (son). That way, they can put Batman (or, should I say, B.A.T.M.A.N) in a battle suit and give him guns or something while trying to make a dude dressed as a flying rat seem more serious.Sgt. Sykes said:
I've got to say, I'd rather have a good DC movie regardless of whether it copies (or appears to copy) the success of another movie. In theory, this is distinction solely for the sake of distinction. I'm not sure I can sign on with that.Fappy said:
I was speaking from a purely marketing point-of-view. It's smart to differentiate your brand when the market is already over saturated with similar products. From the layman's perspective they should theoretically be able to identify the different brands by categorizing them as the "funny ones" and the "serious ones".Zachary Amaranth said:
As for whether that's good for the story, well, pretty much any restraints you put on a narrative can weaken it. Hollywood certainly is no stranger to consciously complicating their own projects. Marvel is doing the same thing by making screenwriters and directors shoehorn in continuity connections that some may rather do without.
All that said, I hope "no jokes" does not translate to "no levity". Without the 'ups' the 'downs' mean very little, and would be especially jarring when the central characters are running around in colorful, spangling leotards.
They don't want Batman to be funny, they clearly don't want Superman to be heroic, what DO you want, Warner Bros.?
Yeah because EVERYBODY LOVED IT WHEN YOU DID IT IN MAN OF STEEL
Look I don't have a problem with you wanting to make a more serious story, and I get this in theory, but come on, if their is no humor whatsoever that's not exactly going to make people enjoy it...
More and more I am getting concerned about this movie and WB's treatment of DC comics in general...
Look I don't have a problem with you wanting to make a more serious story, and I get this in theory, but come on, if their is no humor whatsoever that's not exactly going to make people enjoy it...
More and more I am getting concerned about this movie and WB's treatment of DC comics in general...
Well, DC did tell a writer [http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/123464-dc-comics-told-paul-pope-they-only-publish-comics-for-45-year-olds.html] they only make comics for 45-year-olds.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6281-Crying-Through-The-Laughs
Old Jim Sterling said it best. If you want us to accept the dark times, you need to compensate with some lighter tones here and there.
*Warning, the video has some Tidus laugh.
Old Jim Sterling said it best. If you want us to accept the dark times, you need to compensate with some lighter tones here and there.
*Warning, the video has some Tidus laugh.
Stupid. This immediately shows an assumption that 'comedy' and 'jokes' are these unitary things that you check off on a list when determining genre, rather than whole diverse modes of expression in their own right. Marvel movies have a silly, irreverent sense of humour, which is why they're light and fun, but you can have sly, cynical, intelligent humour in a dark film with complex themes that in no way makes it light nor fun (and that second word being a slur here is why darker films tend to be very cloying/dreary unless done well). Yes, DC needs to be distinct from Marvel, no, removing a basic form of human interaction does not do that.
